Ven, thanks for posting these. It just emphasizes my point! The guy is a snake.Veneratio said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGkrNJ19DSU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nkZ3eHeXlc
and for the grand finale,
http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/index.jhtml?episodeId=220533
And I could go on and on and on.
Forum > Cramer At It Again....
Displaying entries 21 - 38 of 38 forum posts in total
12
|
Posted July 05, 2009 (10:28AM)
|
|
Posted July 06, 2009 (01:03AM)
I'm very ambivalent about Cramer. He has given some good advice that I've made money off of (like buying stock in increments as it falls, hitting the bottom is improbable). When he trashes indexing, he sounds insane. He has attacked naked short selling, which should have been made illegal yesterday. I wish he would go more after the fraudulent bear raiding of the naked short seller. Also, I agree with his attacks on leveraged and inverse ETFs. These new types of ETFs lose value solely due to volatility even if you make the correct bet. There is an excellent webinar on them somewhere. Ones like SKF should be gone. With the current hypervolatility they are only useful for daytraders (they were useful to a month at inception).
|
|
Posted July 06, 2009 (01:41AM)
I Gotta stick up for Carmer. He's made me money. Not because I've blindly followed his stock picks, but because I did my own DD, as he suggests. If you wanna attack him, please do so on the basis of his overall investment strategy, not because of his individual stock picks.
Ven - I respect you. I just happen to disagree with you on this point. If you want to atack Cramer, feel free to do so. Noone is perfect. He's advocated boners in his past, as have we all. Attack his investment philsophy. There I think you will have greater difficulty. He himself says to do your own DD. Like I said, he's made me money, so this is my basis for my defense, nothing personal. Pax, ~~Weird Uncle Jesse~~ |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted July 06, 2009 (04:13AM)
Definitely UncleJesse, nothing personal.
It's impossible to expect someone to make impromptu stock picks day in and day out. It's just not feasible. Yet so many people take Cramer's word for it. They latch onto anything he says. And CNBC fuels this ridiculous mindset by advertising crap like "In Cramer we trust," "All you need is Cramer!" ect ect ect. The show is fundamentally flawed. If instead of looking out for himself and those in charge, Cramer could host a show where he actually helped people. The sad thing is I'm not sure such a show could even stay afloat in todays mainstream media. |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted July 06, 2009 (12:25PM)
Ven, I completely agree.
I don't want to undermine the possibility that Cramer is legitimately attempting to look out for the best interest of his viewers, nor that he's a "bad guy turned good", but I think he'd be much better served by not putting so much focus on specific stocks and promotioning individual companies and more focus on the how and why of sectors, indices and the economy. |
|
Posted July 06, 2009 (12:33PM)
Long time ago, late in the last century and early this one I was consulting at Nike in Beaverton, OR for a year. At that time they aired some commercials that were perceived very bad by everybody. Nike advertising people - happy as they can be. I asked them why and the answer was "no publicity is bad publicity". This is how I feel about Cramer, at least in my mind is mostly a show man and no publicity is bad for him. I doubt if his salary from CNBC depends on the performance of his picks
|
|
Posted July 06, 2009 (12:40PM)
The smart experts are dull, the dumber experts are sharp.... Nobody wants to listen to a dull expert.... He has curb appeal, he is crazy, and he sells adds... Entertainment... use his voice for a quick pop when he goes against... I wouldn't go after anything he says to buy...
I found that an analyst he is not.... an entertainer he is... Let him entertain you by holding bears and st.... |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted July 07, 2009 (12:06PM)
Someone who dislikes Cramer maybe more than I do... |
|
Posted July 07, 2009 (12:40PM)
I'll agree with what Otter said, he's definitely a showman and thats likely what he's paid to do.
A simple matter of deduction and you come to the conclusion that the best thing for Cramer to do is to stop promoting specific companies so much as general sectors, techniques for screening fundamentals, chart analysis (which isn't his forte) and the inside skinny on what hedge funds and institutional traders are doing. I almost completely ignore his segments where callers call in and ask if they're diversified, I barely pay attention to CEO's he interviews except they sometimes offer insights on their overall industry or the market. I'll be first to give him credit for his insights on hedge funds, fund of fund managers, analysts and many other non-specific advice that has given me food for thought and really helped my strategy. Even if his promotions don't benefit him, the old saying that you can feed a man a fish, or you can teach the man how to fish comes to mind. He does much better talking about the how and why of the market than what to buy. This is why I like Fast Money, they spend a lot more time openly debating the logic behind their often differing opinions, which really gives insights on my own portfolio and specific strategies. |
|
Posted July 07, 2009 (01:07PM)
I am not defending Cramer, but let's be realistic. Fast Money is geared more for traders, while his show is for the investing long-only crowd. He is up five days per week and recommends two-three stocks every day. It does not matter how good he might be (assuming he is any good of course) - he can not beat the market by much. And as we know the market has not been very kind to the long only crowd lately
|
|
Posted July 07, 2009 (01:38PM)
If Cramer and CNBC really wanted to do a proper show for the long -term investors, they should do so by recommending plays based on fundamentals. The problem is that the show tries to sell itself as a show for investors as Old Fart mentions and Cramer recommends stocks based on momentum and technicals (even though he will not admit it). |
|
Posted July 08, 2009 (04:19AM)
Just came across this thread and wanted to say: thanks for the
compliment, MrReed! Interacting with you folks not only keeps us informed as to
how we can improve our products and services, but it's also one of the
most fun parts of my job - really. So thanks to YOU for not minding
when I chime in now and then.
