Santelli vs Cramer
Since this has been circulating around the intertubes anyway, we present you with:
Rick Santelli vs Jim Cramer
Friday, January 25, 2008 | 04:00 AM | Permalink
| Comments (51)
| TrackBack (0)
add to de.li.cious | 
digg this! | 
add to technorati | 
email this post
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/763/25458194
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Santelli vs Cramer:
Comments
Cramer probably makes more money being a show man that managing money. How's his french? There is a vacancy at SocGen in Paris.
By the way, why would SocGen unload billions of Kerviel's positions on a day the Nikkei had closed down almost 4%?
Can an arbitrage expert comment here?
Posted by: Steelduck | Jan 25, 2008 4:49:00 AM
Well, he's getting his rate cuts...let's see what happens. Dollars to donuts we are down big time by the end of the year - no consumer, higher food inflation, and fewer home sales than everyone is predicting now.
Posted by: Justin | Jan 25, 2008 5:04:36 AM
It's foolish to respect any of the TV pundits, so I suppose I must be a fool because I have always admired and believed in the honesty of Rick Santelli.
The situation is as bad in the UK, although there are three or four "good guys" who regularly appear on Bloomberg and CNBC TV over here, so we probably get more glimpses of the truth than US viewers.
It's just as well we have honest guests on the network TV shows like yourself Barry to maintain some balance.
Posted by: John East | Jan 25, 2008 6:21:57 AM
I want to nominate this as the most rediculous phrase of 2008: "Our Fundamentally Strong Economy"
Posted by: Justin | Jan 25, 2008 6:34:04 AM
The only thing I can say is that as long as you see Cramer on TV, it indicates that the public is gullible and that stocks have not bottomed. Every "cramer" throughout history has crashed and burned. When he disappears, it will be a sign that the fever has broken and that speculative tendencies are tampered and it is safe to invest for the long term again.
Posted by: Steve Barry | Jan 25, 2008 6:43:52 AM
This is a quote from Mark Zandi:
"The most immediate conduit between monetary policy and the economy runs through the housing market. Housing is the most interest-rate sensitive sector of the economy, and historically it would receive a quick boost from monetary easing. This boost will be much more muted today given the ongoing problems in the mortgage securities market. The issuance of bonds backed by subprime, alternative-A, and jumbo mortgage loans has collapsed. Save for conforming fixed-rate loans, which are only loosely tied to Fed actions, lenders are unable and unwilling to extend mortgage credit at any interest rate"
Note: "unwilling to extend mortgage credit at any interest rate"
Posted by: Justin | Jan 25, 2008 6:45:38 AM
Cramer's sour response when Santelli introduces himself is classic.
There is subtext here: Santelli is Chicago, bonds & commodities, patriotic, worried about his country. Cramer is New York, stocks, cold-blooded salesman, ethics of a tobacco executive.
Posted by: Roger Thatchery | Jan 25, 2008 6:51:03 AM
Response from a question asked over on the yahoo (FNM) board, that asked, "will the new rules increase the jumbo loan limit?" I thought the insight of the poster is...well just read:
"Yeah, what a disaster. Got out at 36 today, luckily.
This increase will do nothing to help homeowners, and will just force the agencies to insure a bunch of California jumbo mortgages (as I am sure was Pelosi's intent). Funding on these mortgages won't improve, because the agencies can't put much more on their portfolios, and MBS investors aren't going to pay up as much for CA jumbos that they know are going to refi any chance they get.
So again the net impact is just to shift the credit risk of CA jumbo loans off the balance sheets of the banks onto the balance sheets of the agencies.
Of course they aren't stupid, so will probably start imposing charges to guaranty loans between the old and temporary limit, and for loans in CA, etc. They already have charges in place for loans with high LTVs to borrowers with low FICOs.
At the margin the only people this will help are Nancy Pelosi's rich friends."
Posted by: Justin | Jan 25, 2008 7:00:19 AM
Rick Santelli Rules!
Posted by: Matt | Jan 25, 2008 7:06:07 AM
Roger above is absolutely right-on. Cramer pwned; Santelli for President!
Posted by: Chris | Jan 25, 2008 7:29:55 AM
Well, Santelli is not only right but he is funny as hell.
