Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Cramer Bashing: The one thing I don't like about the Fool



August 22, 2010 – Comments (31)

I love The Motley Fool and always have. They helped introduce me to investing and I can't thank them enough for that. In addition, I had the extreme priviledge to intern with them this past year. It was unbelievable and my respect for the company and its employees just shot through the roof. They truly are what they preach-- and members, I can't tell you how hard Fool employees work to provide you with the best member experience possible. It's a special place.

With that being said, there is one thing (and really just one) I don't like: The Cramer bashing.

You see, I have also worked at and got to meet Cramer and talk with him. First, he is a really nice guy. Even more importantly, he has an unbelievable track record: 24% annual returns after fees for 14 years on Wall Street. No Fool (capital F) can make fun of that.

You can criticize the guy all you want, but he is incredibly talented. He has a great track record, founded a $100 million dollar company, was extremely successful at GS, and was chief editor of the Harvard Crimson (a big deal). The guy still works insane hours and truly loves investing.

Frequently, there are Motley Fool articles that poke fun at Cramer taking a tidbit of one of his shows and running with it. I think The Fool is above that. I think it insults their incredible brand, and I really hope they stop doing it. I understand he is a competitor, but if you want to compare results, do it in an honest way. Pointing to his "CAPS Score," which is calculated through Mad Money picks in a very questionable way. He runs his own newsletter-- wouldn't it make more sense to compare newsletter to newsletter results? Or perhaps his HF results or overall record?

For example, I would not have felt comfortable while I was at TSCM to use any Fool employees CAPS scores as indicative of their investment track record. Now, imagine that you are Cramer and you talk about thousands of stocks every month.. with callers coming in. You tell them to wait five days so they don't buy on a pop (I seriously doubt his CAPS score waits five days). Then, because someone is calling in, when do you close the pick? When another caller happens to call in? There is NO WAY to capture that correctly, which is why he "TrackJimCramer" is a joke. The articles are even worse.

I love The Fool, which is why I really think they are better than this.



31 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On August 22, 2010 at 6:02 AM, fransgeraedts (99.66) wrote:

Dear Connor,

i agree with you and find it brave and commendable that you said so.

I sincerely believe however that the Cramer Bashing is a symptom of an underlying problem. TMF has not yet understood that its brainchild Caps is the next generation investment application for individual investors worldwide. I believe that a Caps will become the investment environment of choice for all individual investors in the not so far future. I believe a Caps could become a generic name like googling -grin.

From a TMF view Cramer is a competitor. From a Caps view he is a potential contributor to be courted. Thats the problem in a nutshell i believe.

I would be  very interested in your view about the following vexed questions. Is TMF aware of the potential of Caps? Has TMF a vision for Caps that will make that potential a reality? Is TMF ready to make the crossover from company policies that favor TMF to policies that favor Caps?

There are some bloggers here on caps that persistently think and write about innovating Caps. I would very much like you to do so as well.


Report this comment
#2) On August 22, 2010 at 6:07 AM, XMFConnor (96.87) wrote:


Thanks for the thoughts.

I don't think we will be seeing Cramer actually on CAPS anytime soon. He is rather busy with other things :)

There are a lot of really smart and innovative people at The Fool, including a team dedicated to making CAPS great. I think we could agree they have done a great job so far! It can certainly improve to become a much bigger network with more features, and they are actively working on this. I'm sure that they don't want to make changes too quickly-- because they already have something that is very successful.


Report this comment
#3) On August 22, 2010 at 6:34 AM, fransgeraedts (99.66) wrote:

Dear Connor,

that answer saddens me -grin.

It demonstrates the problem. Yes, looking from the perspective of TMF Caps has been a big succes. Looking from the perspective of Caps it has been stagnating for a long time now.

I again invite you to make the gestalt switch necessary -grin  - a good way would be to imagine what it would take for Cramer to want to be on Caps....

If i may run with this a bit? Is a television show not a very old fashioned format? A newsletter via mail positively archaic? A newsletter via email only slighty better? A website so very very web 1.0? Forums idem dito? Cramer's formats are behind the times. Now i do not deny that he is very succesfull  -among other things because he can be both right and very entertaining. Nor am i suggesting ditching any of those formats long as they work and make money...

