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: Ted David who wrote (5501)	5/11/2000 10:03:00 AM
From: Mark S.	Respond to of 17683

I think CNBC has done a nice job reporting the business news. My wife (bless her heart), watched the ticker for me while she was in the hospital having triplets. The Doctors made special trips to her rooms, thank you for providing the extra special attention we dearly needed. Long enough though. 3300 level in the Nas is comforting to me. A possible crash is not. CNBC shouldn't have to defend themselfs for the ups and downs of this surreal bull market. People should read SEC rules and realize they are responsible for doing their own dudiligence or hire it out (hehe). CNBC is a starting point to investing. God Bless and hug babies.

To: Ted David who wrote (5501)	5/11/2000 11:47:00 AM
From: Canuck Dave	Respond to of 17683

I don't watch CNBC while I'm trading any more, but I have a question for you. (The reason I stopped watching has nothing to do with editorial content. Some of the broker ads were subliminally appearing in my dreams. I HATE it when I realize I've let Madison Avenue get inside my head). One of the people on the threads was making the comment that an analyst was on CNBC advocating people buy CSCO ahead of earnings last Tuesday. She said that we online traders were behaving a lot more responsibly than the so called professional managers by waiting for CSCO to post BEFORE we make any recommendations or take positions. Do you agree? Do you also agree that the analysts often have a symbiotic relationship with the companies they cover and these relationships should be pounded on by reporters over and over again? TIA CD p.s. I apologize for the lack of civility of some of the other questions. It really isn't the norm on SI, but I think your network is a hot button for a lot of people.

To: Ted David who wrote (5501)	5/11/2000 10:02:00 PM
From: Yogizuna	Respond to of 17683

So SI is repeating your posts also. Same thing happened to me over at the Elian thread yesterday, but one of mine repeated three times..... Yogi

To: Ted David who wrote (5501)	5/12/2000 12:32:00 AM
From: B.REVERE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17683

Hi Ted, Didn't realize you were posting. Nice to have one of the few unbiased journalists chat on our threads. I consider you, Herrara and Faber the only ones worth listening to when I have the sound turned on. (ng) The others always seem to be protecting their 401k's no matter what the hell is going on. Doesn't it seem ludicrous to you that analysts that come on the show and pimp stocks whose valuations cannot be justified no matter how they twist their story, are let on your program, ad nauseum? Are the producers of this show out to bankrupt every naive investor that happens to tune in at that moment? Maria touts some Lehman clown(Shobin?) from last Friday night's show that we've hit a bottom because the market went up that day after getting hammered all week. And she has the nerve to reiterate it Monday morning as if she or this guy knows jack. Another 8% retracement three days later and not a word about this guy's call. Does she have any clue at all? It's liquidity and momentum. NOTHING ELSE. Momentum goes both ways, show her a chart for crying out loud. If this market traded strictly on valuations, the market would have corrected 4 years ago. It's time the public starts getting some responsible journalism (again I don't put you or the others I mentioned in this group)and get some real analysts on the show, not these dart throwers who wouldn't know a server if it fell on them. Sorry to vent so much but there are a lot of people who have gotten hurt by CNBC'S failure to present both sides of every story and the mindless cheerleading that goes on when a stock "beats" its numbers. What a joke this has become. Cisco buys companies every quarter to get another "one-time" write off to "beat" its numbers by a penny again. How many times does a company get to write off billions before it no longer becomes a one-time write-off? The SEC won't police the big boys. The FED protects its friends (LTCM). The moral hazard Greenspan protected in "98 were the wealthiest people in the world, not the minions. The internet has truly leveled the playing field by allowing small fry like me know that the info is out there if you know where to look. The market's a sham and it's there for the one percent of the truly wealthy who really run the whole show, and I'm not just talking about the market. Thanks for your time