Booyah Slide and Sentiment
Via Media Bistro, comes this fascinating ratings tidbit:
"Jim Cramer's ratings must be causing some alarm in Engelwood Cliffs.
He fell below 200,000 total viewers at 6pm in May -- averaging 175,000 for the month, a 29 percent drop from his 247,000 average in May 2006. (In March, he averaged 255,000, and in April, he averaged 205,000.)
In the 25-54 demo, the declines may be more ominous. Here's the trend from January to May: 87,000, 72,000, 88,000, 59,000, 50,000. His May demo delivery of 50,000 is his worst in many months, and down 50 percent from last May's average of 100,000..."
I have a few questions: The first one about this is from a Sentiment perspective -- last year's Booyah mania did not remotely mark a top -- as I suspected it might have the potential to do. I even did a Street.com column raising the question last year (Monitoring the 'Mad Money' Madness).
Now, we see ratings have slipped. Is that simply the short attention span of today's youth? Or, does the decreased viewership support the Bull's argument that the sentiment out there is not excessively exuberant.
Maybe this is merely another example of the magazine cover indicator at work -- this time, it might have been New York mag that top ticked the latest trend!?! Or, it could simply be a case of "Cramer Fatigue."
But the most likely candidate for the ratings slide are all of the "Cramer Watch" websites (including Seeking Alpha) posting his list of stock "Buys and Sells" have stolen some of the shows thunder -- and ratings.
>
UPDATE: June 16, 2007 6:33am
The theory that is gaining the most traction in my mind is that websites are stealing Jim's ratings by reproducing his Buys and Sells -- without requiring an hour of viewing time.
Its is a zero sum game -- their gains in traffic come at the expense of Jim's ratings. See this recent traffic graph from the (unaffiliated) MaddMoney:
This is but one of dozens of sites that track CNBC's Mad Money, especially the stock Buys and Sells. I would suspect that all of these sites have pulled between off viewers of 25,000 to 50,000 per broadcast.
MY ADVICE: Call these bloggers into a meeting with Jim. Ask that they sequester the market calls for 48 hours. They are free riding on his work, and if they keep doing it, there may be no show at all.
>
~~~
DISCLOSURE: I am a contributor to TheStreet.com
Monday, June 11, 2007 | 10:46 AM | Permalink
| Comments (38)
| TrackBack (1)
add to de.li.cious | 
digg this! | 
add to technorati | 
email this post
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c52a953ef00df3523a4d98834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Booyah Slide and Sentiment:
» Write-Offs: 06.11.07 from DealBreaker.com
$$$ Guess who said this: "Rupert Murdoch started stalking Dow Jones more than a decade ago. I know, because he and I discussed the deal." [NYM] $$$ Sushi Etiquette [Banker's Ball] $$$ Booyah Slide and Sentiment [Big Picture] $$$ Schwarzman... [Read More]
Tracked on Jun 11, 2007 4:32:23 PM
Comments
I would surmise that the decline is due to the shtick that after time becomes unwatchable. I used to watch, and I felt that he put some terrific ideas out. But over time, the ideas seem to be a bit too stretched. He has much to offer, but that format makes it more like a three ring circus. His radio format was much better.
Posted by: Leisa | Jun 11, 2007 11:25:36 AM
I wonder if all of the Cramer Watch websites (including Seeking Alpha) that post his list of stock Butys and Sells have stolen some of the shows thunder -- and ratings ...
Posted by: Barry Ritholtz | Jun 11, 2007 11:29:36 AM
Maybe people are running out of money to invest? 2000 replay...
Posted by: theroxylandr | Jun 11, 2007 11:46:40 AM
The people watching it just ran out of oxy or x or whatever other kind of pills they were taking that made it seem interesting to them.
Posted by: Bob A | Jun 11, 2007 11:47:09 AM
I watched it regularly for the first year or so but found him increasingly harder to watch. I still feel he is a smart guy with some intereting ideas but I just cant take the screaming anymore.
Posted by: GerryL | Jun 11, 2007 11:49:51 AM
... and like anyone who's followed him long enough knows, they're learning his picks are about as accurate as flipping a coin.
Posted by: Bob A | Jun 11, 2007 12:15:13 PM
Cramer's rise took place in a market that really only moved in one direction...UP.
Now that volatility is back, and he will have more misses(now that he's not throwing at the broad side of a barn...like everyone else was!) his feable minded mob will turn on him and start looking for the next false prophet.
Posted by: KP | Jun 11, 2007 12:23:30 PM
I think what got Cramer such a wide audience at first was that he had personality and credibility. Over time, his credibility wained as his personality became more over the top.
I think we would also be remiss if we didn't offer the possibility that Fast Money is stealing his audience. Their traders, while less identifiable to the layman, are more directly engaged in the market rather than merely serving as a mouthpiece to a team of analysts. I walk away from Fast Money feeling like I just overheard a conversation among some guys (and gals) who are richer and smarter than me. I walk away from Mad Money feeling like Cramer is trying to sell me something.
Posted by: Kevin | Jun 11, 2007 12:39:37 PM
Barry,
Does anyone know if last year's ratings include the late night showing of Mad Money?
I bet they lost a lot of viewers by dropping the midnight showing. I think it would be a great show to watch in college. Ya gotta drink everytime someone says BOOYA!
Posted by: Christopher Laudani | Jun 11, 2007 12:56:58 PM
I watch regularly, but I've found his shows to be a little less interesting lately. It seems more like he's been doing a bunch of lists of stocks, instead of detailed segments on specific stocks - granted he does still do this.
Also, I'm not really looking for new ideas at the moment. I also find his smallcap picks ridiculous, after he mentions them the stocks shoot way up. I tend to like his larger cap ideas better...
Posted by: Joe | Jun 11, 2007 1:20:03 PM
Maybe this is part of a general trend away from materialism? We've seen this sort of thing before (eg. 80's flashiness became decidedly uncool in the early 90's).
Posted by: Estragon | Jun 11, 2007 1:32:07 PM
Mad Money is really a sitcom in disguise. Like 90% of them they only last about one season. If I was the producer of his show I'd add in more 'characters'. Too bad Aaron Spelling is dead, he'd know what to do.
Posted by: Norman | Jun 11, 2007 1:50:07 PM
Cramer needs guests on that show. Get some sector experts on their to tell Cramer he's full of crap. But he may be too much of an egomaniac to let anyone else on his show.
Posted by: drsqueeze.com | Jun 11, 2007 1:55:31 PM
2 words: FAST...MONEY.
CNBC, I will speculate, has cannibalized Cramer's audience. I'm not going to lay out the X reasons why it's happening (or that it isn't CNBC's objective to do so, for that matter)...but it's happening.
Posted by: CDizzle | Jun 11, 2007 2:50:05 PM
My guess is something like "Cramer Fatigue." The show was on three times a day (still two) and that just can't be maintained without over exposure. I no longer watch regularly, but that goes for Fast Money too. The markets are just making me too nervous as I try to follow Buffet's rule no. 1.
Cramer has done an excellent job in bringing the markets, and finance to a wider audience, a woefully uneducated audience about most of this topic. This country's lack of understanding of even basic finance is amazing. It should be taught in schools from the get-go. Cramer's mania while hard to handle at times cuts through the dullness. The man is smart and has insight and if even 1% of his audience stays with the subject, he will have done a better job than most of the financial media put together. It seems to me that Fast Money has lifted their pacing and other aspects directly from Cramer.
I'm a bit tired of all the Cramer bashing. Is he perfect? No. He at least admits to his warts and imperfections. Those who grade him on the "accuracy" of his picks are missing the point. I'll take coin-flip accuracy if it makes me money. That's probably much better accuracy than Peter Lynch ever had. I don't know how you can grade Cramer when he doesn't give enough information to make the assessment (like Jim Jubak does for example).
Posted by: Gary | Jun 11, 2007 3:01:58 PM
that's actually not a bad idea --- introducing new 'characters'.
Any show as boring as Mad Money would be gone. It's like Seinfeld except in every episode Jerry sits on the couch and just talks about stuff. It could be actually funny for 2 or 3 episodes.
He could probably ramp up ratings 10 fold by getting someone to completely disagree with him and they could argue about stuff once or twice a week.
Or maybe he could make a few picks that don't suck.
Lots of possibilities...
Posted by: ari5000 | Jun 11, 2007 3:20:48 PM
ari5000:
"He could probably ramp up ratings 10 fold by getting someone to completely disagree with him and they could argue about stuff once or twice a week."
Wasn't that what Kudlow and Cramer was about?
Posted by: KP | Jun 11, 2007 5:32:39 PM
I guess nobody else is willing to be publicly embarrassed by coming right out and saying this (but I have kids, so NOTHING can embarras me):
From an entertainment perspective (which is what brings in an audience), the high point of Mad Money was when some crew member(s) weighted down the chair Cramer threw each night (his reaction has to be one of the great moments of TV).
Once the chair throwing stopped (probably due to a decision by a combination of lawyers and medicos concerned about killing off the star), interest waned. I watched less and less, and eventually stopped entirely.
Jim's clearly a high energy, intelligent, ethical, hard working guy. I'm sure he'll be on to something else before you know it.
The better question is (to mix metaphors), who is going to be the NEXT Pied Piper, roping in the Main Street sheep?
He sure had ME BAAAAAAHHHHHing there for a while.
Posted by: Jim Bergsten | Jun 11, 2007 7:03:24 PM
Oh yeah, forgot my disclosure...
"I" am a contributor to the thestreet.com too.
To the tune of about $1K/year.
Posted by: Jim Bergsten | Jun 11, 2007 7:14:26 PM
I agree with Kevin, Fast Money is way better than Mad money. Eric Bolling is the best trader I've ever seen.
But thanks to Kramer for identifying AMZN, I am shorting it.
Posted by: ManhattanGuy | Jun 11, 2007 7:16:39 PM
I refer to him as Crater. He is as overexposed as Rachael Ray.
Posted by: buckykatt | Jun 11, 2007 9:14:00 PM
Norman, that's brilliant! Cramer's show needs a Spelling-esque "Jiggle TV" makeover.
Are you thinking what I'm thinking?? Do you think Cramer has the guts??? ;-)
Posted by: wunsacon | Jun 11, 2007 9:23:50 PM
cramer's old real money radio show was pretty f**king cool, he's alot more enjoyable in his sarcastic understated character...
Posted by: SINGER | Jun 12, 2007 12:56:00 AM
Maybe he'll blame it on gas prices... For me, Fast Mo. is a better use of 45 minutes (Tivoed) at this point.
Posted by: John F. | Jun 12, 2007 4:58:29 AM
Cramer is just too much. I can only watch him in the gym with Closed Caption and even then the screaming comes through in his body langauge.
Plus its just an hour with a middle aged bald guy. He should get Rebecca Jarvis as a co-host and I would be more interested.
Posted by: Karl Smith | Jun 12, 2007 10:23:08 AM