But now imagine a million users of a Caps. That use that Caps as their web enabled investment environment. Dont you think he would develop a format for it? I most certainly think he would.


Report this comment
#4) On August 22, 2010 at 7:36 AM, XMFRosetint (40.17) wrote:

Hi Connor,

 I think Cramer's largest problem is that his television show requires him to come on every day an make a stock pick or two that he believes will do well - over time, no matter how good at analyzing securities you are, if you're forced to pick one nearly every day for years on end, you're going to have to sacrifice the quality of the picks.

 Another issue is that often he makes what I view as absurd statements, such as when he proclaimed that stocks that go to $80 per share will usually go to $100 per share, and that stocks that go to $100 per share will usually go to $120 per share. He may well have an underlying reason for this, such as believing that the fundamentals of companies which manage to reach $80 per share will usually be able to justify being priced higher than that, but if there was he certainly didn't explain it very well. I think what's more likely is that, with his television show, he is more showman than analyst and as such often makes broad generalizations and uses hype to keep people interested. Like it or not, a show focusing on exploring the ins-and-outs of Costco's 10-K filing isn't likely to hold the attention of too many people.

If you add all these factors together - hype, broad generalizations, and picking stocks every day - it's not hard to paint a picture of him that isn't very pretty when it comes to investing ability, whether that view is warranted or not. I can't say as I would particularly care to defend him, either, since he's largely brought it upon himself due to his television show. It's a bit of a trade-off, I think.

Best wishes,


Report this comment
#5) On August 22, 2010 at 7:43 AM, Obamanationomics (31.86) wrote:

Some thougths on Cramer,

I like the show, get some good perspectives on how the big money men think.

He may be brilliant, but I see him as an average to decent stock picker,  His Action Alerts CAPS portfolio should be a better indicator of his abilities and this score (72) doesn't reflect his research team or his abiltiy to pump the price of his picks up for a few days. Given thise assets, he should at least be a.low level all star,

I look at his picks with an open mind, I may buy some but more likely will short the pop on his clunkers. 

As far as the fool is concerned, they may be a bit byassed, but they track alot of the so called experts and offer both positive and negative commentery on many of them,  I don't have a problem with it

Report this comment
#6) On August 22, 2010 at 8:45 AM, XMFConnor (96.87) wrote:


Just to clarify, his CAPS portfolio is NOT his newsletter (Action Alerts). In addition, he does not pump his stocks in the newsletter. In fact, he has extremely strict restrictions that actually make it harder for him to succeed. For example, he cannot buy or sell a stock in his portfolio that he has mentioned on the show for at least five days. Also, his stocks are almost all large caps, with the occasional mid-large cap, so the effects would be minimal anyways.

Report this comment
#7) On August 22, 2010 at 8:51 AM, XMFConnor (96.87) wrote:


For Cramer to want to be on CAPS, the opportunity would have to be so large for him financially that he would abandon, his newsletter, and his other ventures. Considering that those represent many millions of dollars for him annually, I don't see how it is possible for this to happen.

The Fool would have to open up CAPS to allow people to make money off of their picks, attract followers, etc. It's an interesting idea, but difficult to implement. In addition, The Fool's interests have to be kept in mind as well.

I guess I could suppose there could be some system where people can pay to follow other users and receive their advice, and the Fool takes a small cut out of all of it or something. This would be a radical shift from the community aspect they are currently trying to achieve though because it would result in smaller, professional networks. Even with this approach, I don't think you would see Cramer on there, but hey, you never know :)

It's an interesting idea for sure though

Report this comment
#8) On August 22, 2010 at 8:57 AM, rockbox64 (20.37) wrote:

While CNBC employs Cramer for ratings, I truly believe that Jim Cramer actually wants to teach the individual how to be a better investor.  He is a genuinely good guy who is a fabulous investor. He is entertaining as hell.  He does teach some useful things.  He has provided investors with picks that, after the research, people end up investing in.  Don't you think its great that CEO's of major companies come on his show and talk to Cramer, even though his questions may be softballs geared to the average Joe?  Would anyone really wanna hear Cramer ask Dan DeMico (sp) about his leveraged cash flow?  I would actually, but no one would ever watch.  I am sure he is under pressure to make too many picks.  Given that, I think he does pretty well.

All that said, Cramer and Mad Money do a tremendous job at tailoring its show to the individual investor and heightening awareness on investing AND how Wall Street works, and that is a tremendous service.  Sure they're are haters and that's cool. Yes, he is considered a "sell out" by many.   But all in all, for people at home, Cramer has been a godsend. 

CAPS is information, and useful at that.  It very well turn out to be a tremendous investing application.  Jim Cramer is entertainment - first and foremost.

Now if only I could find out a way to get his picks two hours in advance :) 



Report this comment
#9) On August 22, 2010 at 9:18 AM, MoneyWorksforMe (< 20) wrote:

Cramer is very assertive--almost to the point of arrogance--when it comes to his picks--that is my problem with him. With individual companies he has made some decent calls, but I find that he is terrible at reading what is going on macro-economically and relating that to the overall market. Even just recently, he completely missed the ominous signs of the beginnings of a significant correction back in late April into early May.  I remember him urging people to buy while the correction was still in its nascent stages, calling it a "small dip to pick up solid companies at a great price" only to have the markets correct another 12% over the next two months.


Report this comment
#10) On August 22, 2010 at 9:31 AM, rockbox64 (20.37) wrote:

If this was during the whole Goldman/Europe is imploding scare, Cramer told everyone that he saw the Dow possible going to correction levels at 9500 and I think, if things got really bad, 8120 or thereabouts.  He urged people to be careful.  Look, I'm not Jim Cramer's brother in law, but I don't think his macro calls are bad. And when he does screw up, he admits it much of the time.

People that rely on Jim Cramer for stock picks and macro calls should not be handling their own money.  If people are looking to the guy for places to put their money, they are going to be disappointed.  You can watch him if you wanna get some tips on how to do your research, recognize opportunities and for some laughs.  No?

Report this comment
#11) On August 22, 2010 at 1:30 PM, fransgeraedts (99.66) wrote:

Dear Connor,


I do not envisage Cramer giving anything up. Nor do i see any reason for him to do so. Like i said, i think he would develop an extra format...

The idea of opening up Caps for people like Cramer  -that is closer to the spirit of the thought experiment i am devising here. Lets be more radical: imagine opening Caps up to all investmentletters out there. Make it possible for them to have a two layer engagement. The first should be open and free. The second layer should be premium and payed. Every letter should make its picks within the Capssystem  and the result (not the individual picks) should be visible.

Something like that could be devised for the actively managed mutual funds out there. Even hedgefunds could be accomodated if one tried.

And i do not think that that would in any way diminish the community-dimension of a Caps. It would enhance it.


it was a pleasure thinking with you




Report this comment
#12) On August 22, 2010 at 5:11 PM, smartmuffin (< 20) wrote:

Totally agree with this sentiment.  When I was a brand new investor, I got most of my education from two sources, Cramer and TMF (mostly CAPS), and they have more in common than you'd think.  Cramer gets a lot of grief for not being perfect, as if anyone is.  The main purpose of his show is to teach you how to be a smart investor, just like this website.  And also like this website, he occasionally "picks stocks" with mixed results.

Nearly every episode he specifically tells people to do their own research and not rely solely on his recommendation.  If people choose to ignore that and blindly follow him, I don't think they'll do much better or much worse than blindly following any alleged expert or any random mutual fund or even basing all of your RL purchases off bb's CAPS picks.

Report this comment
#13) On August 23, 2010 at 2:09 AM, awallejr (28.75) wrote:

Remember past performance is no guarantee of future performance. While I am sure he is a nice guy, he still has an agenda and that is to sell his books and get you to subscribe to his newsletter. 

He switches on the dime.  He throws you some obvious "bones," basic things any investment book would teach you, then churn the hell out of you.  One day he says "if you bought and held Merck for 20 years you'd make a fortune" then next day he says "buy and hold sucks."

Jon Stewart owned him and that will never change.

