>> what's going to happen to them? >> well, they're going to be with our shelter. >> beth, thank you so much. tomorrow it is finally here -- "today's voice forndid as"ur o blind auditions begin. >> we'll see you again. >> bye, everybody. i'm jim cramer, and welcome to my world. >> you need to get in the game! firms are going to go out of business and he's nuts! they're nuts! they know nothing! i always like to say there's a bull market somewhere and i promise to try to find it just -- "mad money," you can't afford to miss it. hey, i'm cramer. welcome to "mad money." welcome to cramerica. other people want to make friends, i'm trying to save you money. my job is not just to entertain you but to educate and coach you. call me at 1-800-743-cnbc. perspective. boy, perspective can be a real pain in the butt, can't it? i heard so much hand wringing about the selloff this morning where the market was annihilated. the dow plunging 131 points, s&p
giving up 1.14%, nasdaq sinking 1.08%. i found myself determined to see how much of a disaster this decline really was, perspective. where does this catastrophe fit within the context of recent history? first of all, in the last five years, we have had 67 instances where the dow fell more than 250 points even at the ugliest moment today's selloff, we came nowhere near that level of pain. >> the house of pain. >> we had 101 instances in the last five years, 101, where the market fell more than 2% in a given session. we came nowhere near that today, either. yet among the comments @jimcramer on twitter, almost 500,000 followers, or people -- the hedge fund managers i talk to and know. how about the civilians i pulled up since the friday employment number.
my view is that the selloff will be less than catastrophic. it was met with total derision by all those cohorts. all i heard was i was being way too confident. i read about how cavalier i am on twitter, how lacking in rigor i've become since i left the hedge fund a dozen years ago. i love that one. what do these critics want to hear from me? they want me to come out here and say because may's historically been so rough, i should tell people to get out now. sell at april and go away even though that doesn't rhyme like sell may and go away. the criticism i've received and suggestions of how i can improve my thinking by getting more pessimistic is a reminder that the course of least resistance remains going negative, being entirely negative. it's almost a personal mission on the part of so many people to get me to say "sell, sell, sell," about the whole market. i think it would be a mistake.
i was more than willing to tell you to get out when i thought you were going to lose money september and october in 2008. now i think i've got a different role to play. i can offer a contrary view to the negative nancy nonsense that people want me to spout. let me throw it back at the bears. see, i want to focus on the word complacency for the moment. that is the current harpoon being launched. as in i'm being way too complacent for my viewers' good. here's the thing, though, after what i just i told you about how many horrid selloffs we've had in the last five years, after showing empirically that things had been worse on negative news, i think the complacency attitude would be to stay negative. that's right, it's possible for pessimists to be complacent, too. and as it so happens, what was complacent and therefore ultimately costly in the last six months was to avoid stocks because for years it had been a
terrific move to shun the asset class as being too risky. you thought you were being prudent if you didn't buy stocks in the third quarter of 2011 because it had been so darn long since we had a buoyant market. you thought. i challenge that view. i think you were complacent if you didn't buy. lulled into thinking that stocks were risk-on assets, a bogus term i ridicule regularly for its fanciful irrelevance. standing on the sidelines serves to be anything but prudent. i could argue you were downright reckless to pull out of stocks six months ago. you might not get another chance to make money in stocks like this for many, many years to come. complacency in this market is staying negative just because negativity worked for the last five years. in my view, what's most thoughtful, what's most rigorous is to give this market the benefit of the doubt of what may turn out to be an errant employment number like we got on
friday. let's delve into a reckless point of view. first, the smartest people on earth, yeah, them. told us this market was going up the whole time because of liquidity, a fancy word for the creation of more money by the federal reserve. if you believe that the fed had been the real source of the up side in this market and not companies doing well after cleaning up their balance sheet, coupled individuals doing better after fixing up their own balance sheets. then the fed's comments revealing maybe they won't do qe-3, printing more money. if you believe this logic, and i don't, then when we got weaker than expected jobs reports from the labor department, that was another signal to sell. without the fed's help, the stocks would go lower. the qe-3 is totally part in parcel with this bearish complacency i see everywhere. the intellectual laziness, the lack of rigor i see everywhere. as long as you believe the fed
