I think the old FNN would spend the time needed for developing the ideas being presented. It would be impossible to examine a subject in any depth in the brief time CNBC would devote to it. I don't think I'm alone here in believing that fewer ideas, fully developed, and completely discussed, would prove more beneficial to the investor/viewer than the hurried coverage which only presents the most superficial analysis and no review. Unfortunately, the MTV emulation prevails on CNBC today. Perhaps this is a better way to operate a broadcasting business, and hence, more profitable.
Remember, CNBC exists to make GE money, not you money. Realizing this provides a rational explanation for our many irritations. I'm not angry that the opportunity to serve investor viewers has been wasted, but I am saddened by it.
Perhaps a connection between maximum profits and maximum viewer satisfaction could be discovered. In that case, we'd all win.
Cheers, PW. |