Report this comment
#14) On August 23, 2010 at 2:34 AM, XMFConnor (96.87) wrote:


Everyone has an agenda. Of course he wants to sell books and sell his newsletter. That doesn't mean he has bad advice or that he deserves unfair comparisons.

He is about the easiest target out there. Everyone in investing makes bad calls-- we just don't have them filmed every single market day.

Report this comment
#15) On August 23, 2010 at 10:21 AM, FreeMortal (28.71) wrote:

Cramer is unquestionably brilliant and I often glean useful strategies from the show... However I'm rather amazed how someone so emotional could be such a successful hedge fund manager.  Two years ago I was never more convinced that a man's head was going to literally explode.  "They're nuts!  They know nothing!"

Now, of course, *some* of this is just showmanship, calculated to attract viewers --though one has to wonder exactly what KIND of viewers the producers are trying to attract. 

Cramer is in the public eye and doing his best to stay there.  Doing so makes him an easy lightning rod for us here in Fooldom.  He's beggining to be made fun of.  I don't hate the guy at all, but I'll clown on him all day.

Report this comment
#16) On August 23, 2010 at 10:23 AM, FreeMortal (28.71) wrote:


He's beggining to be made fun of.

He's begging to be made fun of.


...please pardon my dangling preposition.

Report this comment
#17) On August 23, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Gaugamela (95.35) wrote:

Cramer, like anyone in the investment community, is all about how you use the information that he provides. I Tivo Mad Money every day, and make it a point to try to watch the Lightning Round at the very least.

I have held BIDU since buying it at a split-adjusted $7 per share. There were times when Cramer recommended selling it (pre split) when it was trading in the low 300s. Did I listen to him? Heck no....I knew better.

On the other hand, I saw him talking about ARMH on Mad Money and was intrigued by the company as I had never heard of it. I did my own research and am up close to 100% on it now.

To me, he is no different than a buddy of mine that I talk stocks with that is the business. If you're going to go and buy anything that Cramer (or anyone else) recommends without doing your DD, then you deserve what you get.

Report this comment
#18) On August 23, 2010 at 6:37 PM, awallejr (28.75) wrote:

Everyone has an agenda. Of course he wants to sell books and sell his newsletter. That doesn't mean he has bad advice or that he deserves unfair comparisons.

I really don't have one.  I sell no books, newsletters nor do I direct people to any websites.  My only motive is to give free suggestions to others.  In fact, I think over 90% of stock suggestions I made in actual blogs or blog replies (not on my scorecard but stocks I actually suggested people buying) have appreciated, some quite handsomely.  

Cramer violates his own rule when he spouts off dozens and dozens of weekly stock suggestions in that he certainly isn't putting in 1 hour per week on all his calls. When people call for his advice, he never inquires into that person's actual financial circumstance before spouting off what that person should do.

Really, google that Jon Stewart face to face with Cramer.  Says it with style.

Report this comment
#19) On August 24, 2010 at 2:12 AM, XMFConnor (96.87) wrote:


Let me point out the obvious flaws in your arguments.

1) O.k., so investing is a hobby for you. Well for Cramer, it's his job. My bet is that you have an agenda (getting paid, keeping your job) with your job as well. It's not wrong to have an agenda-- The Fool has one too of course. Any sort of business has an agenda. The fact that you choose to blog for free has nothing to do with it. The fact that you claim a success rate "over 90%" hurts credibility. Even Peter Lynch says the best in the business over time can get 6/10. Why don't you just stick to those picks that can't be tracked and be a 99 in Caps if you think it is truly achievable?

2) Cramer puts in plenty of time researching stocks-- more than just about anyone on the planet. He gets up at 4-5 AM each morning, works out, and then spends the rest of the day until midnight researching stocks. You can even often find him blogging at 3 AM about a conference call.

3) Because he has done it for so long and knows so many industries, he doesn't need to spend one hour per week on each stock-- he already has the background. To suggest that Cramer has to research a stock as long as a beginning investor to reach a level of competency is absurd.

4) The Fool doesn't ask for your personal financial circumstances when they give a rec either-- and why should they? That's not their job, nor Cramer's job. He's a stockpicker. He gives stock advice. He DOES however preach diversification, and gives sound advice to make sure people don't get burned. If they choose to ignore it, they would have made poor decisions anyways.

