Jim Cramer:TSCM, Mad Money &amp; The Street.com

http://www.thestreet.com/radio/#archives

Top 42. Aug 25, 2002 8:45 AM

» Jen_ - Re: June 2000

to continue with Cramer in 2000

there's a good archive of his articles by month at NewYorkMetro.com

I just wanted to know when Cramer became a tech bear but a bull on boring steady value stocks that are cheap and pay good dividends....the same song that he's been singing pretty much since his RealMoneyTalk radio show started .... one month's archives here...

OK looks like it was June 2000 when Cramer finally threw in the towel on tech....well I think from this article it may have started out as a temporary defensive move....but then he just stayed there....cause tech never bounced back....

Bombs Away!

So what if tech tanked? Before it bounces back, there's money to be made in less glamorous sectors, like tobacco and defense. (What, you got a problem with that?)

By James J. Cramer

People hate the stock market right now. They despise it because of their newfound losses. And they can't believe that their favorite stocks, many of which have been cut in half, can go still lower. They wish they had sold everything on March 10, the nasdaq's top, and find it hard to even look at the stock tables or their monthly statements. But is it the stock market that they really hate, or is it technology, that portion of the stock market that has come to define investing for us in the past five years? Do they really abhor a portfolio of balanced stocks, or do they consider the stock market to be Cisco, Intel, Microsoft, and a couple more wild tech names that made people fortunes during the great Bull Run?

I'm no Pollyanna. But I was born to search for bull markets wherever I can. And I am happy to report that there are a few bull markets that are alive and well right now, not gushers but decent money-makers, even if the nasdaq continues to falter.

Don't bother looking in any of the old familiar haunts: semiconductors, software, contract manufacturing, computers, wireless, and, I am afraid to say, even fiber optics, which is the last region in what was once a boiling tech market. These well-trodden areas are in what stock-market folk call "distribution," meaning they are struggling to find real owners, not the margined transients who took so much of this stuff down at much higher levels. I am reluctant to call tech a bear market because that rubric comes with too much baggage. The "fundamentals," the actual core businesses of tech, are doing fantastically. In fact, the biggest negative is the lack of supply -- there aren't enough components to make all of the tech equipment needed to meet worldwide demand. The stocks simply got well ahead of the prospects; they were too richly valued for management to meet the expectations set for them by worshipful buyers. When these stocks come down enough, they will reignite and become excellent buys. But they aren't there yet.

While these stocks cool, however, mini-bull markets abound. You just need to know where to look for them. They don't offer the rewards of technology investing, meaning that there isn't one of these groups that could double or triple in a three-month span, something that became commonplace for hot tech areas before the market topped. But they offer something that has become a bit like gold in the mountains of dirt and rock -- they offer real gains.

So here's your guide to the five paths that are making people money in the toughest market anybody has seen in six years -- that's six years since the last time the Federal Reserve started aggressively tightening up on interest rates as a way to cool an economy it thought was getting way too hot. Back then, in 1994, this stuff worked best right when the gloom set in, just as people began to realize that the economy was indeed slowing and that plenty of companies that needed a strong economy would not live up to expectations.

That's where we are right now in 2000, so why not go with what worked in the past? That's what we're doing at Cramer Berkowitz, and we have a ton of money on the line. This isn't just idle cocktail-party chatter about how crummy the market has become; this is how we're working the market.

Food stocks: Talk about bear markets. This group has been in one since Pillsbury got a bid in the late eighties. Once the province of bountiful yearly gains during the period when the Japanese conquered all but our dining table (yes, there was a time when I sold the food stocks at Goldman Sachs with the tag line "You will never see a bottle of Mitsubishi Ketchup on your table in our lifetime, so why not buy Heinz?"), this group is back, filled with takeovers and stable growth prospects. We have come to like General Mills and Sara Lee and have even debated buying Kellogg, a company we shorted successfully for a decade. Best Foods, one of the choicest of the lot, is being pursued by Unilever. Best Foods' attempts to roust a white knight could pay off with suitors for the remaining players in the industry. Not a lot of risk, some decent reward.

Defense stocks: Holy cow, this group has been clobbered. Once loved for its consistent earnings, under Clinton this group became the whipping boy of almost every branch of the government. Things have gotten so negative for these companies that the military now frets that some of them aren't strong enough to survive. But as the Federal Reserve keeps tightening, expect to see more people join the Republican fold. A Bush win should make this group double in price. Lockheed, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and General Dynamics will all benefit.

