BloggingStocks http://www.bloggingstocks.com BloggingStocks http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/media/feedlogo.gif BloggingStocks http://www.bloggingstocks.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/<![CDATA[Jim Cramer Sees a 'Very Negative' Trend]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/08/24/jim-cramer-sees-a-very-negative-trend/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/08/24/jim-cramer-sees-a-very-negative-trend/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/08/24/jim-cramer-sees-a-very-negative-trend/#commentsFiled under: ,

I didn't find this recap of Jim Cramer's CNBC show interesting because of his recommendations. I found it interesting because he talks of an overall "bearishness of the market." Cramer noted that this bearishness began in the tech sector, spread to retail, and is now creeping into the food sector.

He notes that it is "remarkable to see how little enthusiasm there is ... even for companies that are doing well." An example of this lack of enthusiasm for good performers is that analysts will cut price targets on a stock, but will raise the company's earnings estimate at the same time.

Continue reading Jim Cramer Sees a 'Very Negative' Trend

Jim Cramer Sees a 'Very Negative' Trend originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>CramerfeaturedinthenewsJim CramerMad Moneymarket moodmarket sentimentsentimentTue, 24 Aug 2010 12:30:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: This bull is just biding his time ]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/12/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-this-bull-is-just-biding-his-time/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/12/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-this-bull-is-just-biding-his-time/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/12/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-this-bull-is-just-biding-his-time/#commentsFiled under: , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says he believes we have a bit further to fall, but he'll be buying again soon after.

In a week we've gone from, "Prove it, bears -- prove how crummy it really is," to, "Bulls, give me a break -- don't bother taking the futures up, you're finished and you know it."

What caused the transformation? I think price. The realization that the moves have been so breathtaking that it converted bulls to bears literally overnight. I don't think this is the "same old bear" that is growling.

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: This bull is just biding his time

Cramer on BloggingStocks: This bull is just biding his time originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>cramerfeaturedtolWed, 12 Aug 2009 10:00:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: Don't Hit the Brakes on 'Cash for Clunkers']]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/03/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-dont-hit-the-brakes-on-cash-for-clun/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/03/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-dont-hit-the-brakes-on-cash-for-clun/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/03/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-dont-hit-the-brakes-on-cash-for-clun/#commentsFiled under: , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says critics of the program don't understand the simple good it does.

The Wall Street Journal's editorial page launches an attack of the Cash for Clunkers campaign today, noting that we are destroying perfectly good cars for no reason and giving away thousands of dollars only to increase the federal deficit. We should give vouchers for all sorts of goodies if we are going to go down this route, they cynically point out, and they label it a Democratic giveaway.

First, let me say that if the government gives away $4 billion or $5 billion on this one, big deal. We have supported every cockamamie military project, every bogus part of stimulus -- ours amounts more to a giveaway to the only secure workers in this country (state and local employees) with a minimum of stimulus for infrastructure -- so what's wrong with one that actually mimics the successful Chinese program of forcing consumers to spend?

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: Don't Hit the Brakes on 'Cash for Clunkers'

Cramer on BloggingStocks: Don't Hit the Brakes on 'Cash for Clunkers' originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 03 Aug 2009 10:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>Cash for ClunkersCramerfeaturedFordGeneral MotorsGMMon, 03 Aug 2009 10:00:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: Hey banks -- stop your bellyaching ]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/03/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-hey-banks-stop-your-bellyaching/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/03/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-hey-banks-stop-your-bellyaching/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/03/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-hey-banks-stop-your-bellyaching/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says it's not too much to ask that banks have enough money to loan to customers and to pay back TARP.

Bankers who complain about having to raise more money to pay back the Troubled Asset Relief Program ought to be real careful here about their insistence that the rules have been changed.

Never did Treasury say, "If you raise this money, you can pay TARP back." What it did say was, "If you raise this money, you can stay in business."

Given that most of the banks that raised the $85 billion probably could have gone by the wayside, I don't think there's all that much to be said about the government demanding that the banks have enough money on hand to loan to customers and to pay back TARP. Is that really too high a price to pay?

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: Hey banks -- stop your bellyaching

Cramer on BloggingStocks: Hey banks -- stop your bellyaching originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 03 Jun 2009 10:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>cramerfeaturedfinancial crisisFinancialCrisisgsjpmtarpWed, 03 Jun 2009 10:00:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: Stop Moralizing]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/09/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-stop-moralizing/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/09/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-stop-moralizing/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/09/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-stop-moralizing/#commentsFiled under: ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says it's just not an investable way of thinking.