Cmon awellejr, you really expect Cramer to act like a financial planner, asking for every caller's individual financial circumstance on a show with hundreds of thousands nightly viewers? You've got to be kidding.

5) Jon Stewart is a comedian. Cramer is an easy target. Of course it's funny. I, however, don't form my opinions based on a comedian's skit.

Report this comment
#20) On August 24, 2010 at 3:04 AM, awallejr (28.75) wrote:

Connor, my suggestions are public record.  Every blog I made here can be verified.  Investing is not Cramer's job..  He doesn't OWN stocks.  He claims to entertain, yet who wants entertainment in losing money.

Seriously, the only agenda I have is giving investment suggestions to fellow human beings. I make ZERO money off my blogs.  I DON"T WANT anything. 

And to suggest that because he was a hedge fund manager years ago means he doesn't have to follow his 1 hour per week research rule is ridiculous. It is hypocrisy.  Plain and simple.

What the Fool does and what Cramer does are separate issues.  The Fool caps stock picking off of set rules, for right or wrong.  That is irrelevant to Cramer's show.

Personaly I think he hurts people in the long run.  He flip flops, because hey that's what hedge fund managers do.  Not investors.

Jon Stewart may be a comedian but he called out Cramer with documentary proof.  It wasn't all comedy.  Watch it.

Report this comment
#21) On August 24, 2010 at 3:18 AM, XMFConnor (96.87) wrote:

Investing is not Cramer's job? Are you kidding?

First, Cramer does own stock. He is the largest shareholder of look it up. The only reason he doesn't own other stocks is because he would have conflicts of interest. He does however get paid to invest money for a charitable trust, which he runs through TSCM.

O.k., so if Cramer is researching an oil stock and some beginning investor is researching an oil stock.. who do you think needs to do more research before reaching a competent level of analysis? Cramer, the guy who has spent years researching that name and the industry, or the complete novice who couldn't tell you the price of crude? That's not hypocrisy-- that's common sense. He gives that rule conservatively, so that the complete novice will not go rush out and buy something.

You universally declare what hedge fund managers do, which reflects an ignorance of the industry-- there are many different kinds of funds, including long-term investors.

Based on your statements, I clearly doubt you know very much about Cramer at all. You seem to get your knowledge from a comedian. Yes, I have seen the spoof. I have also seen his website, worked for his company, seen his newsletter, read his books, and met the man.

Cramer is a public figure and is therefore open to criticism, including illogical and ignorant criticism like your own. The point of my post was to urge The Motley Fool not to publish articles with the same level of ignorance that you have because it is intellectually dishonest and is detrimental to their great brand and ethics.

Report this comment
#22) On August 24, 2010 at 11:46 AM, awallejr (28.75) wrote:

Investing is not Cramer's job?

You misunderstood me.  Cramer isn't about investing, he is about trading.  He churns the hell out of people.  One week he was claiming the market would go up, down or sideways. 

I don't watch his show anymore though once in awhile I might catch his opening.  But I can't take his spinning any longer.  So he had a show claiming how "buy and hold basically sucks."  Then yesterday what does he argue?  Buy quality dividend paying stocks.  Now why would it matter to buy dividend paying stocks unless you planned on holding them?  And remember his "Merck" video, porte posted it somewhere but I won't waste time searching for it. 

Another recent favorite was when on a day after the market opened down and then finished up he puts chart after chart of stocks telling people well if you bought on the open and sold on the close you would have made money.  Brilliant.  I can't imagine anyone not being able to make money in HINDSIGHT.

God I could go on and on with examples.

I won't challenge his knowledge, but I do challenge whether he really is helping people.  #17 is right.  View him for what he is worth, but do your own DD in the end.  But you really do miss the real take from Stewart.  While catching Cramer in lie after lie, IN THE END, Stewart was arguing  where was Cramer warning his viewers BEFORE the whole collapse occurred.  And it was that purported knowledge and experience that the little guy deserved but never got.

"I have also . . . worked for his company . . . "

And there is YOUR agenda.  You want to idolize the man that is your choice.  But you came on this website knocking others for bashing him instead, so don't hit me with the "illogical and ignorant" line because it can be readily thrown back at you.

