Jim Cramer is a bozo who doesn’t get it

Jim Cramer is concerned about Apple.

tl;dr version of the above is mainly because Steve Jobs is no longer alive. Cramer was always one of those who were late to the party when it came to Apple. Before the whole iPod and iTunes ecosystem really took off, Cramer was not what you would consider a real AAPL bull. I still remember how guys like him consistently missed the huge gains AAPL saw from 1998-2000 (before the crash). It was only relatively recently in the past few years that Cramer would constantly gush about the stock (to point where it was nauseating because even though he was pumping it, you could still tell he really didn’t get the whole picture). Thus after Jobs death and Isaacson’s autobiography, it didn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why guys like Cramer are jumping off the bandwagon while missing out on the next leg up. That (the next journey upwards) is not a matter of if, but when.

Going off on a tangent for just a bit, I finally finished the autobiography and there weren’t any major surprises except that Jobs turned out to be a little bit more thin skinned and black and white than I thought, to the point where his “tatemae” (aka public face) filter was “broken” where he was “honne” (aka true feelings) all the time. This sort of explained his mercurial, petulant, and over the top assaholic behavior. True, one major revelation which came out of the autobiography was just how much more deeply involved Jobs was in the details especially in regards to new projects. However, other revelations showed that he wasn’t always correct with his original decisions (making the iPod Windows compatible, making iTunes available on Windows, native apps on the iPhone, etc — all of which made a huge difference in terms of its disruptive nature and turning Apple into the force it is today).  Regarding the first revelation, Jobs has been portrayed as maniacal when it came to the details…. my opinion is this was especially true when it came to new products. I don’t share that same opinion that he had this same laser focus when it came to the mature “legacy” (like desktop form factors) or “hobby” products like the Apple TV.  Furthermore, Jobs never had the same level of enthusiasm when it came to Apple’s enterprise products (he seemed to get bored of them quickly because by its nature, the enterprise is a different beast from the consumer market — and not Apple’s key strength). Why do I believe this? Because I’ve mentioned my fair share of flaws in Mac OS X and the 2nd generation Apple TV (plus I experienced that working on the enterprise side).

So what am I getting at exactly? While the autobiography sheds a bit more insight into Jobs, you really cannot take the whole thing as a bible either. As Isaacson mentioned, he himself was not sure if at times, he was being swayed by the RDF and far too much spin. Myself, I normally am skeptical and tend to take contrarian views rather than taking everything at face value. It’s why I regularly now and then, slam some of the stupid stuff that I encounter with Apple.  It acts like a sanity check.  True, Jobs did have this uncanny ability to see tiny details and drive people to do the impossible (something I also experienced). But that doesn’t mean there aren’t other people who can also do the same and maybe accomplish the same feat with a bit more humility and respect. Tim Cook may not be a product guy but Jonathan Ive is. The individual strengths of these two people are like a more sane version of Steve Jobs. Because focus is one of the key traits which Jobs engrained in Apple’s corporate culture, I have a very difficult time in envisioning the current leadership team, not being able to carry the torch in terms of refining current products, and also defining new ones. Then there are all the engineers and staff who carry out the gruntwork of getting this stuff done. The people lower in the hierarchy rarely get the individual glory and recognition but they are extremely critical and important to the overall mission. Included in this group are people who can be as detail oriented as Jobs was. My point is that the bandwagon folks like Cramer are way too quick to dismiss the talent deep within the bowels of the company.

Another area where Jobs is often given far too much credit for is his persuasive ability. Look, before the whole iPod and iTunes ecosystem took off, the Mac was still Apple’s key revenue generator. But Jobs and his persuasive charisma was not having much serious effect in garnering plenty of new users from outside its traditional customer base prior to 2004. Once the iPod, iTunes, and then the iPhone really turned Apple into the 800 pound gorilla, that is really when Jobs was able to dictate terms on his level. My point is that for many years after his return, he was basically preaching to the choir and it took a combination of market disrupting factors which allowed Apple to finally garner significant mindshare outside its traditional demographic, which therefore allowed Jobs to wield far more influence in various markets.

People like Cramer however don’t truly get Apple and the whole intersection of technology and the liberal arts mantra (they think they do but they really, really do not get it). It’s an ethos which explains why Apple tends to build some really great products that people end up having a desire for even in the toughest of economic times (despite a recession, Apple was relatively immune to it all; which tends to go against all common sense because one would think that Apple products would tend to be subject to more discretionary spending in terms of being expendable as opposed to food). And just like in the past when Apple had to climb a wall of worry (aka hierarchy of skepticism) and its stock turned into this compressed spring every time the stock would literally go nowhere despite the fundamentals, that coiled spring would eventually snap and the stock would go through this explosive upwards move. I personally accumulated during these periods and ended up with some obscene paper gains. That exact same thing has been occurring since 2008 to the present and my original objective still stands where I won’t really begin to divest any shares until at least 2015. This doesn’t mean I’m not cognizant of whats happening or not evaluating events which could dramatically alter my time frames. What I’m saying is that the death of Steve Jobs does not mean Apple’s best days are behind it as some are thinking.  I for one now believe the skies the limits because often times, having a founder around can have a throttling effect on the true potential of the talent pool.