> Is there any reason to believe that Jim Cramer (or the inverse of Jim Cramer) would do particularly well in the stock market?
Jim Cramer, before he was on TV, did well beating the market as a fund manager. So there is a good reason to believe he could. Whether he could televise his strategy to retail investors and funds looking to profit from retail investors and make his viewers money is a different question.
He beat the market according to him, with no evidence to back it up. Multiple analysis of his stock picks that I have seen have all found his picks to underperform the market.
Inversing a pump and dump operation, provided it is well timed, can easily beat the market. Assuming that Cramer is a paid actor, this could probably be the case here
When you say, paid actor, are you proposing that Cramer is being paid by some fund to pump a stock that they already have a position in? I don't know, but I believe it'd be highly unlikely given that he had a pretty good career as a fund manager himself, probably doesn't need more money.
The article mentions (or links somewhere to this info) that there's no longer a Cramer pump, although there definitely was a couple years back
Having fun? What are rich founders doing that are still at the helm of their own company, what are rich fund managers doing that have already proven their merit?
Jim Cramer, before he was on TV, did well beating the market as a fund manager. So there is a good reason to believe he could. Whether he could televise his strategy to retail investors and funds looking to profit from retail investors and make his viewers money is a different question.