Jim Cramer
 

Okay everyone has seen Jim Cramer's mad money show on CNBC. I kindof enjoy watching him, although I have no clue if he actually knows anything about finance. I am discouraged by the fact that my grandmother listens to his every word and buys/sells anything he says. Am I the only one who likes watching this guy? Does he know what he is talking about?

Re: Jim Cramer
 

Anyone who knows a lot about the stock market would be too busy getting incredibly rich to do a tv show. Also, sharing your information decreases your edge.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

Jason,

I find Cramer to be perhaps the most irritating finance commentator on TV.

I don't follow him closely, but from what I've read in the past I'm under the impression that he has generally somewhat underperformed the market.

I'm not sure that following guys like this broadcasting to huge audiences is ever a really great strategy.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

He used to run a very successful hedge fund. He is very rich and started out poor. So he must have done something right. However, I think the TV show should be treated just like any other TV show... entertainment.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

he's a moron. i've read a lot about him and used to actually like him - prob 6 yrs ago - but he's morphed into an idiot.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

He supposedly returned 24% net of fees!!! per year at his hedge fund over a 12 year period. He ran about 300 million, and those returns were probably jacked up by his huge allotment of IPO's which worked well back wehn he ran that money. This puts him in the league of Warren Buffet but who knows what his real returns were.

I think his show is obviously hammed up for TV but there is no question the guy is very smart and more inmportantly a good "street" trader

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
He used to run a very successful hedge fund.

[/ QUOTE ]

eh, not sure how true this is on final inspection (it was certainly wildly successful in the late 90's - but what wasn't). he definitely makes a lot of claims, but i've heard some conflicting info from people who are in the know.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
He supposedly returned 24% net of fees!!! per year at his hedge fund over a 12 year period. He ran about 300 million, and those returns were probably jacked up by his huge allotment of IPO's which worked well back wehn he ran that money. This puts him in the league of Warren Buffet but who knows what his real returns were.

I think his show is obviously hammed up for TV but there is no question the guy is very smart and more inmportantly a good "street" trader

[/ QUOTE ]

He also managed a tech mutual fund which lost 99.5% of its value in 2000-2002.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

el D i can see why u think he is annoying, for some reason I am not annoyed by him. I actually watch the show hoping to be annoyed and am usually not.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

Henry Blodget (lol) has written a bunch of stuff in Slate recently about Jim Cramer.

http://www.slate.com/id/2158497/

In that article there's a link to a website that shows that the stocks that Cramer recommended in 2006 underperformed a bunch of index funds. Their methodology is a bit sketchy, but it's an interesting site nevertheless:

http://madmoneymachine.com/portfolios/portfolios2006

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure that following guys like this broadcasting to huge audiences is ever a really great strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe not following them, but not following them!

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure that following guys like this broadcasting to huge audiences is ever a really great strategy.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only broadcasters I would listen to are ones who recommend index funds. Too bad that makes for boring television.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

I will watch the show for a few minutes from time to time just to see his antics, but I imagine he's reputed as the Phil Hellmuth of the finance world. Mostly talk, and busy doing "other things" (DVD's/TV shows) to truly dominate poker, or in this case, the stock market.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
Henry Blodget (lol) has written a bunch of stuff in Slate recently about Jim Cramer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Henry Blodget calling out Cramer for being an idiot is the pot calling the kettle. Can you say Investment Banker lackey?

from Wikepedia

"...Blodget's later articles for the magazine focussed on the return limiting actions of individual investors, including listening to analysts and the financial media, and relying on active management such as mutual and hedge funds. Instead, Blodget recommends low fee index investing to capture the broad return, while focussing on reduced portfolio turnover to minimise taxes. This investment strategy is in contrast to his earlier life as an analyst, and one he readily acknowledges throughout his discourse. His Slate articles about investing carry a seven-paragraph disclosure of potential conflicts of interest."