Why is it such a bad idea to buy stocks if the worst is over? Why is it considered so heretical? One reason could be that there's too much moralizing going on among the stock pickers and the pundits these days. Yesterday, for example, I heard so many people blasting the government for coming to the aid of the Hartfords (NYSE: HIG) (Cramer's Take) and Lincolns (NYSE: LNC) (Cramer's Take) and Principals (NYSE: PFG) (Cramer's Take) that you would have thought that people wanted these companies to fail.

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: Stop Moralizing

Cramer on BloggingStocks: Stop Moralizing originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Thu, 09 Apr 2009 10:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>cramerfeaturedhigjim cramerJimCramerlncpfgThu, 09 Apr 2009 10:00:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: TALF washout]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/08/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-talf-washout/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/08/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-talf-washout/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/08/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-talf-washout/#commentsFiled under: , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says it's a good deal, but there isn't enough risk capital about.

So TALF is dropping off -- not enough money going into the program. Not enough at all. And it worries me.

This program is integral to the turnaround thesis -- we need money to flow into these asset-backed markets. It's a sign that people aren't willing to put in more money than last month -- the program needs a push.

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: TALF washout

Cramer on BloggingStocks: TALF washout originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 09:50:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>aacramerfeaturedjim cramerJimCramerWed, 08 Apr 2009 09:50:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: I'll take a bear-market rally any day]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/07/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-ill-take-a-bear-market-rally-any-day/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/07/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-ill-take-a-bear-market-rally-any-day/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/07/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-ill-take-a-bear-market-rally-any-day/#commentsFiled under: , , , , , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says a 20% move in a matter of weeks is plenty to get excited about.

So maybe today they kill it? Maybe today is the day that they keep it down? We sure have enough bigwigs saying it. Soros is saying it for certain: Bear-market recovery because we haven't turned the economy around.

Sure. Could be. But once again I point to the numbers. We just had a 21% move up. I want more of those bear-market rallies. They are better than bull-market rallies! They are faster, they give you more point appreciation and then they let you play again! Sure beats a good old-fashioned bull-market rally that might take a couple of years, maybe even three, to give you that kind of appreciation.

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: I'll take a bear-market rally any day

Cramer on BloggingStocks: I'll take a bear-market rally any day originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:15:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>AAPLBACCramerFfeaturedJim CramerJimCramerRIMMWFCTue, 07 Apr 2009 09:15:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: So you missed the recent run -- now what? ]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/06/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-so-you-missed-the-recent-run-now-wh/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/06/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-so-you-missed-the-recent-run-now-wh/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/06/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-so-you-missed-the-recent-run-now-wh/#commentsFiled under: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says if you don't want to wait for a pullback, look abroad for the next leg or find values at home.

What do you do when everyone knows we have come up too far, too fast; no one knows who is actually buying; and we are going into earnings season?

What do you do when the animal spirits are taking up the market and yet other than a handful companies -- Research In Motion (NASDAQ: RIMM) (Cramer's Take), Xilinx (NASDAQ: XLNX) (Cramer's Take), Corning (NYSE: GLW) (Cramer's Take), Best Buy (NYSE: BBY) (Cramer's Take) and Taiwan Semi (NYSE: TSM) (Cramer's Take) -- almost all companies that have spoken during the "off-season" earnings reports have been dismal?

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: So you missed the recent run -- now what?

Cramer on BloggingStocks: So you missed the recent run -- now what? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 06 Apr 2009 09:50:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>aaabtbbdbbybhpcelgchncplcramerdriewzfeaturedfxigisglwgshdhpqhsyitujim cramerjnjjpmkolownkepbrpepqcomrimmriottsmvzxlnxyumMon, 06 Apr 2009 09:50:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: Sticking to my guns]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/03/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-sticking-to-my-guns/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/03/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-sticking-to-my-guns/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/03/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-sticking-to-my-guns/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says it'd be easy to follow the herd and doubt the staying power of this rally, but that's not his style.

People think I am nuts . . . even more than usual. All they can talk about at the cocktail parties and the lunches and on the Street is how bad things are. They want to hide in gold. They want to hide under the bed. They think that every move is false and every rally must be sold. The negativity is so thick that even my closest friends think that I am being wishful about the turn. Oh, and heaven forbid there would be one positive article in The Wall Street Journal about this market. Just one!

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: Sticking to my guns

Cramer on BloggingStocks: Sticking to my guns originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Fri, 03 Apr 2009 10:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>Action Alerts PLUSActionAlertsPlusBen BernankeBenBernankeCramerfeaturedgildJim CramerJimCramermark-to-market rulesMark-to-marketRulesTim GeithnerTimGeithnerFri, 03 Apr 2009 10:00:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: Pricing the end of the depression]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/02/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-pricing-the-end-of-the-depression/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/02/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-pricing-the-end-of-the-depression/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/02/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-pricing-the-end-of-the-depression/#commentsFiled under: , , , , , , , , , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says most people are still leaning the wrong way on this market.

In August 2007 we went into a recession because of the collapse of housing. I pick August because that's when I went nuts on TV about how things were falling apart in the credit markets and you just couldn't see it yet in equities.

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: Pricing the end of the depression

Cramer on BloggingStocks: Pricing the end of the depression originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Thu, 02 Apr 2009 09:50:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>aigBACcCramerfeaturedGSJim CramerJimCramerJPMMSPNCWFCThu, 02 Apr 2009 09:50:00 EST<![CDATA[Barron's slams Jim Cramer again]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/09/barrons-slams-jim-cramer-again/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/09/barrons-slams-jim-cramer-again/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/09/barrons-slams-jim-cramer-again/#commentsFiled under:

Back in August of 2007, Barron's Bill Alpert slammed Jim Cramer's stock-picking abilities in a cover story (subscription required). At the time, Alpert reported that "Over the past two years, viewers holding Cramer's stocks would be up 12% while the Dow rose 22% and the S&P 500 16%, according to a record of 1,300 of the CNBC star's Buy recommendations compiled by YourMoneyWatch.com, a Website run by a retired stock analyst and loyal Cramer-watcher."

Now Alpert is back for more. In the latest issue of Barron's, he writes (subscription required) that "Cramer's recommendations underperform the market by most measures. From May to December of last year, for example, the market lost about 30%. Heeding Cramer's Buys and Sells would have added another five percentage points to that loss, according to our latest tally."

Continue reading Barron's slams Jim Cramer again

Barron's slams Jim Cramer again originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 09 Feb 2009 11:15:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>BarronsCNBCcramerinthenewsJim CramerJimCramerMad MoneyMadMoneyMon, 09 Feb 2009 11:15:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: Pfizer's Wyeth bid is obvious in retrospect]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/23/cramer/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/23/cramer/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/23/cramer/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says it's a quick way to ensure growth in the face of generics competition.

Pfizer's (NYSE: PFE) (Cramer's Take) moves suddenly make sense. You lay off your scientists, you buy the better group at Wyeth (NYSE: WYE) (Cramer's Take) , you get Wyeth's franchise and you slash the sales budget, and voila, you have growth.

That's the greatness of the pharma industry. You need mergers, especially when Obama has made it clear that he's not going to be in the camp of stifling generic competition, of which Pfizer faces the brunt of.

It is why I recommended Forest Labs (NYSE: FRX) (Cramer's Take) last night -- believe me, that's the cheapest. I own Bristol-Myers (NYSE: BMY) (Cramer's Take) because BMY looks like Wyeth with a bigger dividend and a great cancer franchise.

Celgene (NASDAQ: CELG) (Cramer's Take) too -- Celgene was approached not that long ago when it was much higher. CELG's another way to replenish.

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: Pfizer's Wyeth bid is obvious in retrospect

Cramer on BloggingStocks: Pfizer's Wyeth bid is obvious in retrospect originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Fri, 23 Jan 2009 10:15:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>bristol-myers squibbBristol-myersSquibbCelgenecramerfeaturedJim cramerJimCramerpfizerpharmawyethFri, 23 Jan 2009 10:15:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: Insider buys are nice, but banks need capital]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/22/insider-buys-are-nice-but-banks-need-capital/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/22/insider-buys-are-nice-but-banks-need-capital/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/22/insider-buys-are-nice-but-banks-need-capital/#commentsFiled under: , , , , , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says recent purchases at Bank of America and JPMorgan are a good sign, but they don't solve everything.

Fool me once? Remember when Bob Steel bought a million shares of Wachovia? I went nuts over that purchase, mouthing all the usual shibboleths: Insiders sell for a million reasons, but they only buy for one reason -- to make money.

I remind myself of that because, obviously, not all buys in the open market by insiders are equal. Ken Lewis' buy of 200,000 shares of Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) (Cramer's Take) may be a vote of confidence, along with buys by other board members, but what if it is all Steel? It certainly doesn't match the amount that Steel bought.

So the jury's out. How about Jamie Dimon's buy of 500,000 JPMorgan (NYSE: JPM) (Cramer's Take) shares slightly below the current price here? Better. More money. And in Dimon's case, a welcome reprieve from his own bashing 10 points higher when he was interviewed by Erin Burnett of CNBC. More conviction.

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: Insider buys are nice, but banks need capital

Cramer on BloggingStocks: Insider buys are nice, but banks need capital originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Thu, 22 Jan 2009 08:50:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>BACCramerfeaturedGSJim CramerJimCramerJPMNOKRIMMSKFThu, 22 Jan 2009 08:50:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: Hedges in the Sand]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/24/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-hedges-in-the-sand/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/24/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-hedges-in-the-sand/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/24/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-hedges-in-the-sand/#commentsFiled under:

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says that it should have been obvious to many more hedge fund managers that things were going totally awry.

Something better go up besides job losses and Treasuries. The central theme of everything post the Lehman Brothers imbroglio is that everything goes down: corporate and municipal debt, M&A, stocks, commodities (particularly oil and copper), industrial production, retail sales, car sales, home sales, you name it.

In that world, no one can make money, except people who are short everything, and, judging from most hedge fund returns, that ain't working either. I mean, where is it written that hedge funds should be taking losses in this environment and gating themselves? I would suspect that cautious or negative hedge funds should be up huge in this environment. That's what they are paid to do.

If they aren't up huge, maybe the managers should come up with another calling.

I look at this because when I examine the newspapers and web sites this morning, I realize that there are instruments to short pretty much everything that's out there, from bank debt and commercial mortgages to residential mortgages and commodities. Yet, day after day, I read about these hedge funds that have to gate people, and I wonder why they all had such a long-side bias.

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: Hedges in the Sand

Cramer on BloggingStocks: Hedges in the Sand originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 24 Dec 2008 08:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>Cramerfeaturedhedge fundsHedgeFundsJim CramerJimCramerMad MoneyMadMoneyWed, 24 Dec 2008 08:30:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: You're nothing if you're not a bank]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/23/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-youre-nothinig-if-youre-not-a-bank/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/23/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-youre-nothinig-if-youre-not-a-bank/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/23/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-youre-nothinig-if-youre-not-a-bank/#commentsFiled under: , , , , ,


TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says that CIT's approval as a bank holding company means anyone with a lending business can make it.

CIT Group (NYSE:CIT) made it to the finish line. They became a bank. After a sickening and seemingly endless slide for this lender, to $4 from $30, the whole way down with nothing but rosy projections, the company made it to bank holding company status and now it will be able to survive. Who knows, the company might even thrive, which makes that last stock offering seem pretty delectable.

The issue for me now is you are nothing if you are not a bank. You can see the ramifications of making this reckless lender -- it can say otherwise, but aren't we tired of all the say "otherwises" at this point; it's just better to admit it -- a bank. It means that anyone, no matter how profligate, no matter how wasted, can make it, if it has some sort of lending business.

I ask, why? What is the government's interest in saving Citigroup (NYSE: C)? Why bother? Should we look for other companies that lend and give them protection?

How about Las Vegas Sands (NYSE: LVS) )? When you go there you can borrow money. Prime candidate for it, I believe.

I know I was thrilled when all of those life insurers got around the law by buying little banks. That was good judgment in action.

The real worry, of course, is that without bank status, like the status of the utilities, how can you finance your way through this period? Can we make troubled retailers banks? If someone has a retail charge card, like Macy's (NYSE: M) ), isn't that the same as American Express (NYSE:AXP). Tons of retailers have charge cards and they are all candidates for bank status as they get in trouble. Neiman Marcus should have bank status.

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: You're nothing if you're not a bank

Cramer on BloggingStocks: You're nothing if you're not a bank originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 23 Dec 2008 08:40:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>AXPCCITCramerfeaturedJim CramerJimCramerLVSMMad MoneyMadMoneyTue, 23 Dec 2008 08:40:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: Regulators will make clearinghouse anything but fair]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/17/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-regulators-will-make-clearinghouse-any/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/17/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-regulators-will-make-clearinghouse-any/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/17/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-regulators-will-make-clearinghouse-any/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,

The Fed's putting pressure on various exchanges to set up a clearinghouse for credit default swaps. That's the "news" this morning. News is in quotes because, first, the exchanges all want to do this, and they have wanted it for months. They need the revenue. Second, we want more than one exchange so there is competition in pricing and we don't want a sweetheart deal by a government so prone to sweetheart deals that I want to vomit every day I come to work.

