SI
SI
discoversearch

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: James J. Cramer who wrote (145)12/30/1998 11:36:00 PM
From: cicak  Respond to of 766
 
James - I really enjoyed your article today about your ISP being down. We've all been there. It's amazing how the internet has become interwoven into the daily fabric of our lives - in such a short period of time. When I don't have access to it - it really has an impact. My daily routine is screwed up for starters - but then add in lack of e-mail - chat/discussion capability - online trading - research - entertainment etc. Just to think - I've only been on the internet for less than 3 years.

And jeez - what am I doing now but typing a post on SI via the internet. :~)

Regards,

Phil
=====================================================================

Wrong! Dispatches from the Front: Shoot Me Now

By James J. Cramer
12/30/98 3:23 PM ET

For the last two days, my Internet service provider has been down.
Don't come near me. I am completely miserable because of it. I am
sending this piece via my home ISP and I have jerry-rigged my laptop on top of my desktop with wires everywhere so at least I can get some of my email.

I want to murder somebody. If the ISP guy were here right now, I am
entirely confident that if something bad were to happen to him, I would be acquitted for justifiable homicide.

Why am I venting? Because this is the schizophrenic nature of the Net
writ large. The only reason I need a phone is to harass my ISP guy! I
hate the phone. I love email. I love surfing. I love ordering. I love
bidding. I love everything about the Net. And if you take my Net away,
you will have to peel my cold dead hands off ... or whatever else that
NRA line was.

That's the dichotomy isn't it? I don't think Amazon (AMZN:Nasdaq)
belongs up here, but I am long it because it has become a part of my life. (And I don't buy that recession thing, because if Amazon becomes the retail portal, people will go no matter what.) Yahoo! (YHOO:Nasdaq)? Take it away and a routine that I love, even though it is only two years old, would be destroyed. Should it be at $254? I don't know, but I am hooked and I have to tell you that I am miserable without my.yahoo.com.

Why don't I just switch my ISP? Because I have my mail server and my
T-1 through it as well as my Net address. It would be easier for me to
leave the country than to switch ISPs.

Now I know what Bob Pittman is talking about when he buzzes about
the "persistent" client. Guess that makes me the crazed persistent client.



To: James J. Cramer who wrote (145)12/31/1998 8:47:00 PM
From: Mark Davis  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 766
 
Yowser, what was that stuff today with AOL, CMB, and AN? Looking over time and sales, the specialists must be trying to make Nasdaq MM's look good.

Are those prints for real? Could you have actually bought AOL at 144 3/4 on the close and sold it in the aftermarket for 160?? What's the annualized ror on that 15 minute turn?

And are the inmates running the asylum?

Have a very Happy and Healthy New Year.



To: James J. Cramer who wrote (145)1/10/1999 5:34:00 PM
From: Jimbo Cobb  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 766
 
Jim: Do you think INDI (Individual Investor Group... iionline.com) will run on the coattails of the CBS Marketwatch.COM IPO ?? INDI has made some serious improvements to their web site over the past few months and the traffic is starting to pick up ( biz.yahoo.com ).

Moreover, they have a deal with Yahoo and will soon be featured as editorial content from the main Yahoo finance page right beside Motley Fool and TheStreet.Com at

fnews.yahoo.com (the test site is already up, check it out)
fnews.yahoo.com
fnews.yahoo.com

Between the CBS Marketwatch.COM IPO and the Yahoo links going live and being announced in a press release, I think INDI is poised to double from $5 to $10 range soon...

Also, any plans to take TheStreet.COM public into this insatiable market appetite for Internet-related IPO's ??

For disclosure purposes, I am long INDI at $3 but not planning on selling until at least $10, and I will likely add to my position on Monday.

Enjoy your work...best wishes,

Jimbo.



To: James J. Cramer who wrote (145)1/11/1999 6:32:00 PM
From: Jimbo Cobb  Respond to of 766
 
Gee, I guess I was right about INDI/CBS Marketwatch.COM sympathy play...still dirt cheap under $10 in this environment...

