we were down about this much yesterday. i thought something would happen. the new senior vice president took that has gospel. it must be so. he learned differently, didn't he? i have no idea what comes. that's nothing. >> "street signs" with erin burnett gets under way in 30 seconds. janet yellens said ben bernanke said they made the economy less important driven. they will blame it for the run

up and are premature and said they are inaccurate. the inspector general said they didn't breech his duty to investigate alleged fraud. they comes from a report obtained by cnbc. i'm julia boorsten. >> i'm erin burnett. here's what wall street is looking at. what they want to hear from barney frank, talking about the newest compensation bill in congress. the first amendment protects their right to pedal drugs on television and magazines. they get a deduction too on their taxes. is this right or not? things that make you go hmmm. the man at the fund of funs that lost the most with bernie madoff bought a $30 million yacht. that's our show that begins now.

few key headlines today. we had better than expected and nothing to celebrate, but confidence is up and nothing to be excited about whatsoever. we had a treasury option. what is the most important headline and will stocks struggle into the close? down for the dow and s&p we will see if it will be a down day or not. let's get to the market reporters and find out. the big board game. thanks to all three of you. let's start with you, zane since you are focusing on one of the latest things that happened from the auction and what is a record week for issuance of american debt. what's your take on the auction? >> a little bit disappointing. people had their expectations

for greater interest than what we saw. the interest was much better than than has been the last 10 time, but not as good as the last time. i think a lot of people were looking for a lot of interest. that would be expressed in the form of a target where last time was about 69% of the bidders. this time was only 33%. the market traded off a little bit after the results and having said that, we had the 20-year yesterday and the two-year today. seven years tomorrow and holding up well given all the supply we do have. >> i'm glad you gave that perspective. the lack of foreign demand causing the concern. they have been pairing their losses. is there a link and are they getting the full story or what else is causing them perhaps to take the loss? >> the resiliency of the market.

they moved up and any time you get pressure on the market and it bounces back. that trend is powerful. the dow is down 100 points and consumer sentiment is weak. that was disappointing and always dangerous to tell the market what to do. they are focusing on the wrong thing. it's the home price numbers showing signs of the bottom. >> you can see it doesn't go down much. they are poised to close at the highest levels and dropped along with the market. look what happened as it struggled to come off the bottom here once again in the last hour. stock charts look similar and try to come in and put pressure on the market and can't succeed at getting stocks down and people come in and cover and markets move to the upside. this is a sign of resiliency.

>> fair point and on your side, what is causing the market to turn up. we inch just higher and calling it flat. if you are looking for something that is really working lately, look no further than biopharma. the world's biggest company, that beat next year's guidance. am jen is up 3%. mylan is up over quality contro7 worries. we had an initiation of 3% with a buy rating. the company is calling them the next dominant biotech company. a bullish analyst and commentary and upside surprises and data and deals have been helping the nasdaq index out perform a strong nasdaq as you know

overall and doing so well that there is talk out there now of a billion dollar ipo in biopharma, possibly being put into the hopper. >> that would be something to talk b. a quick final check with you in terms of whether you think there will be demand for treasuries. as we move ahead and yields that are not that exciting. >> in the shorter maturities and the five-year comes tomorrow. we will see them come and go and a basis point or two cheaper, but we will get the supply placed and dot seven-year after that. >> health care the only major group that stuck out today moving higher. do you think we got the health care reform priced in? >> here's something interesting. good point. they are an hmo, but specialize in services to government operations like medicare and medicaid. the numbers came out better than expect and raised guidance.

this company would be a big beneficiary if there was more public involvement in health care than private involvement and there is a play that people can make if that is going to happen. the stocks are up and coventry that has a medicare advantage program had better numbers and also raised guidance as well. these stocks are buffetted by political circumstances overall, but certain groups that would clearly benefit if reform was coming. >> thanks to all three and appreciate your taking the time. to a guest and a story getting a lot of attention with wall street watchers and investors at home. legislation aimed at curbing compensation. a man who introduced the bill and a chairman with democrat from massachusetts, barney frank. good to have you with us. appreciate it. obviously we have a copy of the bill here and have seen some of