determines stock prices, you don't have to do any homework to find stocks that can rally in this environment. you can avert your eyes from individual stocks, avert your eyes from apple, starbucks, las vegas sands, from all those great stocks and say you know what? i don't want those points. trying to get those points -- reckless. as for me, i have the polar opposite view. ben bernanke thinks he doesn't have to print any more money, maybe things are really getting better. bernanke was so smart to use the printing press when we needed it, perhaps he's being smart again. of course if the employment numbers stay as weak as they were on friday, maybe he keeps the printing presses going. either way is a win. not a loss. either things are better or if not, we'll get more monetary stimulus from the fed. i don't know -- why is that so hard? why? more important, what did we see last week? how about a decline in oil? get a decline of oil in earnings
period with gas prices, paramount negative, fuel as a raw cost is escalating, then you've got reason for corporations to give you a more positive outlook. let me leave you with one last critical point. i do more homework than most people. i am proud of that. i don't hide behind selling individual stocks because stocks are risky and risk is off. what does that make you do? i'll tell you what it did today as it has for many days in the last six months. that ludicrous mindset caused you to sell in the bottom of the trading session. as if that's brilliant thinking? that's prudence? here's the bottom line, who is really being complacent? the guy who recognizes that 2012 is a different year? one where stock picking matters. or the so-called geniuses say you've got to be negative because it was good to be negative for several years. to me that's the definition of complacency. missing a 20% decline, that's rigorous, stepping aside for a 20% decline, that's rigorous, missing an increase, that's complacently reckless. the perma bulls are on the one
side of the coin. the permanent bears, they're on the other. make no mistake about it. they are, indeed, two sides of the same bad coin. mel in florida. mel? >> caller: boo-yah, jimmy. >> hey, sunshine, what's shaking? >> caller: two questions, what do you think of avon products? and how about the new ceo? >> all right. avon products i had high hopes that they would boot that underperforming ceo, show her the door, and bring in somebody new. but she's staying as executive chair. that's andrea jung. and as long as she's there, i worry. i worry that value can be created. she's such a great wealth destroyer, she will counteract any new ceo. i want to go to steven in indiana. steven? >> caller: yeah, this is steven. >> yeah, i had a feeling. what's up? >> caller: yeah, i just heard about the aol -- the 800 -- 800
firms they did. i was wanting to know if i should stay or get out. >> microsoft is a cheap stock. last week we did the chart work on microsoft. we said pull the trigger between $29 and $30. i'm sticking by that judgment. john in illinois. john? >> caller: hi, cramer. no boo-yah today it's all go cubs for me. >> hey. >> caller: my question has to do with at&t stock. i heard they sold their yellow page interest for $750 million, yet the stock was down today. what's your outlook on at&t? >> look, i'm still reeling from this all cubs thing. don't hit me with the stock. i've got to take -- takes my breath away. i think at&t is good, i think verizon now is better. actionalertsplus.com, my charitable trust, we sold that at&t out of the portfolio, looking to buy verizon when it gets to 5.5% yield. all right.
it's a rigorous versus reckless market. and we've been in worse ones. i just gave you the performance figures and the big declines of the last five years. we are not in that market anymore. please recognize that. that's how you'll make the best money. "mad money" will be right back. coming up -- go for growth? all this week cramer's building his ultimate growth portfolio. after years of action dominated by the quick trade and wild swings, could the market finally be ready to recognize and reward long-term growth? and later -- cable cross-fire. there's a showdown on the street that's begging the question, is content still king? cramer's viewing both sides of this drama. to find out if it's time to tune in or change the channel. all coming up on "mad money." this italian b.m.t. is amazing.
ciao! ciao! dude!? [ male announcer ] try the delizioso italian b.m.t., one of our fresh takes on italian. subway. eat fresh. we're testing new degree, the only antiperspirant activated directly by movement. activating protection, bear! it releases bursts of protection as you move feeling fresh and dry bear! the more you move, the more it works [ roars ] oh, no! [ screaming ] new long lasting degree with motionsense. help me! keep running!
