Cramer's Got My Number

rffrydr · Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 7:33 pm Post subject: Cramer's Got My Number

Well here's the Madman once again: couldn't help reprint 'cause now he's talking to--at--me. Is this really the "secret consensus"?

rffrydr · Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:30 am Post subject:

In a perverse way the autos show the way through the valley. Go Jimbo, go:

rffrydr · Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:42 am Post subject:

It's easy to criticize but The Madman is at the top of his game:

lewie2004 · Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:06 pm Post subject:

It's Time To Think Big
By Jim Cramer
RealMoney Columnist
11/19/2008 7:41 PM EST

Now what? Those who clung to levels know that the levels failed. Those who cling to the aversion of the financial apocalypse seem out of answers. Every kind of bond except for Treasuries is now under intense assault. Every asset class except Treasuries is being liquidated.

I think it is time to think big -- as in, can we afford to buy stock knowing that we have some major financial and manufacturing and real estate interests that are about to go under? Can we afford to buy stocks now that we have taken out the levels that functioned as safety nets to so many?

The answer for me is very hard. Unless you think it is possible that stocks will rally on the news of bankruptcies and cram downs and collapses of commercial construction companies, retailers, auto makers, banks and the like, you can only buy small on the way down. Or you don't buy at all. I have to be talked into a thesis that says stocks can rally on the sequential downfall of so many institutions.

I think it is all PURE LEVEL BUYING FROM HERE AND YIELD BUYING with selling accompanying EVERYTHING YOU BUY on the short squeezes up. So, if you bought a little down 300 as we did today, now you have to wait on a wide scale to buy. The only thing that is going to save your life is a scale.

Why buy at all? Because we all know that many stocks are now being forced down unequivocally to bargain levels.

So why not be bullish? Because a sizable number of the stocks currently trading are zombies, brain dead stocks that will ultimately disappear. Or they are like GM (GM) or Ford> (F) , with so much debt that the common stock is irrelevant.

I had been comparing this era to 1990-1991, but that went out the window a long time ago. I have compared it more lately to the 2000-2003 Nazz. In that one, many of the companies people bought down on didn't exist a year later.

In the latter example, it made more sense to sell at this point than to buy.

I can't disagree on that course of action, although I think the propensity to get those miserable short squeeze rallies will give you a better opportunity.

Bottom line: as the market goes down, I do like it more. But it has to be with stocks that will be backed up by companies still in existence when the smoke clears.

At the time of publication, Cramer had no positions in stocks mentioned.

RELATED STORIES
Commercial Real Estate Will Be the Next Crisis
Technical Washout May Be Imminent
Our Biggest Banks Are Falling Apart

At the time of publication, Cramer was long XXX. 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. Outside contributing columnists for TheStreet.com and RealMoney.com, including Cramer, may, from time to time, write about stocks in which they have a position. In such cases, appropriate disclosure is made. To see his personal portfolio and find out what trades Cramer will make before he makes them, sign up for Action Alerts PLUS. Watch Cramer on "Mad Money

lewie2004 · Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:35 pm Post subject:

Bonds Paint Bleak Picture
By Jim Cramer
RealMoney Columnist
11/18/2008 6:42 PM EST

You have to recognize the divergence between the total collapse in the credit markets that occurred in the last few days and a closing rally that seemed like it was a true hold of nasty levels.

I am seeing mortgage bonds made up of FICO 700 plus, Triple AAAs, trading in the 30s. That means we are in huge trouble. We have basically given up for now trying to fix the mortgage problem. I have seen high yield bonds without bids. I have seen Treasurys trade to absurdly high levels because no other paper is worth anything.

And then I see beautiful sell programs in part because Chevron (CVX) and Exxon (XOM) are being bought in huge amounts to get things rolling.

The struggle between bonds and stocks isn't and hasn't been playing out right for two years now. The stocks are signaling that we are finding a bottom. The bonds are indicating that there is no bottom in sight.

