Cramer Alerts

Boeing Faces Strange Headwinds
07/05/2006 10:49 AM

In this article, Cramer cites BA's recent slide and suggests it is wrong to sell.

He exclaims: "I would contend that the pullback is unwarranted and the stock a buy as it gets back to the level before the Airbus news. To me it is inconceivable that this company could be worth less since Airbus' implosion."

Bottom line: The market has not rewarded BA for Airbus' implosion. Cramer feels "That's just plain nuts."

Occidental's Miss Could Be a Tell
07/05/2006 10:36 AM

In this article, Cramer cites OXY's earnings warning and suggests switching focus from big oil to "midrange" companies.

He exclaims: "Because the whole notion of owning the oils here, after the big run, is that they will blow the numbers away. How does this change things? It tells me that perhaps a switch from the majors to the midrange companies that can still get takeover bids -- think Marathon -- might make sense. If Oxy misses, there could be other misses among the majors behind it."

Anomaly Stocks Look Unusually Attractive
07/05/2006 10:18 AM

In this article, Cramer searches for strength in a down market. He points to strength in MHP and PEP and declares Pepsi is " a great place to hide."

Furthermore, he thinks MA looks "cheap."

He exclaims: "...if the market reverses, these stocks will move up more than others; they have natural buyers. If the market stays down, these stocks should go down less because of the upgrade or buybacks."

It's a Correction, Not a Missile Crisis
07/05/2006 9:39 AM

In this article, Cramer cites today's selloff and exclaims: "the market got overbought again."

Furthermore, Cramer suggests the media is blowing the N. Korean situation out of proportion-- enabling the market to correct.

Nonetheless, Cramer feels the market is correcting after a big move up. Nothing more, nothing less.

Don't Pin All the Blame on Short-Sellers
07/05/2006 8:53 AM

In this article, Cramer defends 'naked short sellers.' He feels naked short selling scandals "never" come up with good, money making companies. Furthermore, he cites VG's sickening decline and suggests it went down for every reason in the book, except short selling.

He exclaims: "I continue to think that short-sellers should be considered blameless in almost every case that I have ever seen involving a decline. I have heard the alibi endlessly. I always say that if a company under the stock is any good at all, the shorts will be forced to cover, and the stock will go up even more than it should."

Finally, Cramer plays judge and jury: "the companies that are often mentioned as victims deserve their victimhood."

NOTE: Jim is going out on a limb on this one. As a result, he is taking heat from his readers.

JackOfAllTrades said...
07/05/2006 9:21 AM
Where is your sense of justice, Jim?

The issue is not whether naked short-sellers are to blame for a stock's decline. The issue is why the SEC is not doing anything about such blatant violation of the law. Why does the SEC allow such huge numbers of failure-to-delivers? When someone is allowed to sell shares that they do not own, or have not borrowed, isn't that just creating "counterfeit" shares? As a result of naked short-selling, are there not more shares in the market than the shares issued by the company? If the government actively pursues those who create counterfeit currency, why does it not pursue those who create counterfeit shares? If you are condoning naked short-selling, then I must say, "Shame on you, Jim."

jbravo said...
07/05/2006 9:50 AM
Wrong Jim

All the new regulations the past 10 years such as REG FD, Sarbanes Oxley, ect are all aimmed creating a level playing field for all investors. Regular retail investors can't participate in naked shorting so why should institutions have access to the fake currency. This issue isn't about bear raids by hedgies or crummy ran companies. It's all about fairness and access to the financial markets. Jim, I am a long term fan of yours, but how can you support your buddy Elliot's political agenda and not be against naked shorting?Your supposed to one the "good guys." Your comments make you no better than the people that implicated you in OSTK case. Get over the OSTK guys and be the stand up gentleman that you are.

Banks Offer New Charms, to Acquirers
07/05/2006 8:28 AM

In this article, Cramer cites the SBIT buyout (25% premium) and suggests any bank trading less than 2X book value is a buy.

He exclaims: "For a long time at my hedge fund, I would purchase any bank that sold below two times book, because when banks fell below that price, they would be grabbed by larger entities."

Bottom line: Cramer cites the buyout price of SBIT at 5x book and suggests it may be a "new benchmark" for the industry.

He exclaims: "Now it's just a home run for someone who believed. We all should have believed, and there are a ton of these banks still out there worth owning."

Damn the Missiles
07/05/2006 8:01 AM

In this article, Cramer disccuses the N. Korean missile situation and suggests " What do the North Korean missile tests have to do with the price-to-earnings ratio of Bristol-Myers?"

Furthermore, Cramer will cautiously add money into today's decline, ahead of Friday's employment number.