Be Good, Don |
|
Posted July 08, 2009 (04:28AM)
I am afraid that I can't take anyone too seriously, that actually follows the advice of Cramer. The guy is a bottom feeder. No different than the Snake Oil salesman. He is not looking out for you. He is looking out for old numero uno. He uses the guise of his Chartitable Foundation as a reason he dishes on most everything he pushes. He will listen to people on the phone and tell them .. "yeahhh.. that stock MIGHT be a decent one, but the one in my Charitable Foundation is soooooooo much better"...
Time to wake up and smell the coffee... and find yourself a better source of information. Happy Trading.. /:) |
|
Posted July 09, 2009 (06:41PM)
I had to dig this thread up and give credit where it's due.
Tonight, Cramer is doing EXACTLY what I started watching him for in the first place. He's discussing the cause and effects of market manipulation, and the conflicts of interest within the SEC. He offered a suggestion that SEC officials be given incentives for catching illegal activity. It's common sense, an ex Goldman Sachs employee that works for the SEC has everything to lose by taking notice of illegal activity....just as they did with Madoff. Give these officials more money for doing their job, it makes sense...there is absolutely no incentive for these guys to permenently black-list themselves in industry circles if they only have civil service pay to look forward to for the rest of their lives. This is what Cramer does best, insights on the inner workings of the market...for now I guess I'll eat some crow, humbly, and give Cramer some credit where it's due. I'm starting to wonder if he reads this forum..... |
|
Posted July 10, 2009 (03:00PM)
Cramer is a bright individual and his "handlers" at CNBC know that he lost a lot of credibility with the John Steward show video clips ...
How does he build credibility back up? he picks the populist side of a current debate and everyone swoons over how Cramer is great and booya this and booya that... It is good information no doubt. I would have some more respect for him if he came out and admitted to his own market manipulation as a hedge fund manager... Nothing worse than the pot calling the kettle black... |
|
Posted July 10, 2009 (03:13PM)
Cramer is a complete fraud. Go to youtube and do a search for Don Harrold. He does an excellent job of showing Jim Cramer for what he really is.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted July 10, 2009 (03:27PM)
here is the link where he tells how he did it and has a very flippant attitude about it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRa0B34jMOQ |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted July 10, 2009 (04:36PM)
WOW...twice he implicated Bob Pisani.and CNBC overall,.as well as openly states that hedge funds work together to manipulate.
I have to credit him for one thing, if nothing else...if he wasn't coming out and talking about these activities, which he regularly discusses on his show, we likely wouldn't be having this discussion. I do not think Cramer is a "good guy" for his deeds, but when you consider the fact that he's the only one in the business beyond Markopoulis that has put his neck on the line for the sake of transparency and honest disclosure...it's scary to think of just ho wmany fund managers regularly steal from the public this way....regardless what Cramers current motives are, there's no denying it's a good thing. Another recent developement related to market manipulation...when Goldman Sach's software had been jeopardized earlier this week, they made a statement that the software would be dangerous in the wrong hands because it can be used to manipulate whole markets...which brings to mind the obviious question of why they're allowed to use it in the first place. From where I stand it's looking more and more like Goldman Sachs is the incognito controlling arm of the SEC. The CTFC is in the midst of regulating large funds, investors and speculators regarding oil futures speculation and those institutions abilities to buy huge percentages for the purpose of manipulation. This isn't just a problem in the oil futures market, it's in every market. Cramer has it right (personal judgements aside), there is absolutely NO incentive for SEC officials to burn bridges with old friends, family, college buddies and coworkers by turning them in...for that matter it would be absolutely no surprise if many of those officials were able to profit by turning a blind eye....either with inside info or kick-backs in one form or another. All the above is why I have been ranting for months in this forum regarding regulating big corporations and those who control vast amounts of money...there is no "code of ethics" that has any validity without law enforcement. As the truth unfolds, it would appear almost as if the entire welfare of our country and it's economical standing has been in the hands of highly questionable ethics. |
Displaying entries 21 - 38 of 38 forum posts in total
12
|
You must Log In to post to this forum.
|