Third, this is a regulatory issue and it should be done by some superbody - but please not the easily lobbied-Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which will make you put no margin down because then the fees will be huge from trading. And please not the Securities and Exchange Commission, which doesn't understand markets and has blessed a world where these are under deep cover.

Frankly, as much as I want a clearinghouse on this stuff, I don't think it is possible with these sets of regulators to get a fair one. They are just too easily lobbied by the bad guys to do the wrong thing.

And who would be the worst at this? Tim Geithner and his merry band of "everything we do is right" Federal Reserve folks. I was listening to the TV Thursday and some host was asking some guest how she thought Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke was doing. She said "he's done a great job." And I found myself thinking, you have to be kidding, you can't possibly believe that, how could anyone think this guy has done a great job?

Anyway, he and Tim "Mr. Let-Me- Call-the-Media-and-Get-a-Good-Story- About-us-Because-I am-Savvy-and-I- Know-How-They-Care-About-the-Call- Back-and-Will-Praise-US" Geithner" (long and deserving hyphenated nickname) would be without a doubt the worst two to be involved in this credit default swap market because they don't play dirty and don't know how the game works. One of the reasons we are in such a jam is that SEC Chairman Christopher Cox has huge faith in the market and Bernanke has huge faith in the power of debate with people like Dick Fisher, the totally discredited Texas Fed man who was saying that inflation is the issue and it is out of control as the greatest wave of deflation overwhelms us since 1932. Fisher's an arrogant and erudite one-man wrecking crew of this economy.

If the Fed is pressuring for these exchanges then we are really in trouble.

I wonder if they even realize that Oct, 21, the day of the Lehman reckoning when we give the Wall Street gangsters their pay off on their hit jobs on Lehman, will cause the federally owned AIG (NYSE:AIG) write gigantic checks and will also reveal who guaranteed this stuff. It will most likely be lots of institutions the Fed doesn't understand or doesn't know.




Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: Regulators will make clearinghouse anything but fair

Cramer on BloggingStocks: Regulators will make clearinghouse anything but fair originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Fri, 17 Oct 2008 09:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>aIGBen BernankeBenBernankeChristopher CoxChristopherCoxCMECramerFEaturedFederal ReserveFederalReserveJIm CramerJimCramerNYSENYXTim GEithnerTimGeithnerFri, 17 Oct 2008 09:00:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: Sentiment can't measure this broken market]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/16/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-sentiment-cant-measure-this-broken-ma/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/16/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-sentiment-cant-measure-this-broken-ma/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/16/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-sentiment-cant-measure-this-broken-ma/#commentsFiled under: , , , ,

All my career, the sentiment indicators have worked. When you get anything near minus 10 on the oscillator, you have to be silly not to buy. When you get anything approximating 35% bulls on the Investors Intelligence survey, you have to buy.

We have almost double that negative on the oscillator and half as many bulls as that pathetic number.

Sentiment has become meaningless. It is incredible.

If we are going into a severe recession, some of the selling makes sense, but not all of it. As we pull back to 8500 on the Dow, we will be looking at stocks that are yielding 6% to 7% that are solid and can't be shaken. We will be finding stocks at prices that we will look back and think it was impossible to believe.

And then there will be another cohort where we will buy and then watch them go down again, because business is so soft.

I want to reiterate that the stock market for now is just plain broken. You can't have Occidental Petroleum (NYSE: OXY) down 15% like it is nothing. The company should be losing money with that kind of decline. Remember when I said on Monday that you can't have ExxonMobil (NYSE:XOM) ) go up 10 because it can go down 10 just as easily?

Well, here we go.

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: Sentiment can't measure this broken market

Cramer on BloggingStocks: Sentiment can't measure this broken market originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Thu, 16 Oct 2008 09:10:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>cramerfeaturedhalJim cramerJimCramerkmpmcdoxypmxomThu, 16 Oct 2008 09:10:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: A fighting chance for the credit markets.]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/13/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-a-fighting-chance-for-the-credit-marke/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/13/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-a-fighting-chance-for-the-credit-marke/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/10/13/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-a-fighting-chance-for-the-credit-marke/#commentsFiled under: , , , , , , ,

Finally, a plan that isn't elegant and dreamed up by a Federal Reserve that doesn't want to do anything but behind-the-scenes liquidity injections that have failed miserably and auction facilities that have done nothing.