I won't attack people for making bad calls.  I will attack people for being disingenuous.  I will criticize when someone tries to cover all bases and then cherry pick when he is right.

Report this comment
#23) On August 24, 2010 at 1:05 PM, truthisntstupid (79.86) wrote:


I used to watch Cramer quite a lot, even though I disagreed with some things he said.  I too think maybe he's a pretty nice guy.

But the "average person"  his show might be trying too hard to appeal to, if all they do is watch his show, won't be well-rounded in their investing education.  He tells them to do their own research...but spends little if any time telling them how.  Maybe his books go over some things I've never seen him teaching people on TV.  I don't know.

I quit watching a long time ago.

He stresses "buy and homework"  over "buy and hold."   As if buy and hold is dead or a bad thing.  I've heard him say "buy and hold is dead."

Buying and KEEPING great companies that have long histories of earnings and dividend growth and still have a low, moderate, or at least manageable payout ratio in spite of having raised their dividend every year for a decade or decades, will never die. And "buy and homework"  is not new. 

It's just that nobody had ever coined it and claimed it for themselves before, because it is common sense.  Nobody ever thought "buy and forget"  was very smart.

I have nothing against Cramer.  But buying and holding great companies is the individual investor's greatest weapon.  Looking at it as buying a piece of a business vs buying a powerball ticket and hoping for capital appreciation. 

If the greatest living investor tells us his "favorite holding period is forever" that means dividends matter, and not just in the businesses he has 100% ownership of.

From The Warren Buffet Way:

"We don't need a daily quote on our 100 percent position in See's or H.H. Brown to validate our well being.  Why, then, should should we need a quote on our 7 percent interest  (it's more now) in Coke?

The individual investor's greatest weapon is time owning great companies with unassailable moats while over the years they grow earnings and dividends. 

By being anti-buy-and-hold, he is taking away one of their most valuable tools. 

And it's why I no longer watch. 





Report this comment
#24) On August 24, 2010 at 2:43 PM, XMFConnor (96.87) wrote:


You obviously have a different investing strategy than Cramer (as do I). This is obviously perfectly acceptable-- there are many ways to make money in the market.

I hope you don't interpret anything I have said as personal attacks-- because that's certainly not the case. It sounds like we share a more Foolish investing style.  He likes to take profits off the table, and likes to cut his losses short. This could be thought of as flip-flopping.

However, I certainly do not have an agenda, nor am I trying to idolize Cramer. People are free to criticize his analysis, his process, etc. I was simply trying to point out the blatant flaws in how The Fool has attacked Cramer in past articles before because it does a disservice to their great brand.

"I won't attack people for making bad calls.  I will attack people for being disingenuous.  I will criticize when someone tries to cover all bases and then cherry pick when he is right.:

awellejr, we could not agree more on that statement. If you really watch his shows, read his articles, etc, you will find that he admits to making many mistakes-- that's part of the game. I was simply hoping to alert The Fool that some of their past articles and methods have been disingenuous in the ways that they portray Cramer.



Report this comment
#25) On August 24, 2010 at 3:33 PM, awallejr (28.75) wrote:

One thing Cramer loves to say all the time is "no one ever got hurt taking a profit."  Actually that statement isn't necessarily true,  because once you do sell what do you do with the proceeds?  You could be selling out of a solid, steady company for the sake of taking a profit, then put it into another company that tanks. 

Well I think I criticized him enough for one thread ;p 


Report this comment
#26) On August 24, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Schmacko (91.82) wrote:

@ #23

He isn't anti-buy and hold as you describe it.  He's anti-buy and forget.  He just want's people to keep up to date on what they actually own so that they'll actually be able to make informed desicions on whether or not to sell or keep holding.

He actually does a pretty good job of presenting investing in the stock market as a whole in a way that the avg Joe can understand.  As for not explaining how to do research... I don't know he says to read quarterly and yearly statements and to listen in on conference calls.  He also on various shows will take about some of the more common ratios and what they mean... mostly P/E of course.  I don't think a step by step breakdown of how to read a 10Q would make for exciting TV nor do I necessarily think it should be his job to teach someone how to do research.

