To: Rande Is who wrote (25788)
From: Rande Is Friday, May 12, 2000 3:39 PM ET
Reply # of 25818
. . . . . . . .Another CNBC Rant. . . . . . . .
Its the same thing over and over on CNBC. . .Blah blah blah. . analyst after analyst. . .taking turns throwing out the big "fear of higher interest rates". . . shall we start counting how many times interest rates are mentioned on CNBC and use it as an economic indicator? How about the number of times Maria says the words "Goldman Sachs" in a single day. . . compared to all other journalists combined?
Is anyone here AFRAID of higher interest rates? I'm not. And the high flying companies aren't either. . .they don't borrow money anymore. . .they sell stock.
And this economy has proven over and over that it can support higher interest rates without necessarily leading to higher inflation. The productivity of our companies accounts for the higher growth.
If CNBC does not do some serious soul-searching with regard to how they serve the needs of we individual investors [the primary viewing audience] in their reporting. . . then we will start to boycott them. . .in favor of Bloomberg TV. . . which DOES address the needs and concerns of the individual investors in their reporting. Bloomberg is currently available on Direct TV. . . but if we all call our cable companies to request Bloomberg TV, that may change.
And what a pleasure it is not to hear the personal bias of the reporters. Today's pump of Agilent by the Goldman Sachs analyst, accompanied by Maria was pitiful. And how many times have we heard the words, "stock for sale in size at AOL" ? ?
Perhaps the SEC needs to beef up its MEDIA ENFORCEMENT division!!
Day after day Goldman Sachs, DLJ and Merrill reports [in that order] are pumped over and over and over in our face. . . .as though the reports are written to help us. . . . when most all individual investors know full well, that they are designed to trip us up. We aren't as stupid as you may think!
CNBC, in case you have not yet figured it out. . . the market is a two-party game. On one side, you have the hedge funds, the major brokerage houses, the market makers and the large fund managers. On the other side, you have the individual investors/traders that watch your program all day long.
Catering to the requests and announcements of the major brokerage houses. . . simply shows which side CNBC prefers.
Contrary to popular belief. . . we DO have a choice. Personally, I don't "watch" CNBC. . .it plays BEHIND me. . .I only listen. . . I found out that Ron Insana had a cue ball 3 days after everyone else.
Perhaps someone should provide links to the equipment that mutes the TV during commercials. . . not only would that serve our purpose of getting the attention of CNBC executives, it would save our sanity from the small queue of spots that repeat far too often.
Throwing a few "interesting" specials out there after market is patronizing at best. I want to hear reports 5 minutes before and right through the opening bell, telling me of what is REALLY moving. . . . not what some brokerage told their anal-yst to report. I want to regularly hear reports from the individual investors. . .technical analysis. . .sentiment. . . stories, etc. I want to hear reports from the traders themselves. . . not what the journalist thinks he heard them say.
Do we have to start our own TV/radio/newsroom to show you how it SHOULD be done? There was a time when that sounded ridiculous. . .but now it is quite accessible. . . especially with broadband and streaming video/audio. . .and there are plenty of capable television workers right here in Nashville that need work.
CNBC has FAR too much influence at present. . . and I almost never hear full disclosure of positions held by guests reciting analysis. Web broadcasting is the future. And I for one welcome change.
Rande Is
View Replies (4) | View Next 10 Messages | Respond | Previous | Next
Remove SubjectMark Ignore this Person View SubjectMarks
Terms of Use |