Tobacco: Ouch, I hate writing positive things about these guys. But the ethical dilemma of making money off these stocks has been resolved by my clients, who demand performance and don't demand asterisks about which stocks I make them money with. Right now I'm making it with tobacco, and the best performer is Philip Morris, a company that seems to be morphing into Kraft as I write. Kraft is worth more than the price of the stock, and if you can stomach the litigation, you have a chance for a 30 percent move in a relatively short time.

Hospitals and managed care: Another group that has been in bear mode while technology romped. As the economy slows, the earnings of these recession-proof stocks should shine brightly. Two of my favorites, which I am waiting for a pullback to buy, are United American Healthcare and HCA, the old Columbia Healthcare. The latter just settled a huge fine and is putting its sins behind it.

Beverages: Everything from Pepsi to Bud's been rocking ever since the market peaked three months ago. Normally, I would say these stocks have had too much of a run, but considering that they have done virtually nothing for years and years, they may have some further upside in them yet, especially if the Fed decides to inflict more pain on us in the form of another round of interest-rate hikes.

I know there isn't an "interesting" stock among them. I know that no one talks about these stocks at parties, no one brags about these holdings during commercials between Knicks games. But we are entering a phase where talking about the market is like talking about a death in the family. You do it circumspectly, as you never know who just incurred ruinous losses. Maybe a boring portfolio is just what is needed to get you through this era of newly lowered stock expectations.

And what do you do with all of that technology that you loaded up on during the great bull run in these stocks? Frankly, it is too late to sell most of the decimated stuff. Seems like dead money to us until we are farther along in the slowdown. If the pattern of seven years ago holds, three months from now we will want to jump back into tech. It is the opportunity cost of waiting while these other stocks work that we find unforgivable. We would rather make money in what's working -- I didn't earn the nickname "the Reverend of the Church of What's Happening Now" for nothing -- than stare at stocks that seem to go up three and down three with Ferris-wheel-like regularity, ending exactly where they started when the ride began.

James J. Cramer is manager of a hedge fund and co-founder of TheStreet.com. At time of publication, his fund had positions in Best Foods, Cisco Systems, General Mills, Intel, Microsoft, Pepsi, Philip Morris, and Sara Lee. His fund often buys and sells securities that are the subject of his columns, both before and after the columns are published, and the positions that his fund takes may change at any time. Under no circumstances does the information in this column represent a recommendation to buy or sell stocks. Cramer's writings provide insights into the dynamics of money management and are not a solicitation for transactions. While he cannot provide investment advice or recommendations, he invites comments at jjcletters@thestreet.com

.....Jen

-- posted by Jen_

http://www.suite101.com/discussion.cfm/i...

Top 43. Aug 31, 2002 9:06 AM

» Jen_ - Cramer

copied from the "TA" thread...

Author: triacs
Date: August 31, 2002 7:03 AM
Subject: Cramer

I have been listening alot to Jim Cramers radio show lately, and I think he makes alot of sense. He seems to be mostly into Fundamental Analysis as opposed to TA. He is really down on Tech, where
Kirk seems to be much more bullish on tech. Correct me if I am wrong. There is even talk on this thread on Qs getting to a resistance level of 26, which would be quite a move from its current level. Interesting to see which way it goes.

Author: Jen_
Date: August 31, 2002 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: Cramer

In response to message posted by triacs:

Hi Triacs - I'm a RealMoneyTalk listener also. We've been discussing Cramer & his RealMoneyTalk radio show on the Cramer thread starting about here...

Recently noticed that a month of the shows are archived here....

http://www.thestreet.com/radio/#archives

....Jen

-- posted by Jen_

Top 44. Sep 1, 2002 9:28 AM

» triacs - Cramer

Cramer has been touting Fidelity Contra lately. He says his wife knows the manager. Part of my kids college money has been in Fidelity Blue Chip, which has been a dog the last couple of years. Fortunately, only 40% has been in blue chip, with the rest in the money market since Jan, 2000. That is one of the few good things I got from Brinker. At his Jan, 2000 call, I went from 100% blue chip to 40% Blue chip, 60% money market. I have now switched the 40%(actually now about 25% due to market drop) from Blue Chip to Contra due to Cramer. I also finally sold out of the QQQ's (lost a fortune in QQQ's thanks to Brinker) and bought a group of five stocks I got from listening to Cramers "Am I diversified" shows. Bought companies he likes like MO,RD,HD,C,etc. Have I gone from mindlessly following Brinker to mindlessly following Cramer?

