Ben,
Good point, but just for the record,
I was not referring to my market letter, not that I am saying that I have one because
that could be construed as advertising, so hypothetically speaking if I have a market
letter, I wasn’t making any reference to it. This illustrates how difficult
it is to share information under the current rules, in this case replying that I
wasn’t referening something I may or may not do, because that would be acknowledging
that I may offer a market letter, so that could be construed as advertising.
Regards,
Norm
From: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ben
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005
12:44 AM
To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [RT] Long Only
Commodity Funds
Since no advertizing allowed
he can not say that his own mkt letter (which
has performence verified)
done better than the fund in 1,3 and 5 year
performance
Ben
----- Original Message -----
From: <redbean17@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 8:27 PM
Subject: RE: [RT] Long Only Commodity Funds
> At 07:55 PM 9/28/2005, you wrote:
>>Redbeans,
>> That s good performance, but
I am aware of much better.
>> Of course, past performance
is no gurantee of future results.
>>Norm
>
> Norm
>
> Now, don't be a tease. Please elaborate for
curiosity's sake.
>
> red beans
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database:
267.11.8/113 - Release Date: 9/27/2005
>
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.8/113 -
Release Date: 9/27/2005
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS