digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.

Jim Cramer Last Week: Don't Sell Bear Stearns! watch!

liveleak.com — Wow. What a fool. Bear Stearns ended up at $2 a share!

show profanity settings
expand all
  • imacommi, on 03/17/2008, -21/+58I'm not a big fan of Cramer but this is was really hard to predict. I can't remember the last time a bank the size of bear went down. Things are going to continue to get worse.
    • jstohler, on 03/17/2008, -15/+28If it's hard to predict, then Cramer should be trying to predict it. That's what's wrong with people like this: they take things that are inherently unknowable and pass them off as fact in order to make money themselves. (In Cramer's case, as a TV "expert.") It's *****, and everyone needs to call him on it.
      • notque, on 03/17/2008, -9/+8Exactly. If you have an opinion express it. if you can get paid for it, fine. But do not call it fact. It's an opinion.
      • ornellasm, on 03/17/2008, -5/+20hard to predict=! impossible to predict, Jim Cramer has had huge successes in the past and huge failures (like in this case.) To say no one should predict how a stock does is asinine.
        • minorthreat, on 03/17/2008, -2/+4what language do you use? I've always known !=
          • ornellasm, on 03/17/2008, -0/+4sorry, I had never really used it before, just seen it in passing. I probably should have looked it up before using it.
        • popfrogs, on 03/17/2008, -6/+1Grammar nazi FYI, the proper symbology is != as in not equal...you have equals not. Go ahead and hit minus.
        • techmaster, on 03/18/2008, -0/+2I'd give her face a two and her asinine.
      • SpykerSpeed, on 03/17/2008, -7/+3Exactly. Cramer's specialty was shorting stocks. He should have seen the inherent dangers in owning Bear, yet he told this guy to hold on to his shares. I don't care for his argument that his opinion alone would have killed the stock - his opinion was contrary to what the market did anyway. Cramer doesn't move markets, as much as he would like to think he does.
        • bacon_skoda, on 03/17/2008, -2/+1i don't think he does, publicly.
    • jstohler, on 03/17/2008, -11/+3Correction to comment above: should NOT be trying to predict it.
    • moofer, on 03/17/2008, -15/+2i can has retard
    • platinumrod, on 03/17/2008, -1/+87Actually, the question was whether or not to pull money from a Bear Stearns account, NOT whether to sell its stock. Since the FED guaranteed all Bear accounts, that money was and still is protected. So Cramer was right, but people still think he was talking about the stock. He clarified that today on CNBC.
      • Markp487, on 03/18/2008, -3/+2The FDIC guarantees the accounts, not the FED. Plus, Cramer said 'if anything they will be taken over'. He is referring to if a bank fails they are usually bought out and your deposits transfer banks.
        • kyoung989, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Wrong. (about the first part)
          The FDIC does NOT insure cash in brokerage accounts, which was the subject of the question. And the Fed did indeed take steps to insure proper liquidity in Bear Stearns accounts, should anyone want to pull money out.
    • PolishLogic, on 03/17/2008, -2/+20He says nothing about stock. Did you watch the same video linked here? He's talking about moving your account away from Bear Stearns.
      • bacon_skoda, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2aside from stock vs company, i think if i had an account in Bears, i would move my money out simply on principle. Even if the Fed guarantees it. I'm not going to be involved with a company that can be so wrong on something they are suppose to be an expert at. there are many other brokerages...don't really have to be in Bears.
        • PolishLogic, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1As would I (probably), but that's not really here nor there. That's merely a comfort-level decision. As of right now, there's no reason other than personal comfort to do so.
    • Yazilliclick, on 03/17/2008, -2/+4Well I would hope anybody investing money wouldn't take their advice from this guy yelling on tv for ratings.
    • cliffzdude, on 03/17/2008, -3/+4Cramer is but one of hundreds of stock jockeys out there. Nothing new here. People who buy and sell individual stocks, and *WATCH* a show like Cramer's take his "advice" with a grain of salt, or they ignore it. Stock buyers and sellers are LOVE to talk stocks. They read "The Journal" (the WSJ), IBD, FT, and subscribe to dozens of little newsletters as its fun (for them).

      To say that the media should stop publishing BUY/SELL/HOLD opinions because they may be wrong at times is pretty ***** silly.
      • bobthebuilder25, on 03/17/2008, -3/+1
        • Yazilliclick, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1Nobody is great at predicting stocks, ***** happens when dealing with anything with any volatility and even the pros are wrong almost 50% on things like that. Anybody looking to invest their own money should know enough to do their own research and the risks involved and thus there's no reason for a show like this to be removed because he was wrong. He's also been right.
      • cfulp, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1I find he's good for finding out about new stocks. But he even says, do your own research, don't buy for a week, etc.
    • bobthebuilder25, on 03/17/2008, -7/+1
      • swazo, on 03/17/2008, -0/+4not defending cramer but the question wasent about stock. it was about liquidity.
    • jaxcs, on 03/18/2008, -2/+1Don't predict me, bro. Sorry, I had to.
    • natmaster, on 03/18/2008, -1/+2Ron Paul predicted this. If it's so hard for you, maybe you can look to someone who gets it right.
      • split4to1, on 04/01/2008, -1/+0haha cramer what a character!!!!!!!!!
  • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 03/17/2008, -12/+8At 11:00 am Eastern, Bear Sterns was down 25 to about 4.6.
    • econoar, on 03/17/2008, -2/+7Because they sold for $2 a share...that was expected
  • ssn697, on 03/17/2008, -31/+53A fool following Cramer's advice, and his money are soon parted...
    • CJUNIT, on 03/17/2008, -8/+8You don't have to hang on to his every word. Everybody should do there own HW on a stock. Cramer at least opens peoples eyes to an unforeseen opportunity, but it's up to you to do your own research. It's YOUR money after all. The Bear Stearn's thing though was clearly out of left-field and no one expected a FED assisted bail out via proxy through JP Morgan...
      • jstohler, on 03/17/2008, -5/+12Cramer: "Hey, there's a fire in the building! Everybody should jump out the nearest window."
        You: "Wait -- there was no fire in the building, but you caused a mad panic in which a lot of people got hurt."
        Cramer: "Don't blame me -- you should have checked it out for yourself. You should thank me for opening your eyes to the possibility that there might have been a fire."
      • blueplanet, on 03/17/2008, -7/+3Wow, why don't you get Cramer's ***** out of your mouth...
    • salomejones, on 03/17/2008, -7/+14Here's the deal about Cramer: If you need his advice, then you still somewhere deep down inside believe that you'll get rich quick playing the market--which is of course, almost never the case. If you don't need his advice, then you already know that playing stocks is the second best way to lose your money (the best way being a poker table in vegas).

      To put it bluntly: if you're watching him for anything other than mild entertainment, youre screwed.
      • chuckDontSurf, on 03/17/2008, -1/+4Wish I could double-digg your post.
    • ralphthemagi, on 03/17/2008, -8/+5His advice is actually pretty decent, sans this example.
    • freezeout, on 03/17/2008, -3/+2I tend to avoid the financial advice of manic cokeheads. even those with their own highly rated TV shows. call me old fashioned I guess...
      • MWeather, on 03/17/2008, -1/+4Can YOU afford to snort that much coke on a daily basis?
    • LastDitchHero, on 03/18/2008, -1/+0Ok ssn697 I will bite, his money is titled "Mad Money" for a reason. This show is designed for the 10% speculative portion of a 20 to 45 year old's portfolio. Now, do people not take head to that lesson? Sure they do but that is their fault.
    • mrynit, on 03/18/2008, -1/+1Who's the more foolish: The fool, or the fool who follows him?
    • Locke2053, on 04/05/2008, -0/+1Cramer's advice was EXACTLY right. He said they were likely to be taken over, and they were. He said it was silly to close your accounts with them, and he was right.
  • slapded, on 03/17/2008, -7/+28timberrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
    • GorfTron, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1Timbuuuuurrrrrrnnnnnnnn!!! Cramer, your burned by Dr Greg Burns, but my friends called me Greg "Burn", on account of all the burnage!
  • 2bsbc, on 03/17/2008, -23/+16Cramer's advice is no different than any other information you get from the rest of the main stream; lies, propaganda, misdirection. Real programming, if you know what I mean.

    Turn the ***** thing off.
    • CazMo, on 03/17/2008, -8/+3You're mad as hell! And you're not gonna... ah, ***** it.. you failed.
  • tehbeermang, on 03/17/2008, -9/+10If I had 100 shares of Bear Stearns and took Mr. Cramer's advice, how many shares of JP Morgan Chase would I have today?
    • wild, on 03/17/2008, -4/+14Like 4.
    • wukillabee, on 03/17/2008, -18/+3ummm 100 you idiot
      • econoar, on 03/17/2008, -2/+13JPM is trading at 40...Bear Sterns at 2...so you get 1/20th per share...so not 100...about 4
      • wukillabee, on 03/17/2008, -3/+2.
      • wrathchilde, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2no no no, that's just silly.
    • jdh24, on 03/17/2008, -2/+16zero. bear stearns still has its own stock
      • clarionhaze, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1I think he means for the trade. And he would have virtually none since JP is over 100 and today BS closed at 2.00 when the FEDs decided to bail them out.
    • ernieoporto, on 03/17/2008, -2/+7100 $2 shares.
      • wleung76, on 03/18/2008, -0/+0LOL, so $200 bucks!!!
        • sbluetruck, on 03/18/2008, -1/+1or like £700,000, depending how you look at it
    • Locke2053, on 04/05/2008, -0/+1Cramer didn't advise you to buy or sell the stock. He was talking about individual accounts. If you don't understand that, you shouldn't be investing.
  • canewediggit, on 03/17/2008, -14/+99just saw his response to this call; he's claiming the question was about the bank, not the stock. he said the response was fine because if you had your money in the bank, it was/is guaranteed so you're ok and his statement had nothing to do with the common stock.
    • 2bsbc, on 03/17/2008, -22/+9*****.
      • Shorties, on 03/17/2008, -2/+17Well in his defense (Hey I don't like him either but lets be fair) he did say they most likely would be taken over in the clip.
        • 2bsbc, on 03/17/2008, -15/+2Let's be honest instead of fair. Jim Cramer is a corporate whore. Jim Cramer lies, and costs people money everyday. Families lost everything when the company was taken out; are you aware of that? This goes so far beyond being ***** "fair".
        • tdog138, on 03/17/2008, -3/+6Damn... I find it hard to believe that Jim Cramer is out to have families lose everything. He might give out bad advice, but that doesn't mean he has ill intentions.

          Or maybe he is a "corporate whore" who knows...
          • 2bsbc, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1There's a glimmer of hope in your last sentence. Research what type of bank Bear is; that will give you an answer.
        • fokov, on 03/17/2008, -2/+4Since he is on TV giving advice, I bet you half of his pick are because his group owns stock, which is also a selling point: I have it so you know I think it is good. However, they are just putting the money in the stock to get the sheep on TV to buy it, raise its value, then dump the stock. That is the daily life of Wall Street. You are trying to buy something and then sell it to someone else that thinks it is worth more than you paid. These things work.
      • cfulp, on 03/18/2008, -1/+2Watch the video. The question was about liquidation, not the stock.
    • kevcool, on 03/17/2008, -4/+16"Bear Stearns is not in trouble" coupled with "candidate for takeover" clearly point to the fact that he was talking about Bear Stearns common stock - rather than a custodian of your money. Of course your money is safe with every custodian (at least $100k of it) due to Fed-backed insurance.
      • cheeseysynapse, on 03/18/2008, -1/+2why didn't he say buy? he has been saying buying GS - if you had to buy an I bank - he was talking about accounts
    • diggingaround, on 03/17/2008, -3/+19....than can you explain to me why is Cramer showing a stock chart while talking about someone's "bank account"?
      • 2bsbc, on 03/17/2008, -1/+4They don't want to hear it diggin, I think they are on the payroll.
      • Future2, on 03/17/2008, -6/+3They show a stock chart on every company he is discussing. It doesn't necessarily mean he is talking about the company as an investment option. Neither Cramer nor the person that posed the question were talking about investing IN Bear. More like investing THROUGH Bear Stearns.
        • 2bsbc, on 03/18/2008, -2/+7It's an investment bank. He is talking about the ***** stock! Why are you lying, what do you have to gain?
        • cfulp, on 03/18/2008, -2/+1I don't understand. In the video, he reads the question, and clearly mentions liquidation. Are you deaf?
          • 2bsbc, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1You can't fix stupid. Get back to your episode of the smurfs.
    • Cowboy1015, on 03/17/2008, -2/+6Ahh hello??? That's stupidest excuse! He's talking about the stocks. He's show is about investing in stocks. I'm glad stopped watching his show.
      • cfulp, on 03/18/2008, -1/+1Did you even watch the video. He reads the question, which clearly asks about liquidation. Every company they talk about, their producers put a graph up. Have you even see the show?
    • theskyisblue, on 03/18/2008, -0/+6Um.. sorry but Cramer talks about stock picks, not putting your money into a bank. Hence why there is a stock chart showing a descending channel for BSC common stock. They are an investment bank, they structure portfolios and deals for individuals and other companies. You can't get a Bear Stearns checking account.
      • 2bsbc, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1Exactly. What is it with people? These posters refuse to see the truth, it's scary in a way I can't comprehend.
        • vault, on 03/18/2008, -1/+1He was just saying what the rationale was, not that he agrees with it.
    • quoderat, on 03/18/2008, -0/+5Bear Stearns is not a bank, and as such, is not FDIC insured. See here: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/56276 ...
  • airiox, on 03/17/2008, -13/+63This is ridiculous. The FCC is a joke. Bears was valued at 3.5 billion according to their stock price just a few days ago. Now JP Morgan buys Bears for a shanty town price of 236 million. "Biggest Theft in History"
    • colincornaby, on 03/17/2008, -5/+22FCC as in the people who decide what we can watch on TV? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC
      • airiox, on 03/17/2008, -4/+11Yeah sorry, lol. So many FTC, FEC. All those federal agencies that want to ruin America get me confused.
    • airiox, on 03/17/2008, -3/+10FTC... My bad. Also if you take in account it was selling at $60 as recently as a week ago and $80 less than a month ago. It should be valued at 7-10 billion instead of the 3.5 I previously stated.
    • diggingaround, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2Welcome to 1929... but with finesse and market control in overtaking and buying penny on a dollar!
    • heystoopid, on 03/17/2008, -2/+9Nice to see you failed economics 101 , like the TV dude and suddenly forget about the $38 billion dollar non repayable bad debt on the books thus the net worth was in the last three years went from zero, nada , zilch to minus mucha lotta wall to wall non repayable overvalued yankee dinero ?