so far, at least up until last week, 2012, it had been an absolute joy. we hadn't had a pullback until now. or much at all since the end of the third quarter. so tonight i want to use this pullback as a teaching tool, not a panic tool. see, i believe we're returning to a market that is more generous and more supportive of growth stocks. and that's a big, big change. for much of the '80s and '90s, the stocks of companies that grew consistently went up consistently. we saw tremendous appreciation in the stocks of all the companies that delivered consistent growth. but ever since the dot com bust began in 2000, maybe a long-term bear market began. the markets made everything into a trade, not an investment. first we traded stocks as a part of a larger sector, then we traded sectors on bets of growth.
we've taken trading to the most absurd logical conclusion, with the peak of this lunacy being the notion of risk off/risk on. last year we got an etf for putting risk on or turning it off. the pair marked the absolute top of the ultra trading era. ironic, isn't it? in fact, i think the risk on/risk off idiocy marked when common sense investing was hijacked and replaced with anti-investing. literally the notion that investing itself was somehow old-fashioned. all that mattered was intraday to-ing and fro-ing. it got so bad i often wondered if marx, karl, was right when he talked about how capitalism was going to collapse under the weight of its own contradictions.
but the era of anti-investing is now over. beginning in the fourth quarter of last year, we've seen a sea change away from this turbocharged trading mentality, and i've tried hard to figure out why that is. could it be the traders who hijacked the market did so poorly, their clients took the money away? could it be because of the futility of taking risk on or off on a daily basis finally sunk in with people? or maybe fears of a permanently slower economic growth period have led to recognition that some companies simply perform better than others during this kind of market. so their stocks are worth sticking with regardless which way the wind blows, sticking with, of course, and paying up for because you've got something special. the why doesn't matter, though. what matters is the fact that at long last we've reverted to classical investing once again, although no one else is talking about it. we went from owning stocks like owning homes to renting stocks
month to month to staying for hotel length increments to ultimately paying by the hour for a stock that was like paying by the hour to use a hotel room. now it seems as though owning stocks is back in style on the wall street fashion show and that's a positive development for you and me. it means we can use our brains to make investing decisions based on objective criteria as well as subjective intuition. we're holding on to stocks with poisonous, now not holding for long periods is reckless. not holding. so what is this market looking for now? i think it's returned to what has always done well over time, except for in the last decade, seeking out the stocks of great american growth companies. that's why all week i'm going to highlight the growth stocks i think fit the profile of what the market really wants these days. why this week? because i believe these companies will shine during the earnings season that starts tomorrow and they'll be the
first to bounce back when the selling squall runs its course. these growth stocks are exactly the kind of names you want to buy during a macro related market wide selloff like this one started last week, then accelerated with the employment number we got on friday. you see the pullback, you use the pullback. you use it to get a discount that you wouldn't otherwise be able to get your hands on. trying to identify the great growth stocks, i think it pays to examine the greatest performing stock of our lives. you know what that is, right? i'm talking about apple. funny thing, i was at a restaurant the other day and someone bought a couple shares of apple. and i said when apple was at $200 on the show, i told people they'd be well served to buy ten shares. now it's worth $6,000. not a lot of ways to make that kind of money. even as people chided me at the time for recommending a stock you can only buy a handful of shares. they hated that, oh, what is that three? what is that five? it's okay if it's a winning stock. some people might love the stock a little too much. i recognize that. i think apple gives us a glimpse
into what this market really values. it shrugged off a downgrade today. initially falling seven points before rallying to close up $2.55. to yes, a new high. how do we analyze a stock like apple? first, a little countdown here, schematic. first we need to know if there's potential for multi-year growth that we can put a value on because the growth path is clear enough to give us visibility. when it comes to apple, the answer's a resounding yes. soon itv. these present multiple revenue streams, which is exactly -- these present multiple revenue streams which is exactly what we want to see. in other words, we need to see growth out far enough that we can put a value on it. second, is the market for its products big enough? the reason apple has so much upside because so many of its products still aren't dominant. we're in the early ramps for everything but the ipod, frankly. particularly if you think of the
ipad as a replacement for the personal computer, that's a big market. third, can the company stay competitive? apple again makes this exercise easy because it's so innovative. but it won't be as easy for the others in this series as you'll hear. fourth, is there the possibility for the company to return capital to shareholders over time? we see a lot of companies pay out for no reason. or does the company have such a well-defined growth path that it can just continue to pile money back into the business? get accelerated revenue growth? in apple's case the company had too much cash so they decided to return it, a big chunk of it to shareholders at no reflection on its growth rate which remains strong. fifth, can the the company expand internationally? apple's further along than most, but not in all phases of its ecosystem. sixth, can the balance sheet support the growth? apple's got the best balance sheet of any country or company
or person i've ever seen. is the stock expensive when it comes to the outyears? meaning several years out? that's what a good stock gets measured by. apple should earn more than $50 a share in 2013. makes it absurdly cheap. 12.75 times earnings. hey, look, the average stock sells at $14 earnings. does the company have the management to execute on the plan? we have no doubt that they haven't skipped a beat since steve jobs died last year. i do not care how much a manager is paid. does it need economic growth to meet its objectives? if so, it doesn't count as a growth stock. it's cyclical. finally, can it grow margins? or is it going to be overpowered by raw costs? something a stock can't be constrained by if they're going to be anointed. apple doesn't need worldwide growth, it just doesn't. and margin pressure other some fox com worries, i don't see it happening. when it comes to the ten most important qualities of a growth stock, apple has all of them as viewers to this program well know.
