WSW: Louis Rukeyser's Wall Street Summary &amp; Discussion $treet

Top 440. Mar 28, 2002 7:30 PM

» jbking - NYT: PBS Scrambles to Pull Together 'Wall Street Week'

From http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/28/busine... about the guest this week:

"For a featured guest, the station turned to Gus Sauter, who manages indexed stock mutual funds for the Vanguard Group. Mr. Sauter, who at 47 will be the youngest person on the program, eagerly accepted the invitation because he thought the format of "Wall Street Week" would give him time to explain the benefits of indexing, said Brian Mattes, a Vanguard spokesman."

-- posted by jbking

Top 441. Mar 29, 2002 5:56 PM

» pete_man01 - I cant believe this new format

These guys make Louis look like he was a young wipper snapper. What a bunch of gueezers!

-- posted by pete_man01

Top 442. Mar 29, 2002 6:08 PM

» mdorsey - Re: I cant believe this new format

In response to message posted by pete_man01:

Not as smooth as Lou was, but give them a few months and we will see. At least the panel members had some good ideas, even mentioned one of my exfavorites NLY. That puppy was a good one for me before I became the BEAR I am today.

-- posted by mdorsey

Top 443. Mar 29, 2002 6:18 PM

» soonertimer - Re: Re: I cant believe this new format

In response to message posted by mdorsey:

Tonight's show proved how skilled Lou was to have made it look so easy and effortless for such a long time. I was surprised by how shamelessly they attempted to imitate the previous format, while only producing a very stilted program.

-- posted by soonertimer

Top 444. Mar 29, 2002 6:34 PM

» JeffChristy - Re: I cant believe this new format

In response to message posted by pete_man01:

Pete

I don't know if you noticed it but Jim Grant, Bernadette Murphy and Julius Westheimer were not among the 22 panelists listed in the December 2001 transcript. I was curious to see how old Julius Westheimer was and I came across this article. It looks like all 22 panelists are boycotting the show.

Fans raise roof over Rukeyser flap
:http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/2002...

-- posted by JeffChristy

Top 445. Mar 29, 2002 6:46 PM

» mdorsey - Re: Re: I cant believe this new format

In response to message posted by JeffChristy:

That may be the best part of the new show, new panelists. Sometime this summer they planned to change the format, so we may have to wait till then to see anything new.

-- posted by mdorsey

Top 446. Mar 29, 2002 9:04 PM

» Makena - Amelie fund?

Did anyone catch the details of the fund or hedge fund that Jim Grant was talking about at the top of the show, which he said he had his father in? He said they did 12% last year, invested in mortgage backed securities, but using some leverage. I wanted to investigate online but can't find it. The name sounded like 'amalie'. I've tried various spellings but can't find anything in google.

Not that being in CMOs with leverage is going to be good going forward necessarily, but I wanted to read about it.

Does anyone get a transcript of the show where they could tell the correct spelling?

Thanks

-- posted by Makena

:http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=nly&d=t

Top 447. Mar 30, 2002 4:48 AM

» JeffChristy - Re: Amelie fund?

In response to message posted by Makena:

Makena

Try Annaly. Here is a link:

It would have been a good one to own but I wonder how it will do when interest rates start to rise.

-- posted by JeffChristy

Top 448. Mar 30, 2002 6:35 AM

» BrianMcG - Wall Street Weak

I watched the show for 25 years or so--there was no competition in the early years, and it was the only financial game in town. For about 5 years now, however, I have been unable to watch on a regular basis. The problem was not only a creaky format--what worked in the late Sixties is obviously antiquated now. The real problem was Rukeyser himself. The program became a thinly disguised showcase for his own ego, which became bigger and bigger as the years rolled by. Guests were "my" guests, not "ours." Panelists were obliged to laugh at Rukeyser's awful puns. They were oh-so deferential to The Host. Afraid no doubt of getting the heave-ho like Robert Nurock and Gail Dudack. Dudack was humiliated by being fired on the air! But nobody complained. After all, Rukeyser's name was on the show, and he was The Host. I got oh-so tired of his predictable monologues, and their relentlessly cynical tone. (Why are so many investors so stupid? Why don't they watch "Wall Street Week with Louis Rukeyser" and find out what's really going on?) And that "joke" about the market taking a dive whenever The Host went on vacation. Post hoc ergo propter hoc. It was mildly funny for the first dozen years or so. After that it grated. Yet the panelists were duty-bound to laugh every time it was repeated. I don't think it's a matter of age. Rukeyser and I are nearly contemporaries. OK, he's a little older, but not much. Loeb and Murphy and Westheimer are all a lot older, and I admire them all. I would love to be as sharp as Westheimer when I am an octogenarian. Jim Grant is younger. To me, it's a matter of ego. I'll take my financial advice without Rukeyser's ego, thanks. I suspect that the ego got in the way off-screen as well as on. (How many people in contract disputes liken their adversaries to the Mafia? Say what you will about him, Rukeyser isn't subtle.) I don't doubt The Host will get another show, and that he will still command a large audience. But I won't be watching.

Brian McG (formerly QQQless).

-- posted by BrianMcG