wall street cheat sheet

Deficit Spending: The Emperor's Children Also Have No Clothes

Thank you to everyone who share their thoughtful comments. Although I admire those who are courageous enough to start a new life in a new land, I also applaud those who know we can stay and fight it. The question remains: how can we shakeup the Repub-Dem oligopoly enough to create real change?

And thanks to Pat C for being honest. I don't think this situation was created with malicious intent. But I think your solution is the right answer. If everyone your age wants to help fix this mess, seems like we'd have both young and older Americans making this place better for the future generations. Since I have a 5-month old, I desperately want to see this happen so she is not forced to leave.

Thanks everyone!

TheStreet.com's Accounting Mess: What Would Jim Cramer Have to Say?

Read our site. We have nothing to hide. Instead of issuing blanket buy and sell calls thousands of times a month, we offer our readers stop-loss points and profit targets. That's the ONLY way to responsibly advise people since predicting the future is futile.

More importantly, this isn't a contest between me and Cramer. I am not trying to prove I am better than him. I am ONLY trying to prove people like Cramer are harming the life savings of innocent people and the man can't even beat an index. Therefore, should the mainstream media hold him up as a guru (CNBC: "In Cramer We Trust") or let him pump his products? We don't think so.

This is the information age. It's time to start acting like trackrecords are available. And when someone sucks, they need to be fired. That's capitalism and meritocracy. What we have now is cronyism and nepotism.

On Nov 22 09:21 PM PG13_Funnys wrote:

> A lot of Comments and Complaining.
> How about sharing Your BEST &amp; "free" Picks for the readers.<br/>Inc...
> 1, for each degrading article, so we can track Your expertise and
> Creditability.

Cramer Does It Again with CIT Call

Oops. You're correct. I meant to add that you need multiple investments to double. I wrote that on the fly late last night after a long day watching football and having a few brews with the family ...


On Nov 02 09:38 AM kgeechee wrote:

> Your math skills are as bad as some of Cramer's stock picks. Double
> your money after a decline of 90% won't help much. Assume $10K invested,
> 90% decline to $1k doubled to $2k; I am not even; I'm $8k short.
> Double again at $4k and again at $8K and I'm getting closer; only
> $2K short now after 3 stellar picks in a row. Moral: forget the math
> (and spelling). Use protective trailing stops. Yes, sometimes you
> get closed out on an immediate 'short' run and the stock recovers
> to a decent profit. Those are the breaks. It won't happen often.

More Heads on the CNBC Chopping Block as Financial Media Landscape Shifts

True: the year over year comparison is against the crash. HOWEVER, their ratings have been down for many months now to the tune of 20-30% plus every month, month-over-month. That's a trend.

Cutting Paulson Some Slack

Telling the truth would not have been like shouting "fire" in a crowded theater. The market lost over 50% of its value. We were having a real fire and almost everyone in the theater was already getting scorched. Paulson should have said, "Yes, the theater is on fire, BUT the fire department is here and we have all the hoses in the world to stop this now -- look here are the firemen now."

The proper analogy is those who understood Paulson was lying exited the theater quickly and quietly while leaving the average, nonfinancial professionals to burn in hell while Paulson told them they were hallucinating about the fire.

Case in point: after the major investment banks and hedge funds met with Bernanke and Paulson days before the collapse of Bear Stearns, they all pulled EVERY funding source and investment they had in Bear. So, they were told about the fire (the truth) and were given the chance to save themselves. Should the government act as a truth-teller to certain factions of society and not others?

If we accept the government lies because We the Children are too dumb to handle the Truth, this logic can rationalize every single lie the government tells. I don't think that's the vision of the Founder's ...

Why Do We Listen to Nouriel Roubini?

You are correct. The detriments listed by Roubini are still largely issues for us on a longer term basis. However, my main thesis is that Roubini is like a broken clock bound to be correct at some point ...

Second, my other main point is NR has received the lion's share for "predicting" the crisis. Conversely, I have a list of people who correctly called the crisis for the correct reasons and, in my humble opinion, they deserve the credit once we push the spotlight away from NR and his aggressive PR team.

I ask: what's the real difference between Jim Cramer who looks great in a rising tide, and NR who looks great in a waning one?


On Aug 20 06:21 AM PainfullyAware wrote:

> Wall Street Cheat Sheet - I Am Not Sure I Would "Acquit" With Your
> Argument.
>
> Seeing that the "Building" is not "Structurally Sound" is easier
> than "Prophesying Which Piece Will Fail First" and start the dominoes.
>
>
> The "Detriments" you attribute to Roubini's "Plausible Possibilities"
> are still currently factors - And Things Do not Seem To be Getting
> Any Better.
>
> Governmental Involvement Has Never Been Seen On This Scale In The
> USA. Has "It" Already Happened?
>
> Yes - All Information, Except Personal Experience, Is Filtered Through
> Others. Some Are better At "Reading Tea Leaves" Than Others.
>
> No One Listens To Prophets Until It Is Too Late.

Why Do We Listen to Nouriel Roubini?

Doesn't seem I got anything wrong. Just that I left out one new incorrect Roubini call. I am not sure how lawyers have anything to do with psychics or my article.

And for the record, I never practiced law in a private firm. My experience was with the Florida Supreme Court. I did the ibanking and entrepreneurial thing ...