I would also agree with Conner that the TrackJimCrammer (and probably the Trackanybodyelse for that matter) caps accounts aren't really accurate or worth paying attention to.

But definitely do not go out and buy or sell a company just because he said so on his show. 

Report this comment
#27) On August 24, 2010 at 4:40 PM, CMFStan8331 (97.49) wrote:

I have mixed feelings about Cramer.  He's likeable, humorous and I think he does offer some really good background information in terms of the structure and function of the markets.  I would even say he's doing the right thing in terms of trying to teach what he knows.  The problem is the trading strategy he knows is something that's extremely difficult for individual investors to execute well. 

Frequent trading forces the investor to be right many, many times regarding both sales and purchases to achieve a high level of profitability.  It's vastly easier for an individual to be right about a specific company's long-term prospects, especially with the excellent resources now at our disposal (including but not limited to CAPS and/or TMF).  There obviously are full-time professional traders who make a lot of money, as Cramer himself did.  There will always be unique cases but I don't believe that model can be successfully adapted in large numbers to non-professional investors who have full-time day jobs.  I makes far more sense to look for Buffet's one-foot hurdles to step over.       

That doesn't mean that Cramer won't have many good stock ideas. I would suggest using him as a valuable source of information and entertainment - just avoid trying to closely mimic his trading strategy.

Report this comment
#28) On August 24, 2010 at 5:24 PM, dargus (84.20) wrote:

Personally, I like Cramer the man, but I agree with awallejr, and Jon Stewart, that Cramer's manic personality puts people in the wrong frame of mind for investing. Yes, I know he warns people to do their own DD, but at the same time his showmanship gets people thinking about making tons of money RIGHT NOW BOOOOYAAAAA! I simply submit that someone with that attitude will tend to do poorly because emotions often overwhelm the logical part of the brain. While Cramer may be telling people to beware, his actions nudge people to do the opposite. Clearly many people don't listen to him since you can easily watch the moves of his picks the day after his show airs. Is this Cramer's fault? No. His existence does, however, create this situation, and it makes him a target.

Report this comment
#29) On August 25, 2010 at 4:08 PM, llgrout (84.62) wrote:

I listened to Cramer when he said not to invest in Netflix when it was under $20 a share, and have not listened to him since.

Report this comment
#30) On September 02, 2010 at 11:41 PM, awallejr (28.75) wrote:

Yeah I knowI I said I was done bashing Cramer in this thread but I made the mistake of catching his opening skit tonight.  He touted how he told people to sell at Dow 11.200 and Dow 10,000 in '08 yet he failed to mention how he was telling people to buy at Dow 13,000 and Dow 12,000 that same year.  This is why Jon Stewart owned him, he just replayed clips of Cramer after lie after lie.

And when he says how he is not charging people for any of his advice, he fails to mention the fact that he pushes his books constantly on his show or how he tries to get people to subscribe to his newsletter.

Sorry for the late rant, but I really wish I turned my tv channel sooner tonight.

Report this comment
#31) On September 03, 2010 at 11:08 PM, awallejr (28.75) wrote:

Can't avoid this post.  Generally I trry to catch Fast Money, although I do miss Macke and Dylan.  Sometimes I don't swtitch the channel fast enough and I wind up watching Cramer's opening.  That's what happened tonight. 

So here he is claiming how people who suggest any buy and hold strategy are doing a disservice, that  people should be trading since prices can swing (like the average Joe is any good at timing), and that price is important so you should buy low and sell high (there's a unique strategy suggestion).

But what just cracked me up was his response to his very first caller.  That caller said he made money on a stock, sold some to recoup his cost and was now basically playing with the house's money.  He then wanted to know what to do.  What did Cramer say?  He said, and I kid you not, hold and forget!  So buy and hold is wrong, unless it is house money then you can buy forget.  So if the thesis for holding the stock changes, who cares, it is still "house money" even tho in reality it is that individual's current money. So while I am a proponent of buy, hold and monitor, Cramer is a proponent of buy, trade, but hold and forget once you take out your original investment

His shows are taped so does he even watch what he says?

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners