When you scan the market, you can very easily say one thing: If it is for real, you really haven't missed as much as you would expect after a 6% rally.
Take the banks. If Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) (Cramer's Take) is the real deal, like Rick Bensignor thinks it is, there's not a lot of danger at $4. If mark-to-market becomes mark-to-market lite, then JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM) (Cramer's Take) is still cheap, assuming it is having a profitable quarter. Only Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) (Cramer's Take) has moved up too much.
In tech, it's similar. Hewlett-Packard (NYSE: HPQ) (Cramer's Take) has moved up, but maybe wait on that. What the heck was it doing at $25? And what's the difference between $25.80, where it spent much of the day, vs. $27.50, where I would expect it to go in a selloff? Here only Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) (Cramer's Take) and Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) (Cramer's Take) have moved too much because of voracious short-covering.
The oils had a great run on Tuesday and they gave back a tad today. Here's a group that, as I said on my show, you don't need to rush at all. There's an OPEC meeting -- won't that be a disappointment per se, sending oil under $40 and the stocks back to where they were Monday?
In the meantime, drugs, healthcare and foods all are flat for the week.
That means you have a pretty good chance to get in.
What I find ironic is that usually when we have had these 5% to 6% bumps, many stocks rally to what I call "quicksand" levels where there is no support for them whatsoever. I don't see that. I don't feel it. There's no real enthusiasm about the rally other than from people who have been bullish, and nobody believes -- as far as I can see -- that anything can really be done with the banks.
There's a lot of sense to the bear argument: Things aren't good. But that said, the banks -- that sector and that sector only -- can quickly be made better by Tim Geithner pushing the envelope on the accounting rules by saying Treasury cares about Tier 1 capital and those who need it can have it in return for a note.
He then needs to say, "I listened to what Ben Bernanke said and we are going to call the ratings agencies and the bankers, come up with some more reasonable standards -- usurp the Financial Accounting Standards Board! -- and make some more sense of the situation than we are now."
The only people who would disagree are the purists/shorts who know that without some give to mark-to-market, we are all history anyway.
Jim Cramer is co-founder and chairman of TheStreet.com. He contributes daily market commentary for TheStreet.com's sites and serves as an adviser to the company's CEO. At the time of publication, Cramer was long JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs.
The week in preview: No turkey earnings from Tyson, Hormel, Cracker Barrel ...
Comfort Zone Investing: Intel is saying something ... can you hear it?
Twitter finally reveals revenue ambition, wants to be Google -- but not yet
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-12-2009 @ 11:12AM
pkacp said...
Cramer is a jerk and has never been accurate in any of his predictions! In fact he should be banned from the business world for life. Maybe he should try being a comedian, like Jon Stewart who wooped him!!!!
3-12-2009 @ 12:03PM
BHarrison said...
So . . . why is it so difficult to post a comment on Cramer's story? I tried numerous times and it just will not post.
3-12-2009 @ 12:04PM
BHarrison said...
Cramer is not always "right", no one is ALWAYS RIGHT, not even Warren Buffett.
I appreciate some of Cramer's perspectives, opinions, and recommendations. He has acknowledged that he made a lot of his wealth from market manipulations. and practices that were legal at that time; but later deemed to be illegal for future use.
To me, Cramer is like a rober baron or mobster type, who, once they gain their wealth, seek to gain respectability.
Cramer could certainly go a long way in helping to restore INTEGRITY and STABILITY in the markets, if he divulges what he knows about ongoing market manipulations and apparent frauds in the market place. "Disclosures" are the best and most effective means to bolster the integrity of the market.
He certainly wouldn't "win any friends" in the business; but it would help our nation and the peole of America in cleaning up the markets. No prudent and reasonable person is going to invest in a manipulated, corrupt, and declinging markets.
Cramer is somewaht like Obama . . . they have the opportunity to achieve a lot of unprecedented "good" for our nation. It is just a matter of whether they can and will do that.
3-12-2009 @ 7:19PM
rpgpa said...
actually BHarrison(and love your post) ive always found it strange that CNBC and Thestreet dont have user commentary section for all of the articles. Is Jim and all his bobblehead buddies scared of critical commentary?
3-12-2009 @ 8:04PM
harry balsac said...
Who would take advice from an idiot pushing big red buttons to make retarded sounds......Oh yeah, he recommends BEAR STREARS
3-12-2009 @ 8:06PM
BIG BAD MAMMA II said...
I meant Stearns, I sound as dumb as he does..............
3-14-2009 @ 10:57PM
deardrphil said...
I have never trusted Cramer or anyone else without a published/transparent trackrecord of their portfolio. Theres a new platform for these so called "stock experts" and get rich quick forex softwares to prove themselves before charging for newsletter subscriptions. its fairly new but there is absolute transparency and objectivity. So, to all finance bloggers who think you have the goods, feel free to take on the challenge. full details ehre: http://theinflationist.com/the-inflationist-challenge-2009/the-speculator-challenge-2009