THREAD IS CLOSED! --- Bob Brinker Free Discussion Site 11K+

Top 5104. Jan 2, 2001 11:19 AM

» Will_L - Re: Hi all

In response to message posted by SLO219:

I think that the Nikkei in the early 90s is the best model for the NAZ. Thus, we're headed even lower in the future. BB got this part right. If we do not have a significant bounce from these levels, it will be a major departure from historical norms. Bear markets of the past have always had significant bounces on their way down. BB seems to be betting subscribers money on this phenomenon. "

You say "BB got this part right", meaning that you subscribe to his idea that the market will bounce up and then go lower--that we are in an ugly bear market. I would caution you that Brinker was certainly wrong on the QQQ direction and I would not be so certain of any other call of his that you seem to be betting your future on. There is always the possibilty that "BB will get that part wrong too".

I don't trust gurus to devine the future period but as I mentioned if you believe that certain events will happen at a particular time a very active strategy like you have may work. It does make me feel much better about a good asset allocation and inaction-rather than quessing what Brinker is wrong or right about.

Everybody is pretty much friendly over here Slo--Dan will even buy you an adult beverage. Sounds like you've got a plan. I get nervous when I hear the word "short" anything.

I was struck with your statement.
"

-- posted by Will_L

Top 5105. Jan 2, 2001 11:22 AM

» ACousins - Re: Re: Re: Re: Not the same

In response to message posted by Will_L:

I only remember the McDonald's coffee story vaguely. However, I think the elderly woman got about $300K probably before her attorney took 40% or whatever.

She suffered severe burns on the inside of her legs and ongoing pain. I think she spilled it when the attendant handed it to her. Maybe the result would be different if she had spilled it while driving out of the lot.

I also vaguely remember that they had complaints about the temperature of the coffee over many years. I also vaguely remember that other fast food places had lower coffee temps.

Maybe someone else remembers the story in better detail than I do. It sounds like McDonald's was taken to the cleaners by a gold digger but I think the entire story is much more complicated.

You know, it pays to listen to customer complaints because they might actually be right. Firestone may now go under because they refused to pay attention when complaints started coming in years ago.

Instead of making changes over time, they may actually lose the entire company. Sad for the consumers and sad for the company.

Sure you take risks as an investor but you also take them when you give investing advice. That's what liability insurance and good legal counsel is for.

-- posted by ACousins

Top 5106. Jan 2, 2001 11:27 AM

» DanG_6 - Re: Doing the math

In response to message posted by Mark_J:

Mark, one minor correction to your numbers. Bob recommended up to 50% of cash reserves to be "invested" in QQQ, not 30%. 30% was the LOWER limit for agressive investors (and the upper limit for conservative investors).

-- posted by DanG_6

Top 5107. Jan 2, 2001 11:29 AM

» ACousins - Legal problems

Also, do you all think that BB will try and sue the purveyors of this board for copyright infringement for daring to discuss his show or newsletter?

Isn't he going after someone already?

++++++++=

Just a rumor on the above. Anyone know if it's true?

-- posted by ACousins

Top 5108. Jan 2, 2001 11:36 AM

» Mark_J - Re: Re: Doing the math - Joe

In response to message posted by joe_fabitz:

Joe, I've put my pom-poms in storage and will let others do the cheerleading. I've turned over a new leaf for the millenium. Just wanted to post some numbers so folks can put some flesh on this QQQ trade and what it may mean for an investor with a 70-30 portfolio.

As Rande often points out, sure, there may be those out there who put 100% or used margin to put 150% in this trade. Maybe even used Rydex Velocity or Profunds UltraOTC. Those folks are having a bad hair day. No doubt.

But for the 70-30 investor with a $100,000 portfolio, they're probably down abour $4100 on this most recent QQQ trade. And overall for 2000, slightly up or slightly down.

"Preserving capital," as was the goal, with over 30% in dry powder, and even more if they want to tap that fixed income portion at MOABO. The goal in year 2000 was to preserve the capital made during the 90s, and make money on the countertrend rallies. The preserving capital part worked out okay, and Bob batted .500 on the countertrend rallies...

Of course, we're not out of the woods yet...

-- posted by Mark_J

Top 5109. Jan 2, 2001 11:41 AM

» ACousins - Re: Re: Re: Doing the math - Joe

In response to message posted by Mark_J:

Bob batted .500 on the countertrend rallies...

Please weight that statement with risk, % allocated and timeframe. I see your rose-colored pompoms are back.

-- posted by ACousins

Top 5110. Jan 2, 2001 11:41 AM

» Mark_J - Re: Re: Doing the math

In response to message posted by DanG_6:

Yes, Dan, the more aggressive investors lost more then the more conservative investors. I've read some posts around the net from folks who went into Velocity or UltraOTC on the trade, and who are experiencing this thing exponentially. Sheesh!

I was using a 70-30 mix and a 30% QQQ trade as an example. Some folks have the pedal to the metal. Some don't. I figured I was using a reasonable average.

-- posted by Mark_J

Top 5111. Jan 2, 2001 11:42 AM

» SLO219 - Re: Re: Hi all

In response to message posted by Will_L:

Indeed, shorting is risky. However, my feeling is that shorting a basket of very high P/E tech stocks in a Bear market has less risk. Also, this strategy is primarily a hedge since many of these stocks are in the Qs and I've got a position in the Qs. The portfolio is actually UP today despite the NAZ decline. I'm just trying to suggest alternatives to sitting and watching a portfolio undergo decline. By any historical measure the NAZ is in a Bear market. The question to be answered-- is this a 73-74 Bear, a NIKKEI Bear, or God Forbid, a 29 Bear. The measure is the length of the Bear... 2 years, 10 years, or 30 years. Or, something else.

-SLO219

-- posted by SLO219

Top 5112. Jan 2, 2001 11:48 AM

» ACousins - Batting Zero on the Counter Trend Rallies

In response to message posted by Mark_J:

Given the risk/rewards of the CTRs he is currently batting zero. He would be batting negative but that is physically impossible.

Batting zero means that he should stay out of these ill-fated ventures because they are a net negative. Minor gains on the first do not negate major losses on the second.

Apologists who continually deny these problems are just causing more potential grief for future investors.

-- posted by ACousins