If Cramer would stop his "entertainment" yammering and do more writing like the following piece, I would have more respect for the guy. In fact, this piece shows me he can actually think outside the box. If only he could say things throw things like this at Lawrence Kudlow . . . or are the two of them still have faux debates on TV for entertainment? Writing like this, he could way more good for investors than that blasted Boo-Yah TV crap:p.s. Disclosure: I've owned GG shares since $11.00 and I got that tip from Bill Fleckenstein two years ago in a piece posted on either financialsense.com or prudentbear.com. (By the way, GG pays a monthly dividend of .015 cents per share.) Eventhough I already know about GG, Cramer has supplied some other tips here which we all might want to look over. One more thing, if you are a dyed in the wool Republican, this beginning of this piece will be painful to read:http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/bizfinance/columns/bottomline/14639/index.html
I watch the Kramer show sometimes, but, for me, it leaves a lot to be desired. I would appreciate it more, if he would quit yelling and talk a little slower. Also, although I may be interested in the stocks he likes, I am more interested in WHY he likes them. I wish he would spend a little more time and go a little more in depth as to why he likes a particular stock.Delwin
If anyone is interested in following this, here are Cramer's picks with 10/6/05's closing prices:FDG 40.30GG 19.42RTP 158.55SSL 33.91TOT 127.36I've set up a tracking port on Yahoo (the Boo-yah Bush Port) to track for myself, but I thought I'd catalog it here for posterity.ab
The best way to sell gold is to scare the heck out of people. Cramer does it good but with no basis in facts. Let's hunt for the central motive power of the piece:If the Chinese decide to be good communists and stop buying our bonds, the Feds will have to raise rates to attract new investors and the reaper will be at our doorstep with interest rates more akin to those of South than North America. Right now, it's not a problem. But in a year or two or maybe less, I perceive that the government will throw a bond auction and nobody will show, including the Chinese, until rates shoot up dramatically. What's wrong with that reasoning (if you can call it that)? First of all, US Treasuries can only be bought with US dollars. No matter how many yuan or yen or pesos or bolivar you might have, you can't spend them on US Treasuries. You need US dollars to buy US Treasuries. Ask yourself where the Chinese got the dollars they use to buy US Treasuries with. By selling products and services to America. Some of those dollars were diverted to oil producing countries and much of it was used to buy American products and services but, after spending as much of their US dollar stockpile as they wanted to, the Chinese have lots left over and they use them to buy US Treasuries. What else can they do with their excess pile of US dollars? They could stuff mattresses with them but then they would earn even less interest than with US Treasuries. Do the Chinese like buying US Treasuries? Probably not, but what other alternative do they have? Well, for one they could slow down their economy and stop exporting so much. Yeah, right!Cramer continues, more scare tactics:While Gigi is wildly profitable with gold at $465—you didn't know gold had shot up that much lately? Well, what did you expect with this deficit?—I figure gold could reach $1,000 if the Chinese stop buying our paper. Here is a long term gold price chart:http://www.lenntech.com/prices/gold.htmWhy was Cramer not recommending gold in 2000? The top line, the green one, is in historic dollars, not adjusted for inflation. Gold has not done much since 1981 when it was around $400 an ounce. Now look at inflation adjusted prices, the dark blue line, and then thank your stars that you didn't bury a hoard of gold back then. I sold gold, real gold, two little ingots, back around 1995/6 and I got close to $400 an ounce for it. Ten years later it is $465. CAGR = 1.5% That's less than inflation I would guess.Cramer continues, more scare tactics:The world is running out of oil, of course, and... -------------------------------One more thing, if you are a dyed in the wool Republican, this beginning of this piece will be painful to read:freethinkerkeywe Sorry, this piece says a lot more about Cramer than about Bush. Republicans need feel no pain from it. But gold buyers likely will.Denny Schlesinger
Denny, you forgot to mention one thing...If the Chinese decide to be good communists and stop buying our bondsThe Chinese are no longer Communists...At thie point they're more like fascists.bozob
