All the Cramer bashing really gets old. I will give you that he is annoying, I can't stand his show, however, until you have managed around a quarter of a billion dollars and managed to pull down 25 and 30% returns with consistancy you don't have much to say. I know, I know, I know, it was easier then, he had an edge with the analysts etc etc etc. Fine, it was easier then, How did you do then? Until you have matched his accomplishments, your bashing says a lot more about you than about him. Brandon
I have to say one thing Cramer seems to be good about is changing his opinion in a heartbeat. I think that's actually a plus if you're investing short to midterm. If the market goes down 3 days he's becomes careful and thinks 100% consumer staples. If we go up 2 weeks it's the best bull market it years. The worst thing you can do is fall it love with your idea of market direction - bullish or bearish - and stick with it forever.
(out of the ten stocks that Jim stated were buys, some went bankrupt later on) The Winners of the New World By James J. Cramer 2/29/00 9:42 AM ET Editor's Note: James J. Cramer is the keynote speaker at the 6th Annual Internet and Electronic Commerce Conference and Exposition, held today at the Jacob Javits Center in New York City. We're running the full text of that speech here. Click here for the latest from James J. Cramer. You want winners? You want me to put my Cramer Berkowitz hedge fund hat on and just discuss what my fund is buying today to try to make money tomorrow and the next day and the next? You want my top 10 stocks for who is going to make it in the New World? You know what? I am going to give them to you. Right here. Right now. OK. Here goes. Write them down -- no handouts here!: 724 Solutions (SVNX:Nasdaq - news), Ariba (ARBA:Nasdaq - news), Digital Island (ISLD:Nasdaq - news), Exodus (EXDS:Nasdaq - news), InfoSpace.com (INSP:Nasdaq - news), Inktomi (INKT:Nasdaq - news), Mercury Interactive (MERQ:Nasdaq - news), Sonera (SNRA:Nasdaq - news), VeriSign (VRSN:Nasdaq - news) and Veritas Software (VRTS:Nasdaq - news). We are buying some of every one of these this morning as I give this speech. We buy them every day, particularly if they are down, which, no surprise given what they do, is very rare. And we will keep doing so until this period is over -- and it is very far from ending. Heck, people are just learning these stories on Wall Street, and the more they come to learn, the more they love and own! Most of these companies don't even have earnings per share, so we won't have to be constrained by that methodology for quarters to come. There, now that that's done with, can we talk about the methodology that produced those top 10 so that you can understand how, in a universe of a gazillion stocks, we arrived at those, so you too can figure it out? I hope we can because I have another 10 and still another 10 and another. They all do the same thing: They make the Web faster, cheaper, better and easier to access anywhere, anytime. They allow you to get on the Web securely anywhere in the world. They make the Web economy the only economy that matters. That's all they do. We try to own every one of them. Every single one. And if I had my druthers, I wouldn't own any other stocks in the year 2000. Because these are the only ones worth owning right now in this extremely difficult, extremely narrow stock market. They are the only ones that are going higher consistently in good days and bad. I love every one of them, just as I loathe the rest of the stock universe.
Whats your point. I was unbelievably bearish from the first week of March 2000 and I made a good bit of money from it, so did my subscribers at the time who I told to get off margin, not be long and at the very least go to cash if not short. I was right on that call, but its one trade, one idea. Over the course of his career vs my career Cramers earnings would make me look like a janitor. You win some, you lose some...and traders move on. Brandon
Uhh, have you ever heard of David Tice and Doug Kass??? Come on man, you are letting your biases blind you. These guys are on every freaking week talking about the end of the world and they are massively short.
