David Tepper's bull case could not have been presented in a better manner. The lead in included how rare it was to have him on TV, his stellar past performance and his amazing trade in the financials. Then he presented his case for the market in a brilliant manner, managing to make it seem exactly like his financial trade that helped him earn over 100%.
If I didn't know better I would have thought I was watching an infomercial with Billy Mays. I was sold on the market and I wondered if I bought one SPY, could I get a second free if I called now? Until I actually thought about the argument he made.
Stated simply David Tepper made the Bernanke/Greenspan Put argument. That same argument could have been made the entire way down in both of the meltdowns of the past decade. It also sounds very similar to the "liquidity" argument that was being made in April right before the market fell by 17%.
A year ago everybody was following John Paulson into the financials because he made "The Greatest Trade Ever". They have been the worst performing stocks since. I urge readers to judge David Tepper's bull case based on the merit of his argument and not based on his past performance or the convincing manner in which he presented.
Please note: I am not saying that the bull case is necessarily wrong, just that I don't agree with this particular argument.