At the end of the day.......thank god for Santelli and the Wolfman
Posted by: ken h | Jan 25, 2008 7:42:37 AM
Thanks for posting this. Notice that Wesbury was one of Cramer's co-discussants on several clips - how appropriate. Let's hear it for schadenfreude. Do you suppose someone might do a similar composite clip of Mr. Kudlow ? Hmmm...I wonder who could be set opposite him.
Thing that keeps making me shake my head in wonder is that as late as Oct. Cramer and many others were still bullish. Well enjoy the bear market bounce, sell into it and start lining up your inverse bets.
BtW this stimulus package will help insofar as direct payments to consumers go but the tax cuts for business are ideological unsinn and the jumbo extension is a) applicable to a small section of the market and b) won't change the fundamental shift in housing credit nor buying, at least IMHO. But the fundamental problems in the economy are going to be with us for a while. What this does is mitigate the damage and keep it from fracturing all the numerous fault lines that are exposed.
Stage II Denial: http://tinyurl.com/2onha7
Posted by: dblwyo | Jan 25, 2008 7:43:29 AM
Santelli gets intermarket relationships -- that when the dollar's weak, commodities tend to rise; when stocks are plummeting, bonds catch a bid. He also has TA statistics at his fingertips -- e.g., when was the last time that the T-note traded at this yield. He's good about presenting the constellation of facts from different markets, and letting you draw your own trading conclusions.
Sadly, the rest of the CBNC talent consists of cheerleaders (up is good, down is bad) and fanboys who debate government economic reports and brokerage earnings estimates, without having the slightest concept that they are largely fictional. That CNBC would even give a platform to an obnoxious, prevaricating flake like Cramer is a major reason that I rarely watch it anymore. I prefer the greater intellectual stimulation and rigid factual discipline of staged wrestling matches and exercise machine advertorials.
Posted by: Jim Haygood | Jan 25, 2008 7:57:16 AM
Not the mention the idiot Cramer then went on that same morning to say w/out Fed intervention, we'd have dropped 2,000 points...and now with their intervention the day would only drop 1,000 points. He is such a psycho. It's all medication, and it's soooooo New York City. (And that's where I harken, so nobody tell me otherwise without using the word "exception" first, since there are some of them.)
Santelli is like fresh air coming through a slightly cracked-open window in a bathroom full of stink.
Posted by: dukeb | Jan 25, 2008 8:01:25 AM
anybody know if there's an unedited clip of the cage match?? Heck I'd settle for a old fashioned transcript.
Posted by: Mark D'Alfonso | Jan 25, 2008 8:34:10 AM
Santelli is the only person on that whole network worth listening to!
Posted by: JT | Jan 25, 2008 8:47:49 AM
I am so thankful this got posted.
I said on this blog last month that the older retail investor who got so badly burned in the 2002 crash is not coming back into the market as in the past to take these inflated securities off the backs of the investment community (as usual, at the top) and has resorted to putting Cramer (and obvious others) on TV to recruit, cheerlead and indoctrinate a whole new (largely naive) generation of potential investors. Cramer's days are numbered. Every market cycle has a few blow-hards that are discredited and cast out. This is a natural ingredient producing the eventual market hype. You better believe that big disclaimer at the beginning of his show is there for a very good (legal) reason.
Thanks Rick! Really......thanks!!
Posted by: BG | Jan 25, 2008 8:56:49 AM
So, kinda related, but did anyone else catch Bloomberg's interview with Robert Prechter last night? I'll be honest, I don't know all the ins and outs of Elliot Wave, but Prechter's comments were interesting as heck.
Posted by: Florida | Jan 25, 2008 9:25:59 AM
The only other regular worth listening to besides Santelli is Art Cashen. How about an alternative program with those two, Barry, and a couple others? I definitely see a demand here.
Posted by: Terrence Patton | Jan 25, 2008 9:47:15 AM
remember that Santelli is surrounded by traders who are realists and trading one way or another for their own accounts. If Santelli flung the std BS he would not be well received on that floor.
VS the floor of the nyse with dilligan and Pisano--the folks there only like them if they can get on tv and hype what they need to hype.
basically, we have a lot of used car salespeople on wall street and the media.
Posted by: Hal | Jan 25, 2008 9:47:45 AM
Missed the Prechter interview, but caught the book. Not bad, but boy does that organization really try to suck people into the purchase of their newsletters and misc. packages! And it's a very sleezy pursuit at that. Better off to buy Panzer's book and forgo all the infomercial muck.