Individual Investor Shares Jump After Analyst Says Stock Undervalued

Dow Jones Online News, Monday, January 11, 1999 at 18:00

By Brian Steinberg, Staff Reporter
NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Shares of Individual Investor Group Inc.
surged Monday after an analyst at Southeast Research Partners upgraded
his rating on the stock.
Barry King said he changed his rating to "buy" from "hold," and set a
price target of $8 to $10 a share for the New York business publisher.
"The stock is undervalued," the Southeast analyst said.
King said he believed Individual Investor's print publications are
worth $5 to $7 a share, and the company's Internet ventures could
generate $2 million in revenue or more within a year's time. Currently,
King said, the Internet operations generate about $1 million in revenue.
And, the analyst said, an IPO scheduled for Marketwatch.com Inc.
later this week could give Individual Investor shares even more value.
"That company has a revenue base very similar to Individual
Investor," King said. "Its revenues are about five times those
Individual Investor has been generating." Should Marketwatch increase in
value, King said, that could establish a higher value for Individual
Investor.
Shares of Individual Investor (INDI) ended the day at $7.125, up
$2.25, or 46%, on Nasdaq volume of 858,000, compared with the daily
average of just 70,500. Earlier, the shares traded as high as 7 7/16, up
52.5% from Friday's close and near the 52-week high of 7 5/8 set March
12, 1998.
- Brian Steinberg; 201-938-5218;
brian.steinberg@cor.dowjones.com
Copyright (c) 1999 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.



To: James J. Cramer who wrote (145)3/9/2000 10:26:00 AM
From: StockDung  Respond to of 766
 
shame on the street.com

Whats wrong with the the street.com to be interviewing such individuals as Charles Payne

Super Wednesday? Good Enough, Say Longs, as Major Indices Rise
By Aaron L. Task
Senior Writer
3/8/00 4:34 PM ET

Gotta Have Faith

"Even at the Nasdaq's nadir, few market players believed the action suggested blue-chips would revive at the expense of tech names for long.

Charles Payne, chief analyst at Wall Street Strategies, recalled that the last time the Dow dipped below 10,000, the Nasdaq took a bit of a powder before storming back in earnest.

"You saw some bargain-hunters coming out with drugs the biggest beneficiaries. But I don't think the game has changed," Payne said. "In a couple of days more of the buying and cash flow will be redirected back into the Nasdaq."

That desire reasserted itself today. Gains by bellwethers such as Microsoft (MSFT:Nasdaq - news - boards) and MCI WorldCom (WCOM:Nasdaq - news - boards) helped the Comp overcome weakness in tech stalwarts such as JDS Uniphase (JDSU:Nasdaq - news - boards) and Ciena (CIEN:Nasdaq - news - boards). The Nasdaq 100 rose 1.3%.

Yesterday's dichotomy between P&G and Network Solutions (NSOL:Nasdaq - news - boards) is the "snapshot that told the story" of why investors just can't stay away from the Comp, Payne said. "The reality is, I can find value all day long [on the Big Board] but people want instant gratification. They want to make money."