When in doubt, go with the bonds. And that is what I am doing.

At the time of publication, Cramer was long Chevron.

Know What You Own: Other stocks related to the ones mentioned above are BP (BP) , ConocoPhillips (COP) , Royal Dutch Shell (RDS.A) , Total SA (TOT) and PetroChina (PTR) .

RELATED STORIES
Holding the Triple Bottom
Feeble Bulls Couldn't Get It Done

rffrydr · Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:36 am Post subject:

The Madman discounts this rally asking where are the BKs; where are the layoffs. It's a trading market for him (sell Chevron on 3% yield, buy on 4%). 500,000 jobless and Chrysler DOA, Circuit C and Mervyns--and the death of Merrill et. al. not enough?
_________________
Today is the Tomorrow you worried about Yesterday!

diesel · Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 7:53 pm Post subject:

I dont think anyone disputes that the markets are broken but that wont prevent a good rally to alleviate the oversold condition evident on a monthly basis. Markets cant defy physics forever.
_________________
All cats are gray in the dark.

lewie2004 · Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:37 pm Post subject:

Too Much Complacency in This Broken Market
By Jim Cramer
RealMoney Columnist
11/11/2008 6:48 PM EST

The vast complacency conspiracy strikes daily. You hear it endlessly that it's time, that you have to see the bargains because they are everywhere. I don't hear anyone saying that the market is broken and that the rallies have all been big phonies and that the state of many businesses in the country is pretty precarious.

It's amazing to me that people just don't come on TV. and say that they are shell-shocked, just shell-shocked, at things like Las Vegas Sands (LVS) or Prudential (PRU) or Hartford (HIG) .

It is astounding to me that people don't see how broken things are. How can we act as if everything is OK when Ford (F) , General Motors (GM) and Chrysler are all pretty much insolvent? Why doesn't anyone come on TV and say, "Holy cow, Genworth (GNW) is at a buck and change, and I have my insurance with them," as I do, and I am plenty worried. Why aren't people more scared?

Believe me, I am not fomenting panic. I am simply saying that if you are not cautious or at least concerned that lots of moving parts seem to be breaking down in both the financial and manufacturing economy that matter tremendously to the well-being of much of the country, we cannot be numbed into thinking that everything will be OK.

I just don't get it. I don't get it at all. How can not a single person come on and say, "Oh man, what the heck, Pru? Pru?"

I am dazed by this stuff.

How can others not be?

At the time of publication, Cramer had no positions in stocks mentioned.

RELATED STORIES

lewie2004 · Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 9:12 am Post subject:

Trichet's Blunder Shows Just How Much Trouble We're In
By Jim Cramer
RealMoney Columnist
11/6/2008 10:09 AM EST

ECB President Trichet, when asked if we are in a recession, says, "We shall see." He tells us there is no credit crunch.

There. That's about all you need to know about how bad things are going to get. Much of the big thesis about why stocks have already bottomed is a deep abiding theory that once we are in a recession you have to start buying because stocks reflect it. I call this the Buffett view, augmented by the conversion of bear to bull of other respected people like Jeremy Grantham, whom I regard as being bearish from about 5000 and has missed 9,000 points but is still somehow respected. I hope I can be that wrong and still be that respected. It is also the camp of "newfound" bull Steve Leuthold who claims he just joined the bullish party but has taken a gigantic pasting when he was supposed to be a bear.

I was always skeptical of the Buffett view, because it is too rosy. It is too rosy because of the Trichet view that we don't know yet if we are in recession. If the policymakers don't know we are in a recession, how can people claim that we are already right in investing (as distinguished from trading)?

My view was short-term bullish, longer-term bearish. I have been playing the wave because U.S. stocks have gotten so low, or at least so low at Dow 8100, that it didn't seem worth it to sell 'em anymore. But I do think from now on, after the election where there are tremendous uncertainties, you have to sell the Buffett/Grantham/Leuthold rallies. They aren't worth the risk until we get to SPX 800 and Dow 8100.

