Skip to main content

publishes selected email received by the publication and its staff members. Send email intended for publication in this section to: Please include your full name. Letters may be edited for length, clarity, accuracy and style.

Commenting on Cramer

James Cramer:

I hate to see you

call daytraders moronic enthusiasts. I don't think there is a good daytrader out there who actually believes they can move a market and have prices sustain themselves if no one on the street is willing to buy stock.

What they do know is that stocks with small floats can be driven to certain prices with heavy daytrader volume. When everyone is finished buying, and puts their stock up for sale on island, if a market maker is not willing to relieve them of the stock at that inflated level, then it's the big race to hit the bids. Every good daytrader knows it.

Daytraders, and I am not suggesting you are against them, have been increasingly engaging in the highest stakes game of hot potato that has ever been played. The times have changed, hot potato is in, and when the music stops, everyone knows to hit the bids. That's not stupid.


John Cassimatis

(Received 2/18)

If the

NDX whacking at 3:30 is so predictable, why aren't traders playing it? Why are the futures so powerful? I would think the Nasdaq 100 would be big and liquid enough not to be roiled by a bit of futures selling. Exactly what proof do you have of your allegations?

Forgive the skepticism, but I still don't quite see what you're seeing. It's an interesting theory but I don't think you've proven your case. Let's see some charts or solid evidence to back it up. As far as I'm concerned a free market means exactly that! I doubt you can start trying to regulate the futures market. We will survive.


Larry Hayes

(Received 2/18)

Fund Face Off

Joe Bousquin:

While I agree with your

conclusion and find your reasoning sound, I think that you missed a big reason to avoid this fund -- the changing face of health care in general. I am a physical therapist and teach at the college level as well as spending a significant amount of time in the clinical setting. The health care industry is undergoing a siege on all fronts. Reimbursement rates from both Medicare and HMOs are being cut dramatically. The only segment of the industry still making money is the pharmaceutical segment and they will be taking quite a hit over the next two or three years.

My other reason for avoiding this fund is more a moral or ethical issue than a financial issue. Working in health care I have seen first hand what happens when an institution considers its shareholders, and not its patients, first. I try to avoid working in these facilities and I certainly don't want to give them any of my financial support.

In conclusion, I'd like to thank you for your time and congratulate you on a well written and persuasive argument.


Jim Petaccio

(Received 2/17)

Who's Holding the Bag?

Christopher Byron:

I found your

recent column very interesting, but very scary for a number of reasons. It reminded me of the savings and loan crisis, on which I worked. The spinning of real estate to increase its value was like musical chairs -- someone eventually was left without a chair once the music stopped.


Kathlyn Hoekstra

(Received 2/17)

C'est Bon!

"... its deftly realized impression of Philippe Petit in buttered shoes... "

John Edwards: When I was young such

metaphors did not drop lightly from the pens of Wall Street writers. "Buttered shoes" is delightful!

Bien ecrit! Et merci!


Peter Irvine

(Received 2/17)

Entre Nous

Jesse Eisinger

: It is unfortunate that an article such as the one you

wrote about



leaves you feeling immune to criticism. Anyone who criticizes you and Parker must be one of the naive retail buyers. Unfortunately for you and Parker, you do not appreciate the power of Folkman's data as presented in Nature. They demonstrate the experimental control of cancer that is unrivaled by any drug or methodology. You guys don't understand that there is a chance, perhaps even a fair one, that the EntreMed drugs will cure cancer. If they succeed, the $10 estimated value of this company will prove comedic. If they fail, that $10 estimate will exceed the company's actual value by an order of magnitude.


Alan Silberberg

(Received 2/17)

PC Industry Not Dead Yet



(MSFT) - Get Free Report

Windows and


(INTC) - Get Free Report

industry has

always been cyclical , since business depends on the timing of compelling upgrades. As a company which essentially only sells new Wintel boxes,


(DELL) - Get Free Report

is even more dependent on that cycle than other companies in the PC industry. It's mind boggling to me that anyone could own the stock and not understand that.

So, in a period in which those upgrades have not been compelling/fast enough, poor Dell is only growing at a rate that would be the envy of most other companies. The PC industry dead? Please don't exaggerate.


Josh Stern

(Received 2/17 )

Once again, the PC makers are being declared dead. How many times have we been through this? The PC is like the automobile -- models need to be upgraded every few years and everyone who doesn't have one wants to get one. This may be a blip on Dell's screen, but I find it hard to declare an industry with significant double-digit growth dead.


Rob Vrablik

(Received 2/17)

Jumping the Gun on Dell

I think it would be more rational for

Mr. Greenberg to withhold judgment on


(DELL) - Get Free Report

until after its numbers are released next week. The fact that a couple of analysts were able to drive the stock down on the eves of both a national holiday and the company's earnings announcement, a time when stocks often get rolled, is not surprising.

It is not a foregone conclusion, as Mr. Greenberg implied today, that today's calls are correct. No more so than the bullish calls are correct. The action of the stock today says nothing about that.

I do not own Dell, nor am I short. I am only hoping, perhaps wishfully, that reporting and commentary on a subject such as this rises above the knee-jerk level in the future.


Michael Manning

(Received 2/12)

Melting Mr. Softee

I agree with your opinion on the

ultimate outcome of the anti-trust case against


(MSFT) - Get Free Report

. I also agree with you on the reasons, to punish them, and nationalize their product.

I don't like Microsoft products, even though everyone uses them. However, I hate what the government is doing. They are looting companies who find themselves in an unpopular position with the public. The question is not what will happen to Microsoft, but who will be next.


Ziba R. Dearde

(Received 2/15)

Your view that the






merger should provide just cause for Microsoft to claim a level playing field is mistaken. There is no synergy between the companies, the cultures, or the business plans.

In Net time, a merged AOL/Netscrape company is already like the steel industry. They've seen their best days, and share prices. Portals? Click count? Eyeballs? Give me a break. That's not what the Net is ultimately about. This isn't TV.


William King

(Received 2/15)

Good insight on the Microsoft trial but I believe in the end you will be wrong! I agree the

Justice Department

should win round one, but Microsoft will win in the end on appeal.

It would be almost technically impossible for the Justice Department to make Mister Softie's operating systems public domain. Even as I type, hundreds of programmers are putting the finishing touches on

Win NT5M

, one of the most ambitious commercial undertakings of all time. How can you devalue the intellectual property, the shear ingenuity, and determination that this team of programmers are experiencing?

While I do not agree with all of Microsoft's business practices, I believe there must be some common ground other than a breakup, or making its operating systems public domain.

Imagine if someone told you that you had to make a brain dump on the Internet of all your trading knowledge because your hedge fund was extremely successful and closed to new investors.


Matthew Shapiro

(Received 2/15)