who else fits the bill? that's the subject of this week's series as we build you at home the ultimate growth portfolio for 2012 and beyond. after the break, i'll try to make you more money. coming up -- percolating profits? cramer's ultimate growth portfolio is heating up. don't move, jim's about to serve up a stock that could have big things brewing for years to come. all coming up on "mad money."
during this kind of shellacking, the best thing you can do is calm down. you have to remember that we still had a terrific year. and even bull markets have selloffs. it's what you do during those selloffs that really matters. before the break, i told you how today's action aside, we're witnessing a return to growth stocks in the wall street fashion show. growth is back in style, and as we head into earnings season, i'm going to build you the ultimate growth portfolio for 2012 so we can come back to it and come back to it and come back to it. we started by looking at apple. and now i've got another one for you because this exercise of analyzing great growth stocks is perhaps the most important thing we are going to do in 2012 and i need you to learn it and learn it now. what's the next growth name on
the menu? how about starbucks? remember, we need to use the same rubric that i showed you with apple. i'm going to repeat this analysis over and over again this week so you'll be able to do it on your own which really matters here. in a market where growth is back in favor, you need to be able to evaluate growth stocks so you can pick out your best opportunities that fit your risk profile. that's why i've created this apples to apples rubric which will allow you to get your head around all things growth, regardless of whatever sector they belong to. what makes starbucks part of this growth cohort? let's go through the same criteria we used with apple. first and foremost, we're looking for visible multi-year growth with multiple revenue streams. there's a reason starbucks has a long-term growth rate of nearly 20%. company's expanding like crazy in emerging markets like china. they're moving to new product
categories like single-serve coffee, got that good deal with green mountain, maker of keurig. and the company's domestic business is in good shape with excellent same-store sales growth. second, are the end markets big enough? we know coffee's a big business. the market for at-home coffees were $50 billion. and the ready to drink beverage business that starbucks has been taking share in with the bottle fraps and tazo teas is worth $60 billion in the u.s. third, we always need to ask if the company can stay competitive. with starbucks, that's not an issue. starbucks has practically become synonymous with coffee. a leader at home also taking major market share abroad. fourth, is there a chance that management will return capital to shareholders over time, either through a dividend or well-timed buybacks? yes, definitely. starbucks even with the accelerated growth throws off a ton of cash.
