CLOSED Bob_Brinker_Discussion Site 43,700 Use New Thread!: Re: Re: Re: piano player

» dija - Re: Re: Re: piano player

In response to message posted by Will_L:

Will L said: "(BB) said the nasdaq was not involved in his call. As a result he bragged on his tech heavy portfolio."

Will, this is a minor point, but I think the above statement, which you keep making over and over, is a bit misleading.

Personally, I think he said that because he was frustrated that the nasdaq kept going up, in defiance of his indicators, while the rest of the market was flat or down.

I think he felt the nasdaq was making him look bad, which is why he said it was not involved. He knew it was in a bubble and was not acting "reasonably," and he had no idea how long it would be before it came down.

In my opinion, he stayed with TEFQX, Microsoft and VOD as a hedge against the continuation of the bubble--not because he liked tech. He (like almost everyone) knew it was overvalued and was destined to crash but he hedged to save face in the short-term. Big mistake.

He always made fun of the "new economy" people, so you know he didn't really like tech in Feb. Mar. 2000. He was just afraid the bubble would go on and on and make him look bad.

He didn't receommend the QQQs because he "liked" the stocks either. He was either convinced there was going to be a CTR or, as you have suggested, he was hedging (again).

If you are correct that it was a hedge, then a lack of courage may be his biggest fault. Because I think his actions and statements in early 2000 were definitely a hedge against the bubble, not a "liking" of technology stocks.

-- posted by dija