Stacking the deck in the CNBC Portfolio Challenge?
ICN got an email from an unhappy CNBC Portfolio Challenge participant. The emailer was non-plussed with seeing that one person was ranked in the top 25 several times because they had set up multiple portfolios, in effect trying to rig the contest by throwing multiple entries at the challenge in the hopes that one or more would win.
I’m in the CNBC Portfolio Challenge. I’ve managed to reach the top 4%. Three days ago, they posted their Leaderboard of the top 25 contestants, and someone named Nancy Beaumont of California was listed as #11 through 21. I hoped it was just a computer glitch, because they were having a lot of those. I contacted them anyway.
Last night they posted a new Leaderboard, and Nancy Beaumont of California was #2, 5, 9, 10, 11, 16, 19, 22 and 23. I wrote them again. This shouldn’t be about how many portfolios a person can set up with longshots that take a big jump during the week.
I think I heard Rattigan talk about it, he also said he knew about someone doing something and he was watching the person etc…. maybe that was the person he was talking about. I think he said it was okay to have mulitple accounts but only 1 of them can make it to the top 10 later on for the final showdown.
Comment by Lurker — March 10, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
Suck that you didn’t think of it first huh? unhappy emailer.
Comment by The Intelligent — March 10, 2007 @ 3:43 pm
You would think they would have rules against that to keep it as fair as possible.
Comment by Chad — March 10, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
Fair is a midway with rides and food….life isn’t fair, the internet isn’t fair and people aren’t fair. If someone can find a way to screw the next guy they will, you have to screw them before they screw you.
Comment by The Intelligent — March 10, 2007 @ 6:30 pm
OH god…this e-mailer sounds like a big whiner. It’s not like you have to pay to enter the contest…and besides, if you DO set up multiple portfolios, what’s the big deal? This guy can do the same…or can he not?
Comment by Anonymous — March 10, 2007 @ 8:13 pm
The Intelligent wrote the unfortunate truth. That being said, I still believe Ms. Beaumont’s actions to be in violation of this passage from the contest’s official rules:
“Each Participant begins the Contest with One Million (1,000,000) CNBC Bucks to create and manage a fictional portfolio of NYSE, NASDAQ and/or AMEX-traded stocks.”
Ms. Beaumont has created and managed not “a fictional portfolio”, but several. All but her first account registered should be disqualified.
Comment by -Dc- — March 10, 2007 @ 9:05 pm
Humm, seems kind of interesting that CNBC didn’t build in some sort of block for the names or something, though I guess maybe this was the intention in the first place, allowing for people to create multiple accounts with different ideas (buy XYZ in account one, but RGHT in the other one)
Comment by Chris — March 11, 2007 @ 4:44 pm
CNBC is certainly aware of Nancy Beaumont and is trying to stop her strategy. Watch the YouTube video at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9VR77_gzOs
Comment by Ira Krakow — March 12, 2007 @ 12:35 pm
lol Some of you commentors are crazy. You think the author didn’t think of it first? Sure he did, we all did. But it’s cheating. Plain and simple. Next, are you going to support the person who runs a company and lies to create news that will temporarily double his stock. It’s only fraud, but it will help that person win the Porfolio Challenge! But that’s ok, fair doesn’t seem to matter.
The e-mailer is not a whiner, but there are a few words out there for the rest of you.
That being said, here are my opinions: Nancy Beaumont actions are bad, but I doubt she’s the type of person who cares. I’m sure she’ll feel good about her “victory”. And the fact that CNBC allows this pretty much makes their contest a joke.
I’m still in the top 1%, so I’m doing fine with my *1* portfolio. But apparantly, this isn’t a stock picking contest (although that’s what it’s named). I’m doing a far better job picking stocks than Nancy. It’s a take advantage of bad rules challenge, in which she is totally dominating me.
Comment by Scott — March 12, 2007 @ 1:20 pm
It was mentioned on CNBC that Nancy Beaumont has 803 portfolios. Is this true?
Comment by Dawn — March 12, 2007 @ 3:48 pm
I heard it on TV - Rattigan said she has 803 accounts and he seemed to be ok with that which makes the contest a joke that is a lotterie. Too bad!
Comment by Emma — March 12, 2007 @ 4:45 pm
I had a problem on Friday, I had all my portfolio in one stock, I sold it on 3/9 to buy another stock. CNBC sold the million dollars worth of my stock but put NONE OF IT back into my account!! I open this it up this morning and when I look at transactions for 3/9, one of them has a transaction# of 0 and and error message…the stock I sold was up and still going up, CNBC help staff answered that timing affecting a loss is not their fault - it wasn’t timing causing a loss - the stock was going up up up, there was no loss, they simply sold my stock and instead of buying a million dollars worth of the new stock I wanted to buy, it only posted $4000 worth…so I sold $1,000,000 worth of stock and was given $4000 worth of another stock in return!!!! I dropped from the top 10% to 100% and cnbc is saying too bad they don’t fix their program errors! What a rip, this thing is rigged.
Comment by PRB — March 12, 2007 @ 5:04 pm
It is official. I got this email today:
“Million Dollar Portfolio Challenge Top FAQs:
Why is there the same name on the leader board multiple times? (Do we allow multiple entries?)
The Contest rules do not prohibit individuals from registering multiple times, each with a unique email address, and to participate in the game with one Contest portfolio per unique e-mail address. “
Comment by Joy — March 13, 2007 @ 9:05 pm
This whole Nancy Beaumont scandal boils down to a lack of honor and character. Some people have it, others don’t. I’d rather keep my honor and character intact, than surrender it to win a contest. $10,000 or even $1,000,000 can’t buy back your respectability.
Comment by Matt — March 14, 2007 @ 4:56 pm
Nancy Beaumont embarrased CNBC. That’s cheating. Plain and simple. CNBC allowed it because their rules are flawed. CNBC needs to modify their rules and they need to disqualify Nancy Beaumont. Just imagine what this contest would be like if we all stooped to Nancy Beaumont’s level. If CNBC pays her one dime I will never use the CNBC website or watch their show ever again!
Comment by Jane — March 16, 2007 @ 7:52 am
CNBC should have seen this coming and created fairness from the onset. One email per person with a 1 million dollar purse period! Nancy Beaumont should be disqualified. If CNBC doesn’t have the stomach do so, then maybe we should all stop endorsing this silly flawed contest. Better yet, ban CNBC viewing.
p.s. I want my million dollars back.
Comment by marra — March 17, 2007 @ 3:55 am
Don’t think its a real game now that Nancy Beaumont has won by finding a loophole in the system…I wrote her a letter and if you want to do the same her address is 112 N Civic Dr
Walnut Creek, CA 94596…I will soon be listing her phone # too…
Comment by Beeker — March 21, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
Attention Sore Losers: Now that we know that its OK to have several million dollar porfolios in the CNBC contest, lets have several if we so desire and leave Nancy the #### alone.
Comment by jj robinson — March 23, 2007 @ 11:40 am