also some lackluster economic data within the u.s. and on both the housing front and with durable goods. you can see the nasdaq ended the day off 16 points, a loss of .7%. s&p 500 also closed lower. of course a big day tomorrow on the jobs front with the jobless claims numbers. "fast money's" coming up next. melissa and the traders. thank you so much for watching, and have a wonderful night. live from the nasdaq marketsite, this is "fast money." just moments away, a showbiz showdown between the lionsgate vice chairman and carl icahn. they will both join us live with a lot of money on the line. but first, gary, euro's cracking today. we saw the euro drifting lower in the after-hours session. will that country's economy take our economy along with it? how do you defend itself in. >> it's not a matter of defending yourself. i thought today despite what happened in europe was a pretty positive day in the market. i think today's real story was the fact that for the first time in almost a year we priced three

ipos, they all traded very strong and as i've said for some time i thought the ipo market, the secondary market coming back was probably the most important thing in terms of what was going to happen with the stock market. >> i think you make a mistake, and i've said this all along this year, i think you make the mistake if you look at the broad market index and let that drive the decision on what trade you want to put on. i think right now the broad market index, it's going to keep going higher, as gary said. the meltup is there. however, there's a trade you can play from the short side. the euro is breaking down right now, they're heading into the summer tomorrow with significant division over there about what the outcome will be. you're seeing the euro right now as we speak the euro's making another low. gold is under pressure, oil is under pressure. playing oil from the short side. i bought some gld puts. there's a trade out there that forgetting where the market goes you play from the short side. >> that's a trade you actually reversed because you were long the uso and today you started shorting oil. >> remember, this is a trade --

i believe you're going to see a big liquidation in the euro. a lot of people that were short the euro, they covered on that last little move up. now they basically don't have the bullets. they're going to have to come in, sell at lower prices. >> july 4th is our independence day. actually, tomorrow, march 25th, is greek independence day. >> it is. >> odd -- >> i didn't know that you were up on the greek holidays. >> you i mention it for the following reason. i think there's a very good reason that friday rolls along, the prime minister from greece comes out and says, guess, what folks, we're insolvent, have a good weekend, let's see how this thing shakes out. now, understanding that greece basically is the size of the state of washington, you take that for what it's worth. but i think there's an excellent chance that friday you see some fireworks out there. >> i can tell you this. we're seeing higher highs, higher lows, and then you look at the volatility index, there's no panic out there. the s&p's finished above 1165. yeah, we're wringing our hands a little bit because we're down 50 points. yeah, i can see what's going on in europe. i think to guy's point yes, there are issues. these are issues we've known about for a long time. if you've followed the whole health care debate, following the whole thing with the

financials as well, the next area that we're focused on, that just gives you over time more and more comfort, more and more clarity as time goes on. we're getting to know much more about portugal and greece and spain than any of us ever thought we'd know. and you can look at our markets. we seem to be shaking off a lot of that very, very rapidly. and i think in the broader market we've got more up side. >> at the same time, pete, the euro, that's not something you actually look at. in fact, in the green room you say i don't know what the euro's trading at. i know you're xajtding. but that gets to the point of perhaps you're in the markets these days and it doesn't matter what they're doing because you've got a lot of activity -- >> i don't know necessarily that you're just going to completely throw aside the euro. i mean, i was half tongue in cheek joking about that. but i mean i look at it but i don't focus on that. i look at our companies, i look at the option activity that's been going on on a daily basis, i look at all these different commodity stocks. devon today. you look at mosaic today. up side activity. those stocks trading higher. when you look at the ag space, something like mosaic, and you see april 60, 65s, 70 calls all getting very, very activityive,

it tells you that people believe in the global story. forget about europe for a moment. when you're looking at some of these ag names, you're talking about south america, you're talking about the rest of the world. >> and it was your busiest day even though the volume on the exchanges has been pretty lackluster of late. >> probably the most active trading day i've had of the year, absolutely. >> you know, in february i thought as the euro was collapsing for the first time, i thought that it was going to have an yes, ma'am pact on the european markets. it didn't. i thought the fact that europe was going to maybe optimistically growing 1% as the eu was going to have an impact on valuations here, it didn't. so i'm pressed to figure out even if the euro does continue this collapse, will it impact the european markets? because it didn't in february. so i don't know what the difference would be now. >> well, i think the flip side to that is there's beneficiaries out of this. the canadian market is somewhere you want to be. even the russian market, which tim talks about -- >> how? >> you get exposure to the canadian market through the currency etf, the fxc. there's a russian etf that timmy talks about.

