Cramer Pumping SEC Petition Re Uptick Rule

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by AAAintheBeltway, May 9, 2009.

  1. I see Jim Cramer is out with a couple of posts urging RM subscribers to sign up for some online petition he and a few other writers on the site have started. Cramer has seemed to get more and more erratic lately, particularly since he got the beatdown from John "Stewart" for his failure to genuflect sufficiently to the Obama. Let's not even discuss the Lenny Dykstra fiasco. I'm sure he'd like to forget it.

    I don't really have a problem with the uptick rule, provided it is reasonable, but I have a huge problem with his ultimate aim, which is to do away with the inverse ETF products. They give the ordinary trader a great means of avoiding all the hassles with shorting, eg SHO, finds, fees, paying dividends. I have been thinking about terminating my subscription to RM for a while, and this may be the final straw.
  2. This shit pisses me off. Worst economic crisis in 70+ years and companies fail. Every douche bag perma bull comes out and blames it on the shorts. The same stupid shit happens on the upside, but no one says shit. Lets just remember what happened when they banned short selling 800 companies, they all kept trading lower. Pieces of shit like cramer deserve to be hung. Lets remember he was talking about buying stock at dow 14000. I'll say this much, wasn't the uptick rule up in 1987? What happened then?
  3. gkishot


    There is a reason behind his vigorous efforts to reinstate the uptick rule since his show will be a direct beneficiary from this. His slogan "There is always a bull market somewhere" miserably failed in 2008. I have a feeling that he stopped using it lately. Now he wants to influence the reality to conform to false and baseless slogans of his show by reinstating the uptick rule.
  4. rickf


    Funny how he never rails against the Ultra Long ETFs ... or would likely support a "downtick rule" to prevent runaway long moves. Shorts are always evil in his eyes, and IMHO that's just a biased perspective that appeals to nobody but the clueless retail investor turning to CNBC for trading advice.

  5. I noticed the lack of an untick rule didn't seem to adversely affect the market's runup from March. That dolt Eric Oberg who has written several articles attacking the inverse ETfs claims stocks need the uptick rule to protect capital formation. Of all the things affecting capital formation and investment, the uptick rule is probably number 700 something on the list.

    Anyway, I suppose people can have different opinions on this. My gripe is with Cramer using his site to push something that a lot of his subscribers don't favor. Seems awfully dumb to me, why offend half your paying customers? It's one thing to have an opinion and state it. Seems to me he crosses the line when he starts pushing petitions.
  6. kashking


    How about a down tick rule. You can only buy on a down tick. That might prevent speculative manias, and BS bull runs?

  7. For some reason they don't see that as a problem.