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

Top 5184. Jan 2, 2001 6:22 PM

» Kirk - Re: Re: Another Open Letter To Bob Brinker

In response to message posted by lasjok:

How did the "Sophisticated investors" know to exit?

We didn't. We ignored the whole gambling thing and tried to discourage others from day trading their life savings to satisfy an obscure radio host ego that was trying to make a name for himself. A man who forgot that many in retirement would pay dearly if he was wrong. I was not at all pleased with his going to cash and saying it was due to a model that has NEVER made a correct exit call. Still, the way many on his web site were day trading b2b stocks, I think he had to take drastic measures to get the mania out of the unsophisticated investors that follow him.

He'd be fine if he stopped there... but he didn't

Once again, SOPHISTICATED investors ignore his advice or just play a TINY percentage of their portfolios more for fun than to make a lifestyle change of wealth. I would put DanG in this category but few others from what I have read that followed Bob off the cliff.

BTW, WELCOME to our little group!

-- posted by Kirk

Top 5185. Jan 2, 2001 6:27 PM

» Will_L - Re: Most will not make a profit with this trade!

In response to message posted by pete_man01:

"I am assuming here that the QQQ's will come back before MOABO. I am doubtful they will reach $90 in 2001. Too far of a wall of fear to climb. "

I guess I have concerns with your optimism and your pessimism, Pete.

Here you are after seeing a trade by the guru who coined the term MOABO mumbojumbo that is down 35 perent from issue. He could not have picked a more steep descent in the history of the Nasdaq. Yet you assume that there is something to this MOABO crap he says will come after this great rally you are currently experiencing in the QQQ's is over.

Does it not dawn on you that some guru who is that far off on the QQQ trade might not just hit the "moabo" mumbojumbo on the head?? That perhaps it was a marketing tool much like being able to forecast 'bear market rallies" of 20 percent upside in a couple months. It sells newsletters. However that doesn't mean it has any validity.

If we are talking about the Nasdaq, why would you think that after this carnage, there is much more downside? Because the same guy that said "act immediately" for a 20 percent upside said so? Sounds skeery to this ole country boy--but all that hedging and shorting and stuff that other guy was doing to make this QQQ thing work 'skeered' me too. I guess the older I get the more perplexed I am at these convuluted thoughts. Too simple I reckon.

-- posted by Will_L

Top 5186. Jan 2, 2001 6:41 PM

» hikingguy - Re: THE STARSHIP MONEYTALK

WELL DONE.....perhaps if we send an inverse polaron burst thru the shields we will get the"reversal" we are looking for
Chicote to Janeway "But Captain...we are breaking thru all support lines and we hae lost half our crew and the rest are whispering mutinee"
Janeway....."do it"
to be contunued

-- posted by hikingguy

Top 5187. Jan 2, 2001 6:44 PM

» Will_L - Now that I was pessimistic with Pete

Time for Optimism

During this last year--I've watched stocks I own be given up for dead by those "in the know". DanG and I happened to own MO for a long time--rode that sucker from riches to rags and watched as the guru's proclaiming the new economy gave it the last rites. I think we talked about the time it hit 19 bucks that it might be a great time to buy--dividend was approaching 10 percent. I know I didn't have enough conviction after buying more on the way down to stick more into MO.

Well today in a very few months its at 46. So much for my bright move of the year. I owned quite a bit for me of PG. I didn't sell when they tried to buy the drug companies in their desperation and I only bought a 100 shares more when they hit the mid 50's --my gut told me to load the truck--I took a pepcid.

I've watched Intel take an elevator ride, Cisco and Sun triumph and now swoon this year. Drugs have methodically climbed. Berkshire Hathaway-dead money they said in the first half the year-is now one of the better performers.

The point is - none of the bright people I listen to said any of this was going to happen, including the guru at the top of this thread. The market is a humbling experience and this year particularly so. It seems to be darkest just before dawn, or before it goes totally black. I defy anyone to tell which prospectively.

I think perhaps with all the pessimism about this might just be a great buying opportunity especially in tech. Perhaps not--but don't think some guy is going to tell you for 185 bucks whether it is or not--he certainly didn't call any of those things mentioned above and didn't do too hot on tech this whole year--missing the run up January to March--selling at the low of the summer on the Q trade and buying at the absolute worst time this fall.

I'm betting things go better in tech but I sure wouldn't go out and use margin like the poster this afternoon. "If not now---soon" would be a good mantra--specially for those like myself who bought QQQ's at 61 or so and thought they were bright. smile

-- posted by Will_L

Top 5188. Jan 2, 2001 6:49 PM

» NYBondBabe - Suze Orman

Suze Orman loves the QQQ's at $52.00. She was on Larry King Live this evening for the entire hour. She told Larry that if she had $1000 she would be putting it into the QQQ's and she has been doing that her self. She is saying to DCA in for the long term (5-10 yrs.)

She doesn't think we're near the bottom yet and thinks it may be around 2000 on the NASDAQ.

Too bad she doesn't have her own radio show since she is very patient and sincere with the listeners. Bob could learn a lot from listening to her......DID YOU WATCH HER TONIGHT, BOB?? DCA, Long term, don't chase

-- posted by NYBondBabe

Top 5189. Jan 2, 2001 6:57 PM

» David_Korn - McDonalds

I walked into a McDonalds today to get a healthy treat. Trying to get a gauge for the economy, I went straight up to the counter, looked the cashier right in the eye and said,

"Did somebody say MOABO?"

-- posted by David_Korn

Top 5190. Jan 2, 2001 7:03 PM

» Rande - Re: McDonalds

In response to message posted by David_Korn:

Two no-beef Qubies, on the sauce, no lettuce, kind of cheesy, in a pickle, hold the onion, with really burnt buns.

-- posted by Rande

Top 5191. Jan 2, 2001 7:22 PM

» gdmoffitt - Re: Re: Re: Did somebody mention Hulbert earlier?

In response to message posted by Rande:

Rande, thanks for the link, I'll take a look. For what it's worth, the professional data I have, as of 6/30/2000, for PI goes back to the beginning of 1986, and shows an annualized return of 15.2, versus 16.4 for the Wilshire 5000. The other portfolios get lower returns corresponding with their aggressiveness. This is true whether risk-adjusted or not.

As for the no-load Fund-X, it sure seemed to me like in terms of market analysis, there was no "There" there..they were just chasing performance, which during a record bull market will make them look pretty damn good.

Others used TA, and some seemed to be heavier on macro-economic and sector analysis. Guess one has to pick one's poison. We'll see in a few months, this year will be a good year for Dorothy to *really* see what's behind that curtain!

-- posted by gdmoffitt

Top 5192. Jan 2, 2001 7:25 PM

» retiredinprescot - Re: re: Most will not make a profit with this trade

In response to message posted by Bettysue:

Bettysue, I did just what you did when I got Brinker's "buy immediately" special bulletin. I had just retired this summer and Brinker seemed so confidant that I put half my retirement money into this disasterous trade. I have followed Brinker for years but his actions since this "recommendation" have been cowardly silence and he has lost my trust. He has hurt a lot of his followers badly and we will not forget.

-- posted by retiredinprescot