Ron Insana snarks back home

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by OPTIONAL777, Mar 16, 2009.

  1. March 16, 2009
    Back on TV, and Back in the Black

    Three years ago, when money flowed easily, Ronald G. Insana left CNBC to hang his own shingle as a hedge fund manager. Now, as he returns to television, he has but one misgiving about his foray into moneymaking.

    “The one regret I have is we ended up losing money,” Mr. Insana said in a recent interview.

    Mr. Insana recently signed a deal with CNBC to return as a part-time analyst. He will make most of his appearances on “Closing Bell,” the daily end-of-trading show from 3 to 5 p.m., and also be available for spot duty on MSNBC and various NBC News shows.

    Mr. Insana’s career trajectory was viewed by some as a cautionary tale for journalists with fanciful ideas that they can do the jobs of the people they cover. Mr. Insana’s departure in 2006 for a hedge fund also was wryly referred to as a sign the market had peaked — which it kind of had.

    “I happened to catch a window that was historically difficult,” he said.

    Last August, Mr. Insana sold his company, Insana Capital Partners, which was a so-called fund of funds. In September, he took a job with the prominent hedge fund SAC Capital, but the economy, and the stock market, went into free fall after the collapse of Lehman Brothers.

    Mr. Insana said he and Steven A. Cohen, the head of SAC, had plans for new products that were “eminently feasible” before the market downturn, but impossible afterward.

    Of the inevitable sniping Mr. Insana has endured — his adventure has been compared with Lou Dobbs’s ill-fated stint at — he said he was not “some sort of sellout that wanted to cash in.”

    “I actually enjoy understanding the financial markets,” he said. “I learned a great deal from the bottom up.”

    It’s an experience he said he can share with viewers now that he’s back on TV.

    “I got to see it first-hand,” he said. “In the media world, you rarely get the chance to go inside.”
  2. Maybe he gets free head from Erin Burnett... better than getting head from the Shark
  3. nravo


    CNBC plus Ron Insana. Network with an admitted stock manipulator as its star commentator hires a failed hedge fund manager and failed talking head. (He switched careers because he saw his on-air opportunities receding with his hairline.)

    All makes perfect sense.

    And it's all owned by GE!

    Couldn't script a satire any better than this.
  4. Some of these crackpots are bad journalists to begin with. There's no excuse when it comes to this recent financial meltdown. These same journalists fucked up big time. I believe John Stewart is largely correct for blaming these idiots for the mess. For example, is taking CEO of a failing bank at face value considered proper journalism? Yeah, if you were taught boneheaded journalism. And yet that was the way they defined journalistic integrity.
  5. nravo


    Not just CEOs. Listen, day after day, these idiots at CNBC take money managers who lose money, have returns that are negative, even in good years, whose stock picking is no better than yours or mine, and ask them what do you think will happen? Well, guess what: They don't know! They have no clue! No one does! But they do have some holdings they like to hype. Yes, it's complete bullshit, but it is so ingrained into our media DNA that it won't change. Five years from now, same shit will be going on. Smart people laugh when they watch CNBC and hear someone predicting what the market will do or what stocks to buy. It's an absolute fucking joke. Look at Erin's face, fantasize, and that's about all the channel is good for. Shame they lost Liz the red head. Those lips! Anyway, keep things in perspective here! This is not news. Read the FT, rent a Bloomberg, if you want news.
  6. Wow another annoying talking head on cnbc. I watch Fox Business although not the best it is better than watching the crew at cnbc.
  7. nravo


    Son, I don't know where to begin. CNBC is entertainment, a joke -- intelligent people know it's a shill machine. Fox, however, is ... I dunno: entertainment for special needs people or something? Do people actually watch that, even in passing? Doesn't have like 4,000 viewers a day? Do you watch it with other people around? No shame?
  8. dsq


    I wonder how these loser money managers are chosen to appear on cnbs?Hmmm,they pull their name from a hat or is it a case of pay-for -play???
    They have a lot fewer money managers /stock pickers on bloomberg.
  9. nravo


    Financial PR firms, I used to work for one, and internal PR departments, pitch them. CNBC has time to fill; they often do very little verification. With some work, some networking, and a decent budget, you can get almost anybody on CNBC, and trust me they don't care; they just want to fill air time. They have their own loyal stable of hacks, too. But how often you see Marc Faber or Jim Rogers on there any more? Privately, these guys will tell you CNBC is a joke, a disservice.

    Bloomberg is much better, but still has some of the same problems in its DNA.

    The deeper problem is instead of being an investgataive / consumer affairs / labor network focusing on business and finance, they do the easy stuff and the stuff that attracts ads: They just report corporate news. All that earnings shit. The noise. And who really cares? The people who do care, already heard it on the conference call or can read it on the wires. Forget it being the kind of short-term focus that has ruined corporate thinking. It's beyond that: It's patently non-news, it's newspeak. But we have all been lulled into thinking that this really is news. Bulletin: UTC reports 23 per share earnings, a penny below estimates. Man, a fucking monkey can read that stuff all day, and a numbed audience just sits there and listens. It's easy. It's dumb. You watch it. Suckers.