On Aug 20 07:35 AM Andrew Butter wrote:

> Great Article and very good research - as one would expect from someone
> in your profession.
>
> It's very nice to have all the dirt put in one place, I shall refer
> to your analysis in the future.
>
> You got one thing completely wrong and missed out one thing:
>
> 1: There is one other profession where the really good ones are
> outrageously expensive, they charge by the hour, they spend most
> of the time just hanging around chatting to their mates, and they
> expect special gifts when they do a good job.
>
> 2: On 14th March 2009 Professor Roubini declared that the 9th March
> bottom in the S&amp;P 500 was a dead-cat-bounce-sucker... (for a
> precise definition of what that means see seekingalpha.com/artic...)
> and that "doom" awaited anyone who sailed in her.
>
> 50% up so far and there are STILL some bears waiting for that broken
> clock to tell the right time.

Fight Club: Zero Hedge, Matt Taibbi Knock Out Goldman, CNBC

Excellent comment!


On Aug 04 02:45 AM PainfullyAware wrote:

> Truth is a tough thing to come by when ratings are weighted to "Entertainment".
>
>
> When things are rosy the truth is welcomed - and entertaining. When
> things are bleak, truth is not very entertaining and thus without
> luster for the "Entertainment Outlets".
>
> No One Likes The Prophets Of Doom - Only The Wise Heed The Warning.
>
>
> Thank Goodness For The Internet !!!
>
> Debate Is The Distillation Of Reality.
>
> Views Untested Are Worthless.

Fight Club: Zero Hedge, Matt Taibbi Knock Out Goldman, CNBC

Bloomberg is far superior. But, C-SPAN has the most enlightening coverage of the Congress floor and it's not entertaining enough for the masses. Sad ...


On Aug 03 05:15 PM Rookie_SA wrote:

> I prefer Bloomberg to CNBC ..
> As far as GS .. What can you say .. They are Government Sachs.. They
> can do watever they want ..

Fight Club: Zero Hedge, Matt Taibbi Knock Out Goldman, CNBC

Thanks, Larry. First, I never said every blog or internet source is objective and unbiased. That's would obviously be ridiculous.

Second, you failed to address the issue that CNBC has spent an increasing amount of time on WWE and Tabloid style rhetoric.

Third, you did not explain how CNBC provides excellent coverage of the markets and helped investors avoid the downturn.

Fourth, you did not address CNBC's 28%, yes 28%, loss of viewership (I think Larry Kudlow is down 40-something percent).

Fifth, if CNBC is so great, I ask one simple question: why do 99% of all the shops on Wall St. keep it on mute?

Yes, you nailed me. I am biased because I run an independent media site. And CNBC is biased because they are a media conglomerate. And everyone in the world has a bias because they have some relative identity too. Not a big revelation ...


On Aug 03 04:20 PM SSALarry wrote:

> Pretty funny article, I am sure the CNBC big wigs sit around during
> the day worrying about Zero Hedge and/or Minyanville, which 99 out
> of 100 people on the street have never heard of. In addition, if
> you are going to score a fight you are supposed to be unbiased, I
> don't believe that is the case here.
>
> As for reporting the news. If you caught the health care special
> on Squawk Box last Thursday you learned quite a bit. Politicians
> from both parties, former HHS Secretaries, drug company CEO's, health
> care officials, etc. all discussing the future of health care. It
> was fascinating stuff, but no one likes to talk about that, they
> prefer to focus on some reporter they don't like and bash the whole
> station.
>
> Lastly, I also find the idea that various blog sites provide fair
> and accurate information without any biases all in the name of the
> First Amendment laughable.

Intuitive Surgical: 'Accident Prone' for Profits

Great points, Anthony. I would look for a pullback, a creation of a support area, and then go long with a stop-loss. The target would be getting back to the 220 area ...


On Jul 28 08:42 PM Anthony B wrote:

> Yea, those earnings were a nice surprise. I was hoping to get in
> lower, and was expecting the sales of Da Vinci systems to come down
> more as hospitals were supposedly cutting budgets. I think I remember
> they still sold 76 systems, down from 85 last year's quarter (from
> memory, might be a little off). Of course surgery procedure numbers
> are soaring as more doctors are trained to do surgeries on the Da
> Vinci.
>
> I guess I missed the boat this time, I'll look to get in if we ever
> get back to $150. You got to have a strong stomach eating breakfast
> watching the ticker on this stock though, big moves.

Interview: Journalist Matt Taibbi

Thanks everyone for the thoughtful debate. That's what this is all about, right?

I do agree that to collect transcripts of phone calls is a bit overboard. Seriously, I used to clerk at the Florida Supreme Court, and lawyers wait their entire careers to get that type of smoking gun. The FBI can survey suspected criminals for years to get that type of evidence.

I appreciate that you require facts before judging. That is admirable. But I think Matt has done an excellent job considering what he has to work with. If Matt and Zero Hedge were not shining a light where others refused to go, we may not have any discussion about exactly what Goldman et al has done or is doing as a major entity affecting our economy/society.

How Majesco Helped Me Win with Insmed: Lessons in Speculative Investing

Thanks! I hope it saves people money.


On Jul 09 02:38 PM IancoleTX wrote:

> Great article.

Is This the Capitulation Phase?

Thanks for the well-wishes! Hope you enjoyed the interview with Mike Bellafiore. He is awesome.


On Jul 19 02:52 PM Swashbuckler wrote:

> Looking forward to the interview post. Congrats on the birth of your
> daughter. Here's hoping she lives a long, healthy and fulfilling
> life.

Is This the Capitulation Phase?

Thanks!! So true! There is much more to life than the markets ;)


On Jul 19 04:32 PM tobi wrote:

> Yes, congratulations and all the best. After all, there is something
> more meaningful than the market's...