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[Cramer on BloggingStocks: Shorts are not and should not be equal ]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/22/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-shorts-are-not-and-should-not-be-equal/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/22/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-shorts-are-not-and-should-not-be-equal/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/22/cramer-on-bloggingstocks-shorts-are-not-and-should-not-be-equal/#commentsFiled under: , , , , , , ,

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer says they're not just the opposite of longs -- they have the power to destroy companies.

Today will be riotously ugly. Today's a day where you could take down a Capital One (NYSE: COF) (Cramer's Take) or a Citigroup (NYSE: C) (Cramer's Take) -- some bad credit card exposure there -- off of American Express (NYSE: AXP) (Cramer's Take). You can bang down Nat City (NYSE: NCC) (Cramer's Take) into oblivionville off of it and hammer Merrill Lynch (NYSE: MER) (Cramer's Take) to the point where you could hear the rumors fly of capital needs. Freddie (NYSE: FRE) (Cramer's Take), merciless Freddie, right at ya. Today's the day when the uptick rule would be the only friend to the notion of owning stocks without fear every minute, fear that they will break your stock. Today's the day that the uptick rule can save Lehman (NYSE: LEH) (Cramer's Take) from $14 or lower. Today's why we need it.

Yet, every time I do a piece that talks about the need to reinstate the uptick rule or enforce the naked short laws, I am immediately greeted with the same nonsense: why should the longs get protection the shorts shouldn't? In fact, other than the usual gang of two -- Patrick Byrne and David Patch -- I don't get any positive feedback on these pieces like the one I did last night on "Mad Money."

Continue reading Cramer on BloggingStocks: Shorts are not and should not be equal

Cramer on BloggingStocks: Shorts are not and should not be equal originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 22 Jul 2008 08:41:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>acpccoffeaturedfrejim cramerJimCramerlehmernccshortsuptick ruleUptickRuleTue, 22 Jul 2008 08:41:00 EST<![CDATA[Would you trust BEA management or Carl Icahn with your money?]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/10/30/would-you-trust-bea-management-or-carl-icahn-with-your-money/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/10/30/would-you-trust-bea-management-or-carl-icahn-with-your-money/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/10/30/would-you-trust-bea-management-or-carl-icahn-with-your-money/#commentsFiled under:

BEA Systems (NASDAQ: BEAS) finds itself defending its rejection of Oracle's (NASDAQ: ORCL) takeover offer of $17 per share as the stock plummets -- and with good reason. Take a look at the chart comparing the return BEA Systems has provided for its shareholders, and compare it with the return Carl Icahn's company, Icahn Enterprises (NYSE: IEP) has provided. Note: Icahn Enterprises recently changes its name and ticker from American Real Estate, ticker ACP to IEP. The ticker used in the chart is ACP.

Having looked at the chart, ask yourself: Who was better poised to make a decision about shareholder value? The company's outside shareholders including Mr. Icahn, or an entrenched management team that has simply failed to generate value?

Would you trust BEA management or Carl Icahn with your money? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 30 Oct 2007 00:14:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>acpBEABEASIcahnicahn enterprisesIcahnEnterprisesieporacleorclTue, 30 Oct 2007 00:14:00 EST