the write throughs on the wire services and describe it as a bill with shareholders with non-binding votes and direct regulators to write rules that limit excessive risk taking. now those are general descriptions and soups like there is not much new here. what is new in the bill? >> what is new is it would become a statute. any public corporation sent out the proxy forms and would have to clod it an opportunity for the shareholders to express their opinion, yes or no on the pay. it wouldn't be bining because you cooperate do that. if it was binding and they rejected it, you couldn't pay people. what they found in england where we have borrowed this, where the corporation gets a no vote, they adjust downward and do not ignore what they say. the newer, what we had voted on, the newer element is giving

explicit instructions to the securities and exchange commissions that any compensation scheme that excessively reward risk. we have this situation where decision makers and others were given a situation where they took a risk and they made money. they took a risk and lost a lot and there was no penalty. you had selectively too much risk. it is new that we are giving the sec the authority to set rules that will make illegal compensation teams. dollar amounts are for the shareholders. if they want high pay or low pay, it's up to the share holders. they have an interest in renting the systemic risk that comes when people get paid off for taking risks.

>> i should have been more precise. if it causes loss, you lose nothing. we are not saying what you get, but they should not be at a disproportion between the value or the reward of a risk that pays off and the penalty for one that doesn't. if i tell you to buy a lottery ticket, you don't have to pay for it unless it wins, we would sell a lot and lose money. by excessive, it means it has to have a two-way street. >> a lot of people would say that everybody or most people think that's rational and make sense.

this is the most common question. a trader makes $100 million and gets paid for it and loses $100 million on the trade. are you going to claw back the computation he had? >> not all of it, but some of it. here's are the things that should be done. that 100 million should not kick in until a reasonable time period. part of the problem we had is that people got compensated a short time. you often don't know within six months. what you will find with the situation is not penalizing an earlier trade. it's the earlier trade that doesn't work out. to lengthen the time and not to allow it to work out until it ripens. >> until trades are cashed in. >> until you see what the asset does. they were short-term spike up and collapse. we are saying wait a white.

we are saying dollar for dollar, but some down with side. >> you say it makes sense and people should not be paid until a trade is done. it would appear that it would would be incentive for short-term trade. create more short-term mind set. >> first of all, it's not the completion of the trade, but what happens to the assets. it's not when the trade is completed, but you wait a while and they look good and doesn't pan out. people on wall street who say that ought to understand the negative picture they are paining of themselves. most of us get hired and do our jobs because we get paid. is there a character defect with people because they get hire and give them the prestigious job and they won't do it right unless you get a bonus. most of us don't need that. we have to align with the company. i'm willing to bet your

incentive to do a good job at cnbc is in line with the company and we don't have to bribe you to do extra. if i were there, i wouldn't stress that. not that the trade has to be completed, but you have to wait for a nature of the assets. >> it sounds like we would have a fundamental overhall not only in the way people are compensated, but even though you don't give a dollar amount, it would be less? >> yes. that's up to the shareholders. i see -- >> the dollar amount, but the bottom line is it would be less. >> i would like to complete the attention here. >> you just interrupted me. >> i did once to clarify, yes. >> may i go ahead? >> yes. >> the shareholders deal with the amount. it may well be, but when one company takes 72% and puts it

into compensation, that may go down. as for the others, if you are asking me do i hope there will be changes, absolutely. there is a consensus that i share with the nature of the compensation with incentivized excessive risk taking. they take risk with no penalty. yes there will be changes with lengthening the time and doesn't give you the shorter time. it's not the completion of the trade, but enough time to see whether the trade was a good one. i think it would be a good time to lengthen the horizon there. >> two other quick questions. one is if i can get a sense of the story yesterday about a citigroup trader and energy trading. last year he made nearly $700 million for citigroup. we know the firm lost many billions more, but he took home

$100 million. he is on track to change to earn more than that. it's in a contract. should he get the money? >> i don't know. you are asking me to comment on specifics of a subject with which i am not familiar. i would say two things. city corp shareholders should say whether or not they want upper limits. i would hope the man wouldn't say i'm only going to make money for the company that employing me if i get a certain percentage. this is a key point that is left out that i don't know. the incentive. i'm not in the public sector part of this. we are not talking about the amount. they said that to the shareholders. what was the incentive? if he were in the third year to make trades that lost the money for city corp, i couldn't answer you until i knew about that. >> one final question to you and one that i heard from a lot of people. i want to give you a chance to

