Dan, two of your observations seem to clash with each other. If James Cramer of the theStreet.com is a short-term trader, how could be >a firm believer in the theory of buying only when everybody thinks the
stock is dead, even though it isn't<?
The only way to invest in stocks that are dead (or thought to be dead) is to be a long-term investor. Stocks that are dead have low volatility. They are not suitable for traders.
Perhaps you were thinking/meant something else?
----------------
Separately, when Mark questions whether Cramer might be slightly biased in his writing because of his stock positions: Any mutual fund manager/hedge fund manager/whatever who speaks in public (TV, Wall Street Journal, Barron's, whatever), is speaking for his own benefit. To think otherwise is to believe in the tooth fairy.
So yes, Cramer is slightly biased: he's biased toward making money, and he's not looking to shoot himself in the foot by giving what is a simple presentation of the facts. The facts he presents are the facts he wants to present, the facts that will help him make money.
I'm not saying this clearly, but Cramer is biased in what he writes by the stock positions he holds. That doesn't mean he writes bullsh**, but it does mean you should read what he writes with the understanding he's trying to help himself as much as he's trying to help you (his reader). Actually, he's really trying to help himself more than he's trying to help you. That is Wall Street.
Regards,
Larry |
