Share
RB,
Good to hear.
Strong robust debate is vital.
I used to argue with guys like Geoffrey Transom and Anton Tagliaferro for years on Investorweb back in the tech bubble days.
I was right for a long time ,then very wrong when the bubble burst.
Anton argued that Solution 6 was worth .30c.
It was trading at $18 at the time.
I thought is this guy crazy?
Does this guy understand technology?
He wasn't crazy and he understood technology.
I would have bet every singly cent that I was right,so certain was I of my position.
It is a very painful lesson when you are wrong.
I made a motza, but it did go all the way back to .30c.
So we were both right for a long time and both wrong for a long time.
What I did realise was that those guys were way smarter than me,but I could still make a lot of money.
I also realised how little we actually know about the companies we invest in.
We think we know a lot but how little did we actually know about BNB,CNP,ABS,OZL to name but a few.
I trust no-one,especially not brokers or guys selling books or subscriptions.
I learn more off HC posters if truth be told.
After the tech bust I became very bearish which was wrong for a long time as well.
Then it was very right.
The market is difficult.If it was easy we would all be billionaires.
My main point is that gold bulls may ultimately be very right but through blindness,be very wrong.
It is vital to keep an open mind.
I much prefer alternative views.
I want people to argue the case.
The more robust the better as far as I am concerned.
