CLOSED Bob_Brinker_Discussion Site 43,700 Use New Thread!

Top 1307. Jul 7, 2002 5:04 AM

» alphacd - Brinker and the QQQs

As some of you may recall, I am a casual Money Talk listener. My only connection to Bob was to heed (or agree with) his 2000 call to cash (went to 70% in March -a little late). Never followed any of his other calls -- probably because I never heard them -- thankfully. With regard to his position on the QQQs, is it possible that he has not sold on rallies because he believes that an enormous surge lies ahead? Does anyone know what he is now saying about moabo?

-- posted by alphacd

Top 1308. Jul 7, 2002 5:16 AM

» alphacd - Bob/Moabo Confusion

If Bob thought it was practical in 2000 to go to a partial equity position 65/30, why is he now saying that he will notify subscribers when to become fully invested. Has he ruled out an adjustment to his current 65/35 ratio? Why would he back himself into an all or nothing position?

-- posted by alphacd

Top 1309. Jul 7, 2002 6:42 AM

» Will_L - Re: Bob/Moabo Confusion

In response to message posted by alphacd:

"Has he ruled out an adjustment to his current 65/35 ratio? Why would he back himself into an all or nothing position? "

Assuming that is a legitimate question let me give you the reasons. Lets look at reasonable possibilites that many following Brinker's advice did.

A few went to cash--A few went into Ginny Maes--they could not read well and didn't get good marks in "ability to follow directions" when young but because of that have made out like bandits. smile More realistic "problems" are the following.

1) Brinker told people to go 40/60 and thus trigger taxes so let's say the average bloke had about 50% of their equity position remaining in cash after paying taxes on years of gains.

2) Brinker was bragging on his portfolio I which was tech heavy. It was outperforming the S&P by a bunch in early 2000 cause the NASDAQ was on a tear. Now what do you suppose that made those who thought enough of Brinker's advice to pay him 185 bucks do? Yep many switched to the equity funds in port. I.

3) Remember Brinker was NOT BEARISH at this time. He was giving EQUAL probablities of the market GOING UP as going down. He claimed that the model thought the market would go up no more than 5% and then gave an example that if the market went up 10% (obviously something he considered well within the realm of possibility) the followers would make 7%. He claimed that the market had the potential to go down 20% or more. But he gave absolutely no more weight to the upside than the downside possibilites. And before anyone tries the "What he meant was it might go up 5% before going down"--HE DID NOT SAY THAT. The up vs down was on equal footing as far as probablility of direction in his explanations.

Therefore when Brinker spent every newsletter in Jan Feb and Mar, having a significant article about TEFQX, it is logical that many people added that fund and did not sell a dang thing more. That was after all Brinker's favorite pick. He was touting it AFTER he went into his "tactical asset allocation". By this time Brinker's spin that his call was "not about the nasdaq" had people believing that Brinker's call was for the "old economy" stocks (which were cratering--Proctor and Gamble cut in half and Phillip Morris down to 18 bucks being his poster boys).

Brinker had encouraged people to hold his favorite stocks--UTEK, VOD, and MSFT. I'm guessing that if they sold anything it would have been UTEK. On the other hand I'm betting that many kept these babies cause they thought bob was ON TOP of their portfolio I and TEFQX.

So it is not unreasonable to have a believer who bought the Brinker spin now having about 30-40% of his portfolio left in cash BEFORE THE QQQ call.

The thinking that got the Bot to this point -- recall large cap tech was still doing pretty well, made Brinker's call for a QQQ investment quite logical. So rather than look at what he had at the moment after overdoing Brinker's "plays" when Brinker called the QQQ trade this guy looked back at what money he took out originally and said "what the heck" and invested like he had not paid taxes, held VOD, MSFT and UTEK and bought TEFQX after selling some funds in Jan 2000.

So we had a bot following what he thought was the "spirit" of Brinker's advice and doing actually a better job of following his directions than those who went to cash or into Ginny Maes, that is now 70-90% fully invested.

Who knows how many took Mark J's advice here to average down on the QQQs or used Brinker's dishonest SECOND BITE OF THE APPLE call on the QQQs "we expect gains up to 50% or more from the jan. 3 low of 52"?

So if Brinker would say to such a screwed up bunch of folks now following all of his coflicting calls--that his lying allocation is say changed to 50-50 or 70 - 30 to equities- what do the people with QQQs up their wazoo say?

The phone lines would be jammed with "But Bob do I count these QQQs that fell from 83 to 23 or ...."