Anytime you can catch 1,000 Dow points it is worth doing, even if you gave back 500 to do so. If I told you you could go long here and make 12%, you would take it in a heartbeat. So if you could make 17% and give back 5%, why is that a disaster? It is only a disaster if you have never run money professionally, which often seems to be the dichotomy among people who read and write for the site.

Now that the Europeans have spoken and don't recognize we are in a recession, we are pretty much sunk, as the fundamentals are the worst I have ever seen in my 29 years of trading. If you have to own stocks, then accidentally high yielders, recession-resistant -- which got hosed by the S&P futures with everything else -- and stocks selling near cash represent the only safe places to try not to lose much money. I do believe that stocks reflected nearly the worst fundamentals two weeks ago, but that required a belief that the Trichets of the world knew we were in deep trouble.

They don't.

Therefore we are in deeper trouble than the Buffetts/Granthams/Leutholds think, no matter how much we love and respect them.

Random musings: My interview with Duke Energy's (DUK) excellent CEO, Jim Rogers -- where he point-blank said solar's too expensive -- is the death knell for the group, because Rogers represents the most forward-thinking and politically intelligent CEO in that industry. ... As I indicated yesterday, I took out a big chunk of my daughter's college money yesterday -- she goes in the fall. The risk-reward's not good enough to risk money that you might need in the next five years, a statement I have made that has come back to haunt me even though it was made at Dow 11,000 and repeated at Dow 10,000, which last I looked are higher than where we are...

At the time of publication, Cramer had no positions in the stocks mentioned.

RELATED STORIES
European Central Bank Lets Us All Down
Big Cut in England Pulls Us From the Brink
We Could See a Dip Worth Buying

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. Outside contributing columnists for TheStreet.com and RealMoney.com, including Cramer, may, from

rffrydr · Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:59 pm Post subject:

He missed the Mittal linked selloff on the global-mining oriented FTSE (RBS earnings didn't help) but that stock was the wrong kind of bellweather, primped and pimped by hedge-funds and "good-will" (in a steel company!)

100 bpts of ease from the master market technician Gordon Brown (not Mervyn) and some ECB followthough would go a long way to balancing this out and leave a bottom at the day gap. If not, I 'm not going to trade it, but I'd agree that this negative impulse should be bought, probably after claims before the jobs friday--the sharper the better.
_________________
Today is the Tomorrow you worried about Yesterday!

lewie2004 · Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 6:41 pm Post subject:

We Could See a Dip Worth Buying
By Jim Cramer
Chairman
11/5/2008 6:37 PM EST

So, we are going to get our chance to buy the dip if the Europeans don't make a strong showing.

We have Wells Fargo (WFC) picking the worst time imaginable to do an offering. We have Bank of America (BAC) through the secondary price, and we have Citigroup (C) , amazingly, at $12.

The news from Cisco (CSCO) , while everyone expected it to be negative, was so incredibly negative as to make me wonder, how in heck did the Nazz lead us? What was it about? Was it just easier to manipulate than the S&P? We had a credit collapse today of converts and straight corporate.

It was like everything had been marked up for weeks and it fell apart in one session.

Without the Europeans cutting and the Chinese buying and the persistent bid, we are probably, after tonight, headed for another shellacking.

I genuinely thought we would have time to sell 'em today, and I got that wrong. I had become conditioned to the trade and the obliviousness to the fundamentals.

Now they are back with a vengeance, and if Europe doesn't deliver we will find out just how nasty things can get.

I say retreat to the stocks with high dividends, the recession-resistants and the companies near their cash.

Everything else is just wait and see.

Now just who was that bidder anyway? And will Buffett/Grantham/Leuthold be there to buy all the way down?

At the time of publication, Cramer was long Cisco.

