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.

Non-Tech : James Cramer -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: StockDung who wrote (707)	9/17/2000 8:30:26 PM
From: RockyBalboa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 766

Jim Cramer is a brave man. He is buying his own stock, at higher than todays's prices. biz.yahoo.com 25-Aug-00 CRAMER, JAMES J Director, 10% Beneficial Owner * 5,000 TSCM Purchased at $8.56/Share. Cost of $42,800. 24-Aug-00 CRAMER, JAMES J Director, 10% Beneficial Owner * 10,000 TSCM Purchased at $8.00/Share. Cost of $80,000. 22-Aug-00 CRAMER, JAMES J Director, 10% Beneficial Owner * 15,000 TSCM Purchased at $7.83/Share. Cost of $117,450. 21-Aug-00 CRAMER, JAMES J Director, 10% Beneficial Owner * 5,000 TSCM Purchased at $7.00/Share. Cost of $35,000. 11-Aug-00 CRAMER, JAMES J Director, 10% Beneficial Owner * 5,000 TSCM Purchased at $6.75/Share. Cost of $33,750. 10-Aug-00 PERETZ, MARTIN Director, 10% Beneficial Owner * 50,000 TSCM Purchased at $6.40/Share. Cost of $320,000. 10-Aug-00 CRAMER, JAMES J Director, 10% Beneficial Owner * 50,000 TSCM Purchased at $6.36/Share. Cost of $318,000. But the number of filed 144s is longer and bigger in shares. Will be interesting to see the corresponding sales. Have such sales happened or have they let the 144s expiring??? And, if Jim Cramer is buying stock, maybe he could write an article about it: Why does he believe the stock is undervalued?

To: StockDung who wrote (707)	9/17/2000 8:42:46 PM
From: RockyBalboa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 766

I believe that Jim Cramer is a coward. Reason? Well he put out a "piece" in which he outlined how he bought an internet stock at a discount and right after/at/before a "big block" changed hands. After that, he outlines, the selling is gone and the stock goes up 30%. I emailed him as I wanted to know (about 3 or 4 days after he put out the "piece" - the article) which stock symbol it was.... because I was interested and I also wanted to see what JJCramer pretended to have seen "early". What did the coward... he writes back "i would if i thought it would not betray sources kjjc" Listen: If he betrays sources then he has [used] nonpublic information (maybe in the form of an impending block sale -as he freely admits to have "seen" or "participating in the" trading through). If he traded on "public" knowledge then I still do not see the problem in telling me/us/theStreet/the World how he found this 30% miracle. As a reference, here is his "piece" inquestion: thestreet.com ----------------------------------------------- "TheStreet.com - Wrong! State of the Web: Dot-com Detritus Debacle" "On Friday, we participated in a big clean-up print of one of the dot-coms. The company has been doing well, but its stock has hurt everyone who has owned it and never sold. The big block has been overhanging the stock for weeks. Once it traded though, the stock jumped 30%. Right after the trade. That's going to be the norm now that we have so many broken dot-com stocks. Most of them have lids on them, big blocks held by people who don't want to realize the loss. Once these pieces trade, the stock is ready to lift. " --------------------------------------------------- The "Last Friday" he talked of was most presumably Jun 2 2000. I believe that I have a case here.