      Nice to see your did not bother to look up the company's filed annual stockholders report and balance sheets , perhaps you should read them and rephrase your comments again !

      The '06 report would indicate that some where between 2003 and 2004 the companies board of directors and internal audit committee totally lost the plot and embarked on the program that ended in the debacle it always was going to be !

      The companies external audit note on the '06 report speaks volumes as to the impending disaster of an implosion , as it merely cites US Government regulations and nothing more , the last sentence in the final paragraph is very telling indeed !
    • bbear, on 03/17/2008, -2/+1Here is why stupid people should not play the stock market.
    • naterpoke, on 03/18/2008, -5/+1yo complete ignorant fatass who thinks he knows about the stock market.
      stfu plz
    • futureisours, on 03/18/2008, -0/+2Theft? This has to be approved by Bear's shareholders, but it's better than going bankrupt and getting nothing.
    • Wormfather, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1This is not a robbery per se, Bear is going to be bought at what it's value is, not a percieved value. Bear has had some magical accounting over the last few years.
  • dksupremacy, on 03/17/2008, -6/+42You automatically fail if you buy a stock you know nothing about......and asking other people what to do with it.
    • bradleyland, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2That's the truth. The common perception is that stocks are like gambling. That couldn't be further from the truth. Placing your money in stocks you know nothing about in a market you're completely ignorant to is worse than gambling. You've got a better chance putting it all on red. Placing your money in stocks for a company that you have researched in a market that you understand relatively well is a calculated risk that, presumably, leans in your favor based on your research done before hand.

      That's not to say that stocks are completely predictable, but just like any industry, you have to know what the ***** you're doing, or you're going to get burned.
    • ernieoporto, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1People should put their money into things like Spyder funds that follow the S&P500 and will do better in the long run by diversifying. Picking individual stocks when you know nothing about picking individual stocks is just foolish. Letting people who know about money do it for you is wiser, although these days I'm not sure who knows about where to put money.
      • nkassi, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1Except you will not get the same return because of fees related to running a fund like spyder. WATCH FOR FEES. That why funds are not always the best choice for people who don't research. You gotta research funds as much as you research stocks. No way out of research
  • dotlizard, on 03/17/2008, -20/+15Cramer is a dangerous lunatic.
    • kesin, on 03/17/2008, -5/+5yeah if you only listen to him, just like if you only listen to rush or oreily.
    • CazMo, on 03/17/2008, -2/+4or fox...
    • tcpip4lyfe, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2I like him. The man knows a lot about the stock market. But Im not going to buy everything he is bullish on.
  • Daamien, on 03/17/2008, -5/+6House of Pain!
  • bossm4n, on 03/17/2008, -13/+11I hope Cramer had a huge chunk of his own money tied up in Bear Sterns.
    • tdog138, on 03/17/2008, -2/+10I thought Cramer can't personally hold any equities, due to his TV contract. That is why he runs his "charity" portfolio. He had to completely get out of the stock market when he left Goldman Sachs and moved into journalism. Or am I wrong?
      • fokov, on 03/17/2008, -6/+4doubtful. He does give good advice to keep some people gambling with him, but he makes his real money (or someone else's that he will get later like a politician) by having the stock, driving up the hype, which might have some good hard data supporting it, and then dumping the stock for a profit when people realize it isn't a good as the majority of the short term'ers thought it was.
        • KOSmurfy, on 03/17/2008, -1/+5You're right. Cramer quit his job managing a hedge fund so he could run pump-n-dump scams on cable news. Makes perfect sense!

          Nice tinfoil hat though.
        • RationalXubrnce, on 03/18/2008, -1/+2 Camer made enough money in his heyday that he doesn't have to worry about playing the game anymore.
        • cfulp, on 03/18/2008, -1/+1He's worth over 200 million, I doubt he left Goldman Sachs, to create a cable show for stock scams...
    • lebruf, on 03/17/2008, -2/+3In his defense... Cramer is an absolute genius, but is hardly infallible. There's no way he would have been able to make it as far as he has in life if he were an utter and complete failure (he had a colossal hedge fund failure in 2000, and managed to come back). Also, if you know anything about efficient markets, in the long run, Cramer's picks may be well informed (or misinformed in this case) but statistically he won't outperform the market as a whole. His advice is just another insight into trading decisions that most traders don't take into consideration.
      That being said, nobody should put him up on a pedestal following every tip he gives , and nobody should be ridiculing him for failing to see something that very few on Wall Street, let alone within Bear Stearns, saw coming.
      • BionicPimp, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1"something that very few on Wall Street, let alone within Bear Stearns, saw coming"

        From what I remember hearing on NPR, Bear was actually doing pretty well until a handful of large investors decided to take their money out ***all at the same time*** leaving bear, instead of having a tiny, but sufficient amt of liquidity, to being on the ropes within minutes. To me, it sounds like the powers that be *decided* to ring the register on bear, and/or engineer a buyout.

