I am 80 years old, experienced a 80% drop in wealth during 2020-2021 with AMZN stock and wanted a conservative focus with the $1 million I had left to invest and live on. The Bonner team for 2 years have been FANTISTIC. Porter and Co has lost on every bet I took with them; same with others. Tom Dyson and Dan Demming are the BEST. Drop Porter and Co from your focus.
Over 10 years ago I signed up with Stansberry Research and I received a good education. They sent me more and more pay research to sign up for, spending over $6,000 and more. And at one time, I responded that I was not interested anymore on any more offer. A lady kept calling me, sending more email, mail and one more time, I responded by email that I was not interested and to remove for sending more notifications, it was a non-stop. So, I wasn't sure if my emails were going anywhere and to check on to see if anyone was reading my email, I verify where that sell person were living at that location that I found...and yes, she was receiving my emails. It turned out to be a threat/security from myself concerning their sale person team and they terminate my account and it turn out to be perfect. They canceled and refund my crypto cash flow from Eric Wade subscription and other paid subscriptions.
Bottom line, this company is not going to evolve much more, all they want is to sell more and more and more of their stuff, they are going up 2 steps and down 3 steps. And it turn out to be perfect with Tom Dyson and the Bonner team that I signed up when I was kick out from Stansberry research from their on going harassment. I am making more money now with Tom portfolio because before I was all around the place and I thought that because I was busy I will get paid more but turn out to be a disillusioned. A good place for research, but do you need all of it?
I had the same experience about 20 years ago. Each of their analysts has his own letters. First they come out with one for 99$. After a little while the have a second letter the silver edition for $199 and after that comes the gold edition for $299. Or they come out with super advice for a life time valued at $10000. But if you subscribe right now you get it for $3000 and a yearly fee of $35 covering their publication costs. They (several outfits ) are trying to do business the same way. They no longer want to help the rich people they want to advice the little people. One of the few Investment letters who do it an honest way is BPR with Tom Dyson their financial expert. Yes ,BPR raised their subscription fees but they gave ample warning and all the old subscribers had the chance to be grand fathered in.
Porter never seems to run out of biggest stories of his career, though he has made some very good calls over the years. He claims that this story "goes far beyond artificial intelligence and machine learning" - perhaps true, but this report from Goldman Sachs on the limitations of AI in cold economics makes for a sobering read:
"The report includes an interview with economist Daron Acemoglu of MIT (page 4), an Institute Professor who published a paper back in May called "The Simple Macroeconomics of AI" that argued that "the upside to US productivity and, consequently, GDP growth from generative AI will likely prove much more limited than many forecasters expect." A month has only made Acemoglu more pessimistic, declaring that "truly transformative changes won't happen quickly and few – if any – will likely occur within the next 10 years," and that generative AI's ability to affect global productivity is low because "many of the tasks that humans currently perform...are multi-faceted and require realworld interaction, which AI won't be able to materially improve anytime soon." "
"Francois Chollet — an AI researcher at Google — recently argued that LLMs can't lead to AGI, explaining (in detail) that models like GPT are simply not capable of the kind of reasoning and theorizing that makes a human brain work. Chollet also notes that even models specifically built to complete the tasks of the Abstraction & Reasoning Corpus (a benchmark test for AI skills and true "intelligence") are only doing so because they've been fed millions of datapoints of people solving the test, which is kind of like measuring somebody's IQ based on them studying really hard to complete an IQ test, except even dumber. "
"In plain English: generative AI isn't making any money for anybody because it doesn't actually make companies that use it any extra money. Efficiency is useful, but it is not company-defining. He also adds that hyperscalers like Google and Microsoft will "also garner incremental revenue" from AI — not the huge returns they’re perhaps counting on, given their vast AI-related expenditure over the past two years. "
The jury is still out for me on the financial implications of ANY computing power. I do prefer Tom Dyson's cautious approach in these times of hype.