and the company put through a terrific 31% dividend boost last year. it doesn't have a high yield, it's 1.2%. of course it was a lot higher, but the stock ran. last year between dividends and buybacks, starbucks returned $1 billion to shareholders. and they still got plenty of cash left over to invest in the business and fund the company's future growth, which is what we care about. fifth item, can the company expand internationally? not only can starbucks expand, they've already been doing it for years to the point where international growth has become a huge component of the story and we'll overwhelm domestic in a few years. the company plans to triple the store count in china from 500 to 1,500 units by 2015. goldman sachs recently upgraded starbucks to the conviction buy list, they projected the company would have 5,000 stores in emerging markets by 2015. that's almost equal in size to the current international footprint of about 6,200 stores. question number six in the
growth stock rubric. is the balance sheet strong enough to support the growth that we're projecting? absolutely. starbucks has a terrific balance sheet with a strong net cash position, nothing to worry about here. growth question number seven. is the stock expensive when it comes to the out years? further out in time? right now starbucks is trading at 25 times next year's earnings estimates, which isn't that pricey when you consider its 19 perfect long-term growth rate. it's not going to be as cheap as apple. apple's the cheapest big cap stock i follow. we know starbucks used to trade for as much as 40 times earnings back during the turbocharged growth heyday. i think the stock's back in what's known as multiple expansion mode. not only will the earnings go higher, but the multiple we pay for those earnings should also increase and that sends the stock much higher. continuing theme, by the way, multiple expansion for growth stocks. number eight, does management have the chops to execute on the plan? you talk about management, can it get better than howard schultz? he was the guy that turned
starbucks from a small regional coffee chain into a global power house before stepping away from day-to-day operations in 2000. but when the company -- i hate to say this because i like the management team, it lost its way. schultz came back, taking the helm again at the beginning of 2008. since then, he's been able to since then, he's been able to return starbucks to its former glory. when schultz came back in 2008, the company was growing same-store sales at 1%, in the most recent quarter the same-store sales 9%. i have not seen a turnaround like this in the restaurant business since the great mcdonald's comeback of the mid-'90s. nine! does starbucks need global or domestic economic growth to meet its objectives? no. no. starbucks is a secular growth story. keep on expanding through a global economic slowdown. and finally, can the company grow margins overpowered by rising raw costs like so many companies we deal with? its margin should actually rise sharply.
plus this company has raw costs under control. especially with the cost of coffee declining. but your price, i paid $5.01, that's not down, that's up. so starbucks has the ability to lock in lower prices for coffee but raise prices to you. bottom line, starbucks is a classic growth stock and right now this market is giving you a terrific opportunity to buy it at a discount. remember, the first down day may not be the best entry point. you want to take your time and scale into this one on the way down because believe me, once the selloff ends, you'll be able to ride starbucks higher and higher on the way back up. classic growth investing is back. and there's nothing more classic than starbucks. so wake up and smell the coffee while the selloff lasts. let's go to tracy in michigan. tracy? >> caller: boo-yah, jim. how are you? >> real good, tracy, how about you? >> caller: i'm great. i've got to tell you, you're a rock star in our house. >> thank you. i hope i deliver for you. >> caller: oh, you have, you have.
>> thank you. >> caller: question today, got in on the ipo of millennial media. it is the spec stock in my portfolio. i did half a position. i thought i would call you and find out. do i buy my other half? do i hold? do i watch it? there's so much going on in that space. >> this is a very powerful story. and this is about mobile advertising. yes, the stock went way too high. it's come back. i want you to wait until google reports. if google says mobile advertising hasn't developed in any sort of way, m.m. will get hit again and then you can pull the trigger. rhonda in massachusetts. rhonda? >> caller: hi, jim. thanks for taking my call. >> of course. >> caller: i want to find out if coach, coh -- >> sure. >> caller: if they can sustain their growth with the men's line, or have they hit their peak? and will their market share change based on the michael kors store opening?
>> that's a great question. michael kors, i think there's room enough for both, i think lou frankfort would admit that, he's the ceo, terrific ceo. here's why i want to come down on coach. i don't know about the men's line. what i do know is this, lou frankfort has continued to deliver, he's a great manager, and i think we've got to give him the benefit of the doubt. just as there's an awful lot of coffee in brazil, there's an awful lot of growth still in starbucks. this market is just going gaga for growth. you need your fix. buy it on its way down and stay with cramer. ♪ coffee in brazil coming up -- can you handle the heat? cramer gets you fired up for a searing hot lightning round. and later, cable cross-fire, is content still king? cramer's viewing both sides of this drama to find out if it's time to tune in or change the channel, all coming up on "mad money."
