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: WTMHouston who wrote (6409)	8/14/2000 9:15:18 AM
From: swisstrader	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17683

WTM: you are deadly accurate, but are you not aware of the fact that CNBC is 100% to blame for many of these investors having lost millions?...please (Yogi) bear in mind that the crybaby factor here is higher than at a primal scream fest in SF.

To: WTMHouston who wrote (6409)	8/14/2000 12:30:38 PM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17683

Troy, you bring up several points which relay on the theory that if all news agencies are doing wrong the wrong is right. CSCO reported two sets of financial statements which I presume was done to shield the company and it's management from any potential law suits. Chosing to report / propagate the more rosy and inaccurate statement is not reporting but advertising the company position whose intention is to prop up the stock (also referred as stock pimping). Even CSCO indicated that the second set are THE ACTUAL ..... results in their opinion. If CNBC chose reporting the results from the second set of financial statements they would not been classified as making news but as more accurate reporting. The headline difference would be 30% or so percent of earnings growth instead of the 60% reported. Would agree with you that Squak Box should discuss such issue as ....... investments earnings representing 40% of operating earnings or the 20% shrinkage in operating earnings and the same should be done with DELL whose operating earnings grew only 5% not 20% but investment earnings grew 400%. The whole issue is about balanced reporting and not HYPE REPORTING which is practiced by all financial networks to attract advertising dollar from interested parties. As to you last remarks 1. CSCO did not recovered yet (to $70) nor has DELL so the market did not embrace the 60% earnings growth ( e.g..... the conclusions of my analysis are similar to others who sold and did not went public about it ..... I did not own CSCO or DELL neither short it). 2. As to the law suits I was advised differently by a litigation attorney in NYC, a litigation is possible based on several assumption to be discovered in depositions, but actual damage must be proven(I admit it was said during an informal get together discussion as a side remark not after evaluating all the facts). 3. IMHO the only way to stop propagating Hype Reporting is to stop this practice ....... which can be achieved only by bringing law suits which will make the news regardless if the will end up being closed or frivolous...... that is the American way .......... I was around the corner on this one and it did not help that I was right .......and recovered some damages BWDIK Haim

To: WTMHouston who wrote (6409)	8/14/2000 9:08:23 PM
From: Yogizuna	Respond to of 17683

Troy, Your points are well taken, but yet, it is extremely hard for me to believe that CNBC with the vast resources of GE behind it cannot or will not do better than simply parrot these important earnings reports without doing any sort of investigating..... If nothing else, a bit of non-passive reporting would help make these important companies stop playing games with the numbers. This would be better for all market participants in the long run..... Yogi