"BEARX vs NASDAQ

During the last 3 months the Prudent Bear Fund (BEARX) has done 25 TIMES better than the once mighty NASDAQ. BEARX has appreciated 25.13% vs a meagre 0.95% of the NASDAQ.

However, before the year is out I estimate BEARX may well be up 50-60%, while the NASDAQ gets hammered for a loss of -20% to -30%. In the mini-bear market in 1998, BEARX soared in value, ranking it the #1 Mutual Fund in the nation.

BEARX has 2 investment objectives: it sells common stock SHORT, and it buys gold shares LONG. The best of both worlds so to speak.

It is not too late to climb aboard. if you are on etrade you can margin it 50% after one month. However in one month the DOW and NASDAQ will be in tatters IMHO.

OK double decker? Are these the "facts" you wanted???

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), October 17, 1999"

When Andy wrote this gem, the NASDAQ was around 2800. It recently topped 5000, though it's hovering around 4800 now.

I remembed Andy and his love for David Tice's "Prudent Bear" mutual fund. Since its inception, Prudent Bear (BEARX) has lost an average of 18.25% per year. When Andy was crowing about Prudent Bear in October 1999, it had actually crawled up to around $4.90 a share. Today, it's trading at $3.83.

Those who panicked (and took Andy's counsel) not only lost the opportunity to participate in the recent market run. They lost money, perhaps a great deal if they listened to his margin advice.

There are a few lessons in this. First, Internet fora are a poor place for investing advice. Second, markets (like people) often over react... in both directions. If you feel gloomy about the economy, it's much safer to simply park your money in a conservative investment than actively bet on an economic downturn. Andy's advice was just as speculative as buying the latest dot.com IPO.

Finally, it's hard to make good investment decisions when wracked with emotion, positive or negative. There are a handful of people who will pay a dear price for running up credit cards to purchase Y2K supplies (per Andy's advice) or emptyting retirement accounts (also Andy's advice). It is difficult to argue these were rational decisions... even without the benefit of hindsight.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), March 17, 2000

Answers

My Webster's unabridged dictionary does not give the word "fora". It does, however, state that the plural of forum is forums.

-- (tiredofstupidity@aol.com), March 17, 2000.

"When Andy wrote this gem, the NASDAQ was around 2800. It recently topped 5000, though it's hovering around 4800 now. "

Yes cockroach, and you recommended that everyone get out when it was at 3000. Remember that, genius?

-- Decker is FOS (loudmouth@arrogant.snide), March 17, 2000.

It's easy to see why Andy ran away like a little baby after Y2K after the know-it-all's incorrect predictions left him with egg all over his face.

-- CJS (cjs@noemail.com), March 17, 2000.

Perhaps you can provide the link to where I was providing investment advice?

Last year, I made no secret of my decision to take profits in April and May... after a particularly good speculative venture. At no time did I tell ANYONE what to do with their money. Of course, you already know this because you were whining about missing out on the rally on an earlier thread under a different "handle." Now that I think about it, I do have a suggestion on where you can put your money....

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), March 17, 2000.

CJS,

It wouldn't surprise me if Andy was lurking, and possibly posting under a new name. It is easy to spot him. Look for:

1) References to gold price going over $10,000 an ounce.

2) Predictions of the DJIA in triple digits.

3) The words "Bilderberg," "New World Order," or "codswallop."

4) Homphobic retorts to anyone who disagrees with his posts.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), March 17, 2000.

Andy, bless his little heart, was only giving the same advice he followed. Some brokers have been known to tout stocks that the brokerage owned and wanted to ditch their position in. So, you can only fault Andy for being wrong, really. That's nothing. I've been wrong as many as ten times before breakfast.

>> My Webster's unabridged dictionary does not give the word "fora". It does, however, state that the plural of forum is forums. <<

Mr. Decker just loves to stretch out and give his high school Latin some room to roam. He simply neglected to italicize the word "fora" to call attention to the fact that he had slipped out of English for the nonce and into Latin.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), March 17, 2000.

Brian,

Plura gratia.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), March 17, 2000.

Would Ken Decker really post something like that?

Keep your...

-- eyes_open (best@wishes.2all), March 17, 2000.

Ken:

I passed over Andy's posts after a while, and I suspect others did as well. He appealed to gold-bugs for the most, referencing the Kinco (sp?) forum. As with Y2k overall, it was important to independently investigate all sides. Why would anyone come to a conclusion based on one voice, let alone a voice that isn't trained in the field of discussion? Andy had his opinions, you had yours, Dick Moody had his, RC had his, etc., but who are ANY of you? Yardeni at least really WAS/IS an economist, and I think he tried to the best of his ability to receive input from many sources, including those that didn't agree with his preliminary predictions. In fact, Yardeni openly admitted that his colleagues didn't agree with his predictions.

My mom was/is very gullible. She hears something on T.V. and believes it. When my dad was still alive she would start a sentence with "They say..." He would always retort "They WHO?" Someone recently presented a link here to an essay on the economy by Steven J. Williams. WHO IS HE? Well, he's certainly written plenty of essays giving his opinion on the economy, and presents them on a Geocities website, but is he an economist? Does he have a track record one could check? Does he freely reference opposing opinions for comparison purposes? The messenger IS as important as the message.

Tired: Webster's Collegiate version DOES include fora...definition = plural of forum. The definition of forum includes BOTH forums and fora as plural.

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.thingee), March 17, 2000.

"The messenger IS as important as the message"

We should all repeat that three times a day :^)

It's easy to believe someone if the message agrees with what you already believe to be true. The hard part is trying to disect truth from those we disagree with. It's even harder when you look at some folks who seem to have some obvious "strange" thought patterns. One of those "strange" thought patterns is the mantra, something Andy bought to a high art. No matter what the issue, gold was the answer. Anyone who never deviates from his mantra should be suspect.

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), March 17, 2000.