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: Chip Anderson who wrote (1675)	9/8/1998 12:24:00 PM
From: Silicon Trader	Respond to of 17683

This show drives me nuts, with the little voice inflections, etc... I still want to know what is happening underneath the lady on the IBD commericials chair. she gets that unbelievable grin out of the blue. When i say going long only i dont get the same reaction <G> GO NRAG MBA $$$

To: Chip Anderson who wrote (1675)	9/8/1998 1:51:00 PM
From: lazarre	Respond to of 17683

Agree. Insana usually highlights and supports any Bearish context he can get his arms around. I am glad to see Bill Griffith back but found it funny that he was shocked that Wendy Rohm, the woman who recently wrote a somewhat scathing book about Bill Gates and MSFT business practices, decided to include some references to Gates's sex life ( even though it was put--at least she remarked--in a relevant context ); Bill questioned --and rightfully so --- whether it was an appropriate subject to raise in such a book . The irony, of course, is that ever since Starr's sexual witch hunt began last January I can't recall once when a CNBC anchor asked the same question ( or even raised an eyebrow ) whenever they asked that windbag of all windbags, Chris Matthews, what was on that night's agenda for Hardball. L

To: Chip Anderson who wrote (1675)	9/9/1998 8:33:00 AM
From: kahunabear	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17683

Balance ? He is the only guy on there that is just a tad bit skeptical. I, for one, am glad that he doesn't sugar coat everything. I think CNBC, and the mutual fund and brokerage analysts that appear there, are one of the reasons this market has gotten to such crazy levels. Its like one big stock commercial. Most folks that appear, have a big vested interest in selling stocks and seeing the market go up regardless of fundamentals. When valuations get skewed so far to the extremes we may have to suffer the other extreme. Its called inertia. I am all for the market advancing based on fundamentals, but we lost touch with reality a long time ago and are paying the price. Thanks Ron for providing a little bit of balance in an otherwise hyped market. WS

To: Chip Anderson who wrote (1675)	9/9/1998 8:38:00 PM
From: ron insana	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 17683

DEAR CHIP, TO WHICH COWBOY REPORT ARE YOU REFERRING? AND I DO ADMIT TO WEARING MORE THAN ONE HAT AT CNBC. I AM BOTH AN ANCHOR AND A REPORTER. I RARELY ENGAGE IN "COMMENTARY" AND IF I DO IT IS USUALLY DONE WITH A SUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION FROM VERY WELL-PLACED SOURCES. I DO NOT GIVE MY OWN PERSONAL OPINION OF THE STOCK MARKET AND I AM NOT BEARISH OR BULLISH. IF MARKET CONDITIONS WARRANT A CLOSER LOOK AT "BEARISH" CONFIGURATIONS, THAT'S WHAT WE LOOK AT AND VICE-VERSA. BEING A U.S. CITIZEN, GE STOCKHOLDER AND A MEMBER OF THE LABOR FORCE, I DERIVE ABSOLUTELY NO PLEASURE FROM TRYING TIMES. RON