respond. as part of the auto bailouts, there is a lot of coverage about the fact that you apparently made a call to protect distribution centers in your distribution. i want to ask you about that. it seemed that that set an example to call and help their own distribution centers ordealerships and set a bad example. do you still think you did the right thing? >> i hope you will repeat your criticisms to my districts. i did not say not that they should never shut down, but two things. this is a bad time to do it with unemployment so high. >> doesn't everyone? >> may i please complete sentences. you interrupt and that's not a good way. you ask a critical question and i have a right to an answer. yes, it is true and in a case where you have closers, it is one thing. they are give together more time and did think it would be better

to delay the closings from the standpoint of not getting in the middle of the crisis. there was another issue. this was a distribution center. we have environmental occurrence. the distribution now will go humans of miles south to all of new england and the legitimate point that i raised is what's the environmental cost if you are now greatly increasing the truck roots for the distribution, what does that do? they can take a look at that. >> i'm glad i gave you a chance to respond and those are questions i felt were fair. >> i didn't say the questions were not fair. i answered every question. >> you did and i appreciate that. i am thinking to your point about how much pain there is in your district. everybody would feel the same. >> may i respond again? yes. extend the time. i think it's reasonable to take into the limits and set a better

idea about the environmental impact. your argument is i have two roles. one is to make policy and i plead guilty. i repeat and i hope you will repeat criticism that i have been too much in defense of my district. >> banner frank, thank you very much. up next on the show, the drug industry is spending about $5 $billion on ads like the one you see here. they get a tax break for the ads. is it right or not?

>> we tried to shed light on the fact that americans demand drugs that are advertised on television. they spend nearly $5 billion on those ads and consumers demand the drugs advertised. 84% of drug costs are for branded, not generic drugs. generics are available for virtually all of the drugs you see commonly advertised. the kmugz might be to ban direct to consumer advertisements all together. joining us now are representatives with such an idea, he calls it the say no to drugs act. what would the bill that you have proposed the say no to

drugs act do? >> say no to drugs ad act. it would say that drug ads targeted at consumers would not be deductible as a business expense. they can still do it and we are not inhibiting free speech, but the taxpayers would not subsidize. >> is that because they have a first amendment right? >> i haven't researched that and i'm not sure because most countries ban it and it was banned until about 15 years ago. be it as it may, don't subsidize it with taxpayer dollars. some of them might continue because it's profitable, but the real reason aside from saving billions of dollars for the taxpayers, i think it's socially harmful for the drugs to be marketed direct to consumers.

they are marketed to physicians and the physicians have the confidence to decide what to prescri prescribe. you shouldn't say i have restless leg syndrome because a pitchman diagnosed a condition. this is idiotic medicine and designed to get you to demand a name drug when a generic might be better in a given case. that's up to the doctor to decide. >> what are would change under your legislation? >> what would change under my bill is that the cost of the direct to consumer ads would not be deductible to the drug company and they would have to pay taxes on it. >> let me ask you this. i was surprised when i found out they placed an ad and that cost is tax deductible. is it deductible for any company that advertises? >> sure. it's tax deductible as a normal

business expense. if you have a company and you sell cars and you want to advertise the cars so people can buy them, that's a legitimate business expense. the point is that this is not legitimate to market drugs. the bill said it's not a legitimate expense to market drto consumers. bear in mind, they spend money marketing the drugs to physicians and pharmacists and that's legitimate and we wouldn't touch the tax deductibility of that. >> we appreciate you explaining the bill as we said the say no to drugs act. they have say rebuttal to the plan and claim they have a right to advertise no matter what and let's talk about what it is. the association for national advertisers. thanks for having us. the deductibility of ads for drug companies as you heard he

said he would ban that and not allow it. fair? >> very radical proposal as the congressman just stated a monday ago. every company in the country has the right to deduct business expenses. we have a net expense tax system rather than taxing people on the gross receipts. what we would do is single prescription drugs out of all of the millions and say everybody else can write off the business expenses whether it's animal crackers and bungee jumping to selling. they can write it off, but prescription drug products that may save lives or substantially affect the people's health will not be allowed to write these things off. what will happen if you don't allow the write off? either the companies stop advertising which means less information to consumers or they continue advertising, but they