Shame on Bonner. This just another scam to make money. Over the years I have ssen many of Stansberry predictions. They do not track them as they should for the public to see the results. That is nor how honest touts work. BEWARE
Just to be clear, this research comes from Porter's new company, not Stansberry research (a company that bears his name but which he was not managing for several years). In any case, I published the note because it has links to his four part series on parallel processing, which I found outstanding. If you read the work and you disagreed, fair enough. You don't have to subscribe to anything to read that work for free (and benefit from it). I also am attentive to people who do research that may not agree entirely with BPR;'s core investment thesis. It keeps us on our toes and it makes us think and work to make sure we haven't missed something important. If you read that four part series and walk away from it thinking you didn't learn anything useful or valuable, I'd be shocked. We don't accept paid advertising from anyone. And when someone we know and trust and respect publishes something we think you could benefit from, we're happy to share it. That's what we're doing here. Definitely not ashamed. And if you feel strongly about that (or anyone does, for that matter) please contact me directly. I'm happy to refund anyone's money . It's true that there are many predictions out there that are outlandish, hyperbolic, and unreasonable (and to be fair, some people have accused US of making such predictions). But Porter's work is great and we're happy to pass it on to BPR readers for further consideration.
Thank you Dan for sharing this. I will not buy their product, but the series about parallel computing is amazing. I think there is now part 5 and 6 coming. Really great information. I will follow the development of these stocks and eventually buy cheap (when Dow Gold ratio is 5 😀). Keep going with useful Intel…
I don't trust Porter. I have been an Alliance member for over 15 years which entitles me to all of the publications at Stansberry Research. Except when they partner with someone else and charge an additional fee to access their research. They employ some 15 analysts so not sure what the necessity is to find others. Back to Porter, he left Stansberry in the middle of the night and sold out for a few billions. (He says that he was screwed out of that money). Some of the analysts left like Eifrig are exceptional, but they still try to hook up with outside writers to collect additional fees. Maybe Porter and Company will be a success, but I won't be putting any of my money there. Bonner approach works for me. However, I don't like that they share their research with Stansberry.
I too am a former Stansberry subscriber, with same mixed experiences. His research is top-notch, no question in my mind. But yeah, the constant upsell, the 3rd time I politely refuse the $10K upgrade... gets old.
The $$$ I spent over the years was well worth it in that I *learned* the concepts and discipline of patience for your entry point, don't get in without an exit strategy, risk management. He still has my full respect in that sense.
But I too prefer the BPR model. Ask any coach, you win more games with a team hitting singles and doubles every time than the guy who either hits a grand slam or strikes out.
Dan, Tom, Bill - keep doing what you're doing and yes, please DO continue to share info of this sort. May not be a good fit for many BPR readers, but still good to think outside the box
Porter and Co has the same MO as Stansberry. They know how to dress up a 10 minute story into an hour long history. It seems like some great information … for an investment 2+ years from now!
You are Big on Books that’s good I read a lot so thought you might be interested in Martin Armstrong book The Biggest stock Bubble Go to Martin Armstrong web sit & read about it .
Porter warned of the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of the world many years ago. Today we are living his prediction. That was the day I began learning and I am still at it today. I thank BPR, Porter and all for the eye opener and the knowledge to prepare.
Don't let the cry babies get you down, Dan. No one forced them to read Porter's missive, so you don't owe any of them an apology. Good Lord, it's incredible what people will whine about these days.
By the way, I found the four part series extremely interesting.
Just curious...did you read the four-part series in the middle? If you did and thought it was a waste of time...our apologies! We can't hit a home run every time.
Like Bill and yourself, Dan, Porter is another that I have been able to confidently rely on to give me the truth as he sees it. Not always right, or sometimes very early, but all you will ever get from him are genuine and well argued ideas!
I am 80 years old, experienced a 80% drop in wealth during 2020-2021 with AMZN stock and wanted a conservative focus with the $1 million I had left to invest and live on. The Bonner team for 2 years have been FANTISTIC. Porter and Co has lost on every bet I took with them; same with others. Tom Dyson and Dan Demming are the BEST. Drop Porter and Co from your focus.
