Last month, Jim Cramer ripped Edward Jones a new one; While I agreed with what he said, I didn’t bother to follow up because I assumed Ed Jones had come clean.
From today’s WSJ:
"Edward D. Jones & Co. received $82.4 million in secret payments from seven mutual-fund firms in the first 11 months of 2004, through a lopsided fee structure that in some cases gave the brokerage firm more compensation for selling poorly performing funds than for selling stellar performers.
The disclosures were posted yesterday, on Jones’s Web site as required by its $75 million agreement to settle regulatory charges that it failed to adequately disclose the payments to investors. They are by far the most detailed figures ever made public on the industry practice of mutual-fund companies paying brokerage firms to induce them to sell their products, an arrangement known as revenue sharing. Unlike front-end sales commissions, which are widely disclosed to consumers, revenue sharing has been largely secret."
That’s pretty egregious behavior. I used to think well of Edward Jones as a firm. Non mas. . .
Here’s Cramer’s comments:
I’m not sure I agree with Paul’s statement that "until January 2005,
Apple had no iPod that served the mass market" givent he enormous sales
numbers the Pod has rung up. But the broader point of targeting the new devices
at truly mass entry level (i.e., cheap) is valid.
click for larger graphic
Check out the full size graph here:
Nice work, Paul
Apple’s Tipping Point: Macs for the Masses
Nixlog, January 12, 2005
Alan Farley is a colleague at Real Money. He posted a terrific list of mental errors that traders sometimes make.
Its worth perusing:
Fighting Mr. Market. There’s nothing worse than trading a trend in a choppy market or sideways choppiness in a trending market. Make sure you know which one you’re jumping into before hitting the enter button.
Loving the bad. It’s hard to admit it when we’re wrong. Rather than cutting losses, we try desperately to transform our worst trades from lemons into lemonade. Sooner or later we find out how easy it is to turn a small loss into an absolute disaster.
Hating the good. Sometimes we know it’s a great trade, but only at the subconscious level. For some reason, we can’t handle our good fortune and jump out with a small profit. Minutes later it takes off like a rocket ship without us on board.
Just last year, one PC analyst at a bulge bracket firm suggested Apple sell itself to Sony. Another suggested that Apple start producing Windows machines, or use Intel chips.
This is part of a long term misunderstanding of Apple by the Street. Most of them don’t “get” Apple; They certainly haven’t been able to figure out Steve Jobs. And since all but one (that I know of) work primarily on a Windows machine, they never really understood what the fuss about the Mac was all about.
Until the iPod came along. Apple created a category killer by engineering a marvelous piece of user friendly technology made from essentially off the shelf components. The secret sauce was their terrific user interface. That forced some Analysts to start getting clued into what the cult of Macintosh was all about.
But what about this new Mac mini?
Understand what Apple is doing with the mini:
1) It’s a Windows replacement machine;
2) Geeks like it!
3) It’s potentially the centerpiece for a Home theatre
4) It’s a cheap 2nd Apple for faithful MacHeads
Let’s focus on #2 today (#1 will be the subject of a Street.com column later this week).
In the old days, geeks recommended Windows because they were a “standard,” they let admins under the hood pretty regularly — and they were cheap.
Indeed, the original name for Windows 95 was “the IT department full employment act.”
It was buggy, difficult to maintain, vulnerable and crash prone – but
it was the industry standard. Any IT guy you spoke to in the mid 90s
would tell you how much cheaper the Wintel machines were to buy, how
much more software there was for it.
he didn’t tell you was how much higher the cost of ownership was –
namely his salary. Its eventually became his entire support staff’s
The result of that “bias” has been costly to maintain PC networks in most offices, and unsupported PCs in most homes. Every home PC user who has ever had a major Windows headache – security issues, virus infections, corrupted ini files, missing dll library – is desperate for an easy to use alternative.
Here we are a decade later, and a new generation of younger IT employees have inherited these headaches from their predecessors. And, to judge by the geek blogs and websites, they are none to happy about it. From Malware to spam hijacking to Explorer vulnerabilities, keeping a windows network running – or even a single internet connected machine – is a time consuming, frustrating job.
For what most people use their PCs for – email, internet surfing, music playing / CD burning, word processing – this is all the machine they need.
And Geeks like it! They really like it! — And they are key influencers of purchases by many people . . .
Ben Edelman is a Ph.D. candidate at the Department of Economics at Harvard University and a student at the Harvard Law. He is more than annoyed at spyware.
Ben has been fairly active tracking the activities of spyware companies. While most of us merely whine about the pathetic weasels who put out this technogarbage (along with making an occasional anonymous death threat), he has actually done something productive about it.
"lists major US companies in the spyware business as I define it (tracking and/or collecting sensitive information, either without notice and consent or without meaningful notice and informed consent), along with the investors who have provided these companies with, by my count, at least $139 million of venture funding."
In other words, a list of the VCs who gave money to Malware firms. I wonder how many partners know that they are investors who fund and support Spyware? Let’s hope they apply pressure to their general partners to stop them, and cut the funding off at the source.
I like the idea a lot. Nothing like a little sunshine on bad corporate/VC activity to influence some behavioral modifications.
Investors Supporting Spyware
Category: Venture Capital