<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1-alpha" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 1440 Wall Street on Jim Cramer&#8230;</title>
	<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/1440-wall-street-on-jim-cramer/</link>
	<description>Unvarnished news &#038; opinion on cable news</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:16:18 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Ira</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/1440-wall-street-on-jim-cramer/#comment-64852</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2008 12:37:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/1440-wall-street-on-jim-cramer/#comment-64852</guid>
					<description>Aaron: For the second time from me (and at least the second time from Haile,) I'll reiterate the basics of Cable 101:

No matter what the programs or the anchors, the Fox Business Network numbers can not and will not improve until they get into more homes.  Period, end of story.

BTW, later today I'll be posting a blog piece about FBN both on my site and Chronwatch.  Check it out!
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Aaron: For the second time from me (and at least the second time from Haile,) I&#8217;ll reiterate the basics of Cable 101:</p>
	<p>No matter what the programs or the anchors, the Fox Business Network numbers can not and will not improve until they get into more homes.  Period, end of story.</p>
	<p>BTW, later today I&#8217;ll be posting a blog piece about FBN both on my site and Chronwatch.  Check it out!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Aaron</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/1440-wall-street-on-jim-cramer/#comment-64820</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2008 22:44:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/1440-wall-street-on-jim-cramer/#comment-64820</guid>
					<description>Well Haile if you regularly read the comments you would have seen my position that FBN will get better when the WSJ can kick in and when they get rid of stupid anchors like Pete Barnes and David Ramsey.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Well Haile if you regularly read the comments you would have seen my position that FBN will get better when the WSJ can kick in and when they get rid of stupid anchors like Pete Barnes and David Ramsey.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Haile Welde</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/1440-wall-street-on-jim-cramer/#comment-64780</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:30:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/1440-wall-street-on-jim-cramer/#comment-64780</guid>
					<description>Aaron. You're not ignorant of the facts, because I posted them a couple of days ago, which you read (in fact, you posted right after me). Yet you persist on trashing FBN, despite knowing what you're saying to be false? Here was my earlier post:

This “Oh, I’m so shocked a new network (FBN) has 6,000 viewers!” is extremely disingenuous.

1) That’s around the ratings FOX News was getting at the end of it’s first year! It’s only been a few weeks for FBN.

2) On top of that, FBN has a far smaller niche audience to draw from than did FOX News.

3) As Ira stated, they have a tiny percentage of CNBC’s distribution at this stage. That will expand exponentially over the years, also helped by News Corp.’s acquisition of The Wall Street Journal, Barron’s, MarketWatch, etc.

4) FOX News _ALREADY_ has the 5 top rated business shows on cable! How convenient for those ultra-liberal reporters to poo-poo FBN’s ratings, and conveniently ‘forget’ to mention this in their reporting.

5) FOX executives have shown with FNC that their strategy is in evolving things to perfection, not pre-perfecting shows before putting them on the air.

So I hope someone is saving all these articles and posts trashing FBN, because in a couple of years, they’ll ALL change their tune to blaming it’s high ratings on “low-IQ business viewers”, or “conservative moneymen” watching religiously, or FBN “taking the easy route” and stoop to people’s base natures and using sex to sell business news by flaunting all the ‘come-hitherly women’. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Aaron. You&#8217;re not ignorant of the facts, because I posted them a couple of days ago, which you read (in fact, you posted right after me). Yet you persist on trashing FBN, despite knowing what you&#8217;re saying to be false? Here was my earlier post:</p>
	<p>This “Oh, I’m so shocked a new network (FBN) has 6,000 viewers!” is extremely disingenuous.</p>
	<p>1) That’s around the ratings FOX News was getting at the end of it’s first year! It’s only been a few weeks for FBN.</p>
	<p>2) On top of that, FBN has a far smaller niche audience to draw from than did FOX News.</p>
	<p>3) As Ira stated, they have a tiny percentage of CNBC’s distribution at this stage. That will expand exponentially over the years, also helped by News Corp.’s acquisition of The Wall Street Journal, Barron’s, MarketWatch, etc.</p>
	<p>4) FOX News _ALREADY_ has the 5 top rated business shows on cable! How convenient for those ultra-liberal reporters to poo-poo FBN’s ratings, and conveniently ‘forget’ to mention this in their reporting.</p>
	<p>5) FOX executives have shown with FNC that their strategy is in evolving things to perfection, not pre-perfecting shows before putting them on the air.</p>
	<p>So I hope someone is saving all these articles and posts trashing FBN, because in a couple of years, they’ll ALL change their tune to blaming it’s high ratings on “low-IQ business viewers”, or “conservative moneymen” watching religiously, or FBN “taking the easy route” and stoop to people’s base natures and using sex to sell business news by flaunting all the ‘come-hitherly women’.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Aaron</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/1440-wall-street-on-jim-cramer/#comment-64762</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2008 16:06:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/1440-wall-street-on-jim-cramer/#comment-64762</guid>
					<description>How about those FBN numbers huh Haile?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>How about those FBN numbers huh Haile?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Haile Welde</title>
		<link>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/1440-wall-street-on-jim-cramer/#comment-64735</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://insidecable.blogsome.com/2008/01/18/1440-wall-street-on-jim-cramer/#comment-64735</guid>
					<description>Cram it, Cramer. You don't have such a hot record of picking stocks. Blame the Federal Reserve for your low ratings too if it makes you feel better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Cram it, Cramer. You don&#8217;t have such a hot record of picking stocks. Blame the Federal Reserve for your low ratings too if it makes you feel better.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
