CLOSED Bob_Brinker_Discussion Site 43,700 Use New Thread!
- ACousins
- Will_L
- La_la
- La_la
- walkerman
- La_la
- Kirk
- walkerman
- Will_L
- Kirk
This archived discussion is "read only".
For the corresponding "live" discussions, post in the active topic forum here.
« Previous 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 Next »
» ACousins - Well now that's scary
Things are getting scary on a regular basis these days. I certainly hope these are contrary indicators coming at the tail end of a bear rather than its middle.
http://www.thestreet.com/markets/aaronta...
"...More troubling, Pimco managing director Paul McCulley argued on the firm's Web site today that the entire U.S. economy may be on the brink of a "meltdown" due to ongoing revelations of corporate malfeasance and resulting risk intolerance among banks.
"If we don't see a renewal in risk appetite in the corporate lending market in the next six to 12 months, then we are on a very greased banana peel toward a Japan-type syndrome," McCulley said, with typical flair, in a follow-up interview. (Concerns about Japan-style deflation were commonly heard last year but have recently faded, as the economy improved and some signs of inflation re-emerged. McCulley certainly isn't alone in warning of the risk of a deflationary spiral here, but is the most notable market participant to publicly discuss it, certainly in recent memory.)..."
-- posted by ACousins
» Will_L - Re: Re: Cyclical Events in a Secular Bear
In response to message posted by Kirk:Isn't it telling that Brinker and his minions like Lala seem not want to use that "Counter trend" description any longer? Lala of course never got back to me answering those very specific questions.
But he really hated my characterization of a "cyclical bull" in a "secular bear" as a counter trend event. There can be absolutely no argument that is indeed the case. Why do you suppose Lala objects so strenuously to those words?
Could it be that the fact that Brinker is claiming that he will call the best buying opportunity EVER (moabo) or the next best (VEBO) not at the beginning of a new "secular bull market". Instead he says that this great buying opportunity will occur as a counter trend event in a market he thinks is eventually going down. That alone should wave a red flag. Why would the best opportunity ever be in the context of a secular bear market and you are picking a brief period in that extended bear as the greatest or nearly greatest buying opportunity of all time.
I believe we know why Lala and brinker don't like to hear his new scam called a "counter trend event" 
Wasn't it about 19 months ago that Brinker called another "counter trend event" with an ACT IMMEDIATELY bulletin?
He claimed the market would go down but before it did he provided a buying opportunity that would bring 20% gains or more in two to four months later extended to 8 months.
That Counter Trend Event went from 83 to 23 in the last 19 months. It is no wonder that he and Lala don't want any "counter trend" mention about his latest call for fear it will remind folks that is exactly the same premise he is using now--picking a buying opportunity in a market he thinks is eventually going down.
Funny how devoid of argument these folks have become.
-- posted by Will_L
» La_la - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Brinker claims t
In response to message posted by Will_L:1) Does Brinker not think we are in a secular bear market?
2) Is Brinker not claiming he will call a "cylical bull market"?
3) Did Brinker not say this weekend that there were two possibilites for that cyclical bull call?
MOABO and VEBO???
That's pretty simple stuff. Please explain where I misunderstood your guru's BS?
No, this conversation has been based on YOUR BS..and BS it has been, up until now. You are finally choosing to be fairly accurate.
-- posted by La_la
» La_la - Re: Re: Re: Cyclical Events in a Secular Bear
In response to message posted by Will_L:
But he really hated my characterization of a "cyclical bull" in a "secular bear" as a counter trend event. There can be absolutely no argument that is indeed the case. Why do you suppose Lala objects so strenuously to those words?
Because we can't even begin to have an intelligent conversation, when one side starts off with faulty info. When you have to put words in Brinkers mouth to find fault with him, you're all done.
-- posted by La_la
» Kirk - Re: Re: Re: Cyclical Events in a Secular Bear
In response to message posted by walkerman:when was the starting date of that "27% bull market cyclical event" that Brinker missed.
Rande http://www.suite101.com/discussion.cfm/i...
VTSMX (closing prices, includes distributions)
(3/24/00 - 9/21/01) -38.2%
(9/21/01 - 3/19/02) +27.1%
(3/19/02 - 7/2/02) -17.9%
-- posted by Kirk
» walkerman - Re: Re: Re: Re: Cyclical Events in a Secular Bear
In response to message posted by Kirk:Kirkster...so you call the market crash and burn that resulted in the 9/11 terrorist attack on America, and the subsequent recovery a callable "bull market cyclical event." God, you crack me up. You are reaching soooooooooooooooooooooooo far for any straw to grasp onto. Actually, I take that back. It's sick for you to use this event in your self-serving effort to bash Brinker.
-- posted by walkerman
» Will_L - Re: Re: Re: Re: Cyclical Events in a Secular Bear
In response to message posted by La_la:My goodness you are proving my point. Labeling calling a "cyclical bull in a secular bear" a counter trend event, is simply an accurate description of what is taking place. It describes what is going on perfectly. Why should calling a cyclical bull in a secular bear a "counter trend event" cause you so much angst. It's simply true.
of course you didnt argue with the facts but only made a slam or two in my direction.
Why don't you try this one and see if you can make a logical argument for Brinker's claims.
His two claims --MOABO--best buying opportunity ever--VEBO VERY EXTRAORDINARY buying opportunity, are his claims for the beginning of a "cyclical bull" within the context of a secular bear market.
Doesn't it seem strange to you that one would anticipate that the best buying opportunity all time would come as a Counter trend event rather than at the beginning of a trend? It defies logic. It is also the same claim he make and then disowned last year.
-- posted by Will_L
» Kirk - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Cyclical Events in a Secular Bear
In response to message posted by walkerman:Well, nobody called the 9/11 attack but I bought stocks when the market crashed and I sold some in the Spring pretty close to the peak. Some of these same stocks I have been buying back again...
and I don't even have a timing model... but an asset allocation model says "BUY" when the market is down and "SELL" when it is up...
So yes, Brinker's method missed the opportunity.
-- posted by Kirk
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 Next »
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.