This week Cameco put out a press release setting things right after "misleading & erroneous" information was put out. The all but proven culprit, was James Dines who has a strong following of lemmings who claim he is a guru with clairvoyant ability and the www.DinesLetter.com site claims Mr. Dines forecasted accurately the gold bull market, the internet stocks boom and uranium boom. Research shows that James Dines is nothing special and not among the best according to leading independent market newsletter digest.
The rankings are compiled by Hulbert Financial Digest, a financial newsletter that tracks financial newsletters, and you can see the rankings as of 2/28/06 from the View sample issue link at:
� Past 25 years - #1 The Prudent Speculator 18.4% annual gain. Dines is not even in the top 5 which is remarkable given he has been doing this since 1960.
� Past 20 years - #1 Louis Navellier's Emerging Growth 18% annual gain. James Dines not even in top 5.
� Past 15 years - #1 The Prudent Speculator 25.2% annual gain. Dines once again is not even in the top 5.
� Past 10 years - #1 Prudent Speculator 23.4% annual gain. Dines is not even in the top 5 ... quite remarkable given he takes credit for first recognizing the Internet boom (Al Gore would be so proud).
� Past 5 years - #1 Outstanding Investments Letter 33.3% annual gain. Dines Letter comes in at #4 ... probably off of the strength of his Cameco CCJ recommendation which he is now negative on. Interesting that 4th place is the best James Dines newsletter can deliver given that he self proclaims himself as the "the original uranium bull."
The Prudent Speculator is published by Al Frank, seems a lot more ethical & better performing than TDL and they publish their track record on their WWW site at:
Hulbert has disliked Dines for at least 10 years every since Dines publically questioned his comments on a number of investing issues, as well as the correctness and accuracy of his digest data.
Dines says, "Hulbert, frequesntly wrong but never in doubt." Dines has not mentioned Hul in several years.
I was up in quadruple digets from 1997 to about late 2000 early 2001 on Internet using Dines' picks. Followed Dines into PM and uranium in 2001 and since and up average triple digit profits. His ability to identify major trends very early is astonishing. His call on Whole Foods (he does pick other winners and that is nice).
Also, his observations on health (not stock, recomendations for YOU, is worth the cost of the newsletter. If you go with TDL also buy the Early Warning Bulletin. Both worth the cost dozens of times over.
BIG WARNING, if you subscribe READ thoroughly his accompanying booklet how how to use the Letter. Also, buy all of his hard cover books on investing and financial study that you can afford. FOLLOW HIS ADVICE. BE PATIENT. If you are inpatient, like margin and such Dines is NOT for you.
His education on charts and trends is well worth any newsletter cost. His picks are a huge bonus of course.
I am puzzled though at his lack of interest in WATER as a major trend- compnies that own water rights, companies that purify it and so forth.
It may be that he believes that it will be nationalized sooner than oil and may therefore not be worth the risk.
ON TOPIC I really would like to know exactly how bad the flooding problem is at Cigar Lake. Buying as much uranium as they did clearly shows that they plan on not being able to produce a very significant amount of the metal for some time. In no way could a well-schooled investor look at that situation and be pleased. They lost a great deal of money no matter how you look at it - and if the problem is really bad the consequences CCJ could be in realy troubl. I bought early per Dines and then sold 50% per Dines and reinvested in smaller high quality picks such as IUC and SRX which have their own mines and mills.
Being diversified and not on margin I'm all profits many times over, paid for the houses, two college educations, and still planning what to do when the sell signal arrives.
I agree Tin Man. Hulbert's rewarded one newsletter
that I subscribed to for a few years. I placed every
stock which they picked on one of my Telechart watch
list and watched. After two years over 70% of their
picks were lower (much lower in some cases) then their
recommended buy price. I E-mailed Hulbert's and advised
them if one purchases a stock at $100 and seven years
later sells it for $120 that is not a 20% annualized return.
Needless to say, they did not reply.
well I can only speak for myself. I am started with Dines about 5 years ago. I have run 60k to over a million dollars. YOu figure out the percentage!
This is truly no bullshit. However, follow whomever you want. I can tell you this, he has a mottos "The Killing Of A Lifetime". I am a believer because it has happened to me.
Have not done as well as you (dont have as much money)
but I am up almost 60% in the past year. I have no idea
why there is so much hate directed to Mr. Dines it seems
that some expect his picks to go up immediately and
if do not they trash him. As he stated in his last
letter "riding out volatility as we await uranium
mining stocks moving into new all-time high ground"
I sure hope he is right. Good Luck.
Imho, you are missing the point of Dines, CaseyResearch, SilverStockReport.com, Grandich, etc.. These are contrarian investing newsletters, whereas Prudent appears to be a list of mainstream stocks (e.g. Apple Computer).
The contrarian investor buys things which are universally hated by the mainstream investor. We look for things that people hate, e.g. right now we like small junior explorers which most investors think are too risky.
When we "sit tight and be right", then we make 1000% gains over 3 - 4 year periods.
Dines' picks overall are not exceptional, because he has 5 sections, some of which are targetted to the conservative investor. Those of us who cherry pick his most prospective smallest market cap explorers, end up with 1000% gains over 3 - 4 year periods.
Interesting post regarding Dines has a "conservative" portfolio suggesting that brings down his performance record.
Shelby, tell me what you think Cameco is a SELL which your post rating gives it. I am interested in learning your contrarian viewpoint on Cameco.
Let me tell you about the Prudent Speculator of which
I was the unfortunate subscriber for over 3 years.
The very reason I subscribed was because of its rating
with Hulbert, boy I was I ever wrong. First, their
average holding period is 6 to 7 years, second I still
have all of their picks on my Telechart watchlist from
three years ago and probably 70% are still below the
price they recommended at. Third, and most importantly,
their returns are not annualized. Factor in say a 3%
return from a CD over 6 years and your investment would
be up 18%, which is the same price their investments are.
Bullshit, someone has got their facts wrong.