-- posted by triacs

Top 45. Sep 4, 2002 5:27 AM

» triacs - cramer

Yesterday, Cramer said that the days big selloff was the start of a chance to buy over the next few days. When the S&P went from 1400 to 1300 to 1200 to 1100 to 1000 there were many big selloffs. Couldn't he have said the same thing after those selloffs? Buying at those selloffs would have been a mistake. Why is buying due to yesterdays selloffs called for?

-- posted by triacs

Top 46. Sep 26, 2002 12:07 PM

» Sinewave - Interesting post from Prudent Bear's Chat Board

This was posted yesterday...found it interesting...

A must read for bears
ocelot
9/25/2002 11:21:11 AM

This is truly incredible James Cramer woke up finally...Is this a signal...

RealCommentary from TheStreet.com
Government Stands By as Economic Muscle Withers
Wednesday September 25, 11:41 am ET

By James J. Cramer,

Oblivious. That's the only way to describe this administration's reaction to the incredible
collapse that is happening right now, in slow motion, in the U.S. stock market. The president,
his advisers, and the secretary of the Treasury seem to have no idea how things are
deteriorating domestically. Oddly, the Democrats don't seem to recognize it either; they keep
focusing on the coming deficits as if those were the real problem with the economy. We have
lots of problems, but, strangely, the deficit isn't one of them, if you judge by the only standard
that matters: the bond market. And the bond market is signaling that we are, if anything, too
prudent with federal spending, as bizarre as that sounds.

The president and his advisors look at
aggregate figures, and the aggregate
figures chiefly reflect the incredibly low
rates that caused the consumer to be
giddy enough to keep spending.

But the aggregate figures lie. Let me
tick off the real problems:

1. The telecommunications system in
our country is probably 18 months
away from going belly up because the
government refuses to recognize that it
can't allow players to lie, cheat and
steal, then file bankruptcy and come
out smelling like a rose. Under that
scenario, which is happening with
WorldCom (Other OTC:WCOEQ.PK -
News), I can't see AT&T (NYSE:T - News) staying alive. I can't see how SBC (NYSE:SBC -
News), Verizon (NYSE:VZ - News) and BellSouth (NYSE:BLS - News) can maintain their
dividends. And it isn't just me; the market's saying the same thing.

But the Federal Communications Commission is oblivious. The idea that we could allow this
incredibly important industry to fail like this because the ne'er-do-wells aren't shut down is
beyond me. In 1990 the government took drastic action before we let the ne'er-do-wells wreck
the banking system. Now it's doing nothing.

2. Asbestos claims are sinking major companies left and right. Honeywell (NYSE:HON -
News), Dow (NYSE:DOW - News), Ford (NYSE:F - News), General Motors (NYSE:GM -
News), Georgia-Pacific (NYSE:GP - News) and Halliburton (NYSE:HAL - News) all have so
much exposure to asbestos that I could argue their securities are on the verge of becoming
uninvestible.

But asbestos plaintiffs' lawyers seem bent on bankrupting everyone in their paths, and the
political system has resisted reforming things so they can't. There is no court relief, no
congressional relief and no presidential relief. It seems just inevitable at this point that the
plaintiffs' lawyers will wind up helping to destroy these companies.

3. The airline industry is about to disappear. Sure, if we all flew JetBlue (NasdaqNM:JBLU -
News) that would be fine. But this whole industry is about to go out of business. Look at those
stocks -- they're just screaming "we're about to go down." In whose interest is that?

4. The financial services industry abetted so much fraud and is so deep into the problems of the
power merchants and the telecommunications industries that it is reasonable to think there's a
chance that either Merrill Lynch (NYSE:MER - News) or J.P. Morgan (NYSE:JPM - News)
won't make it. That's right, won't make it. The liabilities are just too great.

5. Less than one month after we certified the financials of U.S. companies, EDS (NYSE:EDS -
News), one of our largest companies, said it didn't need to disclose a put liability that was just
gigantic. So much for that attempt at getting corporate America to disclose all its nasty
surprises.

