Is Porter Stansberry a fraud?

By captshnuff, January 21, 2014

This is a discussion topic or guest posting submitted by a Stock Gumshoe reader. The content has not been edited or reviewed by Stock Gumshoe, and any opinions expressed are those of the author alone.

I believe, and have long believed, that Porter Stansberry is a blatant, scare-mongering fraud. I’m surprised, Travis, that you even include his oft-wacky meanderings. Google ”porter stansberry fraud” and it might make one wonder…

Leave a Reply

21 Comments on " Is Porter Stansberry a fraud?"

avatar

Travis Johnson, Stock Gumshoe
Admin
4426
January 21, 2014 2:36 pm
We delight in covering the wacky. The more often wacky and the more ridiculous the promise or the “secret”, the better. Porter’s organization is bigger than most and they have pushed the envelope on hype-y “secret” teaser pitches more than most (Porter says his firm invented the “video presentation” ad that so plagues us today, among other things), and the SEC did get a fraud conviction against Porter and his firm based on a 2003 teaser pitch in which he apparently claimed insider info and sold a report based on that insider info (the source, I think it was at… Read more »
ronmador
Irregular
2
ronmador
April 11, 2014 10:38 pm
Travis, You may be interested in my most recent experience with S&A. I’ve been a subscriber to the SIA for more than three years, primarily interested in keeping abreast of Porter’s unique and mostly interesting assessment of the markets, etc. As you alluded to, his firm markets their products most aggressively. After being deluged with an incessant number of emails (at least a dozen or more) soliciting one of their more expensive services (which frankly I could not implement anyway because it requires selling puts which is denied me in my accounts), but even more egregious, being personally ridiculed for… Read more »
Travis Johnson, Stock Gumshoe
Admin
4426
April 12, 2014 9:08 am

Thanks Ronald — like most places I imagine it’s a bit of an echo chamber at S&A, part of their shtick is that they’re arrogant because they’re right (and indeed, part of Porter’s specific ad spiel in the past is that you should subscribe even though he’s an as***le. He’s a fine guy in person when I’ve met him, though he certainly cultivates the arrogant air.)

james
Guest
0
james
March 21, 2015 5:06 pm

What about his 2011 predictions of Germany leaving EU, dollar losing reserve status and advising to go 50/50 cash gold ?

sct2ali
Irregular
34
sct2ali
March 21, 2015 8:06 pm
Well, the “interesting” thing about all the various newsletter writers and their advertising hacks – at Stansberry & Associates, Oxford Club (for their “premium services”), Angel Publishing, etc – is that they NEVER seem to own up to it when their grand predictions don’t pan out. It’s simply part of the “industry”…they just come up with more and “grander” ones. I forget what Porter’s “grand apocalyptic certainty” was for last July – but never happened. Never stopped him for a second. (It seems that Baltimore is home to a huge percentage of the loudest hyper shouters – don’t know if… Read more »
advantedges
Member
56
advantedges
January 22, 2014 3:03 pm
So, what is the lesson for those who have followed Stansberry or Rush Limbaugh or any number of wacky politicians (can you say the name of the Mayor of Toronto without laughing?)? Clearly, unless there is a major correction in the US Market combined with a rapid rise in gold/silver, Stansberry may very well be more than a wacko: He may have lost “his” investors millions of dollars (both in real and opportunity costs). If the market was up @ 30% last year, and gold was down 25%, that is clearly a net loss of @45- 55% depending on the… Read more »
e knee
Guest
0
e knee
January 22, 2014 5:30 pm

i did follow his avise and quarupled my investment with usec in three weeks.

Jim Briggs
Guest
0
Jim Briggs
January 22, 2014 8:15 pm
For e knee: That can’t possibly be true, if you’re talking about the recommendation for which Porter Stansberry was convicted of fraud. I followed that case closely through the SEC’s successful prosecution of Stansberry (he appealed his conviction and million dollar fine, and lost, all the way up to the US Supreme Court), and I had some direct e-mail exchanges about the case with Porter himself in later years (which I still retain in a computer file). Porter — well, he wrote his “fraudulent” (per the court) hype in pseudo, so he didn’t use his own name — advised buying… Read more »
advantedges
Member
56
advantedges
January 23, 2014 12:48 am

Jim Briggs and Travis Johnson
Why isn’t there a way to warn unsuspecting subscribers to the dangers of investing with people or organizations that have been convicted of fraud in their investment advisory and publication businesses? I had no idea that “Porter Stansberry” had been convicted of fraud and had to pay a huge fine! I wonder what other alias’ Stansberry uses? Thank you for sharing this valuable information!!