RELATED STORIES
Watch Europe
Give the Short-Term Bullish View a Chance
Expect More Hedge Fund Pressure

lewie2004 · Posted: Thu Oct 30, 2008 9:02 am Post subject:

The Stocks Are Bad; the Futures Are Good
By Jim Cramer
RealMoney.com Columnist
10/30/2008 10:18 AM EDT

The disconnect between the futures and the common stocks is greater than I have ever seen. Ever. I know tons of managers who are playing the futures because they think the market should go higher and because they can't find any stocks -- save maybe 3M (MMM) or Apple (AAPL) or Google (GOOG) -- where the earnings are good enough to buy. In fact, the "long futures, short common stock" play is the favorite trade. Of course, the futures, used by gigantic pension funds, trump any shorts, causing the pain in the Exxons (XOM) and the Chevrons (CVX) for the shorts that I keep describing, especially because the oil futures are strong.

We are in uncharted waters because we are sending a market up right when earnings and employment are about to fall off a cliff.

To me, homework has been devalued, and what matters is money in, which is trumping the shorts and not meeting any resistance from fund managers, who are riding it up to gain performance. No one I know is taking money out of the market, simply because the futures are rising and they believe they'll continue to rise as the Fed goes into overdrive, making things happen and bailing out anything and everything.

It is a difficult time because you simply have to suspend belief in the actual stocks underneath the commodity if you are going to make any money. You just can't find enough stocks to own. Not even a basket.

But you can own 'em all and make money. Such is the way of this totally broken asset class that everyone suddenly loves so much.

At the time of publication, Cramer was long Chevron.

RELATED STORIES

rffrydr · Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 7:07 pm Post subject:

Cramer may be on to more than he knows. It is precisely these companies that can guide us back to the bull side for these are going to be the first companies that the market can see "through the cycle." Foreclosures, credit and shipping are not going to stop these companies...and beaten down consumers are not going to stop buying, Christmas or no. Even the unemployed.

Once we refine this focus, it will spread beyond narrow ring of companies. Yield will be the floor.

Here's the danger:

lewie2004 · Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:30 pm Post subject:

It's a Trader's Market, Even on the Up Days
By Jim Cramer
RealMoney.com Columnist
10/23/2008 6:11 PM EDT

Editor's note: Jim Cramer will present his 2009 stock outlook for the first time at TheStreet.com Investment Conference on Saturday, Oct. 25. Limited seating. Act now.

Yep, the rally felt better today. More strength, more breadth, even some lift to the financials in the end.

But to me, it is just another example of how you should trade things. If I were a retail investor, I would use Chevron (CVX) as my vehicle. Every time the stock gets to around $60 it yields 4%, and I don't know a soul who thinks that yield is unsafe.

I would put a limit order in to buy 100 shares at $60 and a second limit at $57. Then when the stock gets to $65, I would sell the first 100 and then $68 for the second 100. The worst that happens is you own a high-quality oil that will yield slightly more than 4% in a business that is throwing off a huge amount of cash. I just think that's easier than all of this bottom-calling, which I have said will not happen until the housing issues are cleared up and the hedge funds don't have redemptions.

Everything is a trade here until then. Everything.

At the time of publication, Cramer was long Chevron.

RELATED STORIES

lewie2004 · Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:56 am Post subject:

Cheap Oil Means Exotic Drilling Is a Loser
By Jim Cramer
RealMoney.com Columnist
10/22/2008 1:52 PM EDT

Editor's note: Jim Cramer will present his 2009 stock outlook for the first time at TheStreet.com Investment Conference on Saturday, Oct. 25. Limited seating. Act now.

Here's where the rubber hits the road on the big oil projects. Right about $60 and change is where many of the more exotic projects get scrapped and where the big-time day rates don't work.

It is incredible that oil has fallen to the point where any big contracts made in the last few years for day rates are now making it possible that companies are just at "push" level on their production. That's nasty for Transocean (RIG) , as if the suffering owners themselves can't tell.

