Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Support MFO
Donate through PayPal
Bartiromo Leaving CNBC for Fox News (I've sort of initiated a cooling off period for a bit. David)
She is so far to the right, it's where she belongs. I always found her irritating when she interviewed someone and answered the question for him or her, regardless of the resulting response from the guest. She would always slant the questions to her political agenda, guest didn't stand a chance LOL.
FBN has hired a fair number of CNBC personalities since its 2007 launch. Bartiromo's contract was up. CNBC is posting its worst numbers in 20 years but still leads Fox Business by about 2:1 in viewers while trailing Fox News nearly 10:1. Which is to say, Fox has money and, presumably, the ambition to build FBN into a serious rival while CNBC's finances are likely strapped.
I don't want CNBC (or, really, pretty much any TV) so I can't speak to her politics but I do have a sense of her grasp on economics.
I mean, who really cares? I never watch any of these so-called business channels. The talking heads usually know little more than average investors, and everything said is driven by the need to generate advertising revenue. So the more outrageous and scary the commentary, the more advertising dollars. Bartiromo does have a fairly decent grasp of economics, which is more than I can say for most of the financial people on all of these channels. We tell clients to not watch any of them. Even Bloomberg, which is the cleanest shirt in the dirty laundry, has a lot of over-the-top commentary and some just plain wrong moments. My advice is to turn off these programs and do something more enlightening, like read a book, take a walk, or take a nap.
The lemur is leaving? feh. WTF cares. As so many have mentioned, you never really want to listen to them talk - just read the tape with the volume off. Fox is the religinazi channel and many of the trash on CNBC are soooo hoping to leave like the lemur. Joe, Larry. feh.
Three days ago, I had a name recognition challenge with Maria Bartiromo. I do not watch much television; I watch no business TV except under panic event circumstances. Daily financial shows are noise. So, under normal conditions, I would not even access Scott’s posting on Bartiromo’s career change.
However, when David Snowball or BobC writes, I read. I trust and respect their financial wisdom.
I surely do not know Bartiromo’s politics. Nor do I really care. The issue is how good is she at assessing the investment marketplace? Without a doubt, most MFO regulars can answer that question much more authoritatively than I can. I began and quickly ended my education on the matter today by consulting the Internet on her background. It is fairly impressive.
Maria Bartiromo has over 2-plus decades of experience in the financial world. In addition, she is married to a University of Pennsylvania professor who co-founded the WisdomTree investment dynasty. Unless she completes her assignments as a rote automaton, her extensive time on the job should qualify her as an expert.
In making that rapid judgment, especially without ever being exposed to her analytical methods or her decision making process, I am guided by Malcolm Gladwell’s controversial 10,000-hour rule that be documented in his popular “Outliers” book. For example, chess players need 10,000 hours of dedicated practice to advance from a knowledgeable status to a grandmaster ranking. But time is not enough by itself. Even Gladwell recognized that “achievement is talent plus preparation”.
In the investment universe, talent is always the problematic quality to identify and measure. Many claim it, but few truly possess it.
One of my favorite financial researchers, Michael Mauboussin has addressed this issue in his writings and in his lectures. Although he often recommends an Indexing approach for the average investor, he does endorse a more aggressive approach for those investors willing to put in the necessary study time.
Mauboussin believes in a regression-to-the-mean market and the same for individual advisors. There will be good years mixed with bad years. However, he believes that the baseline “mean” rate of return level is higher for talented investment wizards. The problem is to identify these talented souls early in their careers.
Mauboussin has a theory as to why the wizard population is so thin in the financial industry. It is the complexity of that world that makes reliable decision making so challenging a task. In general, he concludes that expert advice has its limitations. It is dichotomous in nature. His universe is divided into two major parts. His two classes are characterized by events that: (1) have stable and linear outcomes, or (2) have unstable and nonlinear outcomes.
In his application, stable means that given an input, the output is predictable and the magnitude of that output is proportional to the input strength. Chess playing serves as an excellent illustration of a contest that falls into the stable, linear grouping. Experts serve a useful purpose in this arena.
Expert utility in the unstable, nonlinear environment is dubious at best. A minor disruption can produce catastrophic cascades. Investing is certainly in this complex, unstable, nonlinear world. It is a rare bird who can navigate its unpredictable course.
As you know, I am a huge Michael Mauboussin fan. I exploit every opportunity to recommend his work in the MFO forum. Here is a Link to a dated Mauboussin video that addresses these issues:
Mauboussin owes a heavy debt to the lifelong work of Daniel Kahneman. Much of what he offers directly traces to the wellspring of Kahneman’s research. Please take the time to explore Mauboussin’s contributions and viewpoints as applied to the investment marketplace. Enjoy.
