How credible are Fast Money traders?

Discussion in 'Trading' started by garfangle, Aug 5, 2010.

  1. I know CNBC promotes its Fast Money show as a way to follow the actions of its trading hosts, but I wonder how credible they are when they discuss their positions. It doesn't seem possible for them to have daily opinions on dozens of stocks in the news during the week and to make authentic recommendations about them.

    I could see how if you were holding a position for a while you could give a rational call on it, but to make a directional pick based on that day's news seems far fetched. I know the market these days is fluid, but to say that you for instance disliked Goldman Sachs two weeks ago, but now that it has broken above some moving averages it is a buy seems disingenuous.

    It is hard to take their commentary at face value since most of the original crew left.
  2. The way I see it all these guys are straight up 50/50. IMO if you are in the marketplace it shouldn't be based on anyone else's opinion but your own. You can flip a coin as well as they can.
  3. With all the research available to Fast Money, did none of you see the potential for a large move (in either direction) based on its earnings report?

    Surely on "OPTIONS FRIDAY","PRICELINE" would have made a good candidate for an option strategy!

    Instead, you come up with some "arcane" strategy, me and a lot of viewers can't even begin to understand, on a stock that Fast Money suggest "may" make as much as $.10~$.25 profit. Oooooh!

    Since all of you are part of a "team", I think uniforms are in order! May I suggest one similar to the one wore by Clarabelle on the old "HOWDY DOODY" show!
  4. xtrader0


    I wish Radigan wouldn't talk over most of the guys.  He was especially rude, I thought, to guest Melissa Lee, regarding health stocks and his prasing the idiot Michael Moore.
    Yes, Moores newest file isn't as bad as his former ones, he doesn't take as much out of context.  But this one has, in some cases, old info Example stating that women have to wait 6 weeks for a mamagram That happened about 2 years ago when women just over the age of 50, are now recommended getting a mamagram and there weren't enough machines available. Also, any women I know of that finds a problem, once they notify their doctor, the doctor makes sure they get a mamagram within days. As far as medicare, I am on medicare, Have to pay a monthly premium, which means its not free, also have a deductable each year and medicare only pays 80% of what they feel should be charged.  Can you imagine low income people having to pay the 20% over a hospital stay cost? And can you imagine how many more people medicare would have to hire to handle all americans, what about the illeglas, who are the ones who now cause the majorty of proplems of backup help in our emergency rooms.
    Look into the actual facts better. Thanks