You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
3/11/08 Video: "Dear Jim Cramer, should I sell Bear Stearns?"
- Thread starter ByLoSellHi
- Start date
Quote from OldTrader:
Which part of that are you having trouble with you idiot? Is English your first language? Is there anywhere in the video that says "Should I sell my Bear Stearns?"
OldTrader
putting aside your childish namecalling, what difference does it make what the caller's intent was? how does that change cramer's statement?
cramer clearly, unequivocally, declared that BSC was "fine" and that worrying about it was silly.
whether the caller was a shareholder, an accountholder, or neither, is immaterial to the central point of the OP - cramer's prediction was spectacularly wrong.
Quote from OldTrader:
"Should I be worried about Bear Stearns in terms of LIQUIDITY and get my money out of there?"
Which part of that are you having trouble with you idiot? Is English your first language? Is there anywhere in the video that says "Should I sell my Bear Stearns?"
Take it all back, it's not a question of accuracy in your case, it's a question of stupidity.
OldTrader
man you need to use some common sense, clearly cramer made a very bad call telling some poor sap to hold bsc. He then later try to cover it with some technicality bullshit about fund in bsc vs owning the stock. Like others said, who the hell would call him to ask about their account with bsc, bear stern is not etrade...
"bear stern is fine, dont be silly" is not obvious enough for you?
How the fuck do people like you actually make money in the market, the mind boggles....
cramer's done this before.
sometimes, he's blamed the ceo for 'lying' to him.
his book "you got screwed" gives "obvious" signs investors should have known to sell the stocks. funny part? cramer's real money posts at the time ignored these. in other words, he'd have been selling WCOM around 8 or 10, i think - while ignoring the "obvious" signs.
his classic "buy these 10 stocks now and for the rest of the year" internet top call of '00? he's said alternately that he didn't really mean buy them til the end of the year, his "take a little off the table" call a month later trumped that and meant to sell all those stocks, and the best one - something pretty close to: he didn't want to give that presentation at all, he 'had' to, and so he had to talk about those stocks.
cramer will periodically state flat-out "i was wrong on this" and take full blame for it. it stands out only among a room of people who NEVER take blame for anything. but he also weasels his way out of his bad calls time and time again, and this time is no different.
the only difference is, since bear stearns is such a nationally known piece, he's going to get a LOT of flak because of his call. and it's well deserved.
final note: since he's talking 'technically', he's got his january 24, 2008 article where he says bear can be taken over. NOT taken under. and that he'd buy it, and buy calls on it (even while he was saying "don't buy financials!!".
sometimes, he's blamed the ceo for 'lying' to him.
his book "you got screwed" gives "obvious" signs investors should have known to sell the stocks. funny part? cramer's real money posts at the time ignored these. in other words, he'd have been selling WCOM around 8 or 10, i think - while ignoring the "obvious" signs.
his classic "buy these 10 stocks now and for the rest of the year" internet top call of '00? he's said alternately that he didn't really mean buy them til the end of the year, his "take a little off the table" call a month later trumped that and meant to sell all those stocks, and the best one - something pretty close to: he didn't want to give that presentation at all, he 'had' to, and so he had to talk about those stocks.
cramer will periodically state flat-out "i was wrong on this" and take full blame for it. it stands out only among a room of people who NEVER take blame for anything. but he also weasels his way out of his bad calls time and time again, and this time is no different.
the only difference is, since bear stearns is such a nationally known piece, he's going to get a LOT of flak because of his call. and it's well deserved.
final note: since he's talking 'technically', he's got his january 24, 2008 article where he says bear can be taken over. NOT taken under. and that he'd buy it, and buy calls on it (even while he was saying "don't buy financials!!".
Quote from newguy05:
How the fuck do people like you actually make money in the market, the mind boggles....
Geezuz "new guy" this is priceless. I been taking money off of guys like you for decades....guys that can't READ or LISTEN. I blame the school system, but I'm starting to think that some of you guys are just plain stupid.
OldTrader
Quote from OldTrader:
"Should I be worried about Bear Stearns in terms of LIQUIDITY and get my money out of there?"
Which part of that are you having trouble with you idiot? Is English your first language? Is there anywhere in the video that says "Should I sell my Bear Stearns?"
Take it all back, it's not a question of accuracy in your case, it's a question of stupidity.
OldTrader
Ridiculous, ask yourself how many Cramer viewers have money with BSC brokerage. It's obvious that the caller meant BSC stock.
LIQUIDITY meaning their ability to remain a going concern. LIQUIDITY would affect the shareholder more so than the brokerage client. No client of any US equity brokerage has lost a dollar in a bankruptcy filing. The same can't be said of the holders of BSC common.
Quote from HolyGrail:
I mentioned this in another thread about cramer and bsc. If he was just talking about liquidity then why in the world did he show a chart of BSC in the video? Does a chart of a company stock show liquidity? The question was ambiguous, but his answer was not.
100% accurate -- why the chart of BSC common? If BSC remains "liquid" it's certainly not at risk of filing; which we know was the only alternative to the token $2 bid from JPM.
Quote from atticus:
Ridiculous, ask yourself how many Cramer viewers have money with BSC brokerage. It's obvious that the caller meant BSC stock.
LIQUIDITY meaning their ability to remain a going concern. LIQUIDITY would affect the shareholder more so than the brokerage client. No client of any US equity brokerage has lost a dollar in a bankruptcy filing. The same can't be said of the holders of BSC common.
The thing is, not once in the video does anyone, Cramer or the viewer, mention the word "stock" or "sell". Instead they use a word like "liquidity".
Ask yourself this, rather than trying to interpret through your own eyes what the video says, why not just listen to exactly what was said. Then ask yourself, if this viewer WAS concerned about the liquidity of Bear, and worried about getting his money out, which we have seen countless questions here over the last couple of days, exactly HOW would he have asked that particular question?
"Should I be worried about Bear Stearns in terms of LIQUIDITY and get my money out of there?"
OldTrader