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
LITIGATION RELEASE NO. 15371 / May 22, 1997
ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING ENFORCEMENT RELEASE NO. 915 / May 22, 1997
SEC v. MEMBERS SERVICE CORPORATION, et al., 97-CV-01146 (May 22, 1997)
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
The Securities and Exchange Commission today filed a civil action
in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against
Members Service Corporation, Philip Sung, John R. Silseth II, Union
Securities Ltd., David Gilbert, Todd H. Moore, Charles V. Payne, Wall
Street Strategies, Inc., Joseph Lanza, and Kenneth O'Neal alleging
violations of the antifraud, registration, and reporting provisions of
the federal securities laws.
Members, which was based in Winter Park, Florida, purported to
acquire and operate private companies engaged in various businesses,
including oil and gas production, the sale of cellular fax machines,
and the development of a synthetic blood substitute. The complaint
alleges that, beginning in 1992, certain defendants issued false and
misleading press releases, prepared false and misleading financial
statements, and made undisclosed payments to salesmen and others to
manipulate the price of Members stock from $2.50 to a high of $12 per
share.
According to the complaint, the scheme began when stock promoter
Sung and Arthur Feher, Jr., the now-deceased former president of
Members, obtained 1.4 million shares of unregistered Members stock in
sham transactions designed to circumvent the registration provisions
of the federal securities laws. In one transaction, Feher allegedly
caused Members to issue 200,000 shares to his nominee, a 96-year-old
retired nursemaid who lived with him in Florida. In an effort to
invoke Regulation S, which provides exemption from registration for
sales made abroad, Feher allegedly caused Members to issue the stock
to the woman as payment for consulting services that she had not
performed, and moreover caused records to reflect that she lived
abroad. The complaint alleges that the unregistered stock was
deposited in nominee accounts at Union Securities in Vancouver,
British Columbia, where Gilbert worked as a stockbroker.
The complaint alleges that Sung, Feher, Moore, Lanza, and Gilbert
met in Boca Raton in May 1992 and agreed to undertake a series of
actions to raise Members' share price artificially, to sell more than
one million shares of unregistered Members stock that Sung and Feher
controlled at Union Securities, and to share the proceeds from the
sales. Members thereafter allegedly issued various false and
misleading press releases about its involvement with companies that
were developing synthetic blood and producing oil and gas. The
complaint alleges that, in one press release, Members falsely stated
======END OF PAGE 1======
that it had acquired a synthetic blood company when, in fact, it had
not. In another press release, Members allegedly predicted that
drilling on its oil and gas properties would generate substantial
revenues, but the release failed to disclose that there was no
reasonable basis for the prediction.
As part of the alleged scheme, Moore and Payne caused Wall Street
Strategies, a New York investment adviser, to recommend the purchase
of Members stock to its clients, and Lanza recommended the purchase of
Members stock to others. According to the complaint, Wall Street
Strategies, Payne, and Moore failed to disclose the compensation that
they received for promoting the stock. The complaint alleges that
Lanza was paid at least $540,000, that Moore was paid $282,000, and
that Payne was paid nearly $70,000 for promoting the stock. The
complaint also alleges that First New England Securities, a Boca Raton
brokerage firm that Silseth controlled, sold Members stock to
customers at prices that included excessive, undisclosed compensation
to the brokers. The complaint further alleges that, as part of the
scheme, Sung provided Silseth with several hundred thousand dollars to
help finance the operations of First New England.
The complaint alleges that Sung, Feher, Silseth, Moore, and Lanza
obtained illegal profits of more that $5 million from sales of
unregistered Members stock into the manipulated market. In addition,
according to the complaint, Union Securities and Gilbert received
approximately $350,000 in commissions for transactions in Members
stock.
The complaint alleges that O'Neal, who was then a certified
public accountant, participated in deficient audits of Members'
financial statements for 1991 and 1992. According to the complaint,
the financial statements materially overstated Members' assets and
materially understated Members' liabilities. The complaint alleges
that O'Neal knew, or was reckless in not knowing, that the audits were
deficient and that Members' financial statements had not been prepared
in accordance with professional standards.
The complaint alleges that Members, Sung, Silseth, Moore, Union
Securities, Gilbert, and Lanza violated Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a)
of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and Rule
10b-5. The complaint also alleges that Members made materially false
and misleading filings with the Commission in violation of Section
13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 12b-20 and 13a-1. In addition,
the complaint alleges that O'Neal violated Section 10(b) of the
Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5, that Sung failed to disclose his
beneficial ownership of 5% of Members stock in violation of Section
13(d) of the Exchange Act and Rule 13d-1, and that Wall Street
Strategies and Payne violated Section 17(b) of the Securities Act.
The complaint seeks disgorgement of illegal profits, civil penalties,
and permanent injunctions against further violations. See also Lit.
Rel. No. 14901 (May 6, 1996); Accounting and Auditing Enforcement Rel.
No. 779 (May 6, 1996). ======END OF PAGE 2======