Just to add to my last post, I remember the Motley Fool once
recommending, as part of their grand strategy for beating the market,
NOT to value the companies you buy, because "the market is efficient
anyways". What stupidity! Anyone who has taken an economics or a
finance course will see the contradiction in that. If the market is
efficient, we should all just put our money into the index and say to
hell with professionals or individual stocks because their price will
fully reflect the value of all known facts, and all expectations about
the company. How is one to then beat the market? I didn't pay too much
attention to it at the time, but after going to university for
business I clued in. Now the Motley fool, ever the bandwagon-jumper,
has embraced the current Buffett trend of investing.

What Cramer and the Motley Fool have in common, besides flipfloping
more than a fish on the shore, is that they are a distraction to
profitable investing. Actually, come to think of it I like Cramer and
the Motley Fool... steering others into doing stupid things makes it
easier for rational investors to make money.

Mr. Big

Just in case he does jump on the tech bandwagon again tonight.....here
is yesterday's show's highlights titled "Not Time to Buy Tech":
http://www.thestreet.com/_tscct/markets/activetraderupdate/10336992.html

He also has an article about AAPL Today which sounds like his tech
wall is crumbling....it costs to se it so here is just the title:
RealMoney - Premium Content
Apple Deserves a Breakout
2/7/2007 1:44 PM EST
By Jim Cramer
Jobs' industry clout and fashion quotient are undervalued. More

He should get rid of the 'money' on his new book, and just call it
"Jim Cramer's Mad".

His next book should be called the Story of a FlipFlopping Fool.  I am
appalled at how he gets away with the crap that he espouses.  He lacks
integrity -- he pumps the companies who advertise on thestreet.com
(eg.  UPS; BAC) -- or he may have simply lost his last drop of
sanity.  Either way, don't trust him, don't listen to him and don't
invest by him.

It is also worthless to talk about him and devote our precious time. I
feel sick when I see him, no exaggerations.

It is very difficult to say something like that Google @900 today,
maybe he was referring 2 years forward, because the company worth more
than a bunch of international big companies that are in our common
life since forever, Google is even similar in market cap. than big oil
companies. I mean Google is growing big maybe in 2 years will justify
300 Billions, but... maybe. And other thing the movements the stock
did, if you look real closed, kill almost everybody, longs, half of
shorts, almost all the option calls, more puts than you think, and yes
it looks like a the THEME of the quarter earnings. Be careful when are
more than 5 analyst in the stocks or Be LONG as an investor not as a
trader, you will hear this over and over, believe me this is the best
you can do, no matter what.

we need an audio geek on here to come up with a sound effect button
for "pump and dump" that we can send to him to add to his sound board
that he loves to play with on-air. Record audio of a bicycle tire pump
followed by a flushing toilet noise....

I have an additional comment about Cramer and his view on GOOG.

 Let me say that everybody loves a scapegoat but the fact remains:
The stock was 26 cents ahead on EPS....Did ANYBODY really know the
revenue number before the earnings??...  I don't think even NOTO could
know what accounting "tricks" were used this quarter.... So since
nobody really knew the number......

For example if GOOGs revenue was significantly higher the stock would
probably gone through the roof.....

The point is....Noto didn't know ...Cramer didn't know..... We were
all going on hunches/data (like comscore etc)....the real fault of
this quarter was the accounting whereby the CFO was instructed a
"meet" quarter was all "they"(sergey etc...) wanted

These big companies have the ability to accelerate and decelerate
earnings into and out of the next quarter and other "bendable
accounting rules"...so in effect it is indeed possible for huge
companies (with lots of numbers) to manipulate the revenue/EPS numbers
to a certain extent.

If you are not aware of this you are very naive.

THAT is the truth......

Even so....I have to say if I see Cramer on my TV I now CHANGE THE
CHANNEL......If you don't listen to him you will be better off.

Hey, risky, do you believe GOOG will go up to $500 during the next 5
months?

Cheers,

Vasco

BUT here is an example where I believe Cramer is trying to make a
selfserving trade (for himself):

APPL deserves a break out
(Translated:  I just bought aapl at 83 and I want to sell it to YOU at
86)

link
http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/markets/activetraderupdate/10337508.h...

Hi Vasco,

First we have to see how low GOOG goes....it is seeking a new
valuation on "decelerating growth" ....so "where she stops nobody
knows".  Then once it bottoms out this quarter you can try to guess
about a rebound...but from what level will the rebound start?