have to pass the increased costs on to consumers. this will not help consumers. >> i'm sorry because barney frank's sbri went long. when you say those things, i have to be honest. do we need to see a viagra ad when you say give people more information. everybody knows what they are and what they do. >> even though drugs when you go to a doctor to get them, they do other things like blood pressure. 16 million americans in the country according to the center for disease control who don't know they have high blood pressure. that's the silent killer. getting people to the doctor's office is a good thing. beyond that for those people they should be able to hear about these types of issues. many of the drugs are being sold or not and stop heard disease or high blood pressure or diabetes

and those are either threatening or can hurt people. cutting off information to the public is a terrible idea and by the way, this advertising pays for a great deal of media. one of the biggest category for magazines in a bad economy. you don't want to make it harder for people to do business. >> i'm sure they would agree with you on that. e-mail us and let us know at "street signs". do you think that advertising directly to consumers gives them more information or does anything good at all or is it a way for drug companies to make money. should we ban it or not. "street signs" at cnbc.com. farm economy taking a hit. earnings to tractors and things like that. we have an exclusive of avco. a slip of the tongue there. is this you. tapping out a few quick messages while you are driving?

we all see people do it in cars next to us. why is it such a big deal? blal blam

the tractor economy has stalled and it may not get better in the future. that put stocks under pressure and joins us to talk about it and the a d.c. o chairman. we appreciate you taking the time. the first question would be, what do you see for i guess overall. i know you are in many markets. for the economy, are we getting better or heading to a double dip? what? >> first of all, i think they did much better than other industries. we lost some growth, but i think we are doing better than ever. when it comes to the global markets, the population is still growing a lot.

every minute 156 people and per year that is 82 million people, those people need food and the emerging market, they will change tfrds more protein and that is also important. i think farm income in general will be good. farmers behave like normal consumers and the investments. >> is there anywhere where it's increasing? >> this year maybe not. record years one after the other. we saw the markets peaking all over the world. this year we basically have most of the marketings being down. >> what is a bigger issue when you take a step back outside of

the immediate situation. do we have an excess of food supply around the world or a shortage like the food shortage-induced riots 16 months ago. >> you remember the discussion we had and the food. the problem is certainly that it will be tough to feed that growing that needs mechanization. they need it from china, india and central europe. >> we appreciate you taking the time. >> thank you. >> ceo and chairman of the tractor company. jim cramer has trades of the day and ideas on health care reform. from the have they no shame file, the fund manager who lost $7 billion of his investor money

to bernie madoff is enjoying a summer on this boat. that would be a yacht on the mediterranean. $30 million price tag. you can't make this up.

>> it's good to be back with you. >> i miss you. an exciting show. i hope barney frank realizes you gave him a fair shot and didn't feel put upon because he seemed like he was robbed before you got going. >> i don't know. i felt it was fair. >> i was surprised. i thought the citigroup question was now that it's trading aggressively, i think that's right. it's ramping here. what's on everyone's mind. that's on everyone's mind. i'm glad you asked it. >> he said he didn't have an approximate opinion on the amount. >> america does. he may want to form one next time he is on. >> maybe. maybe he might. we have a bunch of things. it is. excited about the new super

financials, but i'm holding that. health care reform. >> it's a rival. president obama should declare a huge victory before we get too granular in the senate. a bunch said the public option are for health maintenance like a tba and hold all the companies to lower price increases is dead. that's why you see u.n. h running and aetna running. this is part of the health care we are seeing all over the map. for the hmo or even for pen et health. >> you are still saying we will get something. >> it's not going to be much of anything. >> you are looking at insurers. you don't think we will get this tax in. >> no. that's why i suggested this great thing about declaring victory. the senate seems to not want to play ball. these stocks are speaking what

they did after clinton went and bashed merck. these stocks act terrifically because the senate will kill whatever will ail these guys. >> this does have a closer look. >> all i see is viagra. >> all i do is see the ads. what's the point? i will not call the practitioner and say i have five ads. i'm 60 according to the new york post. >> by the way, let's speak credibly. the age is wrong. you always make jokes. >> i always claim i'm my father's brother. >> i was laughing when i saw that. let's move on to the europe

financial. >> the new super financial. it's not the beleaguered citigroup. >> first niagara does this buy of harleysville nash. i can tell you that this is what you do when you become a super regional. this is the kind of thing that happen when is you are really at the moment when you have well-capitalized banks. first one of them and then 3% of pennsylvania. they have a nice niche in new york. you will hear it the way complete did. this is one to watch. they have to change the names. >> they bought nor star and the bank of america. >> boom, boom, boom. >> the closing branches. >> my first bank account was at

