eh...people were already expecting a 2 step drop down on ratings with GE. it only fell one, and that's why it's rallying more today. (and upgraded from poor to stable.) but i think most expect it to be dropped down 2. but this isn't a bank. GE financial largely is financing purchases of its own major equipment they sell all over the world....particularly turbines. if the world is ending, then GE at $10 is awful. if it's not...do any of you honestly think GE isn't gonna be there when this economy rebounds?
Stewart's been taking CNBC, Cramer, and others to task lately. Was this worse than the usual or more of the same?
i assume because they haven't been worshipping at the altar of the obama administration lately? it didn't seem like they had much to say until now (and it's not like CNBC personalities hadn't said incorrect things until now). not that i think cramer's great, but unless stewart has been nailing the market's moves, what's his beef? pretty much everyone who has opened their mouth has been wrong a lot this past year. i'll have to remember to watch at 12:30.
This isn't what happened today, but here's a CNN snip about the ongoing battle : <object width="480" height="295"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Eexy-51sIao&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Eexy-51sIao&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295"></embed></object>
watching the interview, i would say jon is crushing cramer, but not so much because jon has that many good points but because cramer is being amazingly bad at articulating his points. cnbc runs a network they hope people watch. telling them what they have to be doesn't make much sense if people are watching. they weren't chartered by the government to get to the bottom of corruption. i suppose you can make fun of them for being wrong, but to seemingly act like they're part of why we're in this situation seems crazy to me.
Yeah, I don't get why he is deciding to pick on Cramer all of a sudden. Did he just find out who this he is? Cramer has always been incredibly stupid. I'm sure the majority of the people that watch CNBC don't actually take him seriously. His style is entertainment. Not exactly entertaining to me, but I feel he does it so outlandishly as a form of entertainment. And what does Jon expect here? These guys are reporting whats going on in the business world, and make predictions and try to analyze the news and what's going on the market. They are never going to be consistently right. That is the nature of the market. That being said, I love the Daily Show, but all this is screaming "lack of real material" to me. They could find clips of CNBC reporters being wrong from Day 1.
francis4prez, Cramer is not good under fire. I've watched it on CNBC.... he gets flustered too easily. I posted this in that other thread about the Daily Show appearance, but in face-to-face confrontations, he's jittery and sounds frustrated. So this happening last night would be no surprise. wakko, Stewart isn't picking on Cramer all of a sudden. This all started back when Rick Santelli had his tirade about the people who pay their mortgages on time having to pay the mortgages of those who don't pay on time. Here it is on YouTube.... the first couple of minutes were what did it : <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/bEZB4taSEoA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/bEZB4taSEoA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> After this Rick was invited onto the Daily Show to talk about his comments. Apparently he agreed, but then cancelled at the last second for whatever reason. Stewart didn't like this and started tearing into CNBC and how they screwed over the "common man" with their butt-kissing of CEO's - this video was posted earlier, but here it is again : <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DoVYE4aVugY&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DoVYE4aVugY&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> Wellll... Jim said the preceding video depicted him and his comments unfairly. The following video will get you caught up on that : <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Vi6bxKAAHzQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Vi6bxKAAHzQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> Which leads us to the confrontation that happened yesterday... that I'm still waiting to see... apparently the aired version is cut short as they went long and the one that will be on the website will be the full version.
Yeah, it's basically like when McCain canceled on Letterman...it pissed the host off big time and gave him some cannon fodder.
Also, Santelli would've been able to handle an interview like this much better than Cramer. Unfortunately for Cramer, he's getting the brunt of it now.
