the stock bottomed on all that bad news, perhaps by a decent yield of 3%, kind of like kimberly-clark and clorox. from there, apple roared 80 points before collapsing back to $489. you look at the charter of that move, it does have the feel of what wall street calls the dead cat bounce. something i know can cause a bit

he told me i said kimberly clark was good for the long-term, making great games over time. he wasn't the least bit interested in only making $1,000. then he questioned my integrity, wanted to know if i was trying to churn him, a horrible charge meaning i was just trying to generate commissions with his money. you know what? i was scorched and torched. but he did treat me a great lesson. if you don't want to turn a trade into an investment because that's usually a sign that use basing a loss and trying to cement why you're in it. you don't want to turn an investment into a trade. if you have a good one, let it run for heaven's sakes. bob was right. kimberly ultimately doubled and i was vindicated, despite myself. finally, i learned the science behind building a portfolio and understanding wealth. a lot of my business involved contacting the people who had just come into a great deal of cash, either through inheritance or through business. they tend to be rather unsophisticated about the cash management. i regarded my first job as listening to their needs, trying to figure ou

at the time, i liked kimberly-clark, the paper company. i still do. come on the show. i told this cantankerous client that knb would be terrific for his portfolio. he told me to buy 1,000 shares. i got it! almost immediately it went up eight points. it was a dream. i had a winner. i called him. i said, bob, bob, i want to ring the register. i want to sell the 1,000 shares of kimberly-clark. i thought he would thank me. he said i thought kimberly would be good for the long term. he wasn't interested in making $8,000. then he questioned my integrity. he wanted to know if i was churning him. that is a horrible charge. just trying to generate commissions with his money. i was scorched and torched. he taught me a terrific lesson. just as you don't want to turn a trade in an investment, you don't want to turn an investment in a trade. if you have a good one, let it run. bob was right. kimberly ultimately doubled. i was vindicated, despite myself. finally, i learned the science behind building a portfolio and a lot of my business about contacting people who

at the time i liked kimberly-clark. the maybe company. i still do.ement comes on the show. i told this cantankerous client i thought this one kmb would be terrific for his portfolio. he agreed. i got i. i got the sale. he told me to buy a thousand shares. i got i. almost immediately it went up 8 points. it was a dream. i had a winner. so i called him, i said, bob, bob, i want to ring the register. i want to sell the 1,000 sales at kimberly-clark. i thought he'd thank me. he was furious. he told me that i had sze said kimberly would be good for the longer the, that it could have great gains over time. he wasn't the least bit interested in only making $8,000. then he questioned my integrity. he wanted to know if i was churning him. that's a hard charge meaning i was trying to generate commissions with his money. you know what? i was scorched and torched. but he did teach me a terrific lesson. just as you don't want to surgeon u turn a trade into an investment, it's the reason why you ferment why you are into it. you have a good one, lettich run, for he

how about kimberly-clark? campbell pork and beans? in other words, companies with a third of google's growth rate sell at the same eastern e earnings rate multiple. if you are a growth investor, you want the super oxygenated growth of google. if you use the same yardstick as the group, you'd be willing to pay substantially more. how much more? it's too insane. this is where things get subjective. we know we should be willing to pay a price earnings multiple twice the size of the rapidly earning rate f. we do that on what google supposed to earn next year, that means you get a stock at 1,600. no, that's too crazy, too. isn't it equally yaez that google sells at that time multiple as clorox when google is growing four-and-a-half times faster. that's a head scratcher, isn't it? we get a price earnings multiple 2.5 times the growth rate. i got to be rigorous on this thing. if you use that growth rate, what do you get? you get google at $1,000. that's why the analysts gravitate to that level. it makes sense. especially if that growth rate

but kimberly clark had not. gat palmolive had not. these things are still immensely expensive relative to the market, relative to their historical valuations. there's not a who'll lot more upside one could potentially see. if rates go up these things get hit. if the market goes down they get hit. i don't understand why anyone would look to buy them here. >> i mean, 22 times forward for mccormick. you may like cinnamon and herbs de provence but is there growth in those areas? >> johnson & johnson is another name i've been on and i've been losing money on the way up and i finally have this thing here now. this is a mid-single digit grower that was trading at high teens multiple because of that 3% -- >> this is all about multiple expansion. it's not about anything that has changed. nothing has changed. it's all multiple expansion. if you're going it sell high yield this is the sector you're going to sell. >> procter & gamble popped on the -- >> and then unpopped. >> tells you one that it wasn't that simple. and two

kimberly clark. every time you try to sell those you say wait, these are basically banks. they have beautiful balance sheets and they can raise their dividend at will. pretty terrific. so i come back and say these are what are known as fixed income alternatives. i think anyone can say a capital stock has no safety like a bond. but if you buy a long term bond, say 110, it can go back. i am trying to be as clinical as possible. >> you're right. but so am i. he is trying to lower my chair. >> that was unfair. >> the reality -- >> dirty tactics. keep it clean, boys. >> it's like professional wrestling. you're right and so am i. it was from morgan stanley. he said -- this illustrates most of the buying has come from shorts covered rather than those longs bought. and you this morning, you this morning talked about buy backs on squawk on the street. i tweeted out how sustainable is that. in the end i have to ask you one important question. i got on this this morning at 4:00. >> i saw this post who raised the question, he is a smart guy. he pulled the plug on netflix in january 20

