Cramer, Pendola and Apple's Two Worlds Colliding

NEW YORK ( TheStreet) -- Thanks to TheStreet's Jim Cramer and Debra Borchardt for the mention here. Cramer riffed on the latest Apple ( AAPL) controversy Monday afternoon. But I must question Cramer.

Interestingly, there's nothing in my contract that says I have to agree with everything Cramer says just because he founded TheStreet. In fact, the guy has been nicest to me when I'm feisty.

Cramer's jealous of my wind blown hair. I could never pull off a shiny dome like he does because I've got an unsightly, lumpy noggin. So it's all good. At least in that respect, we spar on a level playing field.

On one hand, Jim and I agree -- Apple needs another OMG product. I've been writing about that since Steve Jobs passed. For a while, that train of thought made me quite bearish near-term and long-term.

But then . . . something happened. The selloff that absolutely should happen if Apple fails to release the next big thing came about a year too soon. What started as capital gains-related, end-of-year tax selling turned into media and analyst hysteria that has, almost singlehandedly, made AAPL a volatile dog, relative to its past performance.

I get deeper into everything I broach in that paragraph at the links and throughout my article history at TheStreet.

Monday, in Apple Competes With Its Unwritten Future, I laid out my case as clearly as I ever have. For better or worse, the whole Wall Street Journal controversy buried the Joe Strummer-inspired "Unwritten Future" article.

In it, I discuss the notion of The Two Apples:

There's the Apple inside the next six to 12 months that can do almost anything it wants and win big. The foreseeable future Apple ...

Then, there's the Apple beyond the next year. The 12- to 18- to 24-months-down-the-road Apple. The decisions the company makes today set it up for that period. A period where we still might not have suitable answers, but we'll get more clarity on the question of whether Apple can not only innovate, but remain a socially dominant, enterprise-prominent premium brand without Steve Jobs.

It's a bit like the Worlds Theory; right now, The Two Apples have collided.

Everybody loves iPod Apple, iPhone Apple, iPad Apple, light-thin-and-powerful Macbook Apple, innovative Apple. But, beyond the next year Apple is killing foreseeable future Apple. And that's not good.

How in the world can stocks such as Best Buy ( BBY) and Hewlett Packard ( HPQ) rise on news that's bad, but not quite as bad as expected, yet foreseeable future Apple continues to dominate only to drop on noise?

We not only expect perfection from, but we turn on what is clearly the best company in the world. Apple deserves as much love and support (in the create a floor for the stock sense) as ( AMZN).

That's where Cramer surprised me a bit. I don't expect him to keep buying a stock he's no longer 100% bullish on. In fact, Cramer has made all the rights moves with AAPL in his Action Alerts Plus portfolio. But, I expected him to share my outrage over what's been happening to Apple lately. You know, you play the stock one way -- void of emotion -- but hammer the forces that drive the market insanity we're living through.

Outside of Amazon and Starbucks ( SBUX), there's not a better-positioned company -- at least in the retail-meets-consumer-meets-tech-meets-Web space -- than Apple.

The market should not punish it on the basis of regurgitated news and noise.

If you tell me that's just how the stock market works, I can't accept that. Look at Apple's across-the-board domination -- fundamentally, on the balance sheet or as a pop culture and social phenomenon -- and tell me it shouldn't be immune to the whims of a casino-like market? If any stock deserves the benefit of the doubt, its uncertain future notwithstanding, it's AAPL.

--Written by Rocco Pendola in Santa Monica, Calif.
Rocco Pendola is TheStreet's Director of Social Media. Pendola's daily contributions to TheStreet frequently appear on CNBC and at various top online properties, such as Forbes.