And the outfits like Suncor (SU) truly get scalded on any of the heavier oil projects. I presume we will soon hear about cancellations of those giant shale projects in Canada like the one Shell (RDS.A) is doing. Needless to say, solar's a total loser below $60, and I doubt natural gas can hold $6 for too long. I have no idea how coal stays up here and would be fleeing those stocks right now, especially after that "last good" Peabody (BTU) quarter.

Put simply, this decline is now dreadful for any company that relies on 2009 capex budgets, because despite what you will hear -- that we have to keep drilling to replenish -- I suspect that the bears in the room will have their way, just like they did in the mid-'80s, and everyone who went out on a limb to drill 10,000 feet or more will get their heads cut off.

At the time of publication, Cramer had no positions in the stocks mentioned.

RELATED STORIES

lewie2004 · Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 5:31 pm Post subject:

Machine Orders Add to the Market Craziness
By Jim Cramer
RealMoney.com Columnist
10/15/2008 6:50 PM EDT

Even in 1987, even in the 24 hours after the crash, it was never this bad. It never made this little sense. It never took stocks down to 3 and 4 times earnings with good yields, like Nucor (NUE) , where even if we had a severe recession I still believe the company would not lose a fortune.

Of course what this market is saying - no, make that babbling -- is that most companies are going to lose fortunes during this recession, and the yields aren't worth squat, and the valuations for everything are way too high.

To me this whole thing feels like The Terminator, where the machines took over and turned on man. We don't stand a chance against these machines that are spitting out orders for ETFs and common so fast and with so little discipline and in such size that they overwhelm stocks and even make equities like Exxon Mobil (XOM) seem tiny.

You know the money just got too big. I didn't even find today as upsetting as I did Monday, because on Monday the price action in the last 10 minutes was so absurd that you could envision Wednesday happening, because there was no way any real buyer was going to take Chevron (CVX) up 12, meaning someone trying to buy Chevron for investment. Who in his right mind would buy up 12 to make money? That's short-covering, or the tail being wagged by a futures or ETF dog.

It is so obvious that the market has ceased to function right that I can't believe someone isn't investigating whether there is something completely wrong with the mechanics of the market.

Wouldn't you love to know who bought Chevron up 12 or who sold it down 8? Wouldn't you love to know if it was a machine acting in conjunction with an ETF?

Because it sure isn't a rational human out there trying to buy or sell.

We are going to have to get to the bottom of these swings soon, before they eliminate equities as a place to do anything but speculate.

It's that bad.

And in the meantime, each time we fly up like on a Monday and we fly down like we did today, there will be fewer people in the casino.

It just seems so rigged, why bother?

At the time of publication, Cramer was long Chevron.

RELATED STORIES
Sentiment Can't Measure This Broken Market
Margined Sellers Put a Drag on Energy Stocks
This Time, We're Braced for Wild Swings

Jim Cramer is a director and co-founder of TheStreet.com. He contributes daily market commentary for TheStreet.com's sites and serves as an adviser to the company's CEO. Outside contributing columnists for TheStreet.com and RealMoney.com, including Cramer, may, from time to time, write about stocks in which they have a position. In such cases, appropriate disclosure is made. To see his personal portfolio and find out what trades Cramer will make before he makes them, sign up for Action Alerts PLUS. Watch Cramer on "Mad Money" weeknights on CNBC. To order Cramer's newest book -- "Jim Cramer's Stay Mad for Life: Get Rich, Stay Rich (Make Your Kids Even Richer)," click here. Click here to order "Mad Money: Watch TV, Get Rich," click here to order "Real Money: Sane Investing in an Insane World," click here to get "You Got Screwed!" and click here for Cramer's autobiography, "Confessions of a Street Addict." While he cannot provide personalized investment advice or recommendations, he appreciates your feedback and invites you to send comments by clicking here.

TheStreet.com has a revenue-sharing relationship with Amazon.com under which it receives a portion of the