kimberly clark plummeted five points. that's a candidate to the hedge for certain.colgate more than proctor. another hedge, i recommend laffly, the three point jump would have only made sense if he had been relieved before the tough restructuring kicked in, in the 60s. after, it make no sense at all to me. even though that move has been repealed, i would us the misplaced euphoria, because despite mcdonald's herculean efforts, they weren't able to catch up to colgate and unilever, although it would have in months. the market wants to rotate out of the consumer package goods into more industrial financials that do better with real world growth coming back. that kind of rotation has been a time honored investment strategy. i embrace it. why not exit or short proctor again unilever or colgate or kimberly even if you think the world of laffly. there are better fish to fry and better toothpaste and soaps and diapers to own. stay with cramer. you hurt my feelings, todd. i did? when visa signature asked everybody what upgraded experiences really mattered... you suggested lu

the stock bottomed on all that bad news, perhaps saved by a decent yield of 3%, kind of like kimberly clark and clorox. that was probably half because the company boosted the dividend and half because the share price had almost been cut in half. from there, apple roared 80 points before collapsing back to $429 today. if you look at the chart of that move, it does have the feel of what wall street calls a dead cat bounce. something i know can cause a bit of a lift, given that i saw my cat, comag, get hit by an 18-wheeler and the poor soul did have a bit of a lift after the fatal point of impact. of course, apple's a much better opportunity for comeback than comag did, but that's what you get when you name your cat after a disk drive component on the 52-week low list at the time of the accident. and we know that apple fell below its 50-day moving average. something i point out, because when we go off the charts on tuesdays, we hear about traders blow out of a stock. so we've got to throw that in the mix too. but you know what this is really about? it's what it's always about. it's about the e

>> kimberly clark today's overpriced staple stock. >> goog bell on a pull-back tomorrow. >> vaw, addfor all investors. there is always a bull market somewhere. i promise to help you find it. "mad money" starts now! >> hey, i'm cramer. welcome to "mad money." welcome to cramerica. other people want to make friends, my job is not to entertain you. i'm trying to teach. call me at 1-800-743-cnbc. >>> which came first? ben bernanke or the bull market? that's what was on my mind when the m

lower today, kimberly-clark, jcpenney, home builders hit on increased fears of higher interest rates, mortgage rates surging to its highest level in a year. lennar, poulty group trading low per. but bank of america, morgan stanley, goldman sachs all ending the day in positive territory. also, shares of apple bucking the downward trend of the market, following ceo tim cook's comments on where will technology at that conference. high dividend yielding stocks continue to get hit in response to the jump we're seeing in the ten-year yield. that's still the major story in today's week. tobacco stocks in particular moving lower. reynolds american paying dividends of over 5%. shares sold off in today's trade, but keep in mind, they're still up on the year. another big story, pinnacle entertainment and ameristar shares moving lower a after the ftc alleged a merger between the two would reduce competition and lead for higher prices for some customers. you can see pinnacle entertainment ending the day lower by around a 8%. maria, back to you. >> seema, thank you so much. >>> coming up, it's the

kimberly-clark, which i love. i love mr. falk and the buyback. that was down five bucks in one day and there's your yield. you try to pick up a little yield and you lose five bucks and suddenly it's, like, wow! then there's general motors. general motors is a win in this environment. hershey, no. gm, yes. kimberly clark. down five, i'm not going to sell it. proctor i'll sell. i don't like the growth in campbell's soup. >> neither did i. >> we had a long talk about it. but the gatsby index that we set up and it's right the rich are different. i know that's fitzgerald and not gatsby, and that index was up double the s&p. someone upgraded tiffany today. look at michael kors. the rich people are even richer. this must drive obama crazy. i thought i nailed those people. no. >> it's never done. >> we're waiting for the trickledown. >> they've never done better. that is an irony. >> isn't it weird that they're happier than ever, buying tesla. >> going to costco. >> they had merchandise problem, but i still like costco. >> the dell special committee is r

it may have underperformed some of its peers and kimberly-clark and others that you have mentioned, butht, he's clearly happy about the move. there's no doubt about that saying ag lafley is one of the greatest ceos. we're glad to have him back and he made that clear from the outset. what's interesting is the earnings haven't been bad. we had a conversation about procter & gamble before he tangled with carl e kahn. he seemed to be willing to give mcdonald's a chance. >> he put up a very good quarter and it was lower than competitor, but they're making progress and i hope bob can turn this thing around. he deserves enormous credit. he deserves enormous credit is what bell said back in january and look, if you go on with what the earnings have come in at and what the stock has done, even though it's underperformed some of its peers, it's not like the thing was going down the drain. >> some have criticized mcdonald's. his focus on emerging markets to the expense of the core markets. interesting today, just now ubs raising it to a buy. the price target goes 75 to 95. they've made miss steps

kimberly clark down yesterday because people feared this news would be strong. it was weak. it bounces. >> you think the markets in general have overreacted to this rate story? >> no. >> no. >> no. because if it continues you really have -- there are a lot of people caught leaning the wrong way here. i know you are a baseball fan. it is entirely possible that there's just pick-off after pick-off after pick-off. i'm very worried about mortgage bonds. who knows what's in -- we've got trillions of dollars in mortgage bonds we're calling the wrong way. you you don't want mortgage rates to go up because you need housing which is really the only area of the economy that's still strong. i do want to see a leveling off in rates otherwise, no, we're not done with the reit hammering or with the hammering that need rates -- >> the dow utility average yesterday in correction mode. you do have this shift, the make-up of the rally certainly seems to be changing over the last several days to a week or so as we've paid more attention to rates. now people are shun being the you a tilts, stap