Over 10 years ago I signed up with Stansberry Research and I received a good education. They sent me more and more pay research to sign up for, spending over $6,000 and more. And at one time, I responded that I was not interested anymore on any more offer. A lady kept calling me, sending more email, mail and one more time, I responded by email that I was not interested and to remove for sending more notifications, it was a non-stop. So, I wasn't sure if my emails were going anywhere and to check on to see if anyone was reading my email, I verify where that sell person were living at that location that I found...and yes, she was receiving my emails. It turned out to be a threat/security from myself concerning their sale person team and they terminate my account and it turn out to be perfect. They canceled and refund my crypto cash flow from Eric Wade subscription and other paid subscriptions.
Bottom line, this company is not going to evolve much more, all they want is to sell more and more and more of their stuff, they are going up 2 steps and down 3 steps. And it turn out to be perfect with Tom Dyson and the Bonner team that I signed up when I was kick out from Stansberry research from their on going harassment. I am making more money now with Tom portfolio because before I was all around the place and I thought that because I was busy I will get paid more but turn out to be a disillusioned. A good place for research, but do you need all of it?
I had the same experience about 20 years ago. Each of their analysts has his own letters. First they come out with one for 99$. After a little while the have a second letter the silver edition for $199 and after that comes the gold edition for $299. Or they come out with super advice for a life time valued at $10000. But if you subscribe right now you get it for $3000 and a yearly fee of $35 covering their publication costs. They (several outfits ) are trying to do business the same way. They no longer want to help the rich people they want to advice the little people. One of the few Investment letters who do it an honest way is BPR with Tom Dyson their financial expert. Yes ,BPR raised their subscription fees but they gave ample warning and all the old subscribers had the chance to be grand fathered in.
Porter never seems to run out of biggest stories of his career, though he has made some very good calls over the years. He claims that this story "goes far beyond artificial intelligence and machine learning" - perhaps true, but this report from Goldman Sachs on the limitations of AI in cold economics makes for a sobering read:
https://images.mauldineconomics.com/uploads/pdf/20240718_OMS_AI-Zitron.pdf
Here are a couple extracts:
"The report includes an interview with economist Daron Acemoglu of MIT (page 4), an Institute Professor who published a paper back in May called "The Simple Macroeconomics of AI" that argued that "the upside to US productivity and, consequently, GDP growth from generative AI will likely prove much more limited than many forecasters expect." A month has only made Acemoglu more pessimistic, declaring that "truly transformative changes won't happen quickly and few – if any – will likely occur within the next 10 years," and that generative AI's ability to affect global productivity is low because "many of the tasks that humans currently perform...are multi-faceted and require realworld interaction, which AI won't be able to materially improve anytime soon." "
"Francois Chollet — an AI researcher at Google — recently argued that LLMs can't lead to AGI, explaining (in detail) that models like GPT are simply not capable of the kind of reasoning and theorizing that makes a human brain work. Chollet also notes that even models specifically built to complete the tasks of the Abstraction & Reasoning Corpus (a benchmark test for AI skills and true "intelligence") are only doing so because they've been fed millions of datapoints of people solving the test, which is kind of like measuring somebody's IQ based on them studying really hard to complete an IQ test, except even dumber. "
"In plain English: generative AI isn't making any money for anybody because it doesn't actually make companies that use it any extra money. Efficiency is useful, but it is not company-defining. He also adds that hyperscalers like Google and Microsoft will "also garner incremental revenue" from AI — not the huge returns they’re perhaps counting on, given their vast AI-related expenditure over the past two years. "
The jury is still out for me on the financial implications of ANY computing power. I do prefer Tom Dyson's cautious approach in these times of hype.
