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: Mark Marcellus who wrote (11648)	12/12/2002 11:11:05 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 17683

If you think Blodget was right, there's not much to say. I am thinking the same thing wrt you Mark! Let me refresh your memory. Amazon did 300mm in sales in one quarter - December 98. That was something like 300% OVER Cohen's "analysis", and slightly MORE than Blodget's puffed up estimates. Both analysts Cohen and Blodget had Amazon posting losses. Cohen had a $50. target and Blodget had $400. I'm sorry to tell you, that Blodget was right, at least about that stock, THEN. It makes people feel better to bash whoever was around in the late 90s before they lost all their money. But that is an emotional response to changing market conditions, is all. Imo Blodget was a great analyst for about a year- from late 98 to late 99. Then things changed and he couldn't adapt. I would rather have listened to Blodget than Cohen at the time, since both were wrong eventually and Blodget was at least right for a while. Thats what happened this year with Amazon. Holly Becker was right about one stock, yahoo in 2001. But shes a bit of a broken clock and because she was right then, cnbc gave her all this airtime like she was a rising star. She's no different from Blodget, a one trick pony and no ability to see a shifting market in front of her. Again, the only way to solve the problem of bad analysts is to PRESENT ALL SIDES. Lizzie