The logic was sound on Ethanol last year. Thats because the price of corn errodes margins and virtually all of the ethanol stocks were in an obvious bubble. Most of the ethanol stocks, save for VSE, were not turning a dime and had no P/E. The solar stocks are a different breed. First, not all of the solar stocks had rallied heavily. In fact, some of them underperformed the market and traded at a loss to their ipo price like CSIQ. SOLF and JASO both were underperformers. Second, all of the solar companies have turned a significant profit and the growth story is there. Third, there is a softening in the silicon shortage and prices. Fourth, all of the solar companies have turned in great Q1 earnings so far. JASO, CSIQ and FSLR had great calls beating the analyst's expectations. From the F-1 for TSL it appears that they will beat the streets estimates on Monday. From afar, it does appear like ethanol and solar power are involved in the same type of bubble. However, there are many key differences as I explained above. The real question is where did all this mysterious volume come from at 3:30PM for the entire solar sector? Too many coincidences with Cramer. If his actions are not illegal, then they should be. There is something about having a TV show that manipulates stocks and people play the show before it even airs that seems SO WRONG.
Forget those losers. DOJ. Remember, he took an SEC subpoena and threw it, and got away with it. Nothing wrong there, is there?
Cramer can be a real moron, espcially when solar is the way of the future. solar panels are getting smaller and thinner every day. Fact: the sun produces enough energy each day to supply the energy needs for the WORLD for 1 YEAR. only reason we havn't gotten into it yet is b/c its still developing technology,and the oil stranglehold. I would deff recommend any solar [or even the PBW etf] to everyone on the board. peace
Well, I looked a little closer at this and it appears that the Yuan may have had a lot more to do with the fall of the solar stocks. There were a few decisions made recently that effected the Yuan. I think Cramer was a catalyst, but its hard to ignore the other Chinese listed companies that were down as well that day. Im curious if it was all Cramer sending solar down or was it the Yuan or a little of both?
I don't see how this ("that man gots power") possibly is true. Cramer crushed anyone following him in the dot.com bubble and, according to a reputable website, his touts run neck and neck with the Wonder Monkey's dart throws. Anyway, in this instance in particular, as described, couldn't it be that his "sell" the solars simply followed the sell-off the OP reported, rather than precipitated it? I ask because if the statement is true -- i.e., Cramer really can move entire spaces in the market -- then the SHEEP SLAUGHTER IS NIGH! (And here, while I've thought all along that the slaughter will take more helium and a few more years to occur.) P.S. I refer to power to move a space either way, up or down. I realize Cramer has a following, but so does Carleton Sheets.
ok. here ya go, everything in a quick nutshell. 1) cramer is a short term catalyst on stocks he profiles on his show. he also sometimes is a short term catalyst (intraday) on stop trading. 2) his long-term predicting record is the same as a dart-throw, EXCEPT when he finally capitulates on something one way or the other, in which case he's a great contrary indicator.
Cramer does have an effect. Sometimes the effect lasts hours, days or even months. Sometimes its stronger and other times weaker. You have to examine hundreds of variables to make a trading decision of what will happen next. You cant just simply long the stock in afterhours and expect it to go up OR short the stock in afterhours and expect it to go down. Even though Cramer pumps it, the stock will still probably conform to commonly known technical concepts like moving averages, bollinger bands, etc. Gaming Cramer involves watching and studying the man closely. Looking at the stocks he chooses from every single angle technically and fundamentally. Looking at the general market conditions,etc. The most successful pump that I can remember was REDF. He came out one day and stated that RED would be the next Google around Jan 23rd at 15 dollars. The stock then shot up to over 30 dollars in the coming days. (You have to take into consideration that this is a heavily shorted stock with over 50% of the float shorted at any period in time. The available float is only about 10 million shares.) In late 2006, he pumped both RVBD and DIVX. On his pump, these stocks ran from the teens up to 30 dollars within a month and they made for great trading stocks. You also have to take into consideration that the entire market was in an uptrend, techy stocks like RVBD/DIVX seem to do very well in Q3/Q4. Both of the stocks do not have large floats. His pumps acted as a catalyst to these stocks. There are times when Cramer pumps some stocks mindlessly that end up crashing like Coldwater Creek, Trump, Dicks, CAL and a few others. I remember him saying to buy CAL before the earnings call back in January. Then the entire airline industry took a big dump including CAL. Generally, when Cramer goes against fundamentals and general market conditions, then he loses. When Cramer recommends a stock that is already on the way up or market conditions favor the stock, then he wins. I believe Cramer acts like a catalyst to those stocks that are destined to go up. Those stocks that are destined to go down Cramer has a very short term effect on and they all end up crashing down. The parallels that Cramer draws with solar and ethanol are laughable. Most of the solar companies are revenue generating machines having more then tripled their revenue in one year. Most of the ethanol companies operate at a loss and there are many fundamental concerns. Everytime people believe that things will be the same this time around, they are not. Everytime people believe things will be different, they are the same.