No Brinker will tell everybody to go fully invested and then tell them to "rebalance their portfolios during this time of strength". Just like in his latest newsletter he will make the QQQ thing seem like the subscriber's stupid idea. He will say something close to the following.

"For those of you holding Nasdaq 100 QQQ shares we recommend treating them in a manner consistant with your overall risk tolerance. Keep in mind our portfolios are only loose scripts for you to follow but in the interest of diversification one may uses periods of strength to make a sideways move. We recommend those holding QQQ shares to consider this in their overall portfolio management."

So when he goes fully invested--QQQ disappears. He will pretend that everyone was in the S&P when he gave the sell signal--everyone went totally to cash--and everyone stayed there with 100% of their money and suddenly reinvested 100% of thier money on the worst day in the market anywhere near his buy signal. I can read him like a book.

-- posted by Will_L

Top 1310. Jul 7, 2002 8:41 AM

» walkerman - Re: Re: Re: Re: to walkersad

In response to message posted by Jonathon:
Johnnythong...if you are right, prove it, and I will leave this thread. As to your contention that "everyone knows it", well, I have made the same challenge to them. Prove it.

-- posted by walkerman

Top 1311. Jul 7, 2002 1:47 PM

» ACousins - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: to walkersad

In response to message posted by walkerman:

OK Walkerman, I'll hold you to it. If the contention is proved correct you will depart and not return ever again under any alias which would also include your real name. OK?

Wow, that's worth the time spent looking for proof smile A walkermanless world!

-- posted by ACousins

http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk...

Top 1312. Jul 7, 2002 1:49 PM

» ACousins - When was TEFQX recommended?

Bob Junior was doing what? I don't understand exactly what they're talking about here but it does smell smelly. (My emphasis below)

"To:marc ultra who wrote (10120)
From: Justa Werkenstiff Monday, Nov 29, 1999 12:16 PM
View Replies (1) | Respond to of 15129

Marc: Re: "I think Bob may be telling us one day what a great buy this
was on the IPO."
Hey, hey you may be right. I scooped bobbrinker.com on this one (not an easy accomplishment ) and I discovered today that Bob Jr. has set up an IPO site for B2B IPOs subsequent to my post with Freemarkets.com as the only listed offering.

Re:" Now the question is for those who don't get some shares on the
IPO how high a price to pay and what might be good timing."

Yes, with any luck it will come public when the market is weak or will retreat on future weakness.

-- posted by ACousins

http://www.suite101.com/discussion.cfm/i...

Top 1313. Jul 7, 2002 4:36 PM

» ACousins - Bear, what bear?

He has a history of this type of odd behavior:

"Further, in order to do a graceful switch to cash, one would have to know with fair certainty that a bear market was in the offing. So far, I have not heard of any crystal ball or timing model that can accurately predict a bear or any other kind of a market. (We saw last summer that Bob's timing model was not perfect, causing a big flap on this thread.) Consequently, the market may decline significantly before it is clear a severe bear market is underway. By that time, it is only possible to effect damage control of the remaining portfolio.

A case in point is Bob's reaction to the decline in emerging markets. He waited until severe damage had been done to that position before he switched into another foreign equity fund (Vanguard's International Growth Fund, I believe). This fund is still struggling, even though the manager has decreased his Japan
position, increased his European position, and (I believe) added US stocks, thereby making it a global fund and not an internatioal fund, in my view. My point is that Bob didn't switch the emerging market's position to cash even though that position was, and remains, in a bear market. So, I view Bob's position about the action he would take in a bear-market situation with suspicion."

I wonder if he thought he was being a chicken on the overall bear so he'd make up for it by being insane on a trade.

-- posted by ACousins

Top 1314. Jul 7, 2002 4:41 PM

» Will_L - Brinker Number Two and Trying harder

Notice how my call of WHOABO "Will's Hell Of A Buying opprtunity" last week has Brinker in panic mode?

He sees those Subscribers lining up to purchase "Imamarketimertoo" , the what's happening now news you can use and abandoning his "check my bulletin for an update on that QQQ 83 trade" subscription service.

He went so far as to bring back MOABO, his greatest marketing ploy ever. Course after talking about it for a year, this time last year he told folks that he was just pulling their chain about that Moabo junk. Brinker said his model was not about finding bottoms and he might go fully invested way above the bottom.

Well he then noticed subscriptions decline I'd wager. People felt like they'd been hornswaggled yet again by the Brinkster. He never said the word MOABO till Saturday. Why?

