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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kathleen capps who wrote (33055)	9/30/1998 1:29:00 AM
From: PaperChase	Respond to of 132070

>>Cramer is now hot on MU.<< I can't believe I'm reading this. Do you mean MU or MUEI? Could you provide a link (or his quote if it is a pay only site)? Consider the following and understand my amazement that he would buy into a company posting 100's of millions in losses. From: GQ Magazine, (I don't subscribe, I found it in the lobby) August 1998 The One-Day Wonders By James J. Cramer "...First, let's establish what we are looking for in a winning stock. It's a bit hard-boiled, but so is the biz. Let's get one thing straight: We do not care if the product is breakthrough or revolutionary or outstanding or indispensable. We do care whether the company behind the product is profitable. How profitable? Extremely profitable. And getting more profitable all the time. Too high a standard? What do you think Merck is if not a profitable company that grows more profitable by the quarter and the year? And Cisco and Intel and Microsoft? These are not companies that swing from wild profitability to deep red ink..." Gee, hipocracy?

To: Kathleen capps who wrote (33055)	9/30/1998 3:37:00 AM
From: PaperChase	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

Kathleen. Looks like I found an answer to my Cramer question. What a @#$!!! hippo-crit he is. The guy says one thing and does another. I'm going over to the MU thread to inform with my ever so meek opinions :-)