Shame on Bonner. This just another scam to make money. Over the years I have ssen many of Stansberry predictions. They do not track them as they should for the public to see the results. That is nor how honest touts work. BEWARE
Just to be clear, this research comes from Porter's new company, not Stansberry research (a company that bears his name but which he was not managing for several years). In any case, I published the note because it has links to his four part series on parallel processing, which I found outstanding. If you read the work and you disagreed, fair enough. You don't have to subscribe to anything to read that work for free (and benefit from it). I also am attentive to people who do research that may not agree entirely with BPR;'s core investment thesis. It keeps us on our toes and it makes us think and work to make sure we haven't missed something important. If you read that four part series and walk away from it thinking you didn't learn anything useful or valuable, I'd be shocked. We don't accept paid advertising from anyone. And when someone we know and trust and respect publishes something we think you could benefit from, we're happy to share it. That's what we're doing here. Definitely not ashamed. And if you feel strongly about that (or anyone does, for that matter) please contact me directly. I'm happy to refund anyone's money . It's true that there are many predictions out there that are outlandish, hyperbolic, and unreasonable (and to be fair, some people have accused US of making such predictions). But Porter's work is great and we're happy to pass it on to BPR readers for further consideration.
Thank you for clarifying BPR’s position. I’m also wary of the constant sales cycle where the next tier up will get you the info you really want.😉
Wow…a tough crowd for you Dan… I appreciate the cross pollination, and as you say…thought provoking for no cost (other than a bit of time).
Thank you Dan for sharing this. I will not buy their product, but the series about parallel computing is amazing. I think there is now part 5 and 6 coming. Really great information. I will follow the development of these stocks and eventually buy cheap (when Dow Gold ratio is 5 😀). Keep going with useful Intel…
I don't trust Porter. I have been an Alliance member for over 15 years which entitles me to all of the publications at Stansberry Research. Except when they partner with someone else and charge an additional fee to access their research. They employ some 15 analysts so not sure what the necessity is to find others. Back to Porter, he left Stansberry in the middle of the night and sold out for a few billions. (He says that he was screwed out of that money). Some of the analysts left like Eifrig are exceptional, but they still try to hook up with outside writers to collect additional fees. Maybe Porter and Company will be a success, but I won't be putting any of my money there. Bonner approach works for me. However, I don't like that they share their research with Stansberry.
I too am a former Stansberry subscriber, with same mixed experiences. His research is top-notch, no question in my mind. But yeah, the constant upsell, the 3rd time I politely refuse the $10K upgrade... gets old.
The $$$ I spent over the years was well worth it in that I *learned* the concepts and discipline of patience for your entry point, don't get in without an exit strategy, risk management. He still has my full respect in that sense.
But I too prefer the BPR model. Ask any coach, you win more games with a team hitting singles and doubles every time than the guy who either hits a grand slam or strikes out.
Dan, Tom, Bill - keep doing what you're doing and yes, please DO continue to share info of this sort. May not be a good fit for many BPR readers, but still good to think outside the box
Porter and Co has the same MO as Stansberry. They know how to dress up a 10 minute story into an hour long history. It seems like some great information … for an investment 2+ years from now!
Wow brilliant copywriting, I wonter if Proter is doing his own writing of jobbing it out to one of the few direct marketing pros.
Is this like when Porter was all in on Bitcoin & crypto??? Now something else??? Meh 🫤
You are Big on Books that’s good I read a lot so thought you might be interested in Martin Armstrong book The Biggest stock Bubble Go to Martin Armstrong web sit & read about it .
Porter warned of the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of the world many years ago. Today we are living his prediction. That was the day I began learning and I am still at it today. I thank BPR, Porter and all for the eye opener and the knowledge to prepare.
Sad you guys are just shills for Stanberry. Enjoy your measly commission you get from him. Used car salesman.
Don't let the cry babies get you down, Dan. No one forced them to read Porter's missive, so you don't owe any of them an apology. Good Lord, it's incredible what people will whine about these days.
By the way, I found the four part series extremely interesting.
Very disappointed in BPR to be sent this sales pitch to waste my sunday afternoon on. Shame on you all. Guess its all about the money
Just curious...did you read the four-part series in the middle? If you did and thought it was a waste of time...our apologies! We can't hit a home run every time.
Like Bill and yourself, Dan, Porter is another that I have been able to confidently rely on to give me the truth as he sees it. Not always right, or sometimes very early, but all you will ever get from him are genuine and well argued ideas!