        Also interesting is that since it was *private money simply being taken out of a bank*, despite the massive amount of currency we are talking about here, I really can't see how the SEC would have records on the group that pulled their money, or if they do, I can't believe it would be publicly published the way insider stock trades are.

        It really was a master stroke by some group of people (not shadowy cabal...greedy bastards) I always like to see how the people in power pull the strings are pulled, and I think this is one of those times.
      • RationalXubrnce, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1 Read Cramers first book Confessions of a Street Addict. He talks about exactly what you just described and says it's common practice for Wall Street to try and take a company down once they smell blood.
    • JKAL, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1I'm not a fan, however he was talking about actual cash (liquid) not stock as in shares.
  • RaysinX, on 03/17/2008, -16/+153This is taken out of context he is actually saying that you don't need to take money out of your Bear Sterns ACCOUNT.

    buried as inaccurate

    On a side note, the fact that he even has opinions on all of these individual companies is impressive in itself, and although his picks in the "lightning round" are often criticized, his picks in his opening segment are outperforming the market

    • quigley0, on 03/17/2008, -2/+15Yeah, i am not a Cramer fan, but, i did get the feeling he was talking about moving money from my account.
      • indiekiduk, on 03/17/2008, -6/+2He was talking about the stock.
        • cfulp, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1So, when he read the question, concerning liquidation...that was just for fluff?
    • diggingaround, on 03/17/2008, -6/+1yea... the guy clearly sent his latter to Suze Orman but misspelled her name like this "Jim Cramer"... give me a break... you are blind if you don't see a scheme behind this show.
    • dbt10, on 03/17/2008, -1/+8Cramer himself says that they will get bought out.. CLEARLY has nothing to do with the stock price, rather than the money stored in the bank... a big thumbs down to every smug pretentious person who has no idea what Cramer's context was and like assuming that he's a member of Illuminati. It's people like you who bring down markets by reducing expenditure at every small shock in the market, or who create bigger problems by borrowing with no ability to pay back loans.

      Yes I'm slightly bitter haha.
    • minorthreat, on 03/17/2008, -6/+4wow.. ppl dugg you up and people are saying this inaccurate. It looks like diggers aren't investor's.... Why the ***** would he be talking about the bank accounts? Have any of you bothered to watch the god damn show? He is clearly talking about the stock. Don't move your money from Bear....Please continue to listen to this man and know nothing of your investments... The short's will have a great time with your money.... fools you all are.
      • bingobongony, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2Did you actually WATCH the video?
      • minorthreat, on 03/18/2008, -2/+2I did
      • davewashere, on 03/18/2008, -1/+1I watched the video and after a second viewing I think he was talking about the stock. Why would an investor be worried about liquidity of their assets in a Bear Stearns account? They wouldn't seriously think that the company would go bankrupt and flush all their accounts with them without any government intervention. Cramer says "if anything, they're more likely to be taken over," which to me sounds like he's saying that Bear Stearns is still an investment with a possible upside because a buyout usually increases the stock price (what happened this weekend was the rare exception). It would not only be odd for someone to ask Cramer a question about where to hold their assets, but it would be even stranger for Cramer to answer it with such vigor. Why would Cramer really care where someone holds their assets? "Hey Cramer, should I have my savings account at Bank of America or Bank One?"
        I think the person asking the question was concerned that Bear Stearns stock would become illiquid if the company went bankrupt or was delisted or temporarily halted. Plus, as others have mentioned, they noted the ticker symbol in the question (which they pretty much always do, but still) AND showed the graph of the stock. If he wasn't talking about the stock, he certainly didn't make it very clear.
      • dexter411, on 03/18/2008, -1/+1"short's"?

        what language do you use? I've always known shorts.

