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.
Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jim McMannis who wrote (76278)3/12/1999 4:12:00 PM
From: KM  Respond to of 186894
 
Sure did. I just post stuff of interest, not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing.



To: Jim McMannis who wrote (76278)3/12/1999 4:31:00 PM
From: Burt Masnick  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894
 
The New York Times article was answered item by item in Cramer's TheStreet.com article the day the NYTimes article appeared and it seemed to me from reading both articles that Cramer was maltreated and mischaracterised in the article. First of all let me say that Cramer is the quintessential momentum player. He'll get in for a day, a week, a month to capture a move either way. That kind of investing involves a ton of timing smarts. Cramer claims that he did great in 97, way above the S&P. He was OK in 98 till last October when he zigged instead of zagged. To his credit, Cramer entitles his column WRONG! because he is very quick to point out his own trading errors. Like the next day. He immediately acknowledged last October that he blew it. I personally don't buy because Cramer says he is buying or sell because Cramer says he is selling or shorting. Having been following Cramer's column on TheStreet.com my scorecard on him is that he is right much more often than he is wrong, that he does his homework, but that he follows too many issues to have great depth on any one. He relies on his partner, Berkowitz to follow the techs closely and together they reach trading opinions. He is far too hair trigger for my personal tastes but he has the ability to admit that he has goofed. That's a lot more than I've seen in other self-proclaimed market gurus. And being a momentum player, he's not likely to get wiped out. He wrote a series of articles descibing October '87 and how he was fortunate enough (through the advice of his wife, whom he calls "the trading goddess")to liquidate before the big blowup. He just trys to smell trends real early and join/play them. He has made a ton of money on Intel and avoids AMD because he can't trust management's info and guidance. If nothing else, he is probably the most honest and self-critical pro I've seen. He's not afraid to say that he is clueless about market directions if that's the way he feels. When is the last time you heard a market timer say that they were clueless?



To: Jim McMannis who wrote (76278)3/12/1999 10:57:00 PM
From: Paul Fiondella  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894
 
I'm not enamored of Cramer but he is a trader

I think he is more honest than most in revealing his positions (of course after the fact). As to what he has to say, it's shop talk.

His performance was influenced by the panic last year. He sold his most of his positions and got faked out. (What would you expect a trader to do when faced with another 1987? In addition he runs a hedge fund and got tarred and feathered by LTCB and suffered redemptions.

I have a feeling he sold again with the techs this time around but once again too late. They all got caught getting out late with INTC. I don't think he sold his whole position however (he probably has a formula) and I think he got back into INTC around 115.

====================

Incidentally Cramer plans to take Street.com public. That will make him fabulously wealthy. So even if he can't pick em he can sell his mouth. And finally the New York Times owns part of the company.

All we do here is make the owners of SI rich.