3/11/08 Video: "Dear Jim Cramer, should I sell Bear Stearns?"

Quote from OldTrader:

I think the consensus is clear too. Evidently that tells you one thing, it tells me another. But yeah, the consensus is definitely clear.

OldTrader
More...


This thread is almost as entertaining as Efficency and his CFC long call. With the insults OldTrader resembles Efficency.

I'm going to side with the majority on this one. Cramer came down on his opinion on the stock and nothing less. It was tremendously incorrect call touting his supposed trusted knowledge of the street and had very little to do with guiding some poor soul concerning a trading account.

The stock chart said it all.
 
Yeah, this link here sums it up about Cramer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=772PXNSrSiI&feature=user

I mean, if you make a bad call own it. Here is proof he removed a 3/11/2008 buy recommendation at $62 from The street.com. He replaces it with a sell on 3/17 at $4.81, ANOTHER CRAP CALL, the stock went to $8.50 today!

Cramer, you suck!

Why does anyone watch this guy, he is totally annoying, and his calls suck.
 
Quote from ByLoSellHi:

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gUkbdjetlY8&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gUkbdjetlY8&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
More...

reminds me of 'crazy eddie' in the 70's
eddie beat me on my first pair of high-end speakers
 
Quote from Triple X:

Yeah, this link here sums it up about Cramer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=772PXNSrSiI&feature=user

I mean, if you make a bad call own it. Here is proof he removed a 3/11/2008 buy recommendation at $62 from The street.com. He replaces it with a sell on 3/17 at $4.81, ANOTHER CRAP CALL, the stock went to $8.50 today!

Cramer, you suck!

Why does anyone watch this guy, he is totally annoying, and his calls suck.
More...

OK, so the bottom line is that the staff at TheStreet.com placed BSC on a list with a buy recommendation on 3/11. This is from Harrold's video. So in other words, the staff puts it there, not Cramer.

Now, since you guys like to make things up, let me do the same. Suppose the staff saw Cramer's show on 3/11. And suppose they had the same reaction as all of you guys. LOL! Suppose they in effect said, "he recommended BSC, let's put it on the list".

Now, chances are Cramer doesn't review everything they do. Except in this case, the video starts making the rounds AFTER BSC collapses. He finds out about the list with BSC on it. He has them remove it claiming that wasn't what he said on the show.

Now, did it happen that way? I don't know. But it's plausible.

So it seems to me that Harrold really doesn't have much more than he had to begin with on his original video.

You know I find it very amusing that in order to string this Cramer up, what we gotta do is change around the meaning of words on the original video, and then link it to a recommendation he supposedly made based on the same video as interpreted by his staff. Let the hangin' party continue.

OldTrader
 
Oldtrader, you can't be serious. c'mon. are you cramer's alias on elitetrader. the hypothetical scenario you gave is like someone who is an idiot would believe. Nobody calls his shows asking about deposits they made to a bank. thats like a suzie orman question. good day to you mr. cramer, i mean oldtrader.
 
Old trader

I totally understand why you continue to defend your interpretation, and I think everyone here does as well. The real question is why do you feel your interpretation matches cramer's intention?


Why in the world wouldn't cramer just say, hey don't worry your account is insured by the SPIC so even if they went under you would still get your money.

He didn't do this because he said they were a buyout candidate and obviously felt they were worth more than 60 dollars per share. If you had funds at wells fargo would it be necessary for me to show you their stock chart to convince you to keep your money there?
 
One other note. No matter what his intentions he did make this statement:

"BEAR STEARNS IS NOT IN TROUBLE. IF ANYTHING THEY WILL LIKELY BE TAKEN OVER. DON'T MOVE YOUR MONEY FROM BEAR, THAT'S JUST BEING SILLY"

Now even if it was not a recommendation(which it was IMO), wouldn't a follower of cramer who owned the stock get a good feeling not to sell the stock? Wouldn't they feel well hell even if the stock goes down they will be bought out?

Now, was Bear Stearns really in trouble? Yes.

Did he do a good thing for his blind followers? No he did not.
 
Of course he is talking about the common stock. We should put up a website for these poor people watching and buying into his shit, so they realize his performance is below most mutual funds.
 
Quote from HolyGrail:

Old trader

I totally understand why you continue to defend your interpretation, and I think everyone here does as well. The real question is why do you feel your interpretation matches cramer's intention?


Why in the world wouldn't cramer just say, hey don't worry your account is insured by the SPIC so even if they went under you would still get your money.

He didn't do this because he said they were a buyout candidate and obviously felt they were worth more than 60 dollars per share. If you had funds at wells fargo would it be necessary for me to show you their stock chart to convince you to keep your money there?
More...

I can't begin to guess why Cramer didn't go into SIPC. But it goes without saying that if the company goes bankrupt, your money is going to be tied up a while, maybe quite a while, SIPC or no. And then too, if your funds exceed SIPC, then the situation becomes a different matter completely. So if you're a trader getting your money tied up is a problem.

As far as the stock chart goes, I think I mentioned that before. Chances are the show automatically shows the chart whenever a company is discussed.

As far as Cramer's intention versus my interpretation? I don't know what Cramer's intention was. I just know what he was asked and how he answered. That's how I formed my opinion.

OldTrader
 
Quote from HolyGrail:

One other note. No matter what his intentions he did make this statement:

"BEAR STEARNS IS NOT IN TROUBLE. IF ANYTHING THEY WILL LIKELY BE TAKEN OVER. DON'T MOVE YOUR MONEY FROM BEAR, THAT'S JUST BEING SILLY"

Now even if it was not a recommendation(which it was IMO), wouldn't a follower of cramer who owned the stock get a good feeling not to sell the stock? Wouldn't they feel well hell even if the stock goes down they will be bought out?

Now, was Bear Stearns really in trouble? Yes.

Did he do a good thing for his blind followers? No he did not.
More...

I'm not sure what a guy who owned the stock would feel after hearing that comment. The comment "Don't move your money from Bear" just seems to say he's still referring to an account. If he was referring to the stock, why doesn't he just say "Don't sell that stock"? Or press one of those buttons he presses that says "Don't sell, Don't sell, Don't sell"? Again, my opinion is that he was not talking about the stock, so he didn't do his normal thing with the buttons.

OldTrader
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top