4 ms·

You mean, hypothetically speaking, that Cramer would be gasp paid to promote specific stocks? Maybe when they are in a dire situation (or when insiders know it'

You mean, hypothetically speaking, that Cramer would be gasp paid to promote specific stocks? Maybe when they are in a dire situation (or when insiders know it's going to be pretty bad pretty soon now™)? Yes, that would be bad.

kjs3 4y ago
It doesn't have to be "paid" in any direct way. Cramer is an ex-Goldman Sachs, ex-hedge fund guy. He just needs to call up one of his old buddies and say "hey...Ima gonna tell the rubes to buy FooCorp tomorrow on the show". His buddies profit from knowing that early, and they do something 'nice' for old Jim down the road, like get him an 'exclusive interview' or something he can profit from. It's a racket.
- linuxftw 4y ago
  The SEC prosecutes people for this type of thing. Much safer approach is to let your buddies buy first, then pump one of them. Lot's of plausible deniability. "Hey, every major fund has some XYZ, I just like the stock right now."
  - kjs3 4y ago
    Sure they do. But if the quid pro quo exists outside of the finance world (e.g. I tell you what I'm gonna tell the proles, you give me the inside scoop I can monetize on my TV show/podcast/tiktok channel) it's harder for the SEC to bring a case. It's not what they're set up for.
  - ghayes 4y ago
    Curious what the actual crime is there, assuming Cramer had no insider information about the company. Basically, how is this say different from Hindenburg research taking a short position then releasing a damaging report? Or me buying a company and then telling others to buy it, too?
    - kortilla 4y ago
      You have to disclose that you have a vested interest. And even then you have to avoid transactions for a period of time after to avoid it being a “pump and dump”.