Picking when it bottoms is hard. Don't buy it until its at least at a
market p/e, and your better off to buy it bellow a market p/e.
Personally, I think Google has good protection for its revenue, and
the company is highly profitable. The problem lays in what the future
holds; its most likely bright but you can never know for sure. As
well, if earnings are decelerating, look to what the company is doing
with its profit. Buying back shares at a high p/e is a good indication
that management is trying to line their own pockets, and giving the
finger to owners. Buying back shares at a low p/e is making good use
of shareholder money.

"Breakout" smacks of charting. Is Cramer a technical investor?

Mr. Big.

So negative on Cramer...man.  Personally I like all perspectives, bull
and bear.  I don't always drik Cramer's Kool-Ade, but he's helped be
uncover some gems.

Bottom line choose your own course.  Voting strictly with or against
Cramer is a bad bet.

On GOOG.  The bottom is here.  Rally to 513-520 within a month or so.
Most people on wall street don't get GOOG because the guys think years
ahead of everyone else.  Those who do, put a crazy valuation on it and
everyone gets scared.  These guys are and will continue to print money.

well it sure seems to be trying awful hard to do a little mini
recovery today (at least from yesterday's depressing movement)

Hm,

Agreed that its bad to always go with him, and always go against him.
He is more than just  bout bulls and bears, though, he plays with
people's emotions to sell his product. He basically manipulates
people.

Google: Its amazing how they can get so far a head of everyone else.
Its like they're operating in some different super-future, or
something. But seriously, even if they are ahead, they are just a bit
a head of the other guys... knowledge spreads, and so does technical
ability. You can't keep that stuff secret... and if you were talking
about foresight, the way you describe them is in the super-human
realm, just unrealistic.

So, back to bashing Cramer. I read this on his street news report just
now. He was talking about Sears, and how nobody can value its 'hedge-
fund-like-side' because there is nothing to compare it to. Well, here
it is:

+++ Generally, if Wall Street doesn't have comparable stocks,
investors will not buy the stock because they don't know what it is
worth if they don't have any similar businesses with which to compare
it, he explained.

Because people can't value Sears' investment business, they treat it
like a retailer, Cramer continued. But now that Fortress [a soon to be
publicly traded hedge fund] is ready to come public, market players
will be able to see what Fortress trades for and stick that multiple
in the earnings Lampert generates at Sears, he said. Cramer believes
that once Sears has a comparable, more people will invest in it.

"Fortress' multiple, which will probably be 17 times earnings, tells
us what we should pay for Sears' investment business," he said. +++

Well, I think the obvious problem in this argument is that nobody
would know what Fortress should trade for without having something to
compare it to. As Cramer said so wisely, "...people can't value Sears'
investment business..." and "...investors... don't know what it is
worth if they don't have any similar businesses with which to compare
it..." . He says last that "Fortress' multiple, which will probably be
17 times earnings, tells us what we should pay for Sears' investment
business."

But what tells us what we should pay for Forest? Obviously the only
thing investors can compare Fortress to is Sears' investment business,
because according to Cramer, there needs to be a comparable company.
If people don't have a proper valuation on Sears' investment arm, then
they can't apply a proper valuation to this new fund, and if they
can't value the new fund, they still cant value Sears' investment arm.
All they would be able to tell is that one is better than the other,
supposedly.

And remember, all this is assuming Sears has an "investment business".
Since many businesses already invest cash in short term investments,
and this is all that Sears is doing with swaps, and because Sears
isn't investing a huge portion of revenue... is there really an
investment side to Sears Holdings? It looks more like two retailers to
me... Its nice to see that he can pull p/e's out of his ass.

Mr. Big

Cramer: love him or hate him, you can learn a lot from him.

If you really listen to him - not his shouting, but his analysis - you
will find yourself agreeing in most part. He is pushing for
outperforming sectors and their leaders. He does not care if the
sector in demand is tech, porn or sponsoring war.
He also tries to guess the sectors that will be dominant in the near
future, and serves you stocks on a silver platter.

Cramer was wrong many times. We can bring up hundreds of stocks and
suggestions that turned sour. But when he was right, he was really,
really right, and some of his educated guesses came up roses.
I will not judge Cramer only on his stock picks, but also on the way
he picks them, and his logic... it is hard to argue.