The world is running out of oil, of course, and...The US is sitting on 3 times as much extractable reserves of oil than the Saudis. But it's all in shale which with current technologies isn't worthwhile to extract at less than $65 -70 per barrel. But Shell anounced that they believe they have a technology that brings that number down to $33 per barrel. If this is true then the US may just become the world's largest producer again. (This ignores the fact that for political reasons we haven't done any drilling on either the Atlantic or Pacific coasts where people believe there is quite a bit of oil.)bozob
But Shell anounced that they believe they have a technology that brings that number down to $33 per barrel. link, please!Steve
But Shell anounced that they believe they have a technology that brings that number down to $33 per barrel.link, please!http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/news_columnists/article/0,1299,DRMN_86_4051709,00.htmlRemember the Carter-era Synfuels Corp. debacle? It was a response to the '70s energy shortages, closed down in 1985 after accomplishing essentially nothing at great expense, which is pretty much a description of what usually happens when the government tries to take over something that the private sector can do better. Private actors are, after all, spending their own money. Since 1981, Shell researchers at the company's division of "unconventional resources" have been spending their own money trying to figure out how to get usable energy out of oil shale. Judging by the presentation the Rocky Mountain News heard this week, they think they've got it.Shell's method, which it calls "in situ conversion," is simplicity itself in concept but exquisitely ingenious in execution. Terry O'Connor, a vice president for external and regulatory affairs at Shell Exploration and Production, explained how it's done (and they have done it, in several test projects):Drill shafts into the oil-bearing rock. Drop heaters down the shaft. Cook the rock until the hydrocarbons boil off, the lightest and most desirable first. Collect them. Read the rest. They got 1,500 barrels out of a plot 20 by 35 feet and the region considered to have this oil is more than a thousand square miles.bozob
Here's a really interesting oil shale piece just done this year by the Rand Corporation... it's a free download, or $20 for a 'hard' copy.http://www.rand.org/publications/MG/MG414/
It was my original intention to reply to the apparent obsessive nature of this thread, I am not, instead I am going to thank ncfool2 for posting the link along with he suggestion to select the post new option and change the subject line instead of just clicking reply.
It was my original intention to reply to the apparent obsessive nature of this thread, I am not, instead ...jamesoid What's wrong with this thread? I can't see anything "obsesssive" here. Just people stating their opinions/positions. Or am I missing something?Denny Schlesinger
I agree with Denny on his thoughts about Gold. Every 2 to 3 years, someone is explaining how gold is heading for $1,000 an ounce. Of all the commodities/resources the Chinese and eventually India will need in great demand, I think oil, timber, coal, uranium, iron/steel/aluminum/titanium, etc will be in stronger demand than gold...Gold obviously has its value, but for anyone to claim that they can easily see gold at a given price target (more than twice its current worth) a year or two from now is either a genius, an idiot, or a scheister...If a genius, please enlighten us as to why it will be worth more than twice its current price. Where is the worldwide demand/scarcity? And why will it be different this time? Just before 2000 many were saying buying gold was the only way to safeguard against the year 2000 crisis.If an idiot, why do you have this belief? Who/What have you been reading that has led you to believe gold will be worth $1,000.00 an ounce?If a scheister, what is your profit motive for drumming up interest in gold?Taylor
"Please enlighten us as to why it will be worth more than twice its current price. Where is the worldwide demand/scarcity? And why will it be different this time? Just before 2000 many were saying buying gold was the only way to safeguard against the year 2000 crisis." - tman77I cannot tell you why it will or will not double, but I can tell you what I think about this situation. I think it is all about hype and selling a story. The people who bought Gold at $270/ounce want to sell it to someone at as high a price as possible. They want out of Gold before it goes down...but, how high can it go?If enough people can be persuaded that Gold will double, the price will go up as more people suck up the available supply. Then, when enough suckers own that Gold, the market will suddenly realize that Gold is being mined every day for under $200/ounce. Then