Marc Faber joins Sprott's Board

[Guest Broxburnboy]

 

http://cxa.marketwatch.com/TSX/en/Market/article.aspx?guid=http%3a%2f%2fsystem.marketwatch.com%2fnewscloud%2fdocguid%2f{630920AA-739E-4051-9669-76B28005B375}&symb=SII

 

The bears seem so be gathering... a good marketing ploy by the Sprott group of funds.

 

Cheers

[lessthaniv]

I saw Marc speak last year at a CFA luncheon in Vancouver. He's an interesting guy. I enjoyed hearing him speak. You're right though, "the bears are certainly sticking together".

[Guest dealraker]

Call me too cynical- too simplistic-  if you want and I may very well be but it just seems to me that all the "speak-outers" like Faber- and those that are on the opposite side of the fence- are often simply playing the role (successfully) that gets them where they want to be.  That is they are financially successful and in the news and thus "needed" on a continual basis for those who need a hand to hold.  This again is success in this role book.  Remember Munger and Cialdini's "consistency principle?"  It seems to me that these types know more about psychology than anything.  How to get a following group stuck on them and their columns/views, etc.

 

Like a lawyer who turns prosecuter I have this feeling that all of them could turn on a dime and play the opposite role, like  Harry Dent for instance.

[Guest kawikaho]

Faber is a trader and will turn on a dime.  Most people think he's overly bearish, but he's pretty neutral half the time.  Actually, I remember him on Tech Ticker saying stocks were extremely oversold in March, and would outperform.  Now he's pretty bearish again.

[Mark Jr.]

My take on Faber is he calls it like he sees it, and if people want to listen, fine.

 

He puts out his newsletter, interested parties buy it (like me).

 

Contrast with (I was going to say Dent, but I can do better: Bob Prechter): People like this are "doing material". They have a schtick, they have an angle, they have a product and that product is their worldview.

 

Their profits are derived, not from taking money out of the market, and not from owning good businesses. They make their money from "information publishing" - except what they are selling isn't really information, it's opinion. Their opinion.

 

The truth is, information marketing done effectively is a license to print money. And if your "information" is really just your opinion dolled up to look like a thinking man's analysis then it's even better, because you can literally pull it out of your ass and sell it to credulous people for hard cash.

 

There have been very few newsletter writers / advisors who I think are top tier: They just want to put out their coverage and do their thing. Among them I count Marc Faber, William Buckley (The Privateer) and formerly: Marc Rostenko - The Sovereign Strategist, who basically quit the business in disgust.

 

The far more numerous circus acts include, the aforementioned Bob "Elliot Waves Rule the World" Prechter, Harry "I can predict exactly what will happen unless this other thing happens instead" Dent, Bob "you pay me and I spam you" Czeschin and then pretty well everybody who writes for Agora Publishing.

 

How do you tell the difference? When you subscribe to the former, you never get bombarded with marketing upsells and they tend not to sell their lists (from what I can tell). The latter do, boy do they ever.