        See what I did there? :)
    • xerigen, on 03/18/2008, -3/+2Why was there a graph of their stock on TV then?
      • dexter411, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1Because liquidity of a bank's assets depends on its stock price if it's gone public. Econ, maybe?
  • bensone1, on 03/17/2008, -14/+8pffffft he only told people not to sell bear stearns cause he has a cash-load of stocks in j.p. morgan! duh!
  • rabidrabit, on 03/17/2008, -4/+16I do remember him talking up Etrade as a great buy right before it crashed.
  • aforonda, on 03/17/2008, -13/+7this guys an idiot, your better off flipping a coin with his track record
  • maeon3, on 03/17/2008, -7/+38Cramer was talking about money IN the accounts which are FDIC insured. He wasn't saying to not sell the stock. He said the stock was in good condition though. But nobody is perfect, sometimes you pick a loser.
  • 47f0, on 03/17/2008, -1/+14To be fair... he did say "If anything, they're more likely to be taken over.", which was accurate. And he was talking about a classic "bank run", which is still possible, and still a danger, even with the Fed backing the money.
  • airiox, on 03/17/2008, -7/+3great follow up video to watch

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-705112070 ...
  • DuffyDirect, on 03/17/2008, -4/+24i like how this thing went down and suddenly everyone who posts on digg has an opinion and is an investment managment expert
    • nycmac247, on 03/17/2008, -5/+7Like Cramer?
    • napk, on 03/17/2008, -1/+3And how!
    • bingobongony, on 03/17/2008, -0/+6Everybody on Digg is an expert on EVERYTHING. Didn't you know that? I knew that because I am an expert on human behavior. Just like everyone else here.
    • Mpwns, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1YOU WONT THE INTERNET!

      really, best thing ive read in years online.
  • pappaj333, on 03/17/2008, -8/+42Buried as Inaccurate.

    The question was about liquidity and getting your money out of there. It's a FREAKING BANK people.

    The title is wildly in accurate.

    He might have been more clear at the time, just to avoid confusion. And in theory, anyone pissed should be pissed at his clarity, not his accuracy.

    But he was completely (and stunningly... ie, "takenover") accurate.

    Thumbs up to him. Thumbs down to the original digger.
    • dexter411, on 03/17/2008, -2/+2Indeed. I saw this last week and in context, it was clear that the question was about taking money "out of" Bear; not selling shares of it. Well put.
    • minorthreat, on 03/17/2008, -5/+2your all fools.. have you ever invested before? If not, please refrain from leaving comments. When you take your money out of something, you sell your shares.
      • Tonicks, on 03/18/2008, -1/+2Whose "all fools" are you referring to? Mine? His? Hmm, Mr. Stock Market Man minorthreat6 sure knows how to make a point. If YOUR use of English is as good as your investment skills then you are what's wrong with America.
        • Garbagio, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1Having people who use the sentence "what's wrong with America" is what's wrong with America.
      • dexter411, on 03/18/2008, -0/+2So when you say you take money out of the bank, you mean you sell the stocks that you also happen to own of said bank? What if the bank isn't public? Can I not take money out of my local town's bank?
    • wlight, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1Actually, that's a highly inaccurate statement. When I take my money out of Edward Jones and into another institution, I am, in fact, *reducing my account with Edward Jones and placing it into another institution*.

      I'm awfully sorry that the only kind of investing you seem to understand is buying and selling stock, but a whole bunch of us keep our money in anything from mutuals to hedge funds.
    • wlight, on 03/18/2008, -0/+0I accidentally clicked the wrong reply link, so to be clear, I am agreeing with pappaj333 and I am attempting to disagree with dexter411.
    • ckedge, on 03/22/2008, -0/+1He said - and I quote - "Bear Sterns is not in trouble."

      So, please tell me (irrespective of whether he was talking about holding a cash account with them or holding stock) - was or was not Bear Stearns in trouble?

      Are YOU claiming that Bear Stearns was NOT in trouble?

      ( ps: On the weekend I was thinking to myself - "it's dropped so much it's gotta rebound, I should buy". Good thing I'm lazy :) )
  • monkeyrun, on 03/17/2008, -1/+4lol, who could've predicted that BSC will be sold for 2 freaking dollars per share, and it's not even a cash deal.
    • theskyisblue, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1by looking at the fundamental data of the company any intelligent investor would stay the hell away from the financial institutions right now. cramer obviously doesn't invest based on data.
      • monkeyrun, on 03/20/2008, -0/+1no one in the wall street "invest" based on fundamental data.
        Fundamental data is only an excuse for them to bash or pump a stock.
  • theironchef, on 03/17/2008, -6/+2Cramer is not you ifnancial advisor. You do not have to listen to him. He says do not take your monye out of Bear Sters, as in an account. The FED is gaurunteeing all their money. As for the shares, the employees owned about 30 percent, who probably had prefered stock and will be given money first. The rest are people who will lose money because it's the stock market. Nothing is a sure win.
  • topnotchnet, on 03/17/2008, -5/+2lol yeah cuz everyone can predict a stock trading at $90 one day and $2 the next no one could of predicted this even if he did say, and if i remember correctly he also said the fed was retarded for acceptin worthless mortgages as collateral

    anyhoo
    jim cramers helped me make more money the last few years then any full time job has in matter of fact jim cramer is one of the reasons i dont have to work full time for anyone hoepfully ever again

    ive turned many friend onto his show also since he makes it easy for novices to understand cuz for some listening to someone tell you about stock can be like listening to a language you dont understanwhat you do with his info is on you

    but I also don't just buy everything he says buy I do a little research and think on my own before executing any trade

    signed
    retiring in my 30s

    oh and lehmans next lol
    • cheezintern, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1He's made me a fair amount of money as well, it's only the smart people that are able to pick and choose which of his buys are actually worth buying that walk away with a profit.
    • heystoopid, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1Nice to see you don't read the bank's annual reports which actually advises an approximate guesstimate of the actual asset backing of each individual share the preceding 12 months prior to and not the market demand price which is normally over inflated by supply and demand rules !

