Replies to post #6760 on A.I.M. Users Bulletin Board (AIMUSERS)

[karw]

I can fully agree with this post!
AIM is a portfolio management system and it determines the ratio of shares and money in all markets!
It is very interesting that PC control grows nicely. When you have one share in your machine you see that PC/share follows the price.
In the Vortex system, addressing the so-called FLAW, Portfolio Control is all over the place,up and down. PC/share is after each transaction precisely on the price.
I find this amazing that PC/share is reasonable close, but PC is completely different for AIM and Vortex.
The Vortex system as well as XDEV are systems that allow you to trade small cores with relatively large transactions, XDEV with the multipliers, Vortex with the agressivities.
Mr Lichello made sure that it is not easy to break AIM and tweak AIMs parameters for a portfolio in an easy way!

[The Grabber]

Bernie: My apologies. I didn't mean to misquote you. I was cutting and pasting sentences when crafting the post and got things a little discombobulated.

What I meant to say was that you were correct in that if you are investing with an eye towards dividends as being a major component in your return expectations, then by all means you should put all your $ in it. I didn't mean to imply that you supported not investing totally if it wasn't a high yield instrument.

You've made it clear (and for many good reasons) you don't yet support LD-AIM, and that's OK. I accept your opinion.

I maintain that it may yet prove to be a very powerful and flexible approach to investing using AIM. Especially if used as a seedling approach to start new programs with fewer $. Certainly it is clear that if one were to start a new program using LD-AIM; and then let standard AIM manage it long term (in Warren Time?), the difference in total $ return one method versus another would diminish. If this is true, then the $ saved on that initial purchase could also be used to start another program. Therfore you would be more diversified lowering your risk probability to some degree.

Again I apologize.

Regards, Steve

[Undertakr]

That was the best post I have read here ever! Excellent post.

While I hate to go on a rant here, it is seeming to me that many times the posts are mear advertisements for specific $150 stock programs and are not based on discussion, debate or 'fact' (and by fact I mean saying your program made 3000% gains AFTER THE FACT and going back and manipulating history to get 3000% returns is not 'fact' as should be described in trading stocks in my opinion.)

I hope we can continue the debates and the interesting and intelligent discussions and avoid the 'my $150 software program can beat your $150 software program' contests that have lately been posted.

While I'm glad there is software out there for everyone to use, and no doubt they all have their pros and cons, maybe an AIM Investing Software discussion group should be made for such thing.

I'm with you, that Warren guy seems to know what he's talking about. ;)

- Steve