Michael, think about what this Cramerism means:
"Biotech, hey, you know I am a skeptic. I have railed against it, called it a bubble, thought it was way overvalued. But the sector has come down to where their might be values. Won't you join me in finding out?"
Geeze. Cramer was writing nonsense about how you just gotta take CSCO and DELL when MLNM, HGSI, SEPR, et al were doing ten-baggers, and his Big Tech Stocks were falling off a cliff. BTW, you could have had at least a year's notice on the Big Tech Stock Fall, by reading Bill Fleckenstein's column (used to be free on SI), instead of paying for TSCM. Now, Fleckenstein is subscription-only at Grant's Investor, and Cramer is giving more away every day. Funny, isn't it, how the world works.
During the time that Cramer was railing against biotech, most of us here on SI were making fortunes, not just beating hedge funds by losing less money than they. Now, he wants us to join him in determining the worth of biotech companies, and to pay him for the privilege!
What extreme hubris, from a commentator who did no research, who missed so many big opportunities, and who mis-advised his readers. I wouldn't go to Cramer's seminar on biotech any more than I would go to Michael Jackson's seminar on childcare. It's not just a waste of time and money, it's offensive pretense.
If you want to learn about biotech, read SI. Cramer still has value as a frequent contrary indicator with some influence. As has been observed, when his sheep follow him, you can make money going the other way. It also improves one's self-image to have some distance from Cramer. The air just seems fresher! |