      Suggestion basic research usual stops the big boots from flying towards the maw in your mouth !
    • conrail, on 03/18/2008, -1/+2retiring to your mom's basement, maybe.

  • hc5831, on 03/17/2008, -3/+17It's clear he is talking about money in the bank, not the stock. Attention to detail people...
    • krazykid, on 03/18/2008, -3/+2No it's not. If you're talking about Bear Sterns and money in the bank, then why show a graph of its stock price. Also, why talk about being taken over if you're talking about money in the bank? Why not mention the FDIC to reassure bank account holders?
    • jabberwolf, on 03/18/2008, -0/+2What you expect diggers to actually read an entire article or pay attention?
  • chesscat, on 03/17/2008, -2/+3That's why his show runs a disclaimer at the beginning. However, who bothers to read it?
    • glitchbit, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1..umm yea.. who bothers to listen to it too?
  • mverta, on 03/17/2008, -7/+5Hold on... the screaming douchebag on television isn't actually a financial genius? Call Ripley's.
  • dupswapdrop, on 03/17/2008, -5/+2I like all the stock market guys they are like fortune tellers. If they are any good at predicting stock prices why are they not rich? Hey want to buy some hot numbers for powerball, your chances are better.
    • dexter411, on 03/17/2008, -2/+1Except they are rich... Jim Cramer is worth over $100 million.

      Dumbass.
      • dupswapdrop, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1Then why is he on a hack tv show and not some place nice and warm with a beach? If he's rich then he's the dumbass!
    • heystoopid, on 03/17/2008, -0/+2No they are all too busy trying to emulate "Gordon Gecko" to care one iota about their customers !
  • jefuchs, on 03/17/2008, -2/+7In other news: A New York contractor warned the city that Bear was about to collapse due to inadequate supports, but was blown off.
  • NelsonR, on 03/17/2008, -4/+3Watch his show and I give him props for entertainment and admitting mistakes, which there are many, in his suggestions for stock picks. My personal gripe with Cramer is that he is a Wall Street advocate and screw the average Joe Blowe. He continually rails on the Fed by not lowering interest rates enough so His crony's can make more "Mad Money". Screw the U.S. is his mantra, invest in foreign markets, outsource and trade in foreign currency. I ponder, is the man an American or is he Satan's protege that desires MONEY to be the crux of all you do and live by? People who love money live a life of immorality and elitism.
  • Renian, on 03/17/2008, -2/+10Benjamin Graham just lol'd in his grave.
  • fredjoe, on 03/17/2008, -1/+6Title is inaccurate as has been pointed out, but it also sounds like Cramer called it when he said they will likely be taken over.
  • glitchbit, on 03/17/2008, -5/+11..digg reflects why so many people don't invest money..

    THIS CLIP IS NOT ABOUT INVESTING!! (digg users can't even tell when cramer is not talkinga bout investing)

    This clip is about someone wanting to take their money out of their bank because they are afraid of losing all their money they have in their bank account with this bank. If you know anything at all about banks then you know ALL USA banks are garuanteed to pay you back at least $100,000 due to the FDIC.
    • moxley, on 03/17/2008, -2/+2Yeah - but when that money is worthless (as it's going to be within a year likely) then what?
      • hysterix, on 03/17/2008, -2/+1You heard it here first folks! Moxley predicts the total drop devaluation of the US dollar within a year!
      • bingobongony, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1You must be the hit of the party wherever you go!
    • NelsonR, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1But look at the huge interest rate we now earn at the banks. Americans save less then other nation. Gosh I wonder why? Cramer would prefer you lose it on Wall st. while enriching his cronies. Thank you Greenspan and Bernanke, Cramers buddies along with the fat cats of America.
    • diggingaround, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1so ... you have to read between the lines if you want to watch his show?
      • slicerace, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1You have to not make blind assumptions about what he's talking about. The guy is a complete idiot, but it's obvious from the clip that he's talking about if you have an account with Bear Stearns that you shouldn't take your money out of it. He doesn't ever say "stock" or "common stock". I hate Cramer because he is a complete tool but this is definitely an inaccurate submission.
      • bingobongony, on 03/17/2008, -1/+1No...you'd have to have read between the lines, and distorted the lines as much as possible to think that he was talking about selling the stock when watching this clip.
  • icandigthat, on 03/17/2008, -2/+3So Eliot Spitzer, the pitbull prosecutor once known for cracking down on corruption like this, gets scandalized the SAME week as Ariox's Biggest Theft in History and is replaced with a Blind guy. Irony, anyone? Worse?
    • nekama, on 03/17/2008, -0/+1Consider it justice for Spitzer being the target of a Wall Street hit job. Without him, that job is just Wall Street having a yes-man in there.
  • KC311Man, on 03/17/2008, -2/+8Are half you people even watching the clip? He's not even talking about stocks. He never says "Don't Sell Bear Stearns!" as the title implies. What the hell?
  • tobymikle, on 03/17/2008, -10/+8The question and answer WAS about the stock. Why else would the stock chart be put on the screen?
  • patapoof42, on 03/17/2008, -3/+7Inaccurate. "Should I remove my money from Bear Sterns" (as a client) vs "Should I sell my Bear Stern stock?" He said the first. If you can't see the difference, then I'm sorry.
  • iheartboobs, on 03/17/2008, -3/+13buried as inaccurate
  • PolishLogic, on 03/17/2008, -4/+9Buried for not being able to differentiate between moving your investment account to a new brokerage house, and selling your stock.