Let me emphasize the finer points of Cramer's article. Does this sound like a person who manages a few hundred million, went to Harvard, worked at Goldman Sachs and has over 20 years experience in the stock market? Everything in the article, every word, was completely and utterly false. "Most of these companies don't even have earnings per share, so we won't have to be constrained by that methodology for quarters to come." "And if I had my druthers, I wouldn't own any other stocks in the year 2000. Because these are the only ones worth owning right now in this extremely difficult, extremely narrow stock market. They are the only ones that are going higher consistently in good days and bad. I love every one of them, just as I loathe the rest of the stock universe." "To answer that question, you have to throw out all of the matrices and formulas and texts that existed before the Web. You have to throw them away because they can't make money for you anymore, and that is all that matters." "That's the secret of the quintessential New Economy stock: Cisco (CSCO:Nasdaq - news). This giant networker has the ability to control its own destiny. It can, as my colleague Adam Lashinsky says at TSC, buy any company it wants to. It can pay any price. Because it has a currency that it better than U.S. dollars: It has Cisco stock. It can do that because it raises the bar every quarter!" (NOTE: 1 month later, CSCO started tanking) "But what about the Old Economy stocks? Can Merck (MRK:NYSE - news) raise the bar? Can Pfizer (PFE:NYSE - news)? Can U.S. Steel (X:NYSE - news)? Or Phelps Dodge (PD:NYSE - news)? Union Pacific (UNP:NYSE - news)? No, no, no, no, no and no." (A portfolio of just these stocks would have done a lot better then the fabulous ten up until today) "So, whom does that eliminate? First, any company that is a commodity producer simply can't be owned, no matter what." I guess oil companies which have doubled and tripled since 2000 were not the good stocks to own...or those that produced copper, gold, steel and silver. http://finance.yahoo.com/charts#cha...ine;crosshair=on;logscale=on;source=undefined "An outfit like priceline (PCLN:Nasdaq - news) will change the very nature of brands in this country. It won't destroy the premium brand, but it will force everyone else out of the market. Why? Because the way priceline works is that we are trying to buy the premium brand for the price of the off-price brand. That means the off-price brands, whether they be Colgate (CL:NYSE - news) or Dial (DL:NYSE - news) or Hunt's or Ralston (RAL:NYSE - news), are simply doomed by the Web." Priceline closed at 450 dollars on the day of the article and has since NEVER recovered. I think DL and RAL got bought out and CL did alright. "How can Bank of America (BAC:NYSE - news) compete with Nokia (NOK:NYSE ADR - news) as a way to bank? How can Goldman Sachs (GS:NYSE - news) compete with Yahoo! (YHOO:Nasdaq - news) as a way to invest?" BAC and GS are 2-3 times higher now then they were then. YHOO and NOK never recovered. "A-ha, that just leaves us with tech. That's why we keep coming back to it. That's why, despite the 80% increase in the Nasdaq last year, we are looking at another record year now. It is by that process of elimination that I have picked my top 10. And my next 10 and my next 10 after. Only those companies are worth owning. The rest? You can have them." So if I had constructed a portfolio from the stocks he dissed, I would be up maybe 200%. If I had constructed a portfolio from the stocks he was bullish on, then I would have pennies on my dollar. As for your blog and your calls about predicting the tech bubble, let me tell you my thoughts on that: 1) I dont care and have no idea why your volunteering such information. Your a complete stranger to me and that information doesnt fit into any part of my life. It actually scares me that someone is volunteering such information as in any social gathering its not typical telling me your probably an asocial type of person. 2) I dont believe a strange random person on a messageboard especially this site which seems to feed great contrarian information. 3) Im not impressed and have no plans on subscribing to your blog. 4) Get a life.
There has to be some way everyone on ET can e-mail this shcmuck and tell him what a jagoff he is. I doubt it would even bother him.
Brandon, first of all, it wasn't Cramer. He even admits that the vast majority of the money was made by Todd Harrison, now at Minyanville, Berkowitz and "the trading goddess", his wife. He wanted to push the long side, in 1987 -- massively! But she was the one that put the fund short and not only saved their asses but made money. In short, they made money INSPITE of Cramer, not because of it. If you doubt that, just compare how much he's made by himself in his portfolios since he's run that stock picking newsletter on TSCM. The other issue is that back then, he would regularly make money from a non Reg FD world. He railed and screamed against FD and retired because that was his only edge. Even a chimp can make money when they get a call ahead of time from an analyst before an upgrade/downgrade! I have a theory they only had him around as the perfect contrary indicator. When he would go foaming at the mouth bullish/bearish, they would know to do the opposite. But it doesn't mean that he's wrong all the time. The guy has so many opinions and he changes them so often that he's bound to hit one or two right. Of course he only remembers the correct calls and forgets the others.
maverick 74 when i say no bears on earth i'm saying 1 out of 500. yes tice,fleck and kass have been bears for 15 years and i say so damm what. show me out of 5000 bulls on tv and media print the last 2 month any who are even concerned? i'll even take 1 out of 100.the only time they bring kass on kudlow is when they want to laugh at somebody. to sit here and even hint that cnbc,fox or any media outlet aren't damm giddy is wrong and a damm right a lie. an i'm not a bear as i trade both ways. if you want to get into fundamentals but you're barking up the wrong tree. we can start with a slow 8% earnings growth and finish with retail sales,housing sales or car sales falling off a cliff. or should be talk about $3.30 gas or a lousy 88k jobs created which doesn't even keep up with the death/birth rate. but of course we have liquidity and debt to the top of the world and that makes all well. once the liquidity blows down the games over and life will be tough for all
Umm. Of the regular talking heads Joe Battapaglia was a perma bull until a few months ago and last I saw him on a talking head show he was bearish. I also think Jim Rogers is bearish on equities bullish on commodities. These could have changed since I don't watch talking head TV that much except for comic relief. Then again I'd pay attention to Jim Rogers before almost anyone else on TV. Unlike Cramer he was the one that made a lot of money for his hedge fund.