Jim Cramer Sucks Up To Knightscope

By John Honovich, Published Jan 19, 2017, 12:44pm EST

Credit must be given to Knightscope.

They are raising money right now and despite their $80 million pre-money valuation against a lowly sub $1 million 2016 revenue, having Jim Cramer endorse them is a great step to securing their desired $20 million investment.

**** ** *** *** Cramer / *** ***** / *********** *****:

*** ****** **** *** interview:

****** ***** ** ************** Knightscope's "****** ******* ** a ******* ******** *****." Later **** ***********'* *** says **** ***** ***** $7 ** ****, ****** feigns ********, **********, "****'* all?".

** ******, *********** ** nothing **** * **** and *** $* ** hour ** ******* **********. It ** * $**,*** lease *** ***** *** year. **** **** ******** and ******** ****** ***** for *********** ** ****** / ******* ***** ********. Knightscope ******** *** $**,*** per ****, ********** *** much ** ****** *** robot ** ******. *** the $* ****** ******* the ********** - ** time *** ******** ********** *** maintenance. 

***********'* *** **** ******:

**** ***** ******** ***** super ***** ******

** ******, *** **** ******** stairs ** ******* **** uneven ******** ** ******** * 13 **** **** * cardboard *** - *** things ***** *********** ****** do *** ****** ******* omits. ******, *********** *** declares **** ***** ******* can:

**** *** ******* ****** a ******... **** ****** was **** *********, **** were ******* *** ***** and **** **** **** the *** ******, *** day ******, ***** * should *** ******** ****

****** ******* **** ***********'* CEO ***** ***** ** facts. *************, * ****** that ***** ** **** is *** ***** ** read ******** ***** ** 300 ******* ****** * minute. *** *** ****** face *********** / '******* the *****' ***** ** science *******. *** **** if ** *** *** science *******, **** ****** could ** **** **** far ***** **** ***** surveillance **************.

****, ****** ******** **** Knightscope ****** *** "**** to ******* ** ***** and ******* ************", ********** ignoring *************** ** **** ****** for - ******* **** a *****.

****** **** ********* ** affirming:

"* **** ****** *** going ** ***** **** and *** '* **** to ****** ** ***********'"

*** ** ********** ******* him. ****** *** *********** ********** and ***** *** ****** fools *** ***** **** will **** ** ****** based ** ****** ********** uncritical ******** ** ***********.

****** ********** ********* *** hard *** ** *** can *** ** ***** every ****. *** **** parroting * *******'* ****** and ******* **** *** as ***** ** * sure *** ** * lose * *** ** money. ****, ** ***** for *** ****** *********, less ** *** *** TV ************* ********* **** offers.

Comments (13)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #1

01/19/17 06:29pm

Jim Cramer...  Here he is giving investment advice about Bear Stearns at $62/share.  Six days later they were gobbled up in a fire sale for a whopping $2/share losing billions upon billions in investors money.  That idiot is a Wall Street clown act whose whole purpose is to soften the blow to sheeple losing $100k from their 401k's while his real paymasters reap tens of billions with derivatives and default swaps.

Agree: 5
Disagree
Informative: 2
Unhelpful
Funny: 1

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #1 | 01/19/17 06:44pm

And there's Jon Stewart's famous response / criticism of Cramer on Bear:

Not as funny but more interesting to me is how, just in the past year, Cramer repeatedly turned Mad Money into a PR response mechanism for now disgraced Theranos, e.g.:

It is actually sad to see someone as smart as Cramer turn his platform into marketing vehicle for corporations.

Agree
Disagree
Informative: 2
Unhelpful
Funny: 1
Avatar

Ross Vander Klok

IPVMU Certified | In reply to John Honovich | 01/19/17 07:50pm

"see someone as smart as Cramer" Hasn't he gone bankrupt like four or five times?  I think at least once was while he had his show?  

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny: 1
Avatar

Ari Erenthal

In reply to Ross Vander Klok | 01/19/17 07:53pm

Anybody good enough to keep their job as a financial wizard while going bankrupt multiple times must be pretty smart.

Agree: 2
Disagree
Informative: 1
Unhelpful
Funny: 3
Avatar

Ross Vander Klok

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Ari Erenthal | 01/19/17 08:08pm

HA!  I may be thinking of Dave Ramsey...

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful: 1
Funny: 2

Undisclosed Distributor #4

In reply to Ross Vander Klok | 01/19/17 08:53pm

Every professional broker loses it all at some point, unless they're hedging. At least they all say that in their books...

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny: 1

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Ross Vander Klok | 01/19/17 08:54pm

Hasn't he gone bankrupt like four or five times?

Cramer might have bankrupted people taking his advice but for him personally, I see no records of him going bankrupt.

Further as for his smarts, he went to Harvard, Harvard Law School, worked as a research assistant to the famous attorney Alan Dershowitz, was a reporter covering Ted Bundy, worked at Goldman Sachs, etc. Anyone who can do that is easily capable of asking tough questions of a startup. He chooses not to.

Agree: 2
Disagree
Informative: 1
Unhelpful
Funny

Eddie Perry

01/19/17 11:26pm

Hahahahaha I luv this clown though if you want to make money just do the opposite of what he says

Jim cramer 10 years record

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Undisclosed #2

IPVMU Certified | 01/20/17 01:14am

Article title is three words too long.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny: 1

Undisclosed Integrator #3

01/20/17 01:21am

TV is inundated with "ex-lawyers", "ex-traders", etc all authoritatively dispensing advise about fields they no longer practice. If they were any good they would be practicing their trade instead of talking on TV. People would have to be nuts to listen to any of them, they aren't accountable. 

Agree: 2
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

Randy Lines

01/20/17 04:52pm

60K per year can place a great deal of fixed security infrastructure. The audio capabilities are very interesting for security ... looking forward to the privacy people's take on this and I expect it won't be favorable. It will be good in ambassador roles, wayfinding etc.. Bad for rapid response and vulnerable to being disabled (lay a 2 by 4 across the floor).

AI is the future however I am not seeing an ROI on this one just yet. Notwithstanding I am cheering for them and other AI security initiatives.

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny
Avatar

Joe Mirolli

IPVMU Certified | 01/25/17 04:44am

I want to know how it determines a repeat visitor as threat to someone scoping the place instead of an employee reporting for work everyday.....

Agree
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Joe Mirolli | 01/25/17 12:13pm

I want to know how it determines a repeat visitor as threat to someone scoping the place instead of an employee reporting for work everyday.....

Don't ask perfectly reasonable questions like that ;)

Presumably, it has facial recognition and a database of every employee and excludes those matches to employees. Of course, even if that works, you might have a customer come on multiple days, or the mailman, etc.

Perhaps they will definitely an analytic that knows when someone is 'scoping' vs just coming by.

What's weird to me is that this is clearly something they don't have, so why lead with it?

Agree: 1
Disagree
Informative
Unhelpful
Funny
Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 7,208 reports and 960 tests and is only available to subscribers. To get a one-time preview of our work, enter your work email to access the full article.

Already a subscriber? Login here | Join now
Loading Related Reports