    Nowhere does he mention anything about shares of BSC other than showing the price graph.
  • db0255, on 03/17/2008, -2/+2He did say that they were more likely to be bought out. I just don't think Cramer, or any one for that matter, thought that the buying price would be $2 a share...
    The god damned thing was valued over $100 a share just a little while ago.
  • phatboyslim, on 03/17/2008, -8/+3So what, I post the same story, with the same video link 3 hours ago and this one makes the front page? ... pfft.
    http://digg.com/business_finance/Mad_Money_Jim_Cra ...
  • ColonelJessup, on 03/17/2008, -4/+3Here we go with the Digg.com investing geniuses........................................

    Hey everyone, I can give you the BEST investing advice you will get on this website:

    Don't take investing advice from digg.com
  • gossipninja, on 03/17/2008, -2/+9buried as inaccurate, this was a question about liquidity and money in an account, not in bear sterns stock. he was dead on about the takeover (which doesnt take a genius to guess). I am no huge kramer fan, but his answer was correct, to not drain your account due to market woes.
  • 70percent, on 03/17/2008, -3/+6Increadibly inaccurate. Cramer was correct, if you have money invested with Bear, you are covered. If you however had stock in bear, it's hosed.
  • AmishJedi, on 03/17/2008, -3/+5If you know ANYTHING about the stock market or economics or pizza you would know that he was talking about money in ACCOUNTS. the key word was LIQUIDITY. stick to articles about skateboarding.
  • ecape7, on 03/17/2008, -1/+6EPIC FAIL
  • adrenaline33, on 03/17/2008, -6/+8He is talking about someone's bank account, idiot. Buried.
    • 2bsbc, on 03/17/2008, -2/+2When is the last time you saw a chart for someones bank account presented on his show? Ditto. Ditto.
      • slicerace, on 03/17/2008, -1/+2It was a question from a viewer. Your little rebuttal is worthless.
        • 2bsbc, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1No, you brain washed fool, your denial is cancerous. It is a god damned investment bank not a bank such as WaMu. You're wrong. They changed a rule specifically for the bail out. Get away from the TV!
  • galets, on 03/17/2008, -2/+3From my experiences on a stock market, I learned: investment is hard work, it's for professionals, not amateurs. It's a game, where only chance to guarantee a win is to posess information, which is prcey to obtain and pricey to analyse. As a general rule, don't invest unless you know exactly what business does and why you're investing into it. If you want to save for retirement, buy gold, silver and other precious resources, which are guaranteed to remain scarce.

    On that note, I wanted to also mention that the fact that all americans are forced to invest (through 401k, and other sneaky tricks) creates sad state of affairs, where regular people rarely win
    • conrail, on 03/18/2008, -0/+1Plus, the only way to end up rich is to start out rich.
  • Perk, on 03/17/2008, -1/+4I stick by my statement that Cramer is one of the smartest people on TV. He manages to avoid being canceled by blustering and bloviating, but he understands the driving forces underlying the economy better than most.

    Even if his comment wasn't taken out of context, the sentiment is correct. If Bear Stearns had collapsed either through Fed inaction or a run by account holders, the negative ripple effect on the economy would have been a hundred times worse than what we're seeing.

    With the way money is created at this point in history, the entire global economy is a confidence scheme. If it gets to the point where there is no confidence that the Fed (and through them the American taxpayer) is going to prop up large banks (who create the money supply), then the entire economy goes away and we might as well start bartering again.

    Protest against the fact that it's the banks creating money in the first place, not the fact that the Fed stepped in to save the money supply.
    • Prodigal86, on 03/19/2008, -0/+1Very good comment. It deserves more diggs.
  • biomechanic, on 03/17/2008, -1/+3Booyaa!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 92 of 92 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.