CNBC TACTICS? Coverage of ORCL should not even be an issue for the markets, but is CNBC is trying to make it one?
MY (toned-down) EMAIL TO CNBC:
Message 17139164
I wrote an email last night to them (yes, I know it's Pollyanna and rather obvious) but I was in the mood to let them know that people are "onto them", so to speak. They are just too comfortable. It's pretty clear that CNBC is trying to sensationalize the smallest things to increase viewership. In effect, make people think that if they don't watch CNBC they will miss something that could move the Markets. If so, that's sick! Maybe a lot of us have known this for a long time, but I finally decided to do a little something about it.
We've all heard the comments like the one they made on Thursday by one of their anchors ----"Boy, did you see how that stock reacted right after Bob Pasani broke that report?" Joe has quite an ego too about things like that.
Yesterday, all they could talk about in Afterhours was ORCL, ORCL, ORCL. It got more play than the rally. They even paraded guests on like Art Cashin and others who said "Well, all I can say is that this is a lousy way to start the weekend" and another guest who said, after Sue's leading question: "Yes, the markets could react badly on Monday"
It's all so insane. What CNBC did not say is that ORCL sales in the North America and Europe were up!. It was only parts of Asia that were down. So big friggin' deal! They missed by a penny. Do all companies have big sales to Asia? Is everybody in the same business as ORCL? Should the whole market react to ORCL? LOL!
On the flip side, no one mentioned the lawsuit against AOL that came out before the bell. I wonder if it had something to do with the 17,000 Mar 25 calls that were suddenly traded the day before. It should have tanked AOL but it was totally downplayed. Hmmmm.....
Come join the mini-discussion on CNBC on our thread if you like or start one here. Or write them and tell them we're "on to them". Or just shake your head in cynical amazement.
Yesterday just pissed me off and I felt like spreading a little manure CNBC's way. They deserve it.
PS- Here's another article that claims Jim Cramer used CNBC anchors as pawns:
Message 17140680 |