6. Oil is at $31 a barrel and we have no plan or contingency to lessen our dependence on oil.
None. We are more hostage to this price than any time in our history.

7. This was the worst back-to-school season for retailers I have ever seen.

8. We have too much capacity in virtually every single technology sector and nobody even
seems to care.

9. We can't afford to prosecute the directors of Enron (Other OTC:ENRNQ.PK - News) because
the Securities and Exchange Commission is too stretched, but the SEC didn't even ask for a
appreciably more money at budget time.

10. This big old great economy can't support a single initial public offering, not one. We can't
raise a dime's worth of capital in this country for a young business. Not a dime.

And we wonder why the market's going down? I think if it weren't for the shorts and the curbs,
we should be taking out 6800 on the Dow right now. I think we are lucky that the Nazz is
hanging around here, lucky that there are hedge fund shorts that keep propping things up.

But nothing happens. Nothing gets debated. No one in the administration acts as if we were in
crisis. Everyone is distracted, yet every one of these problems could be fixed by the
government either through some sort of recognition and indemnity, or some change in policy or
enforcement.

It is beyond me that years of economic strength are being frittered away right before our eyes.
But it is happening.

And the secretary of the Treasury says all is well and the president acts as if things couldn't be
better because housing's holding up. Of course, that's only because we have a
government-mandated bubble developing.

It is enough to make you ill. It is more than enough to get you to be as defensive as possible
with your investments.

That's the only way you possibly can stay the course until the people at the top recognize how
darned precarious everything has become.

It has been my nature to be bullish and I have firmly believed that in the last 20 years things do
tend to work out in the end. I don't feel that way now. There is too much at risk and too few
important people in this nation focused on that risk.

That's why we have to continue to use any strength to get even more defensive than we have
been until the people in power come to their senses and make changes that can benefit the
shareholder class in this great nation

http://www.prudentbear.com/bearschat/bbs...

-- posted by Sinewave

Top 47. Feb 12, 2005 2:42 PM

» Happy_2 - Cramer the Phony

Cramer is a huge phony. In March of 2003, I heard him say on the radio that everyone should get out of the market. It was going way, way down, he said. At the time the SP500 was about 800.

A few weeks later, after the market had rallied hugely, I heard Cramer say, "boy, I am glad I got everyone into the market before this latest spike up".

-- posted by Happy_2

Top 48. May 13, 2005 3:42 PM

» Bill_Duffy - Re: Re: Cramer Sees $500 Google

.
He does like to make a lot of noise! I've been keeping track of his picks, so I'll see how he does.

I expect he'll be right on a few. But I always think for myself!

Entertaining show, however.

-- posted by Bill_Duffy

Top 49. May 13, 2005 9:07 PM

» Happy_2 - Re: Re: Re: Cramer Sees $500 Google

In response to Re: Re: Cramer Sees $500 Google posted by Bill_Duffy:

"For fourteen years Jim Cramer ran a hedge fund that compounded money at a rate of 24 percent annually after fees"

I don't suppose a certified audit is available to back up this claim. I didn't think so.

-- posted by Happy_2

Top 50. May 15, 2005 2:01 AM

» azxcvbnm - Re: Jaloti's Review of "Mad Money"

In response to Jaloti's Review of "Mad Money" posted by Kirk:

I enjoy Cramer's radio show (haven't seen the TV show) and think he's a honest guy. Why? Because he talks about his bad picks just as much, if not more, than his good picks. Most con artists don't like admitting failure.

What I like most is that he will tell you what he thinks and won't try to cover all the bases like some other hosts. Sometimes you'll have to sit through an entire show in order to find out if Brinker's positive or negative on the market. Sure he's not right all the time, but I do believe that he's giving an honest opinion. Another thing about Cramer is that he's trading oriented. He changes his opinion as new events arise, which is perfectly logical and a plus. He also will change his opinion depending on the price of a stock. He might like a stock at 40, but dislike it at 80 (He explained why he was wrong about Google and told listeners to buy when the stock was at around 140-160).

I haven't heard all the negative allegations against him, and maybe those will change my mind. What are some factual things that he has done wrong, or were unethical? It wasn't his fault that internet mania hit when The Street.Com went public, and I think he talks positive about a stock, not just because he owns it, but because he genuinely believes the stock will go up. Again, I'd like to learn more.

-- posted by azxcvbnm