Posted by: dukeb | Jan 25, 2008 9:49:48 AM
That is one of the funniest videos I've seen. I downloaded it before Cramer's attorneys start sending threats to download it. Most likely they will since you've posted it on your blog.
Santelli and Ensana are the only two voices of reason on CNBC. And, they took Ensana off the air. I don't know if that was his doing with his ventures outside of CNBC or what. Now, we get nothing but clowns and sound bites. Bring back Bollinger and John Murphy to FNN. I can't believe a thoughtful financial channel wouldn't thrive. If I had access to that kind of capital, I'd convince Ted Turner out of retirement to lead the effort.
I said back in 2006 that by the time this cycle was over, Mad Money would be off the air. I still believe that.
Cramer's returns in the 1990s were the result of participating in the biggest bull market in history where dart board investing was shown to yield similar returns.
I saw yesterday that he is now bullish again that the politicos are borrowing more money to give us back the money they took from us so that we can spend more money to make a situation where too much money caused the situation to happen so that we can buy more junk.
Posted by: BDG123 | Jan 25, 2008 10:11:47 AM
Awesome. Cramer is worth listening to, but no more than various other talking heads with different and reasonably well-informed viewpoints, and he certainly deserves a smackdown if he lies about his track record.
Posted by: TKL | Jan 25, 2008 10:12:24 AM
That is one of the funniest videos I've seen. I downloaded it before Cramer's attorneys start sending threats to download it. Most likely they will since you've posted it on your blog.
Santelli and Ensana are the only two voices of reason on CNBC. And, they took Ensana off the air. I don't know if that was his doing with his ventures outside of CNBC or what. Now, we get nothing but clowns and sound bites. Bring back Bollinger and John Murphy to FNN. I can't believe a thoughtful financial channel wouldn't thrive. If I had access to that kind of capital, I'd convince Ted Turner out of retirement to lead the effort.
I said back in 2006 that by the time this cycle was over, Mad Money would be off the air. I still believe that.
Cramer's returns in the 1990s were the result of participating in the biggest bull market in history where dart board investing was shown to yield similar returns.
I saw yesterday that he is now bullish again that the politicos are borrowing more money to give us back the money they took from us so that we can spend more money to make a situation where too much money caused the situation to happen so that we can buy more junk.
Posted by: BDG123 | Jan 25, 2008 10:13:26 AM
One day we will see Cramer hawking mortgages for Countrywide !!!!
How does he look in the mirror ?????
But, then again, how does George Bush.
Posted by: Robert | Jan 25, 2008 10:18:58 AM
Roger (Thatchery, whose comment appears above) needs to be corrected. Save the Chicago-is-apple-pie, New-York-is-unAmerican bullsh*t for your little Rotary club meeting in Kankakee. And FYI, the biggest and most successful tobacco advertising agency in history is Leo Burnett -- of Chicago, IL.
Posted by: TKL | Jan 25, 2008 10:21:26 AM
Santelli does appear to be relatively straightforward, thoughtful, and very patient person. It's just as much fun watching him battle it out with Steve Leastman(sp). That forced smile of his is hilarious. It's as if he hates having to listen to the rest of CNBC boobs as much as I do. He is very much grinning and bearing it.
A breath of fresh air in a room full of NO2.
Posted by: KP | Jan 25, 2008 10:37:35 AM
I apologize to New Yorkers. I meant to say "Cramer is Wall Street". The point being that there is a regional rivalry going on here that many viewers probably don't pick up on.
But thanks anyway, Pin Stripes, for making my point with your Rotary Club comment.
Posted by: Roger Thatchery | Jan 25, 2008 10:52:33 AM
Seems like Mr.Santelli will be looking for a job soon. Sad.
His integrity and ethics do not rest easily with CNBC's editorial policy, and it simply will not do to call their premier advertising salesman and entertainer on his misrepresentations.
Imagine. It's like Rush Limbaugh taking calls from people who disagree with his bile. That cannot be allowed.
Posted by: Thomas Pindelski | Jan 25, 2008 10:52:36 AM
Do you watch my show? , You should watch my show!
Posted by: SINGER | Jan 25, 2008 11:07:27 AM
Cramer comes across like the guy selling the magic car wax in the 3 a.m. infomercials ...
Vince McMahon has more gravitas ...
Posted by: Doug Watts | Jan 25, 2008 11:17:43 AM
The only reason why I ever tune in to that station is to hear what Rick has to say and you too Barry.
Econolicious
Posted by: ECONOMISTA NON GRATA | Jan 25, 2008 11:32:37 AM
I rest my case..
Active Trader Update
Cramer: Countrywide Still Looks Like a Buy
By Jim Cramer
RealMoney.com Columnist
2/6/2007 3:19 PM EST
URL: http://www.thestreet.com/markets/activetraderupdate/10337257.html
This column was originally published on RealMoney on Feb. 6 at 7:32 a.m. EST. It's being republished as a bonus for TheStreet.com readers. For more information about subscribing to RealMoney, please click here.
The conundrum of Countrywide going up even as another subprime dealer, Mortgage Lenders Network, goes under, may be answered by a simple tenet: The weak hands are going under, leaving the biggest and best to triumph.
When I pulled up with Angelo Mozilo, the man who built Countrywide -- the man who is Countrywide, some would say -- we joked about how strong Countrywide's business is because it has always "modeled" the bad loans better than anyone. One of the mistakes made by the analyst community is believing that any loans that go under could be death to a lender. In truth, the good ones model what will happen under a lot of scenarios, and it is pretty clear that Countrywide has the best models. Always has.
When the company's stock got bid up on takeover rumors, despite insider selling, I expected it to come right back down.
It didn't because what's really happening is the long-awaited shakeout. There have been too many crummy players in this business. You are seeing the small ones go under -- and some larger private ones, too. What you aren't seeing is the pullback in the major brokerages' business that is emblematic of a recognition that the margins got too bad in the subprimers that they bought to get the flow for mortgage back. You heard this if you listened closely on all the big brokers' conference calls.
If the brokers are pulling back and the smaller independents are going belly up, that leaves Countrywide to reap the benefits of the inevitable expansion in margin that comes from the end of the price wars for subprime.
That's why it is going up. That's why it will continue to go up. That's why Countrywide is still a buy, despite the problems in housing and the headlines about how bad this business is.
Posted by: GregorSamsa | Jan 25, 2008 12:12:09 PM
CNBC needs to move Cramer to the Comedy Channel and give Santelli a whole hour. Santelli has a brain and Cramer's could fit in a thimble. Over the years, think of all the money Cramer has caused gullible people who watch his show to lose. I got your "Booyah" right here.
Posted by: Pat Gorup | Jan 25, 2008 1:37:33 PM
Rick Santelli just got himself fired.
Posted by: speedlet | Jan 25, 2008 3:21:25 PM
I personally think Erin Burnett is also worth listening to sometimes.
Posted by: day4night | Jan 25, 2008 7:09:39 PM
Amen Pat Gorup!! That's exactly right! How many Millions have been lost by people who thought they were getting a fair shake but were only getting played.
Posted by: BG | Jan 25, 2008 7:33:00 PM
That video isn't fair. There is also video of Cramer saying the exact opposite.
Posted by: bjk | Jan 25, 2008 8:32:55 PM
That video isn't fair. There is also video of Cramer saying the exact opposite.
Posted by: bjk | Jan 25, 2008 8:33:22 PM
TO ALL: Thank you for your comments on the video I upload (Rick Santelli Takes Down Jim Cramer). And, thanks to the owner of this site for posting it here. With regard to the person(s) who argue that there is another side to the story, or, they'd like to see the full version of the clips. I will post the whole UNEDITED version of Jim blasting guests on CNBC along with Rick's challenge to Jim. I should have that up on Sunday.
Posted by: Don Harrold | Jan 25, 2008 8:59:21 PM
The video makes a good point, but the editing is awful and the constant cutting back to the same clips makes it hard to watch.
Simple wins in this situation.
Posted by: Mike B | Jan 25, 2008 9:09:14 PM
really think Kudlow is even worse than Cramer.
Posted by: rickrude | Jan 25, 2008 9:31:42 PM
"really think Kudlow is even worse than Cramer."
Yes, he has the ability to influencialy manipulate more important people (say in politics) to his way of thinking. Way worse!