I'm a little surprised to see all the hate-filled venom about this story. I'm not sure if Maria did something to someone's family or not, but I watch her once in a while and found her to be fairly competent at what she does. I have no opinion about her leaving or going to another network. I guess you can choose to watch or turn the channel. Pretty simple. I definitely prefer to see discussion about investing rather than personalities or TV networks on this page, that's for sure. Sheesh.
over 2-plus decades of experience in the financial world. In addition, she is married to a University of Pennsylvania professor who co-founded the WisdomTree investment dynasty. Unless she completes her assignments as a rote automaton, her extensive time on the job should qualify her as an expert. blah-blah blah and more blah blah blah.
hate-filled venom
defending your liberal agendas
Some of you folks evidently are seriously in need of counseling.
You took exception to three sets of comments on this thread. They were selected from three separate sources; one was from my contribution. I will not comment or defend the excerpts from the other sources, but will solely focus on my posting. That’s fair to everyone concerned.
I am always energized to submit factual, error-free posts. I surely do not always succeed, but it is a worthwhile goal. Given that goal what do you find wrong or offensive about: “over 2-plus decades of experience in the financial world. In addition, she is married to a University of Pennsylvania professor who co-founded the WisdomTree investment dynasty. Unless she completes her assignments as a rote automaton, her extensive time on the job should qualify her as an expert. blah-blah blah and more blah-blah-blah.”?
I was merely attempting to accurately report Maria Bartiromo’s relevant background. If there are false or inaccurate statements within that grouping, please inform me of the mistakes. I will immediately correct them and thank you for identifying them.
Allow me to point out that your representation of my post is itself inaccurate. The Blah-Blah-Blah comments have been inserted and are not my doing. They add nothing to the discussion except a propensity towards laziness.
I neither like nor dislike Maria Bartiromo. As previously stated, I didn’t know she existed several days ago. I contributed to the current thread to bring the discussion into the neutral mutual fund domain. And your purpose is?
Reply to @Old_Joe: I take exception to your comment. Grow up, Old Joe. You want to start throwing around insults, go somewhere else. I'm sure there is some obscure Yahoo chat room that thrives on that sort of thing.
Reply to @willmatt72: You take exception? You arbitrarily define other folks comments as "hate-filled venom", and expect no response? Perhaps you might be lowering the civility level here, and consider another venue for your remarks.
Reply to @Old_Joe: Not uneasy at all. Perhaps you should think before you tell others to seek counseling. It's an entirely inappropriate and over-the-top comment from an otherwise distinguished board. Surely you can disagree without being disagreeable.
Reply to @Maurice: Sorry Maurice- hate is in the mouth of the speaker. Your posture that you have been "viciously attacked here" is ludicrous. If you can find even one instance over the years where I (or anyone else, for that matter) initiated a verbal attack on you, lets see it. As I've pointed out in the past, you seem to feel that you fave the right to say anything that you want, with complete immunity from response. Typical.
Reply to @Old_Joe: BTW, calling someone a "lemur" and a TV network "relignazi" aren't exactly terms of endearment. They are ridiculous and hateful. I expect better from people on this board.
Reply to @willmatt72:Now that you point out those specific remarks, I believe that you are correct in your disapproval. To be honest, since I watch virtually no TV at all I sort of skimmed over those comments without much attention or interest. You are right to expect better here: I do also, which is why I feel that perhaps "hate-filled venom" is a bit strong for the environment. I do think it's fair to observe that Bartiromo certainly doesn't seem to bring out the best in us- I did happen to see a clip of one of her recent performances here on MFO- it was posted by someone- and I'm not sure that "lemur" is actually too far off the mark.
Reply to @Old_Joe: With that said, I'm going to stay away from "off topic" discussions as they are not nearly as interesting as the investing topics on here.
Comments
Regards,
Ted
I don't want CNBC (or, really, pretty much any TV) so I can't speak to her politics but I do have a sense of her grasp on economics.
David
Regards,
Ted
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2013/024/6/c/foxie_by_neon_hyena-d5slnmy.jpg&imgrefurl=http://neon-hyena.deviantart.com/art/Foxie-350370538&h=1485&w=1024&sz=397&tbnid=g0W4M5eA4P1NCM:&tbnh=93&tbnw=64&zoom=1&usg=__wyUvICL89cvikWaAC2Kmf0-TLRw=&docid=drrfnh5TkKQm0M&sa=X&ei=bnCLUp_YKMamygGnrYGYBg&ved=0CD8Q9QEwBg
rono
Three days ago, I had a name recognition challenge with Maria Bartiromo. I do not watch much television; I watch no business TV except under panic event circumstances. Daily financial shows are noise. So, under normal conditions, I would not even access Scott’s posting on Bartiromo’s career change.