what do you do when you can no longer get around like you used to? when you fear losing your independence? who do you call? call hoveround now, to see if you qualify for america's premier power chair. hi, i'm tom kruse, inventor and founder of hoveround. now you can do more, see more, enjoy life more. here's why hoveround makes it easier than any other power chair. hoveround is more maneuverable to get you through the tightest doors and hallways. more reliable. hoveround employees build your chair, deliver your chair, and will service your chair for as long as you own your chair. and most importantly, 9 out of 10 people got their hoveround for little or no cost. call now for your free dvd and information kit. and now every hoveround comes with this tote bag and cup holder for handy access to your favorite items. you don't really have to give up living because you don't have your legs. call now for your free consultation. and right now, get this limited edition hoveround america travel mug free with your hoveround delivery. call or log onto hoveround.com right now!
it is time. it's time for the "lightning round" on cramer's "mad money." rapid-fire calls. you say the name of the stock, i tell you whether to buy or sell. play until this sound -- and then the "lightning round" is over. are you ready skeedaddy? i'm starting with emil in new york. >> caller: hey, mr. cramer.
it's emill from upstate, suffolk county, new york. >> what's up? >> caller: listen, i've caught a stock when it was $14 and change, it's now closing at about $19, it's conn. >> my friend, consider yourself -- consider yourself in great shape to make a sale. >> sell, sell, sell -- >> ring the register. that's a tough industry. i want to go to rod in minnesota. rod? >> caller: hey, jim, big boo-yah from the gopher state in the land of 10,000 lakes. >> beautiful. what's up? >> caller: i've got some manitowoc, symbol mtw. and i'm getting conflicting reports, they're strong but then they're also talking about technical indicators. >> well, look, it's rough. look, you need a strong economic growth scenario to buy that stock. and we don't have that. but we also don't have such a horrible market that i want to sell it. i think it's just a --
>> don't buy, don't buy. >> flat out. barbara in oregon. barbara? >> caller: hello, jim, how are you? >> i'm fine, how about you, barbara? >> i'm doing extremely well, thanks. my stock is cvr partners, which is uan. i want to know if carl icahn takes control of cvr energy, what impact might that have on uan? >> i don't think it would have much at all. this is a limited partnership. but you know what? i can't say for certain. i've got to make some calls on that one and i will come back to you. let's go to matthew in new york. matthew? >> caller: hey, jim, big new york knicks boo-yah. >> looking good boo-yah, what can i tell you? and fun to watch. i'll give them that boo-yah. what's up? >> caller: yes, sir. i bought this stock six months ago and it has nose dived. it's cld, cloud peak energy. >> came and went. >> sell, sell, sell! >> not working anymore because coal be done. not with nat gas going through
too, you cannot own coal. david in florida, david? >> caller: hi, i was wondering what you thought of mgm resorts international. >> i think mgm's okay. i've been a big las vegas sands backer more than wynn because of the internal dispute, i want to stick with las vegas sands. let's go to mehrad in washington. >> caller: washington boo-yah to ya, jim. >> what's going on? >> caller: what do you think about dlth? >> we're building a lot of cars, that said, this stock has had such a run, i want to buy it under $30. that's not that far from here. do be price sensitive. johnny in california. johnny? >> caller: boo-yah, cramer. from beautiful wine country. >> do love it there. what's on your mind? >> caller: what do you think about portfolio recoveries praa? >> i'm worried about it because they're covering people who defaulted. i'm not going to be a buyer. let's go to jerome in my home state of new jersey.
jerome? >> caller: yes, jim. when i'm in las vegas i always like to visit caesar's. i went and bought the stock, what do you think? >> i like caesars now. that stock is heavily levered company. they can fix up the balance sheet which makes it okay to own. yeah, i've been negative, but i've become a believer because that balance sheet's going to get better. sean in pennsylvania, sean? >> caller: jim, what's the price of a boo-yah? >> what's up? >> caller: i've been naming my own 300% profit since price line option since you first called it back in the end of february. you reported back on the q-4 results. march 6th, priceline announced -- just today, supposed to go to $1,000 per share. >> i don't know if it's going to do that, but i do share your bullish enthusiasm because priceline's doing everything right and that business model is terrific and it's great worldwide business and that,
ladies and gentlemen, is the conclusion of the "lightning round." >> the "lightning round" is sponsored by td ameritrade. (sfx: car garage sounds) today my journey brings me to charlotte, north carolina, where i spent the day with geico driver casey mears. i told him the secret to saving money on car insurance. he told me the secret to his car setup. first he adjusts... first he adjusts... (sfx:engine revving drowns out gecko's dialogue) then he... then he... (sfx:loud drilling noise continues to drown out gecko's dialogue) ...and a quarter cup of pineapple juice. or was that the secret to his barbecue sauce? hey, "secret" sauce. geico®. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.
on a day when the market got put through the meat grinder, there's nothing worse than being confused about your stocks. if you know you like something, then you can buy it on the way down. if you don't like it, then you can get ready to sell it into strength perhaps as early as tomorrow, not at the opening, because you know europe will hurt us. if you don't know whether the stock is a buy or a sell, i know what it's like. it's the absolute worst time. and there's nothing more bewildering than watching one analyst tell you a stock is a screaming buy and then seeing another analyst downgrade the darn thing a few days later! aren't these people supposed to be experts? they can't agree on anything. what the heck are you supposed to believe? that's the conundrum we face right now with one particular stock.
that stock is cbs, that's charlie boy sam, because there's pretty much uniformity that cvs a good stock. last thursday, i thought was a very good piece of research that no one paid attention to, deutsche bank came out and reaffirmed the buy rating, raising earnings estimates and upping the price target for cbs to $40, that's 22% above where the stock is right now. it was extremely bullish. but then we came in this morning and citigroup downgrades cbs from buy to neutral. citi's very bearish about the overall television industry and this is exactly the kind of thing that drives regular retail investors like you nuts. is cbs worth buying on the one hand? or should we stay away from it because citi downgraded the darn thing today? sometimes when you see this kind of analyst duel, it can be hard to tell which one's right. not this time, frankly.
i think this is one of those cases where it's relatively easy to figure out which guy to listen to and let me explain why. we have an industry downgrade, that's the report from citi versus an actual what's known as micro recommendation which is what we got from deutsche. all else being equal, the micro company's specific research should always carry more weight in your mind than a big industry-wide call like we have from citi. why? because analysts often get lazy and miss crucial distinctions between companies. they take them all down, that kind of sector analysis that's so 2011. in the citi piece they downgrade cbs along with disney, discovery, news corp., scripps over worries about advertising, that's a head scratcher. cbs is a developer of good programming that works and can be viewed on multiple channels. time warner is a smart product. i like that stock.
but viacom is the most levered to ad rates, therefore is the most at risk of any of the television companies out there. therefore the viacom push within the context of a downgrade of the industry, downright illogical to me. i think cbs is a buy. cbs's network is dominant ratings-wise and the distance between it and its competitor is wider than it's been in the last 24 years. these guys aren't making a bundle from the traditional tv advertising business. cbs is finding new ways to make money, something a deutsche bank piece talks about but obviously the big industry piece doesn't care about. cbs never did any joint ventures like hulu. that means the company keeps 100% of the profits as they make online distribution deals with amazon and netflix. cbs expects to make $1 billion of pure profit over the next five years. that's huge and it's pennies
from heaven. if you want to understand what makes cbs tick, i've got another way to look at it, it's "mad money" style. there was a terrific article in the art section of today's "new york times." you've got to read every aspect of this paper. it was about "how i met your mother." it's a cbs sitcom that's now in the seventh year of its run and it's generating its highest ratings ever by far. the whole article was about how cbs can keep running this over and over again and make money with it. thanks to syndication deals, people are now able to catch up on past seasons of the show in a way that wasn't possible a few years ago. and that creates more and more viewers who want to see the new episodes when they come out because they're familiar with the history. they can run the shows out of order. the residuals are huge. it's a fabulous business model and it's not just "how i met your mother," it's "big bang theory" and the other sitcoms. you know all about it if you read the arts pages in today's "times" how the best ideas are never in the business section of the paper.
if they are in the business section of the paper, everybody sees them. the csi series as well as many other crime dramas can run forever. they're like consumer products, the equivalent of tide, colgate toothpaste, gillette razor blades. i think people are way too negative about media assets in general right now. for example, no one i know thought aol had much value at all. today we learned that aol sold $1 billion in patents to microsoft. don't you want that kind of thing? i don't know what else cbs owns. there's no doubt it is worth more than it's selling for. here's the bottom line, once you forget about this gloomy industry-wide downgrade from citigroup today, i think cbs has been hammered down to where you should consider yourself lucky to get such a discount given deutsche bank's positive spin on the stock. oh, and remember, please some of the best business ideas don't come from the business pages, they come from the rest of the paper. "mad money's" back after the break.