ROFL

Re: Jim Cramer
 

Blodget is a scumbag prick, Cramer is awesome and is coming to my hometown tomorrow to speak and I am [censored] pissed I will miss it. Whether or not his opinions on stocks are profitable, he has the best intentions and should certainly be given credit for making a subject that many regard as dreary into something that is widely entertaining. FWIW, he has made me a couple thousand.

Also, his first two books (at least) are pretty good, especially his autobiography.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

I sometimes used to catch Cramer's radio show on the way home from work. The impression that I got was a guy who basically knows what he's talking about but is overextended. I don't think your grandmother will underperform by following him, because he will weed out the total crap. (Main danger may be getting a bad price after his recommendation bumps the stock.)

He had some good thoughts, nothing that would make you say "Wow this guy's a genius", but enough that following what he says (with your BS detector on) isn't a bad idea. Of course, there are probably more knowledgeable people to listen to.

He does get himself into trouble because he is expected to come up with something new every day. So about half the time he bloviates about companies that he knows little about, and you need to watch out for that because he's a lemming when he does that.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

I dislike Jim Cramer, but only because my mom watches him all the time. I have no knowledge of his personal investing prowess, but the nature of the market means that most of his advice is instantly rendered worthless by broadcasting it over TV. OTOH, he's no more or less worthless (at least for the average investor) than every other program on CNBC.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

I hate him. I love Larry Kudlow though. Amazing cnbc can go from great 5-6 and crap 6-7 just like that

Re: Jim Cramer
 

I like him. What he does on mad money is for show; he is not really like that. He wants ratings and thus he needs to attract both the noobs, and the semi/smarties (like me and strass).

If you listen to his podcast when it was on, you'd see he is very serious actually.

I really hate the guys on fast money


I cant stand these two clowns. The whole show is a penis waving contest. I realllly hate the last guy.
http://media.cnbc.com/i/CNBC/Section...an_bio_140.jpg
http://media.cnbc.com/i/CNBC/Section...ic_bio_140.jpg

Overall, I feel Cramer would have a better show if he cut back on all the charades. Check out bloomberg as an alternative for finance info.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

Didn't he horribly horribly horribly break the law at some point?

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Henry Blodget (lol) has written a bunch of stuff in Slate recently about Jim Cramer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Henry Blodget calling out Cramer for being an idiot is the pot calling the kettle. Can you say Investment Banker lackey?

from Wikepedia

"...Blodget's later articles for the magazine focussed on the return limiting actions of individual investors, including listening to analysts and the financial media, and relying on active management such as mutual and hedge funds. Instead, Blodget recommends low fee index investing to capture the broad return, while focussing on reduced portfolio turnover to minimise taxes. This investment strategy is in contrast to his earlier life as an analyst, and one he readily acknowledges throughout his discourse. His Slate articles about investing carry a seven-paragraph disclosure of potential conflicts of interest."

ROFL

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess you didn't understand the lol in parentheses; I'm not a Henry Blodget fan either. You picked an awful snippet from Wikipedia though because that sounds like some great financial advice. Low fee indexing and avoiding turnover is exactly what Benjamin Graham and Warren Buffett advocate(d). Go ROFL at them too.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Henry Blodget (lol) has written a bunch of stuff in Slate recently about Jim Cramer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Henry Blodget calling out Cramer for being an idiot is the pot calling the kettle. Can you say Investment Banker lackey?

from Wikepedia

"...Blodget's later articles for the magazine focussed on the return limiting actions of individual investors, including listening to analysts and the financial media, and relying on active management such as mutual and hedge funds. Instead, Blodget recommends low fee index investing to capture the broad return, while focussing on reduced portfolio turnover to minimise taxes. This investment strategy is in contrast to his earlier life as an analyst, and one he readily acknowledges throughout his discourse. His Slate articles about investing carry a seven-paragraph disclosure of potential conflicts of interest."

ROFL

[/ QUOTE ]
Did you actually read what you posted there?