(Cramer graduated from Harvard, Magna Cum Laude. He was the Editor of
Harvard Crimson. He got his Doctoral degree from Harvard Law School.
He worked for Goldman Sachs. Quite a resume. I have left out many of
his achievements.
He had his own hedge fund company. Please take a tour of the
street.com and you will be amazed how much very intelligent
information you can amass to help you invest)

If you follow the business shows and commentators, you will notice
that almost all of them shy away from pushing stocks. Even those who
sometimes do, choose the most boring and slow moving stocks you could
find. Not Cramer.
Cramer gives it to you like he thinks. He may like you as a person,
but if you give him the name of a stock he hates, he will squash it
for you in public.
Yes he changes positions, sometimes unexpectedly, he will admit to bad
reasoning, he will sometimes give bad advice. It hurts when you own
the stock he pushed a long time and then, one day, in after hours flip
flops - and the market serves it to you cold and dead the next
morning.
I hated him when he pushed YHOO while the stock was falling, and then
when it dropped to 24$ three months ago, he went against it. Since
then YHOO went up, and is knocking at 30$. At least he is taking a
chance. He is not afraid to be wrong.
Call me naïve, but I do not believe he is trying to help any of his
friends at 'hedge funds' or has any intent in stock manipulation. I
believe he is honest and has a passion for his work, the stock market,
and for predicting tomorrow's winners and losers.
I find him loud, comical, sometimes ridiculous, other times boring,
but his courage of picking specific stocks and giving us his detailed
analysis - mostly right and sometimes faulty - teaching us to think
like him, a big shot on Wall Street, makes me listen to him.

With friendship,

Sergio

I love to watch his show, for the fact that I can watch the shorts
start the next day!  I wait for his pick to get shorted, then i buy at
the low.

I believe in AAPL, but i think that i'll wait until it drops into the
70's...or lower, it will happen.

Sergio, my friend....

Do you work for the street by any chance? haha

I don't mean to be rude, but that was some meaningless dribble.
Especially the "I will not judge Cramer only on his stock picks, but
also on the way he picks them, and his logic... it is hard to argue,"
and then the, "Yes he changes positions, sometimes unexpectedly, he
will admit to bad reasoning, he will sometimes give bad advice," Which
was after, "Cramer was wrong many times. We can bring up hundreds of
stocks and suggestions that turned sour. But when he was right, he was
really,
really right, and some of his educated guesses came up roses." You
have not really backed up much of what you have said. Give an out of
shape amature enough swings at bat at the world series and he will
eventually hit it home.

Whats good for Cramer may not be whats good for you; there have been
very smart people who have gotten rich by conning others. Cramer may
be the same.

I would argue further, but we don't only have different worldviews
when it comes to investing, we're in different galaxies.

All the best,
Mr. Big

Mr. Big,

Thank you very much for your feedback. Did you ever take the time to
read the blogs on thestreet.com?

I cannot read your profile because there is none posted, so I
cannot see your job, credentials, strategies, beliefs, etc. I wanted
to compare you with Cramer.

I can only see you are calling yourself Mr. Big, so I think you
outrank him at least in modesty. Good for you.

Best of luck in investing.

With friendship,

Sergio

Haha, Sorry Sergio,

That post may have sounded a bit worse than I had meant it. No need to
compare me to him, because he would out-invest me in a heartbeat. I
may be more honest than him when giving advice, though... haha

My issue is not with his investment ability, because I'm sure he has a
lot. My issue is with his advice and emotional manipulation.

I have not read the blog, I have only watched the show and read the
Street. I wouldn't really recommend either. I take the view that the
more people know that a stock is a good investment, the harder it is
to make money on that stock, because the price is bid up to a level
where the returns are no longer good. The more popular the guy
recommending the stock, the more people pile into the stock, etc.
Cramer also seems to be making bad recommendations.

I like the hidden opportunities. These are the companies who have
gotten into a bit of a problem over the last little while, but which
are still fantastic companies, and who's stock had dropped a lot. For
example, I recently bought Home Depot. There is a lot of negative
sentiment about housing, and Home Depot in particular. This is not a
bad thing, its a good thing because the stock is trading at maybe 60%
of what its worth. Right now its trading at around $41/share, but is
worth around $60 if given a market p/e. The problems will be overcome,
the company will start growing sales again, and keep buying back
shares... then the stock price will rebound by a large amount, and eps
will grow through topline sales and share buybacks.

Mr. Big