TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says the bizarre rules these days make it worth looking at stocks through a different lens.
How much should we care about low-dollar speculation? How much should we care about the incessant trading in CIT (NYSE: CIT) (Cramer's Take) and Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM) (Cramer's Take), Alcatel-Lucent (NYSE: ALU) (Cramer's Take), or Vonage (NYSE: VG) (Cramer's Take) and Sprint (NYSE: S) (Cramer's Take)? Or even Citigroup (NYSE: C) (Cramer's Take)?
First, I have to tell you that I worry about it less than I used to. Why? Because when we used to have rules and government officials that were willing to speak the truth about stocks, we wouldn't have these single-digit players out there every day. But without it, how in heck can people not believe that Fannie and Freddie Mac (NYSE: FRE) (Cramer's Take) are the biggest and best bets on a turn in housing?
It's not like anyone from the Securities and Exchange Commission is saying, "We have to halt trading." It is not like anyone is saying from the company, "Look, our company is worthless."
Without that caveat, is it really uninformed speculation? Plus, Freddie Mac told you this very month that it is profitable and will work out of this mess. No one contradicted them, so why not buy it? Makes sense to me when you put it the way management did.
Or how about AIG (NYSE: AIG) (Cramer's Take)? Here's a stock that's doubled, or if you want to think about it presplit, it has gone from one to two. Why? Because its CEO, a respected one, Robert Benmosche, basically pledged that the company would pay back all of the money owed the government and be profitable.
Why not buy? If someone respectable makes that call, why is it idle? Anyone who thought it was idle has been run over by a truck. If that stock was at $1 when he said it, believe me, it was worth betting it would go to $2. (Remember that split!)
CIT? Another one in which the company has sworn by the stock and nobody says anything contrary.
Vonage? Forget what you think about its business. For better or for worse, the company reported a profit. A profit! Why not buy a 43-cent stock betting it can go up if the company is profitable. It's gone up five times on that. Excessive? Not if it is profitable.
Finally, there is Citigroup. The big worries here were credit cards and mortgages. Both are now on an upswing. The government can be paid back; the book value's a dollar higher.
Seems like a buy to me.
Sprint? Good takeover candidate if it is allowed to be. Not a terrible franchise; biggest first-quarter winner. Alcatel-Lucent? Every dog has its day.
Am I explaining away bad speculative behavior? No. Given the bizarre circumstances in which everything is allowed to trade and there are no rules, I actually think this is reasonable speculation.
Which is precisely why, unlike Doug Kass, it is not freaking me out and is not a tell on anything.
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 had no positions in the stocks mentioned.
Savings Experiment: Snow Removal
The Money Man Behind Rick Santorum: Who Is Foster S. Friess?


