Jon Friedman wonders whether Jim Cramer is defiant, or just clueless. "When Cramer writes about the stock market for New York magazine, there is no better or more knowledgeable Wall Street pundit around. He is that good. But when he turns into his Mr. Hyde persona on television, his brilliance gets lost in the noise."
Come on. As smart as the public is in electing politicians, you really expect more from a TV personality? There are no standards. Get used to it.
On Jun 03 11:48 AM Jackson Cash wrote: > Jim Cramer is one thing - a crook. > The fact that CNBC and anyone else attributes him is utterly deplorable > and such news sources should be ashamed -- now bow to your mafia > masters.
The people on CNBC are just another version of all the talking heads that come on there. EVERYONE IN THIS MARKET IS JUST GUESSING. Even the very intelligent people that write for this site can do analysis and say something like "in the past this indicator has always meant that the market will do X", and then the manipulated, government influenced, no fundamentals, technicals backwards, rose colored glasses, questionable statistics market does something different.
No standards is a good point, but when he is preaching to the sheeple about separating their money (long track record of horrible money losing recommendations) and his industry I draw a different conclusion.
Sometimes protecting people from themselves requires that the plug is pulled on Jim-the-crook.
If you follow his stock recommendations blindly and you lose money, then you only have yourself to blame.
You always have to do your own homework.
The real value of Jim Cramer is his deep insights into the market, not to mention his entertaining takes on what's going on. (He makes following the stock market a little bit more exciting for non-financial people like me.) That's why I always try to catch him on TV. He provides leads to start off on my own research. But his recommendations are just starting points. I still have to make my own analysis.
Especially since his charitable fund is also actively trading stocks that he talk about. And, I am quite positive that the CEOs he interviews in the show didn't get in there for free.
You folks should be discussing the useless article that Friedman wrote...LeBron James, Kramer and Bloomberg TV...how bored do you have to be to write about something that happened 6 months ago (John Stewart/Kramer), something over covered and unrelated to Market Watch and something that nobody cares about...much less the company that responded to you (Bloomberg)...I feel short changed for even having taken the time.
I would asume, not knowing Cramer or seen him, that when somebody that popular on TV throughout the states makes some recommendations, that the chances of them going well might be good in avarage, since many people just may be tempted to go along with these recommendations. It's simply a matter of mass marketing.
I would asume, not knowing Cramer or seen him, that when somebody that popular on TV throughout the states makes some recommendations, that the chances of them going well might be good in avarage, since many people just may be tempted to go along with these recommendations. It's simply a matter of mass marketing.
This news story has 15 comments:
The fact that CNBC and anyone else attributes him is utterly deplorable and such news sources should be ashamed -- now bow to your mafia masters.
On Jun 03 11:48 AM Jackson Cash wrote:
> Jim Cramer is one thing - a crook.
> The fact that CNBC and anyone else attributes him is utterly deplorable
> and such news sources should be ashamed -- now bow to your mafia
> masters.
Sometimes protecting people from themselves requires that the plug is pulled on Jim-the-crook.
On Jun 03 12:02 PM Neil459 wrote:
"There are no standards.
Get used to it."
theburningplatform.com...
You always have to do your own homework.
The real value of Jim Cramer is his deep insights into the market, not to mention his entertaining takes on what's going on. (He makes following the stock market a little bit more exciting for non-financial people like me.) That's why I always try to catch him on TV. He provides leads to start off on my own research. But his recommendations are just starting points. I still have to make my own analysis.
Especially since his charitable fund is also actively trading stocks that he talk about. And, I am quite positive that the CEOs he interviews in the show didn't get in there for free.
He takes his lumps when he is wrong. I don't understand the rabidness of some of his critics.
It's simply a matter of mass marketing.
It's simply a matter of mass marketing.