Because I pointed out that he not only had dishonestly flip flopped on his model's ability to find a bottom but because last week I pointed out Whoabo right here on this site under his name even. Immediately my Whoabo call was off to a 368 point dow day and a 65 point Nasdaq streak. Wowsa. That got ole Bob's attention.

He had a meeting with Justa, Walkerman, Junior and Lala, put Dija and D strate on a conference call and to a shill they agreed that the only thing left was to bring back "Moabo".

And Brinker ever the wordy one thought that two promises of future riches would trump my single honest call in progress. So Brinker decided a simulaneous dual promise of MOABO or the brand new VEBO (VERY EXTRAORDINARY BUYING OPPORTUNITY) would fool a lot of the dummies that fell for the "I have over 100 indicators in my model" speel. The average IQ from the callers who start "Bob I'm a subscriber and....." is obviously such that very superficial salesmanship is in order.

The "Ebo" (extraordinary buying opportunity) just wasn't getting it done and with my real " Whoabo" well in the black Brinker is desperate I tell you.

Did you see that pathetic last newsletter of his? Whoa Darlin, we at Imamarketimertoo wouldn't be caught dead putting out that thing. Telling folks to buy your newsletter to see when you are going to call another counter trend event so those who "have a postion in the Nasdaq 100 (QQQs)" know when to sell the security he told them to buy at 83 and is now floundering in the 20's.

He had to change. "IMA's" "Whoa" call going up. Brinker's marketimers saddled with heaps of QQQs that everyone knows didn't magically appear in their portfolios.

And of course Brinker doesn't have my main technical indicator. Jiggs. The Jigg's directional pee indicator has NEVER FAILED. Just to show you how accurate this indicator is. I sent Jiggs out this morning with the boxwood bush labeled just like before. Equities on one side-- fixed income on the other. He always pees on the side that is due to outperform. So I tought I would trick him by putting the signs up on Sunday. Why Jiggs walked right up took a look at the right side --equities. Then he looked at the left side ---fixed income hiking his leg ever so slightly. He then sneered at me--you can tell when a jack russel is sneering. Went right over and peed all over the newspaper. Picked out the SUNDAY--in the Sunday Post Dispatch--just to show me that he cannot be fooled and knew that the markets were not open.

There is no way Brinker can compete. But he's pulling out all the stops. MOABO, VEBO!!! But he doesn't have Jiggs and he'll never call WHOABO!!

-- posted by Will_L

Top 1315. Jul 7, 2002 5:04 PM

» Will_L - MOABO, VEBO, EBO, TRUTH, MARKETING PLOY?

Now how pathetic is this Brinker dude anyway? How stupid does he think his average sucker with $185.00 is?

What would Brinker say if you could set him down without a "cut the caller off button" or a call screener and ask the following.

First Bob, when did you decide to move the shorter time frame for your cyclical bull markets from 6 months to 1 year? Was it a coincidence that the old definition overlapped with your last Counter trend event call in the QQQs???

So we are talking with Bob Brinker, host of the radio show Moneytalk on which he has a dozen commericals an afternoon urging people to subscribe to his newsletter. This weekend you brought back your marketing ploy of MOABO, that would be where you claimed you were calling the greatest buying opportunity of all time. Same thing you did a couple years ago and then told folks your model wasn't about finding a bottom.

Now you had been yammering about "EBO" (Extraordinary buying opportunity) . Today you added a V to that calling this promise of riches a "VERY EXTRAORDINARY BUYING OPPORTUNITY" VEBO

So let's see Bob, what in the hell are you trying to do? Would you please define in portfolio percentages the difference that MOABO and VEBO represent in this counter trend event you are promising to call for those that pay you 185.00?? What would EBO amount to? How many MOABO's EBOS or VEBOS have you called in past counter trend events???

Would a MOABO be a 100% gain and a VEBO a 50% gain and an EBO a 20% gain? Or are the words meaningless yammering to stimulate interest in a mythical event to encourage more checks to find their way to your PO BOX?

Your last Counter trend Event was the ACT IMMEDIATELYO call to BUY QQQS for a 20% OR MORE gain from 83. Would you categorize that when inially calling it as a "moabo" a VEBO, an EBO?

Well no matter what you called it, it soon became clear the best anacronym was CRAPO. And now you are selling MOABO VEBO or EBO by telling people they will need that to get out of the CRAPO QQQs.

Please explain why one would trust you with all of your flip flops and obvious marketing ploys?

There is no way the man would give a rational explanation

-- posted by Will_L