Showing posts with label Jim Cramer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jim Cramer. Show all posts

Financial Markets Are A Sham - Stewart/Cramer



Readers of this blog will be aware of how much I adore Jim Cramer (not). Hence when news leaked that Jon Stewart was doing a full show with just Cramer, I know it would be merciless on Cramer. As much as I think Cramer is an idiot on markets, I think he does not deserve the full whacking by Stewart. Cramer is first and foremost an entertainer, then a market commentator, he then tries to pick stocks. If you watch his antics, he is more of a momentum trader - if it swings down he will turn very bearish and vice versa, all in a matter of days, I seriously don't know why people will watch him - but because its America, out of 100 million viewers, you will still be a hit if only a fraction of people watches you.


http://seekingalpha.com/article/125804-cramer-grilled-on-jon-stewart

If you click on the link you can watch the entire Daily Show episode. What Jon Stewart tries to do is to be the layperson savior as he lays blame on the financial experts trying to hoodwink the rest of the world. His strongest point was that the financial industry (analysts, mutual funds, commentators, traders, CEOs, investment bankers, etc.) is playing an elaborate game whereby they use the "capital" provided by everyday people to create an elaborate financial game to lull the rest of the world into "investing and trading" the rigged markets. To a large extent, I subscribe to his theory. The financial industry is like a club, once you are part of it, you pick a role and play it according to the monopoly rules of the game - if you play it well, you will be rewarded with supernormal pay, you will be incentivised by moving the "capital" up and down and getting a cut from the movements and volatility. Nobody really cares whether they are creating real value or productivity.

The layperson by buying shares, putting money in unit trusts, subscribing to IPOs are basically giving capital to allow the financial industry practice the shenanigans. The mantra that is always touted to lure investors is that "stocks will be the best investing vehicle over the long term, that it is still the best way to invest your money to ensure that you keep ahead of the pack". As the 80s and 90s were prime examples whereby bull markets dominated the era, that mantra basically was elevated to tablets handed down by God to Moses, nobody questioned its fallibility.

The other mantra is blue chips which is supposed to provide long term steady outperformance - well, blue chips investors really saw their values being wiped out just like the rest, imagine having HSBC, General Electric in your portfolio... There was supposed to be some sort of "unwritten guarantee" but hey, it does not exists.

Life is tough enough, investing is even harder. Bull markets make normal people think they are smarter than they really are. Nobody is smarter than the markets. Once you think you are, you will make your biggest losses. Markets are fluid, we can only try to minimise the damage when its bad, and we hope to make some money when its good. Don't try to beat the markets all the time. Get 6 out of 10 calls right, and you are golden.

p/s photo: Cut Tari



Proton, Perodua & CNBC Talking Heads


If you have only one hand grenade, who would you throw it at: Gasparino, Kudlow or Cramer? That is my dilemma, no not who to throw at, but that I do not have a hand grenade, and that I am not close enough in person to them to throw the grenade. In my view, I most dislike in the following order:
1) Larry Kudlow
2) Charlie Gasparino
3) Jim Cramer
4) Michelle Cabrera

Everybody knows how much I find Cramer's commentary distasteful and infantile, but Kudlow and Gasparino take the freshly made cake. When watching business news, I like value add commentary, but these two buggers are filled with narrow mindedness that borders on the ridiculous. We all know that no one can be a God in business commentary, nobody is an expert forever, nobody is always right... hence your views are not etched in stone. You may give your views but listen, do you guys ever listen. It makes me think that thats how Americans operate, .... I speak, you try to interject, I speak louder to try and drown you out, I'm not hearing your side of things, my voice go louder, I need to fully make my point, you are still trying to talk, I repeat my redundant points in higher decibels.... wtf... who is listening... I shudder whenever I see the TV screen with 7 or 8 talking heads.... no one is fucking listening to another. Everyone is just trying to get their two cents in.

If you are an average business expert you may get 5 out of 10 calls correct. If you are really good, you may get 6 out of 10 calls. Hey, listen already, learn to debate well. Show some respect, show some humility. Its ruining the CNBC biz programs. Makes me want to switch to Bloomberg TV everytime Gasparino or Kudlow is on.

Its a deliberate programming strategy for sure, Bloomberg TV does not do that, its highly clownish on the part of CBNC. At least Bloomberg TV has a proper seriousness to carry their news. They do their homework well before a one on one Q&A with guests. The questions are generally better in quality than CNBC. CNBC is all show and pizazz. But I do like the rest of CNBC's talking heads.


Michelle's politics are suspect - she always seems to side with the Republican shills like Charlie Gasparino. Gasparino is a Republican conservative gas bag, go get your own TV show "I Heart Republicans In Business". Kudlow is the only person I know that can be dumb and dumber with just one sentence.

Its obviously a cultural thing, you don't see the freakshow during OZ or Asia time slots, and definitely not during the highly proper and reserved European time slots.

To be fair I like some of the CNBC hosts: Joe Kernan, Erin Burnett, Bill Griffeth, Steve Liesman, Mark Haines, Rick Santelli, David Faber, Dennis Kneale, Bob Pisani... I know a lot of people don't like Dennis, but I think he's got game and is misunderstood.

So, the kind of crap that gels with Kudlow and Gasparino would be the recent reviews of Proton and Perodua cars by the highly popular Top Gear magazine in the UK. Fun reading. Proton and Perodua provided so much material for sarcasm, it reads more like a very funny stand up routine. Here are some of the lines:

"even if you are doggedly pro-Malaysia, you don't have to buy one of these"

"so poor it deserves to benefit from the next Comic Relief"

"named after the ice lolly, but not as sweet, desirable or long lasting..."

"... we don't know what Malaysian motorists did to upset the gods, but it must have been pretty serious"



Click on pics to enlarge.


--------------------







p/s photos: Deborah Priya Henry