DoD... I have been following this all week, and watch CNBC everyday so I am well aware of the Santelli rant. Plus I have been watching the beat down Jon has been giving CNBC as well. The Santelli thing really put the heater on the network. Even Robert Gibbs called the man out. Now, some of Santelli's rants are just as ludicrous as Cramers, but to be fair to Santelli, Jon said Santelli was supportive of the bailouts and such, but said he was hypocritical in calling the people the housing plan was supposed to bailout as "losers"... Santelli has been a critic of the bailouts, so I don't get it. I just watched a part of the interview between Cramer and Stewart. Jon is trying to drive home the fact that they know what goes on, but instead, don't tell the truth. I just don't get what CNBC reporters would gain from doing that, besides less credibility.
after watching this, i wonder how he ever made it in the business world where i assume some confrontation happens. exactly, right when they attacked the obama administration (which i don't know if cnbc does too much, but the administration hasn't exactly been sparkling in their dealing with an admittedly impossible situation. i don't remember cnbc loving the final few moments of the bush administration or anything). i'm no D&D guy, but the daily show kind of obviously leans left and loves obama. and then... they got stood up and went on the offensive. i really didn't have a problem with what santelli said (even though it plays badly to the "common man"). so the daily show (which is funny) takes an easy target (anything financial), finds all the bad clips they can, and tears into them. i still didn't see stewart add anything but all the monday morning quarterbacking everyone has been doing since this broke out (except the very few who were way out in front of it). cnbc seems kind of like espn to me. they serve their purpose. they are pretty good at giving highlights and reporting about their area, they hype things up and play up the drama because it makes for ratings, they have a good show or two (PTI, Fast Money) and they love to make predictions, which in sports and finance will make for a lot of wrong people. sure, people's financial well-being is more important than sports (maybe), but cnbc is like any other business, they need to make money and they get that with ratings. granted, i only watch them for Fast Money and then during market hours for the occasional news tidbit, but i don't expect them to make my financial decisions for me or take everything that comes out of a CEO guest's mouth as truth.
Ah, ok. I didn't know if you knew the story or not. My apologies. There's been a lot of mis-speak and mis-quoting in this whole thing. I think Santelli knew he wasn't going to win over fans and the only way he could defend himself would be over the heads of 98% of the public, so he thought better of showing up on the show simply because it would do him nothing positive. I think the slam on Cramer is pretty much spot-on in most respects (again, I haven't seen the most recent one), and he can be equally pissed at Santelli and the bond pit painting everyone who can't pay their mortgage a loser, but when he starts bashing people like Carl Quintanilla for not knowing what's going on with the Stanford Ponzi scheme and then taking a soundbite/clip of him interviewing Stanford with a lightweight question, that's just minor league. Stewart had a legit beef against Santelli... he had a legit beef against Crame, but to say that all these people should have known what was going to happen is equally dumb. There are aspects of CNBC reporting that I think are just pathetic and fluff, but there are also equal parts that can be useful if you're a trader - both long term or short term. When he said "what goes on" what do you think he meant? All the ponzi schemes, the failure of Bear Stearns, or something else like the daily moves in the market?
He actually got his fame as a hedge fund manager who made a ton of money several years ago. His story is actually pretty interesting. The guy is not dumb by any means - he graduated highly-ranked from Harvard and after some personal setbacks had no home and was living out of his car. I think he went on to get a law degree and then work for Goldman Sachs. He did really well there and I started his own hedge fund and this is where he made his mark and turned heads after Goldman. The following is from Wikipedia : Cramer retired from his hedge fund in 2001, after finishing with a positive 29% return in 2000. Cramer's fund had one down year from 1988-2000 while he ran it, in 1998 which was disastrous for many in the industry. Cramer, Berkowitz finished down 2-3% and they did not charge a management fee that year to the clients. It was taken over by his former partner Jeff Berkowitz after his retirement. The man is intelligent - he just uses his circus act to stand out. What's crazy is the guy admits he makes a lot of mistakes but he sounds egotistical sometimes during his rants and this rubs people off and makes them think he's a know-it-all (he probably deserves some of the backlash as a result). I think his inability to articulate his thoughts sometimes is more a social dysfunction to be honest. I've rarely seen him in an interview come off as sincere - he just seems goofy; almost cartoon-like in his responses. There's no real way he can defend himself from Stewart and that's where he'll fail. There's nobody in the world that is always right about the stock market, and lots of people are wrong a lot - they just aren't as visible as Jim and they aren't being archived on film and Internet.
