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.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AllansAlias who wrote (32113)	2/28/2001 7:36:43 PM
From: CAtechTrader	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 65232

That Crammer article on "pre-split prices" was a joke...market capitalization is what counts not the unadjusted split price of any company. Virtually all successful companies split their stock over time as the price grows for purposes of affordability and liquidity. Under Crammer's analysis, Berkshire Hathaway would be a bloated pig at $70,300.00 per share having never split. The article you site was Crammer's "attack du jour" on tech...he figures out some way to attack tech daily to continue supporting his short buddies (and I don't want to get in a discussion about that - hey I was one of his 'short buddies' on dot.coms until today). The same logic could have been used to write a hit piece on KO, MO, XOM, AIG, etc... thestreet.com earns no money, so you can bet Crammer is getting paid someway for these hit pieces. You watch as soon as his hedge fund buddies get long tech, Crammer will write an article du jour on what a great buy tech is, how cheap it is, how growth is the thing, the sky's the limit etc. Mark my words.

To: AllansAlias who wrote (32113)	2/28/2001 11:48:37 PM
From: SecularBull	Respond to of 65232

Cramer's article is so far off of the wall, it makes me sick. He's lacking credibility out the wazoo, and I can't believe anyone reads him (no offense intended). Split-unadjusted? Give me a break! His point is so incredibly irrelevant, given the fact that the companies to which he refers had nowhere near the fundamental strengths in 1998 that they do now. What a bunch of spew! Geesh! LoF