bank of boston. >> really? and harvard. >> and time for one more name. which do you want? >> the masko is exciting. here's the company that cut the dividend. house suggest coming back. we know that. the media doesn't want to admit it. >> jim? thank you. don't go anywhere. >> barney frank didn't look well. >> williams did not make this list. >> thank you. >> i will not go through the other list. they thought they would never

get on. it's a top party school in the country. florida fell to number two and the university of mississippi and the university of georgia and ohio. >> all i can say is we were out of penn state for the show. this is one great school. if you get the party and the education, two thumbs up. >> we r very fair. you got it right. i hope you were listening. okay. >> texting. i see people texting constantly when i'm driving. >> i'm not being rude, but hello. if you text while you drive, you are well aware you can crash. is there anyone who doesn't know? >> people should take up smoking right now. >> we are going to talk about why texting while driving -- announcer: some people buy a car based on the deal they get.

others buy the car of their dreams. during the lexus golden opportunity sales event, you can do both. it's an opportunity today. it's a lexus forever. special lease offers now available on the 2009 is 250. special lease offers fair, straight-forward pricing. that's what td ameritrade stands for. think about it. why pay investing fees you shouldn't have to? or account fees that aren't clear? like inactivity fees? or maintenance fees? it's not right. and you know it. and the thing is, the other investment firms know it. but they do it anyway. and that's just not fair or straight-forward. td ameritrade. independence is the spirit that drives america's most successful investors.

to being able to manage your diabetes properly. it's very important for me to uh check my blood sugar before i go on stage. being on when i'm feeling low can be like a rollercoaster. it does at times feel like my body is telling me to do one thing... and, my mind, my heart is telling me to do something else. managing my highs and lows is super important. with my contour meter i can personalize my high/lo settings so it really does micromanage where my blood sugar needs to be. i'm nick jonas and never slowing down is my simple win. has the fastest hands boxing has ever seen. so i've come to this ring to see who's faster...

on the internet. i'll be using the 3g at&t laptopconnect card. he won't. so i can browse the web faster, email business plans faster. all on the go. i'm bill kurtis and i'm faster than floyd mayweather. (announcer) switch to the nation's fastest 3g network and get the at&t laptopconnect card for free. >> texting is something everybody is doing, but according to the "new york times".com on the front page, texting while drive category increase your risk of an

accident by 23 times. here's how the author of the article says. i thought this was an amazing thing. as i said to jim, anyone who texts while driving and we have all probably tried it, they are well aware the first time they do it they should never do it again. you can't focus on driving. the magnitude of the impact was surprising. >> your comment before the break was funny. we don't usually use the headline duh in the "new york times," but there is compelling evidence to explain why we played it this way and why it's significant. virginia tech institute equipped truck over 18 months with cameras to look at what truckers were doing and behavior and how it affected the road. they found that you have a 23 times greater risk of a crash or

near crash when you are particularing than not texting. that dove tails out of a study out of utah. they put college students in a driving simulator and had them text and determined it was an eight times greater crash risk. those may sound like big differences, 8 versus 23, but what they agreed on is the magnitude is so extraordinary that it belittles any other risk of crash from other distraction. >> you are saying it's about the same as driving with .08 chicago level. how much is that? >> i thought you would put me on the spot from personal experience, i do not know, but it exceeds the .08. that is the equivalent of what you get when talking on a cell phone. that's a times greater crash risk. that's according to several studies this. exceeds even that.

it makes sense when you hear the other data they discussed. in both of utah study and the virginia tech study, they found that people take their eyes off the road for about five second when is texting. to put that into two perspectives that are jaw dropping, one is that with five seconds with your eyes off the road at highway speed, you are covering more than a football field. to put another way would you close your eye for five seconds while drive something. >> you certainly make the point. i did a quick check, that's at least two to three drinks. that's just talking on the phone and not texting. what do we do here? is there anything we can do about it? you can say it's against the law to text, but hard to tell because they are looking down. it's not like a cell phone. >> you ask a good question.