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
He used to run a very successful hedge fund. He is very rich and started out poor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well his Wikipedia entry supports the contention he started out poor, but I'm not sure how accurate this is. I seem to recall he was rubbing shoulders with Bill Gates and Steve Balmer at Harvard. They used to play a lot of poker together, no joke.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
Blodget is a scumbag prick, Cramer is awesome and is coming to my hometown tomorrow to speak and I am [censored] pissed I will miss it. Whether or not his opinions on stocks are profitable, he has the best intentions and should certainly be given credit for making a subject that many regard as dreary into something that is widely entertaining.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good intentions or entertainment value don't matter. If someone gives bad investment advice to grandmothers and causes them to lose money, that is offensive.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

He correctly called the Tech crash in 2000.

He also made a good call on Phillip Morris when it looked like lawsuits would bankrupt them.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

Cramer certainly knows what he's talking about (his hedge fund produced outstanding returns) but like others said, following his picks is a recipe for disaster because of his influence. Watch the show for the entertainment value of it plus the nuggets of gold he drops on abstract topics such as how to evaluate the strength of management and also for his more general thoughts on trends in the economy. DO NOT go buy stock X because Cramer rang the "Bullish" sound on his show.

I also think it's kind of hard to hate Cramer as he strikes me as genuine if a little eccentric. A la Peter Lynch, he walked away from a whole bunch of money to spend more time with his family and he's very self-deprecating (calling his wife the Trading Goddess and openly admitting his gaffes on the show, for instance).

Re: Jim Cramer
 

I love Cramer, if only because we agree that the average industry analyst is a moron.

He advocates extensive, ongoing study of every stock you invest in, so his isn't exactly a fly-by-night strategy.

W/R/T tracking the performance of his recommended stocks, he has to recommend so many over the course of a year that the pool is way too broad. Instead, someone should be tracking the stocks he actually buys.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
He advocates extensive, ongoing study of every stock you invest in, so his isn't exactly a fly-by-night strategy.

W/R/T tracking the performance of his recommended stocks, he has to recommend so many over the course of a year that the pool is way too broad. Instead, someone should be tracking the stocks he actually buys.


[/ QUOTE ]

uhhhhh....

Re: Jim Cramer
 

didn't read all the rest of the replies but fwiw,

there was an article in Men's Health or something like that where they talked about an experiment they did where they threw darts at a newspaper stock listing and did experimental "play money" investments in those stocks, then followed the advice of Cramer, and 2 other people like him and Cramer was by far the worst performer.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

Asked my Dad about Cramer and what he thought.

I know nothing about the stock-market or investing but my Dad certainly does and I respect his opinion as he has done extremely well for himself over the past 25-30 yrs or so I guess.
He watches CNBC for god-knows how many hours everyday (even records it when he goes out golfing or whatever) as well as reading, reading, reading.

Anyway, I asked what he thought.
He doesn't follow Cramer religiously or anything, but does believe the guy actually does know what he's talking about more often than not unbelieveably enough.
He also mentioned how much Cramer built himself up from very little as has already been mentioned (conclusion: so he's probably doing something right).

My Dad is fairly particular. So for him to say the guy isn't completely full of it is significant.


My favorite financial-analyst is probably Wayne Rogers when he's on the Fox News Channel.
I'm not a big fan of any of those other guys on the financial shows on Fox. But Wayne Rogers (the guy who played Trapper John on MASH) seems really sharp and I just wish everyone else would shut up so that he could talk more.

Interestingly enough, my Dad and Wayne Rogers live just a few miles from each other in the Destin, FL area (might just be a 2nd home for Rogers though).

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
uhhhhh....

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, but your point here is kind of...shall I say, opaque?