Posted by: Pat Gorup | Jan 26, 2008 12:04:11 AM
Yes. Rick Santelli is the only one on the CNBC US crew that is able to make sense of the market he covers and the linkages to other markets. Erin Benett is sharp and make sense sometimes. The rest - all airheads, paid to look pretty and sprout 'apparently' sensible comments. I don't even want to get on to some of their guest presenters and/or 'experts' - some of this folks come from Planet Mars.
I live in Asia I would even bother to rate CNBC Asia or CNBC Australia! You are better off watch Circus de Solique if not for the need to watch CNBC for market prices and data.
Anyone who watches Cramer for his views and stock recommendation ought to seriously have their brains examined. The guy is just paid (handsomely I am sure) to sprout words, often accompanied high drama theatrics to fill his daily allocated airtime slot. He does not need to be held accountable for what he sprouts and neither does CNBC the network who will promptly display their disclaimer right everytime right after Cramer's speech.
I have seen a lot of blog readers refernce CNBC - does no one really watch Bloomberg TV?
Posted by: festerpig | Jan 26, 2008 8:21:16 AM
It takes a lot of balls to go against CNBC rules about (their people)attacking and being negative. Rick Santelli was off on Friday.
Others have disappeared from CNBC mysteriously
(by CNBC gestapo's) Rick Santelli, not only speaks at a normal rate - but has an above normal intelligence! Rick Santelli Rules!
Posted by: la grande poussée | Jan 26, 2008 10:09:55 AM
The bald idiot is an idiot, period.
Rick Santelli is the best thing on CNBC.
I agree with some of the other comments in that Cramer would be a perfect fit on the Fox network.
Posted by: bucky katt | Jan 26, 2008 12:31:50 PM
Erim Burnett and other pretty air heads need to stay.
Atleast some pleasure looking at them instead of Kudlow and Cramer... who look like prunes.
Posted by: rickrude | Jan 26, 2008 5:27:59 PM
CNBC is largely white noise to me during the trading day, except when Rick Santelli comes on. I have gotten so much useful information from Rick that has molded my markete views. It's a shame he doesn't have more airtime to amplify his views; maybe Fast Money could give him some regular appearances on that show.
A few people mentioned Ron Insana, and I think that guy is pure genius. They bring him on for a few minutes after the close and the guy is so honest in his views. Insana is one of those guys who knows markets inside out, best of the best.
Cramer...just ridiculous. And, I'm sorry but Erin Burnett seems to have never ending praise for Cramer. She has no credibility with me because of it.
Didn't Cramer go all bullish on Thursday nite now declaring the bear market dead? And didn't he rec Bear Stearns at 88, just two days after it was 68, alluding to the ''cache'' of the Bear Stearns name?...unbelievable....
Posted by: Todd | Jan 26, 2008 7:35:20 PM
Cramer is absolutely killing the little guy. That bald SOB scammed his way to big money in the 90's as evident by the book "Trading with the enemy" in which a hire of his exposes all the bs he did. Now Jimbo thinks he can repent all of his sins by giving sharing his "market knowledge", and he is causing much more damage to the individual investor who sees jim as a "guru". I wish I had a link to his stocks for the 2000's he wrote shortly before the tech bubble burst in which 8 of the 10 companies went under.
Posted by: Eric Sebille | Jan 26, 2008 10:56:37 PM
Cramer has NO CLUE! He doesn't know how bad it is out there! He doesn't pay the phone bill. My people are losing their homes! He has NO CLUE! Open up the discount window and yell out, you're clueless, Schmuck!
HE HAS NO C-L-U-E!!!!!
Posted by: Winston Munn | Jan 27, 2008 12:36:21 AM
PLEASE SPREAD THIS AROUND EVERYWHERE AND ANYWHERE -- CRAMER SIMPLY MUST BE STOPPED!
This is what Jim Cramer said at February 29, 2000:
You want my top 10 stocks for who is going to make it in the New World? You know what? I am going to give them to you. Right here. Right now. OK. Here goes. Write them down — no handouts here!: 724 Solutions, Ariba, Digital Island, Exodus, InfoSpace.com, Inktomi, Mercury Interactive, Sonera, VeriSign, and Veritas Software
You can’t make a worse portfolio even if you try. Looks like your loss should be in the 99% area.
Posted by: np | Jan 27, 2008 11:27:46 AM
