Recently a gaggle of CNBC reporters were discussing TSLA (I think it was on the 10% rebound day after the 14% fall), and I heard Bob Paisani clearly say words to the effect of "I think Tesla has turned out to be a viable company." Sounded good.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Jim Cramer from Mad Money says we are a cult
- Thread starter leilanimunter
- Start date
-
- Tags
- TSLA
Recently a gaggle of CNBC reporters were discussing TSLA (I think it was on the 10% rebound day after the 14% fall), and I heard Bob Paisani clearly say words to the effect of "I think Tesla has turned out to be a viable company." Sounded good.
kevin99
Member
TSLA deserves the Cult status. I don't want to fall in love with my investment, but seriously, what else stocks can rival the extraordinary momentum and positive press TSLA is enjoying now, and almost sure will last for a long while?
NigelM
Recovering Member
Na, cults will eventually lose touch with reality. Stay grounded when it comes to investments.
kevin99
Member
Nigel, it seems you try to counter me in many places. Your tone sounds counter for the sake of countering only, and a bit off topic.
BTW, no one(at least me) need this kind of investment advice.
Last edited:
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
I didn't take Nigel's post that way at all. In fact, I completely agree with it. 'Cults' are associated with blindly following another, not assessing for yourself.
I hope that everyone who has invested in TSLA is not blindly following, without evaluating the investment and their exposure. When Cramer called this a cult stock, he was insulting. He implied that many invest in TSLA because they believe hype and don't evaluate for themselves.
I have thought through risk factors (from my perspective), know what I can tolerate, and monitor all my investments closely. Hopefully everyone else does the same and is not guilty of being part of a 'cult-like following'.
I know this might be off-topic a bit but we are on the Cramer/cult thread. I've watched a lot of Cramer back in the day, and I am fairly sure that he doesn't mean "cult stock" as an insult to those who invest in those stocks. He's not talking about TSLA stock or investors as a religious cult (ie., blindly following or aberrant teachings, etc). He's referring to TSLA stock/followers in the sense of a cult following (ie., cult film/book/tv show). I don't think he meant anything derogatory.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_following:
A cult following is a group of fans who are highly dedicated to a specific area of culture. A film, book, musical artist, television series, or video game, among other things, will be said to have a cult following when it has a small but very passionate fan base. A common component of cult followings is the emotional attachment fans have with the object of the cult following, often identifying themselves and other fans as members of a community. Cult followings are also commonly associated with niche markets. Cult media are often associated with underground culture, and are considered too eccentric, bizarre, controversial or anti-establishment to be appreciated by the general public.
kevin99
Member
I have to disagree. "Insulting" is the the last thing I would read what Cramer means.
Now he explores a bit more on his opinion:
Cramer: Three Specs Powered by Lust - TheStreet
It is anything but "insulting".
What I am having problem with Nigel's comment is the condescending tone and assumption of people is naive or stupid. This is just one incident. To me that is "insulting".
As I recall, Jim Cramer called TSLA a cult stock in the context of a bullish outlook while using the term to indicate his opinion that price movements in the stock are difficult (or was it impossible) to predict [from a fundamentals standpoint one presumes].
As I think we have seen, it is possible to predict TSLA price movements both upwards and downwards with a relatively astonishing level of both resolution and precision.
I would just look to weigh Mr Cramer's remarks in the balance as an extra piece of data to analyze. In this case I would say his input was profoundly irrelevant - it was an "I don't know" with a smiley and an exclamation mark.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Yes, I understand that. I was more explaining the context of Nigel's remark to kevin.
- - - Updated - - -
Yes, exactly. "A common component is the emotional attachment fans have with the object of the cult following." That's dangerous ground, imo, from an investment standpoint. You all know I am a huge fan of Tesla. So when I'm investing, I question every decision to make sure I'm not letting my emotions dictate my investment.
I think Cramer meant that many that invest in TSLA are blindly doing so. I understand others here disagree. We're all entitled to our opinion. (Even me.)
- - - Updated - - -
Yes, exactly. "A common component is the emotional attachment fans have with the object of the cult following." That's dangerous ground, imo, from an investment standpoint. You all know I am a huge fan of Tesla. So when I'm investing, I question every decision to make sure I'm not letting my emotions dictate my investment.
I think Cramer meant that many that invest in TSLA are blindly doing so. I understand others here disagree. We're all entitled to our opinion. (Even me.
)
kevin99
Member
Again I don't think that is what Cramer means.
Quite the contrary. Yes you can have you own understanding. Peace.
NigelM
Recovering Member
kevin99
Member
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Please stop. I've spent the last bit of time going back through his posts and yours, to see if there was an issue. (And other mods would do the same, if a forum member implied I was not evenly applying decisions.) All I can see is that Nigel (appropriately, btw) asked you to not post in multiple threads about an event you're planning. That's exactly the same request we make of everyone. There was nothing offensive in how he asked.
I simply cannot find the problem, kevin.
I simply cannot find the problem, kevin.
kevin99
Member
Bonnie, that is not really the problem.
Anyway I will stop here, unless there is a need to take care of offline.
Anyway I will stop here, unless there is a need to take care of offline.
I believe that the burning of fossil fuels is destroying the environment. My basis for this is reason and science. The data supporting this conclusion are overwhelming. I support and advocate renewable energy and the electrification of transportation. Taking this further, I will act deliberately to leave my children and grandchildren a healing planet. Cult? I prefer tenet.
kevin99
Member
Why 100%? The stock has more than 300% in 6 months. I suspect many cults have that. Mine is more than what the stock gained in the same period since I am insane enough to put my money when my mouth is.
Similar threads