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who knows a lot about the stock market would be too busy getting incredibly rich to do a tv show. Also, sharing your information decreases your edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't totally true. Have you heard of frontloading? He could load up on a stock, mention it on his show (stocks go crazy when he mentions them), then sell.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who knows a lot about the stock market would be too busy getting incredibly rich to do a tv show. Also, sharing your information decreases your edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't totally true. Have you heard of frontloading? He could load up on a stock, mention it on his show (stocks go crazy when he mentions them), then sell.

[/ QUOTE ]

That seems more like a recipe for getting sued by the SEC than for getting rich.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who knows a lot about the stock market would be too busy getting incredibly rich to do a tv show. Also, sharing your information decreases your edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't totally true. Have you heard of frontloading? He could load up on a stock, mention it on his show (stocks go crazy when he mentions them), then sell.

[/ QUOTE ]

That seems more like a recipe for getting sued by the SEC than for getting rich.

[/ QUOTE ]

I seem to recall he did have some legal troubles for doing the ole pump and dump.

Trading solely on whatever his snippit du jour is would definitely be a recipe for disaster, but I don't see anything wrong with watching his program to pick up on some ideas to follow up with the proper due dilligence.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
Didn't he horribly horribly horribly break the law at some point?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure but you might be thinking of Quattrone. AFAIK he's the only one of those dotcom cheerleaders to be seriously prosecuted. How anyone could ever give Blodgett, Battapaglia, Meeker, etc. the time of day is unfathomable to me. I give Kramer some credit for jumping ship a little before those guys. But not much.

The Economist and Barron's were the only two publications I saw that got it right *before* the [censored] started to hit the fan. That and the bears on the Motley Fool message boards. That was a fun time to argue with all the kool-aid drinkers. In it's heyday TMF was pretty addictive.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

suzzer,

FYI, Frank Quattrone is getting ready to launch his comeback. Recent rumors/reports have him raising a multi-billion dollar private equity fund.

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]


This isn't totally true. Have you heard of frontloading? He could load up on a stock, mention it on his show (stocks go crazy when he mentions them), then sell.

[/ QUOTE ]

CNBC doesn't let him talk about stocks with under a certain market capitalization because of that reason. He can't own stocks personally, just for his charitable trust.

Personally I think his mission of bringing investing to the masses is an honorable one. He explicitly tells people both in his books and on the show to not go out and buy every stock he recommends. His whole philosophy is that of "buy and homework", which means you have to evaluate all of his picks for yourself and see how they fit with your investment strategy. All those grannies that are losing money really aren't following his advice.

(Obviously I'm a fan of his).

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He used to run a very successful hedge fund. He is very rich and started out poor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well his Wikipedia entry supports the contention he started out poor, but I'm not sure how accurate this is. I seem to recall he was rubbing shoulders with Bill Gates and Steve Balmer at Harvard. They used to play a lot of poker together, no joke.

[/ QUOTE ]

not everyone at Harvard grew up rich.

anywho, I don't know how strong he is at analysis. I do know he has done a great job branding himself and extracting value out of that brand, which probably makes him a smart/hard working guy

Re: Jim Cramer
 

[ QUOTE ]


He watches CNBC for god-knows how many hours everyday (even records it when he goes out golfing or whatever) as well as reading, reading, reading.



[/ QUOTE ]

QTF. If you want to follow the market and be up-to-date you cant miss one day, or you are out of the loop. Kind of addictive really. But the good thing is by following economic news or by only reading a paper like the WSJ you get all the world news you need since any important news will be important to the markets.

Re: Jim Cramer\'s show would be a lot better.............
 

if he only put some hot chicks on the show, instead of his ugly bald head.

He knows what he is doing. However, he trades so much and is completely diversified. Your grandmother doesn't stand a chance if she follows his advice. He is playing limit poker with his portfolio, because he only trades about one tenth of his position in any single equity, while his followers are are pretty much clueless, and trade in in out on their entire positions much like no-limit holdem.

Just get some hot babes in bikinis on the show when you tout the stocks Jim, then we would have something to watch.