As far as Saul, to me no matter what returns he claims in the past he simply comes across to me as incredibly naive and inexperienced. His insistence on reminding his following in every post of his super-human investment past is to me a huge warning sign both as to his credibility and more importantly his assumption that anything like this is sustainable.

In the late 1990's our investment club had a 10 year record of 35% annual returns because we waded into Cisco, EMC, Intel, Microsoft, etc. at the "right" time. We began selling all of them, but within a month or two our portfolio fell from $1.3 million to less than $400,000. Unlike Saul, we knew we were on shaky ground, we just didn't move fast enough.

Saul's hyper moves from stocks to other stocks is praised by his following but to me is yet another sign of something not so good. One month he won't even let a poster mention anything about some stock he's saying had endless growth ahead, then the price plummets and he's off to another planet stating the former stock has problems- the very problems he would not allow to be discussed a month before.

Saul's is fun, actually delightful, cult to watch. But it is clearly a controlled substance and if you gotta play that game you've got to allow Saul to be your superior. He owns the game and has some serious backup supporters.

It comes across to me as nothing but silly and outrageously immature. Nothing more and nothing less.