does the market have you stumped? no fear. cramer's here. just e-mail him, "mad money" at cnbc.com. ♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] nothing will keep you from magnum. ♪ silky vanilla bean ice cream and rich caramel sauce all covered in thick belgian chocolate. magnum ice cream. for pleasure seekers. a, the appearance. amber. [ jim ] b, balance. sam adams has malt sweetness, hoppy bitterness. [ jim ] c, complexity. pine notes, grapefruit notes. only believe your own pallet. go taste them. ♪ oh pepperoni ♪ how much i love yah
see the game last night? course i did! [ male announcer ] try the meatball pepperoni melt today. subway. eat fresh. who's she? downy unstopables. here to shake up your fresh. like a cheerleader on espresso. toss these little scent boosters in before you wash. and the fresh scent will last until you're ready to wash again. [ buzzer ] [ laughs ] [ both sniff ] and this fresh scent will last? it's like you shoved a rainbow up your nose. i should go. downy unstopables. the fresh too feisty to quit.
lately here on "mad money," we've been trying to solve the puzzle of smoking hot stocks where the source of strength is an absolute mystery. even gave it a rubric. we call it what the heck? as in what the heck is that stock doing rallying so high in this market? i get the best ideas for the segment from the charts i've hand-delivered to my house every saturday. these are hard copy charts i've had them delivered the last 25 years. this weekend i took one look at the chart of sherwin williams.
yeah, the paint company. i said what the heck is that stock doing on the 52-week high list? what the heck is sherwin williams doing up 32% year-over-year, 25% this year alone? but as surprised as i was, there's nothing astonishing at all about this rally as we found out today in a gigantic preannouncement where sherwin williams is going to earn 63 cents a year ago. roughly 70 cents the analysts thought the company would earn. could you imagine that? how big that is? sherwin williams is part of the tremendous resurgence we're seeing among homeowners fixing up their houses, either to sell them or make them look better. how big is this trend? sherwin williams saw its store sales soar 20% this quarter. wow, some of the price increases, but most of it from a ton of new demand. i've been adamant that people are far too negative about stocks in general, you know that. and stocks related to home improvement in particular. i take my cue from what the home builders are saying and they're telling us things have improved and in some areas improved
dramatically, but i also have my eyes on home depot and lowes at all times. they didn't even get hit -- home depot was great today. they keep hitting those highs because of the desire of home buyers and home builders to improve their homes or build new ones. throughout this period, i face tremendous resistance from pretty much everyone i talk to. the bears say the housing-related numbers are inflated by good weather, or say the stores are borrowing sales from the future. sure, there's some upside from the warm weather, but not this kind of upside and not such uniformity. part of a pre-announcement to the upside. what's really going on here? simple, people sense that their homes are done going down in price. that they're worth more. you do not throw good money after bad if your house is declining in value. people aren't that stupid. great numbers from companies like sherwin williams confirmed how powerful this trend is. if things are really terrible, if employment were dropping like a rock, if whole swaths of
america were in the dire straits that the press always seems to be reporting, then sherwin williams would be a 52-week low not a 52-week high. nothing i heard friday from the labor department changes my mind that this move's not for real. and a stock like sherwin williams deserves to move higher. maybe even higher than the $111 and change where it's currently trading, because the move is real, ladies and gentlemen. it's real and you've got to get in it. stick with cramer. greetings from the windy city of chicago. people here sure are friendly but some have had a hard time understanding my accent. so to make sure people get every word of the geico savings message i've been practicing how to talk like a true chicagoan. switching to geico could save you hundreds of dollars on car insurance... da bears. haha... you people sure do talk funny. geico®. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.
all right. all week we're profiling growth stocks. why? because we think the market's a little bit troubled here and we've got to give you something we think you should buy on the way down because they don't seem to be levered to the current earnings reports or to perhaps the downturn in the economy. that's what great growth investing's about and i'm on a mission to teach you how to do it yourself. i always like to say there's always a bull market somewhere, i promise to try to find it fo