Now, we just let the government own big stakes in banks in return for money and a pledge that they won't hoard it but lend it.

The European plan is simple: Give money to the banks, take shares back, and start the process over. If you graft that on the American plan to allow banks to sell bad real estate loans then you get a fighting chance to stabilize the system.

This scheme is a heck of a lot better than all of the little things that Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has wanted to do to keep banks in business, and it also gives the banks a bridge before TARP kicks in.

Of course, it is pure socialism, so I suspect that somehow our government will screw it up in the name of laissez-faire free-market principles. But we are way too far along to quibble. I also expect that it will be perceived as a bank bailout, to which I say, again, "So what? We have spent more than a trillion dollars trying to avoid one and that hasn't worked."

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: A fighting chance for the credit markets.

Cramer on BloggingStocks: A fighting chance for the credit markets. originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 13 Oct 2008 12:06:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>BACbanksCramerfeaturedGSJIm CramerJimCramerMSTheStreet.comUSBWall StreetWallStreetWFCMon, 13 Oct 2008 12:06:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: You can't have it both ways ]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/08/05/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-you-cant-have-it-both-ways/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/08/05/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-you-cant-have-it-both-ways/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/08/05/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-you-cant-have-it-both-ways/#commentsFiled under: , , , , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says this commodity collapse is giving the Fed room to cut.

As the Fed meets and the credit crisis still roars, it is worth assessing all of the chatter that the Fed can't do a thing and that every aspect of everything is all bad. I put it like that because it is hard to read anything without concluding that there will be high-double-digit defaults and that the credit markets haven been crushed and are not useful and the world is, well, coming to an end.

Funny thing: when the world comes to an end, you get a collapse in commodities, which is what is happening right now; it is something the Fed should keep an eye on. That's because there is suddenly more room to cut if necessary, and that matters because the banks need it -- they need more room to make money on net interest margins and playing the curve, because we all know that they need capital, and this is a good way to raise capital. It is the way that capital was raised for BankBoston and Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) (Cramer's Take) and Chase and Citigroup (NYSE: C) (Cramer's Take) in the old days, and it would be the same again if the Fed needs to help.

In other words, caught in all the gloom is the fact that the Fed is winning, and with winning comes flexibility. I expect nothing from the Fed, nothing, but I also want to remind people that the "Fed will raise soon" talk makes no sense whatsoever now, even though the drumbeat was really loud just a couple of months ago.

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: You can't have it both ways

Cramer on BloggingStocks: You can't have it both ways originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 05 Aug 2008 09:15:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>bacccramerfeaturedfederal reserveFederalReservejim cramerJimCramerrate cutRateCutTue, 05 Aug 2008 09:15:00 EST<![CDATA[Cramer on BloggingStocks: Solid yields can't protect equities]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/06/30/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-solid-yields-cant-protect-equities/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/06/30/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-solid-yields-cant-protect-equities/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/06/30/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-solid-yields-cant-protect-equities/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says this is a crucial moment for the dividend-payers, which should be getting support here.

You can't even find protection in yields these days. It just went away. Perhaps we will get it if Sen. Obama gets elected. Perhaps with higher rates. Perhaps with the downfall of the high-yielding American financials. (Nice discussion of the lack of dividend safety courtesy of the man who knows more about dividends than anyone, Dave Peltier, in the Columnist Conversation last week.)

For ages, it seemed you could get to a magic number, typically 4% yield, where stocks would bounce, or at least be given a parachute that opened for a gentle landing.

Last week that parachute failed. You have stocks like Con Ed (NYSE: ED) (Cramer's Take) just getting trashed here, pushing the yield to 6%. You have stocks like Weyerhauser (NYSE: WY) (Cramer's Take), Carnival Cruise (NYSE: CCL) (Cramer's Take), Gannett (NYSE: GCI) (Cramer's Take), just slicing through the protection. The former's got cyclicality, the middle's got consumer and fuel worries, and the latter is in secular. But they all have no trouble paying the dividend.

Or consider Verizon (NYSE: VZ) (Cramer's Take) and AT&T (NYSE: T) (Cramer's Take). The first is at a 5% yield, the other is almost there. No one questions their ability to support that dividend.

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: Solid yields can't protect equities

Cramer on BloggingStocks: Solid yields can't protect equities originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:22:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>CCLCramerEDfeaturedGCITVZWYyieldMon, 30 Jun 2008 10:22:00 EST