the hype will turn negative and the people holding the Gold will find few buyers at the inflated price.This is what I see with oil also. In fact, this is what I see with many things including many stocks. This is just the game in action. Check out most stocks that are at their 30-year high CAGR and you will find scant justification for the inflated price. Granted, the company was probably doing very well for several years in the recent past, but the hype is designed to off-load the company's shares onto people who fail to see the big picture. The buyers are led to concentrate on the more recent price run-up rather than the underlying value. I know, I was the sucker for way too many years and I bought into the hype. The story was always simple and it sounded rational.But, let's not get mad at the game, let's get even. The BMW Method is aimed at playing the game without buying into anyone else's hype. We study the history of things we want to buy and understand the value before we pay a dime of our hard-earned money for anything. Oil, Gold, pork bellies, corn, sugar, stocks or bonds...the thing we are buying is of no consequence because we can spot the value when it is there.For instance, if I were in the market for an SUV, I would be getting very interested right now. The negative hype is at a peak and the price is plummeting downward. Meanwhile, the SUV that was worth $25,000 six months ago is now selling for $16,000 and going lower...it's a buyers market. People who believe the hype are taking what they can get for their SUV and they are buying hybrids and paying top dollar. But, what is a barrel of oil really worth? Isn't that what caused the SUV market to collapse?The problem is people believe what they see on the television. They have learned not to think for themselves and to just react to what they think is happening based on the story. The people who control the story are trying to control the markets by controlling attitudes. That is the game.I hate the game, but I have learned how to play it to my advantage. The BMW Method is my way of sorting out the game for myself. If it can help someone else, I am very pleased. But, do not buy my hype...think for yourself.
BMW:Excellent Post on market psychology!Regards,Emmette
Opinions re Jim "BooyahBoy" Cramer are as common as body parts. So what? What more gravitas should be placed in his "analysis" than any others? Does he use BMWM? Regardless, my reply was more to the point that the apparent "obsessive quality" of the thread (how many posts under the subject line are relevant?, I don' know) almost caused me to miss a very relevant (to me) link to an item of some interest.To make my point as firmly as I can without offending anybody. Is it too much to ask posters to create a new post with a new subject line when desirous of changing the subject from within a page of a thread? Or does it amuse some or educate some or help some to do otherwise?It is like the game "Telephone" where on can experience how much the meaning of a message is morphed as it is passed from participant to participant. Not why I am here.
Regardless, my reply was more to the point that the apparent "obsessive quality" of the thread (how many posts under the subject line are relevant?, I don' know) almost caused me to miss a very relevant (to me) link to an item of some interest.jamesoid I thought all the replies were relevant. They were either directed at Cramer's piece or at the original poster's Bush aside.Since I don't have a TV set I have never seen Cramer in action but from what I have read he sounds just like a TV evangelist getting people into a froth. Why an "investor" would waste his time on such an act is beyond me. Some have confessed that Cramer is entertaining.A look at the various posts:Delwin: I watch the Kramer show sometimes, but, for me, it leaves a lot to be desired.abFatPitch: If anyone is interested in following this, here are Cramer's picks...captainccs: The best way to sell gold is to scare the heck out of people. Cramer does it good but...bozob: If the Chinese decide to be good communists and stop buying our bonds (quote from Cramer)bozob: The world is running out of oil, of course, and... (quote from Cramer)Steve: But Shell anounced that they believe they have a technology that brings that number down to $33 per barrel. (re Cramer's energy statement)bozob: But Shell anounced that they believe they have a technology that brings that number down to $33 per barrel. (idem)ncfool2: Here's a really interesting oil shale piece just done this year by the Rand Corporation... (idem)Sorry but I don't see where this thread has gone astray as you say. Maybe you could point out some specifics that I'm missing.Denny Schlesinger
OK. You win.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra