Moneytalk Bob Brinker Summaries - Information ONLY

Top 397. Jan 9, 2000 5:12 PM

» Kirk - summaries.moneytalk.corn

I heard in chat and via email today that many at the bobbrinker.com web community don't like me and Suite101.com because "Kirk supports David Korn's summaries".

Perhaps I should give a bit of history. I have not changed what I have been doing relative to the summaries since David was posting them for free on both web sites. My policy is anyone can post information here and have links in their signature or give an email address on how to get more information. As long as they are contributing to the content of our site, I feel that allowing them to promote themselves within reason is only fair. Suite101.com does not pay people for contributing content here so this seems like a fair compensation for their efforts. This is very different than the policy at bobbrinker.com.

Steve Thompson quite regularly used to post full summaries of Moneytalk here and we would post links advertising this at Silicon Investor, Yahoo and even BobBrinker.com. Nobody ever complained.

David Korn later started to do very detailed, caller by caller, "Moneytalk Interpretations" with links to more information on what was discussed. Both Bob Brinker Jr. and I tried to entice David to give our sites this information exclusively but David would not agree to an exclusive deal with either of us. The Brinkers even had a special thread for David to post summaries in and Bob Jr. was talking about making it so only David could post the summaries there. David could be a much loved Star in their community. This all changed when David decided he wanted to charge for his work.

Some at bobbrinker.com feel that David is "Stealing from Bob and Disney shareholders". Disney doesn't own bobbrinker.com, that I am aware of, so the advertising of the site from Moneytalk was a freebie and "stealing" from Disney shareholders. I suppose this is fine? Disney didn’t seem to mind as it has gone on for nearly 2 year. None of my business really. My guess is Disney allows it because it keeps their star, Bob Brinker happy as he can use his name to help make a business for his son. What is strange is their site generates advertising revenue. I doubt that this revenue is shared with Disney. It was not unethical for them to have exclusive rights to David's work and post it there where they could collect advertising dollars earned from people reading. If that was not unethical, then why is David deciding to keep the revenue to himself rather than let Bob Brinker Jr. get it through advertising dollars or more web site hits?

So, bottom line, I don’t see David's interpretations as doing anything wrong or illegal. Lawyer friends have said the same to me and Disney has never sent myself of Suite101.com management a request to stop when ever we posted any summaries. I only see the noise on that site from those pretending to have a clue about intellectual property or a mail order law degree while referring to us "vomit101.com" as sour grapes.

David is going to do what he wishes. I neither support no discourage his work but I am happy when he provides us with unique content that interests our community and gives us more to talk about. I am sure Brinker is not pleased as David has recorded many instances where Bob has said one thing and then changed later on such as his position on the internet.

Bottom line, I have not been asked by anyone from Disney in email or through legal channels to even consider stopping David.

If you have friends that are regulars at bobbrinker.com, please cut n past or send them this post so they can learn the full story or, at least, hear my side. It seems pretty silly and childish to attack me or Suite101.com and not to complain to us directly. I am used to it now, but it would be nice to put this issue to rest.

-- posted by Kirk

Top 398. Jan 9, 2000 6:42 PM

» jbrady - kirk, liking anyone who thinks outside their cult

Kirk, you have to agree with the regime or you are out, that site is edited, censored, your under surveillance, it's a dictatorship over there. I think it's like a mind think type of cult. They don't mind if you think, just so long as you think what they want you to think.

jim

-- posted by jbrady

Top 399. Jan 9, 2000 7:03 PM

» Rande - I think it's sad there has to be any kind of rivalry at all.

I think it's sad there has to be any kind of rivalry at all. I think the BB site is a fine one, with lots of fine people who regularly contribute -- just as is the case here. Should be all about sharing information and ideas, learning from each other. And, truth be known, Bob Brinker has contributed much to everyone who has ever listened to him. Faults and all, in a business where independent, quality advice is all to rare, there must be few who can honestly say they're not the better for having known of Bob Brinker. Maybe the world is a different place than it was 14 years ago when BB went national -- better-educated investors, more readily-available information, the fantastic resources of the Internet -- less of a need for a "guru" and greater potential for criticism directed at those who try. Guess there will always be an uneducated investor group looking for direction, but as more and more take it upon themselves to gather their own information and make their own decisions it gets ever more difficult to pull off the "man behind the curtain" routine. That's how it should be. Credit the likes of Bob Brinker for helping many to see the light with regard to taking things into their own hands.

-- posted by Rande

Top 400. Jan 9, 2000 8:41 PM

» Slick - All excellent points, boys

...and I can't take issue with any of it. To bad we don't live in an ideal world. Kirk---your editorial poilcy here is about as open as one can hope for. The times of censorship here are extremely rare---and only in the interest of civility( that I can recollect) , have I seen it used. And then , it's usually gets the "Blithering Idiot" tag! Keep up the good work.

Slick

-- posted by Slick

Top 401. Jan 10, 2000 9:16 AM

» MichaelC_AU - BB Jr. own summaries?

Why don't they just do their own summaries and post them on the BB site?

They could just have a secretary do them, like dictation, robot work. It would only cost BB $20/wk. They would lack David's intelligent comments and interpretation, but that would leave David's subscriber's justification for continuing to retain his services.

The summaries, even without comments, often transcribed with out a clue, would still fill a niche with those that don't want to pay, and create an appreaciation for what David does!

-- posted by MichaelC_AU

Top 402. Jan 13, 2000 12:03 AM

» JollyRoger - Sunday's show on mp3

If you missed Sunday's show or would just like to hear it again.

part 1
part 2
part 3
part 4
part 5
part 6

The first 2 parts are available now and the rest will be up shortly.

-- posted by JollyRoger

Top 403. Jan 13, 2000 12:36 AM

» Kirk - if someone has a legal question about this, please don't hassle

if someone has a legal question about this, please don't hassle me, as I am clueless.
send your complaints or legal team after

jasonp@suite101.com

He has the authority and knowledge to deal with this and can take whatever action is necessary. I just write comments on the market and try to keep this place friendly. I do not pretend to be a lawyer.

-- posted by Kirk

Top 404. Jan 13, 2000 10:52 AM

» matttheduck - my kind of censorship

i think you should start deleting all posts that argue the legality of david korn's summaries. they may "give us something to talk about" but, as a close friend of mine says, "we're beating a dead horse to death"

-- posted by matttheduck

Top 405. Jan 13, 2000 11:17 AM

» Rande - matttheduck,

matttheduck,

That's not censorship, that would be pain relief.

-- posted by Rande