James Cramer Skeptic Thread Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : James Cramer Skeptic Thread

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Robert Graham who wrote (231)	6/21/1998 11:34:00 PM
From: Pancho Villa	of 1254

I agree. Mr. Cramer puts out a lot of personal irrelevant BS out but also good stuff. However, sometimes he writes before he thinks/checks the facts. On Friday he wrote this about Buffet's latest move: "On the heels of an ugly day, what could be more bullish than a giant acquisition of a financial company, a pure play on the bond market, by Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA:NYSE)? Wow, this one will be awfully hard for bond and stock bears to swallow. If all stocks are expensive, how could Warren Buffett pay this kind of premium for General Re (GRN:NYSE)? If bonds are expensive, how could Buffett buy a huge bond owner? If insurance stocks are deflationary plays, how can Buffett buy GenRe unless he believes in the long-term deflationary scenario? I am sure there is a way to paint this one as negative for the market that I haven't thought of, but I regarded it as a massive positive stunner -- the type of news that caused me to scramble to see if I could get more exposure out of stocks by exercising calls that I might have left to go out worthless." I guess he didn't bother checking Mr. Buffet paid for GRN using his own inflated stock. IMo this fact makes Mr. Cramer's comment irrelevant. Pancho

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next