CLOSED Bob_Brinker_Discussion Site 43,700 Use New Thread!

Top 1297. Jul 6, 2002 9:39 PM

» Will_L - Re: Re: Re: to jonathon

In response to message posted by dija:

"The CTR was based mostly or solely on technical indicators."

Dija, name one such technical factor present at the time of his Bulletin?

Better still explain why Brinker who never takes blame for anything, did not share all of these technical factors with those who took his advice and lost thousands of dollars? You can make book that Brinker would be talking about those technical factors if they existed so the sheeples would say--"Well Bob just went by the technical factors and sure enough they were present just like he said and it's not his fault "we" lost our ass-ets."

No Dija there is no reason to believe there were any such technical factors in play--he would still be talking about them failing to work 'that time'.

Also Dija explain why he had to move the 6 month minimum duration to 1 year for the cyclical bull that you claim is unlike his 8 month CTR failure.

-- posted by Will_L

Top 1298. Jul 6, 2002 9:52 PM

» walkerman - Re: Re: to jonathon

In response to message posted by Jonathon:
Johnnythong....oooooooooops...can't back up your words????? C'mon, prove I said Brinker never recommended TEFQX and I will disappear from this thread.......that's gotta be a big trophy....or, which is more likely, you were just not telling the truth. By the way....why would you wait for crap to recover some value, instead of pro-actively following the brinkerbasherbots recommendations? I mean, if it's crap, sell and buy some non-crap. Of course you cannot do that because you have no idea what you're talking about. Anywho.....quote the post where I said Brinker never recommended TEFQX. Elsewise, be known for the stupid liar you are.

-- posted by walkerman

Top 1299. Jul 6, 2002 9:53 PM

» Will_L - Re: Re: Re: to jonathon

In response to message posted by dija:

"Don't let him fool you, Jonathon. Everything AC (and Will) says is designed to make Brinker look as bad as possible. The truth is irrelevant to AC and Will."

Look jerk, the last time you used that broad brush of calling me a liar, I showed you your own words showing you to lie. I have absolutely no tolerance or respect for your continual claims that I lie. Either be specific about it or shut up about it. I am more than tired of your talk without any facts. When I say you are lying--I make it a point to show you exactly that you did. I would appreciate you to drop the innuendo and either put up or shut up.

Your problem is that Brinker is a liar. Here is a prime example. It's not me making your guru inconsistant, it is your guru's desire to spin and change timeframes to sell newsletters.

"MT July 2001
"The secular bear market from February 9, 1966 throught August 12, 1982 included four cyclical bull markets with gains of 22%, 50%, 52% and 22% respectively. Each of these cyclical bull markets lasted from six to twelve months."

This month he'claiming that the historical experience during secular bear markets is a series of cyclical bulls with a 'typical' duration of "One to three years".

That is your guru's words. The reason they are changed is because of that failed CTR--that is obvious. He didn't "misstate" anything you shill.

Of course he goes on to say that "we" will do the best to identify the next cyclical bull for subscribers. (an obvious newsletter sales tool) And continues to scare QQQ holders in to subscribing to know when to sell them.

That is the liar at work Dija, and YOU KNOW IT.

-- posted by Will_L

Top 1300. Jul 6, 2002 10:04 PM

» Jonathon - Re: Re: Re: to walkersad

In response to message posted by walkerman:

comeon walkerman, everyone remembers you saying that brinker didn't recommend tefqx he just was warning people about the high valuations. kirk showed you that you were wrong, and you ran away for a while,pulling a walkerman. why don't you go find those posts where you were discussing tefqx, and kirk's response, and repost them. otherwise, i am right and you are wrong. go ahead, pull another walkerman in your quest to defend brinker with no substance whatsoever

-- posted by Jonathon

Top 1301. Jul 6, 2002 10:14 PM

» Kirk - Re: TEFQX

.
In response to message posted by Jonathon:

pull another walkerman in your quest to defend brinker with no substance whatsoever

Brinker, Feb 8, 2000 MT: "Firsthand e-Commerce Fund (TEFQX) is the newest addition to the Marketimer No-Load Fund Recommended List on Page four…… We have ALWAYS viewed books, toys and on-line auctions as the tip of the iceberg for electronic business. We believe business-to-business transactions will greatly surpass retail e-commerce including software development tools, database providers, hardware manufacturers and service providers.

We are very positive on the potential for the internet growth track to carry forward through international penetration.

We are hopeful the fund will be able to add many of the best positioned B2B companies going forward. Many of these companies are not yet publicly owned but will come to market in the future."

Yup, he was buying into the IPO mania in internet stocks right at the very top. He did mention it was volatile and not for risk averse investors which would leave out P3 types that don't market time.

-- posted by Kirk

Top 1302. Jul 6, 2002 10:16 PM

» Jonathon - walkerman needs our help

sometimes you have to wonder why walkerman is such an unhappy person. could it be that he was bragging on this board that he bought the QQQ shares after getting the marketimer february newsletter? could it be that he was suggesting putting more in the next month? the answer to these questions is yes. walkerman owns those qqqs. are you going to deny this as well walkerman?

-- posted by Jonathon

Top 1303. Jul 6, 2002 10:23 PM

» Will_L - Re: walkerman needs our help

In response to message posted by Jonathon:

I could be wrong but I seem to recall at one time Walkerman saying that it was too soon to know if TEFQX was a bad idea and that he had bought the Technology Leaders fund at Firsthand himself. It is possible I have the wrong guy. But I KNOW that walkerman once claimed that what Brinker was doing in those 3 newsletter articles about TEFQX was warning them not to buy it. --- Only walkerman would try to have it both ways.

-- posted by Will_L

Top 1304. Jul 6, 2002 10:38 PM

» ACousins - Re: Re: Re: to jonathon

In response to message posted by dija:

There have been many strong rallies in the QQQs since the original big plunge from QQQ $83, and AC has been VERY critical of BB for missing those rallies

Yes, I believe that Bob HAS been very critical of his missing the rallies also. I just post my displeasure while Bob mostly blames his customers and everyone under the sun for his mistakes. Of course, it's always possible that Bob blames the RALLIES FOR MISSING HIM. I'm just speculating as Bob doesn't talk to me much.

Everything AC (and Will) says is designed to make Brinker look as bad as possible. The truth is irrelevant to AC and Will

The truth is VERY relevant. You, however, are mostly insane and a Bobette to boot so everything you say is highly suspect of being a complete and total lie smile . Brinker needs no help looking bad. He does it all by himself and as long as the truth comes out, he puts his foot in it frequently.

Dija, what do you think the truth is about the cyclical bulls? Were you paying attention?

-- posted by ACousins

http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.we...

Top 1305. Jul 6, 2002 10:46 PM

» ACousins - What happened to the Rydex contra funds?

Just a cursory check but has he EVER had the Rydex contra funds in his recommended list much less in his model portfolios? I don't remember seeing them.

Also, he did have the Janus Olympus fund until sometime in 01 although I don't know when he first recommended it. I figure it probably showed up and disappeared along with TEFQX but that's just speculation on my part smile

There's nothing like being late to the party and that includes the QQQ party!

-- posted by ACousins