Come to think of it, Crames singlehandedly creates a lot of car and sundries salesmen. Here's a testimonial: âThanks so much, Jim. The Kias are flying off the lot, what with gas so high. And to think, Iâd have missed all this if I hadnât gone all in on your CFC call last year." Buddy
Cramer is an idiot, period. He made a bad call and is hiding behind the sheets. Regular people watch his show, not hedge funds with millions tied to BSC and worrying about "liquidity." The caller is obviously talking about common stocks and worried about the rumors.
if you really want to be disgusted go back and research cramer's stance on the Iraq war, when he and kudlow had their criminal war show together.
Well, What He Really Meant to Say Was... By CONRAD DE AENLLE Published: March 23, 2008 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/b...p=1&adxnnlx=1206291939-xn1h3fK6HOBt9Rb1gpO9pw Jim Cramer expresses opinions with a certitude, not to mention amplitude, that leaves the audience of his CNBC show, "Mad Money," in no doubt about where he stands on a topic. Yet after being widely ridiculed last week for seeming to dismiss concerns about the future of Bear Stearns days before the bank was rescued and its stock collapsed, Mr. Cramer has complained that he was misunderstood. In a March 11 broadcast, viewed tens of thousands of times on YouTube and parsed by satirists like Jon Stewart, Mr. Cramer told a viewer who asked whether he should remove money from Bear: âNo, no, no! Bear Stearns is fine. Bear Stearns is not in trouble.â He then advised: âDonât move your money from Bear. Thatâs just being silly.â Late last week, Mr. Cramer said in an interview that he was referring to assets in Bear Stearns brokerage accounts, not the stock. On the contrary, he said, he later made âan unbelievable callâ that the stock would end up worthless. A transcript of a broadcast on March 14 has him panning the stock, although he did not say unequivocally that it would fall close to zero. As for his earlier assessment that Bear Stearns was not in trouble, well, that was somewhat off the mark.
From the point of view of a Mad Money fan from the shows inception, Cramer got Bear 100 percent wrong. He recommended the stock late January on Mad Money and Stop Trading when it was trading in the 80s. He recommended it on 2 Lightning Round calls since then. He also did a video recommendation on his site about Bear. He didn't turn negative until the stock was trading in the 30s. Itâs one of his worst calls ever. End of story.
Look, Jim Cramer goofed. Everyone WILL make bad decisions about stocks. But trying to beat him endlessly over this is ridiculous. He should have just admitted that he was wrong, instead of trying to defend himself.
To "OldTrader", The problem with Cramer-lovers is that you don't seem to see the big picture. You see, even IF you believe that Jim was talking about "keeping your money" in Bear Stearns, you have to believe something very fantastic. Bear Stearns does not operate like a commericial bank. The only folks who could "have their money" in Bear Stearns would be non-retail or "little guy" investors. Not the sort that email Jim for advice. But, let's go with your assumption. I'll grant you all that if you want. You're still left with Jim POUNDING THE TABLE to BUY BSC at an average price of $80 or so. So, okay, fine, Jim's just a horrible stock picker. Cool. Then, the NEXT MONDAY Jim says that BSC is "worthless" and calls it a SELL. At... $4 and change. Thus, once again, your 90% losses in BSC long now would be 125% losses SHORT thanks to Jim's "prescient" call to SELL BSC at - ahem - THE LOW. Lost in all this is Jim's later backtracking where he claims that he "told people" the "the fed" would "bail out" the "hedgies". That, is, a BALD FACED LIE. At no time did Jim ever say any of that. What Jim said on his show dated March 11, 2008 is that Bear Stearns was "fine", but, at no time did he mention "the fed" or getting "bailed out" with the "hedgies". Jim flat-out, catagorically LIED about that to cover his horrific "advice". Furthermore, and this is the most important part, Bear Stearns was NOT fine. NOT EVEN CLOSE. In fact, if "the fed" did not - literally - bail out Bear Stearns, they would have GONE UNDER. Literally GONE DOWN THE DRAIN. That was the thing that Jim said was "silly" etc. But, ironically, it was the precise thing that happened. The only way you can spin Jim's lies, horrific calls, and, terrible advice on Bear Stearns (NYSE:BSC) in a positive light is if you are a buffoon who ignores facts and has an agenda of some sort. Finally, the issue of whether TheStreet.com and Jim are in communication on what his "picks" are or "are not", is interesting. You argue that it was all some kind of goofy mix up. Really? Well, if it happened with BSC, I wonder how many other of these "mixups" have occured. Just how much of what happens at TheStreet.com is a product of faux pas'? The sad part about all this is that CNBC props up Jim Cramer as some sort of stock-picking dynamo. Truth is, he sucks. Flat out. And, worse yet, his brand of lies, flip-flops, and, shim-shammery is exactly what's wrong with wallstreet. Oh yeah, one more thing: What kind of coward does it take to hide behind "misunderstandings", your employees who apparently can't figure out what you mean, a staff who screens all your calls save the "booyah, Jim, you're my hero" variety, a network that turns a blind eye to your actual record, and, an unwitting group of numbskulls (Cramericans) who can't seem to put two and two together with their "big chief pad" and purple crayon. A real, honest, straightforward man of integrity would not allow CNBC to run articles that claim he "got it 100% right" on BSC. An honest man with any amount of scruples would, at the very least, say: Folks, I told you to buy BSC at an average price of $80. Those trades were all disasters. I'm sorry I got it so wrong. And, my sell call at $4 and change was worse on a percent basis. Regardless of what others may say, I got BSC wrong. I'll try to do more homework next time and be more clear in my guidance. Is that, OldTrader, too much to ask? Sincerely, Don Harrold http://www.donharrold.net
Heyyyyyyy! Don Harrold? For real. Will you join me in my "ethical bullshit"? as I have been so cast. LOL. I'll give you one. Loved the Street changing that Cramer call on the web. But about three weeks ago, we were researching some Herb stuff (all the Street articles he wrote were pulled, but we have them all, thanks to the "businessman" of Deepcapture fame) when we were contacted by a fellow who was hosed by these bums. Seems, he realized his company was under attack, and he copied everything. They had, according to him, Rocker's stuff up there, and as this guy dug and dug, they hit him with 55 negative articles, he got closer to the truth. Then, I guess when Byrnes' lawsuit hit, or some event similar, they all were pulled down. Remarkable. I didn't see all his docs; I had him send them straight to the authorities. But these jokers will be rather shocked when they see the truth hit. More and more people come out of the woodwork going, "Hey, wait a minute!!!" As they realized what really happened to their idea/money/life/employees. You keep it up, Son. People are getting it. Unfortunatel, Old Trader, DH here is spot on. I love you man, your service and all, but don't get too attached to Cramer. Or CNBC. Because when Byrne comes out with that fax stuff, they are going to have a hard time staying on air. In the OSTK conference call, JJohnson, OSTK's attorney, said Discovery was yielding "exactly what we want.", or something along those lines. They are looking now, I guess. Look at a stock chart. Then, if you go to Deepcapture, you can read, and view, the bag job Krudlow and Crames, I call him 'Crames', you know, did on Bryne. It's all the same big turd. Thank God, we're getting to the end of this nightmare. I want to go up against people with talent, not some friggin' punk who's Mama writes for Barrons, or somebody that shills research, or the redeemed Barry Minkow, who shorts the shit out of something, and then "publishes" to save the world. What crap. And we stand for it.