asci bashing on this site ... crap !, page-45

Two points on this matter.
Firstly, have a look at the latest newsletter. They have listed CCU as having been bought at 0.17 in their portfolio section. All future gains or losses will be based on that figure. If it runs to 0.34 they will claim a profit of 100%. Now we all know the price had run to around 0.23 by the time the letter came out. Subscribers could not have entered at the recommended price thereby making the percentage profit on their trades correspondingly smaller. Same thing applies if it turns into a dog. A fall to say 0.135 would register on their portfolio as a 20% drop but for someone who entered at 0.23 the loss would be more like 40%. So what? you may say.

I'm sure we are all familiar with their advertising where claims of substantial profits are made. In this instance and a few other recent ones, e.g MEO, the purchase price listed is "artifically" low allowing the results to be skewed in their favour. This makes the option of taking out a subscription appear more attractive.

Secondly, leaks. Has anyone thought that it may not be ASCI at fault. Presumably companies know they are about to be recommended and the sp is likely to go for a run. What's to stop an employee of one of these companies mentioning the upcoming recommendation to their families and friends?. How many degrees of seperation are needed before it ceases to be insider trading and becomes untraceable?.

Just for the record, I got in a few weeks ago, based on my own research, at 0.145 so this is not sour grapes from someone who paid mtoo much.