Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : CNBC -- critique. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Yogizuna who wrote (3554)	8/20/1999 10:31:00 AM
From: Gary M. Reed	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 17683

I agree with your assessment of FNN. It seemed to me that it was a lot more mentally stimulating and market savvy than today's CNBC. I remember when they swapped over to CNBC, it seemed like they "dumbed down" the show to appeal to the average Joe. I remember while in college, I was a real stock market junkie (that was in the early-to-mid 80's, before being a stocks junkie was cool) and learned an immense amount of stuff from FNN. I remember regularly skipping finance classes at LSU so I could watch FNN, because I learned more about "the REAL world of finance" from FNN than sitting through an hour of listening to some over-educated pinhead with a PhD in finance who was teaching because he/she had no clue of how the real world worked. When they merged with CNBC, I remembered tuning in and watching in disbelief as a network that used to be so cool and savvy was suddenly having detailed discussions about stuff like "how to balance your checkbook" and "what is a CD?" Since then, they have sort of upped CNBC's content to a happy medium (Squawk Box rules, but stuff like the Power Lunch Cool Website and taking endless "Buy-sell-hold" calls from housewives asking about their 100 shares of Compaq stock is lame and annoying). I still say the CNBC folks are missing out on a tremendous opportunity by not going to a two-tiered system. They could have "CNBC Lite" as a basic cable channel (like the current format), where the masses could tune in to hear about their favorite holdings, and Bill Griffeth could spend his 2 hours of Power Lunch teaching people how to balance checkbooks, figure the interest rate on their mortgage, etc., in his hokey way. Then, they should implement a new premium channel (like HBO) called something like "CNBC High Protein" where there were more involved discussions and analyses on the market. Lots of analysts and fund managers discussing their picks, with none of the annoying accompanying viewer call-in crapola. The guests would be instructed by the producers that, since they were in front of a sophisticated market, that they would not have to dumb-down their commentary and analysis. They could charge $10-$15 per month in premium fees, and people would pay for it because the investment ideas you got from watching would easily justify the extra $10-15 on your DirecTV or cable bill. For instance, think of all the daily big movers (up and down) that never get mentioned on today's CNBC because they have to cater to the average Joe, and because we have to be subjected to news and weather updates every half-an-hour. Also, I think the CNBC reporters would enjoy such a show, because, like the guest PMs and analysts, they could really dig into stories, without worrying if the average viewer was understanding what the hell they were talking about. This would surely be a money-maker for CNBC and the Mother Craft (GE). With all the people who have gotten serious about actively managing their own investments, they could position this premium channel "CNBC High Protein" as a must-have for anyone who is serious about making money in stocks. Cripes, I pay an extra $400 a year to DirecTV for their College Football, NFL Sunday Ticket, and Major League Baseball Extra Innings package...paying them another $15 per month for a channel that could make me more money would be a no-brainer. I would also think that ad rates on such a channel would command a premium, since advertisers would know that they have a very targeted, very focused market of able and willing consumers for their products. Gary