However, when David Snowball or BobC writes, I read. I trust and respect their financial wisdom.
I surely do not know Bartiromo’s politics. Nor do I really care. The issue is how good is she at assessing the investment marketplace? Without a doubt, most MFO regulars can answer that question much more authoritatively than I can. I began and quickly ended my education on the matter today by consulting the Internet on her background. It is fairly impressive.
Maria Bartiromo has over 2-plus decades of experience in the financial world. In addition, she is married to a University of Pennsylvania professor who co-founded the WisdomTree investment dynasty. Unless she completes her assignments as a rote automaton, her extensive time on the job should qualify her as an expert.
In making that rapid judgment, especially without ever being exposed to her analytical methods or her decision making process, I am guided by Malcolm Gladwell’s controversial 10,000-hour rule that be documented in his popular “Outliers” book. For example, chess players need 10,000 hours of dedicated practice to advance from a knowledgeable status to a grandmaster ranking. But time is not enough by itself. Even Gladwell recognized that “achievement is talent plus preparation”.
In the investment universe, talent is always the problematic quality to identify and measure. Many claim it, but few truly possess it.
One of my favorite financial researchers, Michael Mauboussin has addressed this issue in his writings and in his lectures. Although he often recommends an Indexing approach for the average investor, he does endorse a more aggressive approach for those investors willing to put in the necessary study time.
Mauboussin believes in a regression-to-the-mean market and the same for individual advisors. There will be good years mixed with bad years. However, he believes that the baseline “mean” rate of return level is higher for talented investment wizards. The problem is to identify these talented souls early in their careers.
Mauboussin has a theory as to why the wizard population is so thin in the financial industry. It is the complexity of that world that makes reliable decision making so challenging a task. In general, he concludes that expert advice has its limitations. It is dichotomous in nature. His universe is divided into two major parts. His two classes are characterized by events that: (1) have stable and linear outcomes, or (2) have unstable and nonlinear outcomes.
In his application, stable means that given an input, the output is predictable and the magnitude of that output is proportional to the input strength. Chess playing serves as an excellent illustration of a contest that falls into the stable, linear grouping. Experts serve a useful purpose in this arena.
Expert utility in the unstable, nonlinear environment is dubious at best. A minor disruption can produce catastrophic cascades. Investing is certainly in this complex, unstable, nonlinear world. It is a rare bird who can navigate its unpredictable course.
As you know, I am a huge Michael Mauboussin fan. I exploit every opportunity to recommend his work in the MFO forum. Here is a Link to a dated Mauboussin video that addresses these issues:
Mauboussin owes a heavy debt to the lifelong work of Daniel Kahneman. Much of what he offers directly traces to the wellspring of Kahneman’s research. Please take the time to explore Mauboussin’s contributions and viewpoints as applied to the investment marketplace. Enjoy.
Best Regards.
Hi Old Joe,
You took exception to three sets of comments on this thread. They were selected from three separate sources; one was from my contribution. I will not comment or defend the excerpts from the other sources, but will solely focus on my posting. That’s fair to everyone concerned.
I am always energized to submit factual, error-free posts. I surely do not always succeed, but it is a worthwhile goal. Given that goal what do you find wrong or offensive about: “over 2-plus decades of experience in the financial world. In addition, she is married to a University of Pennsylvania professor who co-founded the WisdomTree investment dynasty. Unless she completes her assignments as a rote automaton, her extensive time on the job should qualify her as an expert. blah-blah blah and more blah-blah-blah.”?
I was merely attempting to accurately report Maria Bartiromo’s relevant background. If there are false or inaccurate statements within that grouping, please inform me of the mistakes. I will immediately correct them and thank you for identifying them.
Allow me to point out that your representation of my post is itself inaccurate. The Blah-Blah-Blah comments have been inserted and are not my doing. They add nothing to the discussion except a propensity towards laziness.
I neither like nor dislike Maria Bartiromo. As previously stated, I didn’t know she existed several days ago. I contributed to the current thread to bring the discussion into the neutral mutual fund domain. And your purpose is?
Best Wishes.
Twenty years of "experience in the financial world"? Terrific... Bernie Madoff could make the same claim.
"married to a University of Pennsylvania professor"? Really relevant.
An expert what, exactly?