johnlewing

Boo-yah! Barron's Shorts Cramer

I would imagine Murdoch and his staff know the remedy for Cramer's popularity: a dull market or a bear market.

Cramer is a product of the 90's bull market......he was an aggressive money manager with a buy the dips mentality - it worked. If he had reached his prime years in the early 70's with that mentality, nobody would know his name, and he'd have alot less money.

Keep in mind that folks like Cramer are getting their wealth by skimming money from their clients risk taking.......not their own (for the most part). Of course, this is how it's always worked on Wall Street.

A certain part of the Barron's article is unfair in that it is difficult to measure the so-called performance of a clown spouting his opinion in order to entertain retiree's that can't get excited from their own adventures in life (ergo they watch television and pretend they are involved in something). Babbling on the boob tube about this company or that company.............

There is only one reasonable way to measure Cramer's performance: the Nielsen ratings !

His phony familiarity with every public company that is publicly traded is truly absurd......."that's a great company", "great management", "my buddy at Anally is money in the bank", bla, bla, bla, bla, bla........

And like many TV personalities, Cramer presumably appreciates how absurd it is that he gets paid for such nonsense.................

Is Barry Ritholtz opinion any better than Cramer's ?

Generally I get the sense that Ritholtz is moderately more rigorous than Cramer, who seems to believe his gut-instinct-ometer is worth something despite the contrary evidence.

At least Ritholtz educational background demonstrates an interest in the analytical/statistical... aspects of the business........Cramer was initially a journalism type / people person........I don't care what he did at Goldman, you can tell alot about a person by the education they choose...........

Of course in the end for Ritholtz to add value as a journalist his readers need to demand he back up his arguments with reasonable evidence........unfort... when you reach a certain poplularity you can just crank out a whole lotta random chit-chat.......and it plays.

why does it play ?

the goal is to have content surrounding the advertising......as long as the content plays to the suckers, the underlying basis of the arguments really doesn't matter much.

regards, johnny b. dog