i don't think as the reporter describing this stuff i'm qualified to answer, but a lot of legislators and policy makers are grappling with it. they are trying to balance a couple of questions. how dangerous is this and we are seeing that the dangers are significant and how convenience and how do you enforce it. i will tell you what the researchers say about enforcement and the same argument was made when society decided to outlaw seatbeltings. it's tough to enforce and see if they are doing it, but if you do ban it, what it creates is an environment where people are aware of the dangers. it will be tough to catch every texter as it is tough to catch every person not wearing a seatbelt. when you get society talking about it, you affect the way people behave. >> thank you very much. we appreciate you taking the time and hope everyone gets a chance to read matt's story

because it is interesting. you know it's a stupid thing to do, there were interesting revelations in the story. the single largest madoff feeder fund, what is the managing partner doing? writer and contributor, vicki ward, the headline on your story is madoff fund exec sails the seas in his new $30 million yacht? >> correct. >> how did this happen? >> i'm told by his attorney that he is actually trying to sell the boat. you know, erin, being on board, the boat is not the best way to sell it. if you want to sell a boat, you give it to a charter company and say put beyonce or a famous celebrity on the boat and that is the best way to hike up the price. you don't go on a cruise all

summer. looking like you are having the time of your life when your investors have been ruined. ruined. i mean, people wrote in comments to the blog i posted yesterday and they said disgusting. it doesn't do justice to what this man is doing. >> and as you said, his lawyer said you know, "he wasn't able to cancel his purchase or refuse to accept delivery of the yacht." there ever i guess he's force odd to sail the high seas. you're saying that doesn't hold up. >> no, because he could easily charter it out. how much do you think it costs to spends? this has eight crew on it, he's got his family on it. where is he getting the money to pay for all this. i'm sure investors would love to know that. i think once again, this just is a man who has no idea of the damage he's caused to his investors and who really doesn't

have a sense the very difficult political climate, you know, the business world is in at the moment. >> vicky, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> caught my attention and it does sort of defy the imagination. thank you. >> it really does. >> up next, gas costs on the rise and companies are looking for ways to save on that. tech effect has a bay to do it. "street signs" back with us. today there's a way to save more for retirement,

with annuities from fidelity. turn your savings into income -- guaranteed, and get a retirement "paycheck" for life -- guaranteed. call... to get started, and learn how to secure retirement income that won't go down -- guaranteed. call fidelity at... for details about guaranteed income for life, and change the way you think about your retirement savings.

in sacramento, california, air quality officials are spending millions so that owners of flex fuel vehicles can find gas stations that actually are able to sell you environmentally friendlier fuel. cnbc's jim goldman reports. ♪ we're the men of texaco >> go back from this modern refinery to the beginning of petroleum energy. >> you expect more from amoco. ♪ that's yuck trust your car >> dancing dinosaurs plugging

additives at the magic bullet to improve performance. today propel fuels is about what's not in the fuel and not in the environment. it's ethanol and biodiesel philips stations starting to pop up in northern california. >> we provide choice to customers at the pump and give them choices beyond standard petroleum products. today we're selling 85 ethanol and biodiesel and tomorrow we'll be selling hydrogen, electric vehicle charging, whatever makes sense at the time. >> reporter: while flex fuels are less expensive, drivers get between 20 and 30% fewer miles to the gallon, still propel is banking on consumers like paul we cough preferring lower cost and environmental benefits. >> the price is lower but there's energy independence that we're all working on and the lower emissions especially. >> the high tech doesn't end there. consumers and companies contract fuel consumption online. that's good for fleet usesers like the u.s. postal service with 43,000 flex fuel vehicles

nationwide, they're already propel customers. >> when the prices of gasoline go up, every penny it goes up costs the post office $8 million. >> a messages that's got as much mileage today. >> it can gave you money. >> money? >> as it did generations ago. jim goldman, cnbc business news, sacramento, california. all right. thanks to jim. the s&p up about 11% over the past two weeks. that's pretty impressive, but that only makes our country the 22nd best performing market since then. we have the biggest winners after this. we need to send an expert. a walking, talking... know-it-all... expert. a guru. how about wu? wu will do. where to? first stop... peru. vincent wu to katmandu. what's next? timbuktu. area code 212. so, timbuktu, katmandu, peru, and 212. all by half past 2:00. not a problem.

[ female announcer ] need an expert? push a button. that's the human network effect. learn more at cisco.com/newways. phew! two identical rooms. so why does this one cost so much less on hotwire.com? when four star hotels have unsold rooms they use hotwire to fill them, so you get them at prices lower than any other travel site, guaranteed. h-o-t-w-i-r-e, hotwire.com