Jim Briggs
Guest
0
Jim Briggs
January 23, 2014 5:12 am
The investment newsletter business is incredibly difficult to regulate (from what I’ve seen over the past 10-12 years), because you get into First Amendment issues and newsletters are usually (from what I’ve seen) written to emphasize that their recommendations are just that – “recommendations” – and not “personal” investment “advice.” Stansberry got into trouble because he wrote a “special report” making a direct pitch (unusual in this business) to buy USEC stock on a specific date (21 May) and sell it on a specific date (23 May), saying that one would then “make a fortune.” In a come-on sent to… Read more »
Investor
Guest
0
Investor
January 24, 2014 5:30 pm
It must be pointed out that the “free speech” issue that Mr. Stansberry likes to cast his conflict with the “government” as, was only a rear-echelon First Amendment issue for his defense platform. If he still genuinely believes this, his counsel did a poor job of explaining the law to him because (a) the text in question was a marketing piece, i.e., “commercial speech”, which enjoys a lesser degree of constitutional protection to begin with and commands a lesser level of scrutiny. And (b) fraudulent speech, i.e., speech intended to deceive a potential buyer, enjoys no protection at all, especially… Read more »
Jim Briggs
Guest
0
Jim Briggs
January 25, 2014 4:24 am
Having read both the original court verdict and the appellate court decision upholding the guilty verdict against Stansberry, I don’t disagree with your analysis. But there were a whole lot of very prominent media organizations that wrote briefs (and some published articles…including the New York Times and Wall Street Journal) supporting Stansberry on First Amendment grounds: The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, The American Society of News Editors, The Associated Press, The Association of American Publishers, Inc., The Radio Television Digital News Association, The Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression, The Society of Professional Journalists,… Read more »
George Hedenström
Guest
0
January 27, 2014 12:11 am

Everything is What you want it To Be

The Blind DayTrader
Guest
0
The Blind DayTrader
January 23, 2014 6:32 am
I have subscribed to many S&A letters over the years, and canceled most of them in the trial period. I keep a subscription to their Daily Wealth Premium ($5 per month), and to Retirement Millionaer ($80 or so a year). The latter because it’s quite interesting and non-standard. I’ve tried others, and while some have made me money, many haven’t. It’s all in your investing style, and in your level of speculation and time outlook. Porter takes the long Libertarian view, and because of his beliefes about the economy, is willing to ride the wild swings in gold and such,… Read more »
Jim Briggs
Guest
0
Jim Briggs
June 2, 2014 3:42 pm
Well, it’s not a question of anyone calling Porter a “fraud.” It’s a simple fact that Porter was convicted of “fraud” by a US federal court of law and fined (he and his company) something like $1.5 million – a decision he appealed up to the Supreme Court, and lost. Porter says he spent something like $3 million in legal costs. (As Investor noted, the Appeals Court opinion was particularly scathing.) Incredibly, Porter used the recommendation for which he was convicted of fraud, shortly thereafter, as part of his hype for a new service selling puts, claiming his USEC stock… Read more »
advantedges
Member
56
advantedges
January 23, 2014 11:52 pm

Jim Briggs I agree that the Oxford Communique is good value. The proof is the success they have had with their portfolio. Most of their recommendations have done extremely well, and they are a buy and Hold group. The price I saw was @ 60 to 100 dollars a year. Good Value.

Investor
Guest
0
Investor
January 26, 2014 1:52 pm

The number of amicus briefs didn’t surprise me. Not to cast aspersions on the issuing attorneys, but one can obtain those for between US$ 500-2000 apiece from the respective interest groups. In addition these groups deal mostly in genuine First Amendment & media law issues and are unaware of just how fluid the demarkations between commercial and editorial speech are in the direct-marketed newsletter industry
.

Kenneth Groeppe
Guest
0
Kenneth Groeppe
July 7, 2014 10:48 pm
As with anything in this world, you have to be careful. You cannot trust anyone. Not the government, not big business, nobody, because they are all thieves and liars. You pays your money and you takes your chances. I’ve learned that lesson the hard way. You read the opinions and you make your own decisions. After all, no one can predict the future. I had the experience of following one advisor for 25 years, and I made quite a bit of money, but in 2008, his whole operation crashed and burned and 2/3 of my retirement went with it. That… Read more »
wpDiscuz