but i think it goes back to the strategy of 2010. 2010 is not your 2009 market. the comfort assets of '09 are not the comfort 'assets of 2010. think about it. gold, oil. the xle is down for the year so far. massively underperforming the s&p. what's up? consumer discretionary. as a trader, as an investor you have to quickly make that change. >> just to tie a ribbon on sort of the commodity story, joe talks about this for a long time, we've had very bearish stats for crude oil for quite some time now. but crude has been going higher on the back of that. bad news, good performance. today first time in a long time, frs time that i can remember at least this year, that we've seen bearish stats and subsequently bearish price action. it's something to keep in mind especially since we've been right around this 81 level for quite some time. >> let's bring in dennis gartman because dennis gartman is actually watching that euro drift lower in the after-hours session. dennis gartman of "the gartman letter," this sth going to ruin our rally or are we to a point now where we're sort of digesting the bad news here in the market so the impact is

really secondary in that it qul impacts the dollar and the dollar impacts trade here? >> i think getting too concerned about what's happening in europe -- and the euro's in trouble. i mean, it's going to 1.25, 1.20, 1.15. does that have to have a terribly deleterious impact on our capital market? and the answer is no, it really doesn't. so if we think that -- and i think that and have thought for a long period of time that the euro's under duress and is likely to go demonstrably low dwlaerks doesn't mean we have to come out and sell stocks across the board. >> dennis, hold on. we do want to go back toeng'llwood cliffs. mary thompson's at the breaking news desk. >> a ubs banker has been charged in an insider trading case. the u.s. attorney in manhattan announcing charges against two individuals, one of whom is igor poteroba, a ubs banker, and a friend of his, aleksei cobalt. the two of them involved in insider trading.

poteroba tipping off cobalt on six health care deals. the ill-gotten gain of those insider trading tips $1 million. the investigation sun believable. but again, two individuals charged in insider trading by the u.s. attorney in manhattan. one of them a ubs banker, igor poteroba. back to you. >> thank you very much, mary thompson, with the latest on the breaking news desk. dennis, want to get back to you. you're watching the euro. walk us through the 100-day and 200-day moving charts that you've got flagged and tell us what it means for your trade. >> if you take a look at the chart, you're going to see over the past several days the 100-day moving average has come back down underneath the 200-day. a lot of people, a lot of technicians use that as a sell signal. it tends to run very late, but it tells you that the major trend is clearly downward, melissa. so where are we going? we're going a lot lower. and i think that guy made a very good point. you do have a holiday coming up and it's holidays when governments decide to make very massive statements, or important statements. we know that greece probably is only going to be solvent through the end of march.

here you are at the end of march, you've got a problem coming up. this thing's going a lot lower. >> so you keep your short on even through that holiday, dennis. >> i'm going to. >> you are. dennis, we will check in with you a little bit later on for a sneak preview of your famous newsletter. i do want to move on today because we've got to talk about all those ipos, a trio, in fact. maxlinear, calix networks, both tech firms, trading higher by 25% on their debut. also first interstate bank up more than 10%. joe, you are in particular interested in the financial making an ipo and doing well. >> and this speaks to why the credit markets haven't improchd this is why the equity market is pushing toward 1200. think about it. you have a bank that actually did an ipo here, a commercial bank based out of montana and wyoming, a successful one, and this gives you confidence in the market. i think it's phenomenal. >> the first -- i'm sorry, gary, but the first interstate bank i know jim cramer made comments, he says he loves the management there. the ipo on this stock was 14 1/2, trading 15.70.

jim may be spot on with this one. i don't think there's any reason to chase. he with might test back down to that 14 1/2, $15 level but i think that's one you may want to put on your radar screen. >> and a number of viewers might wonder why do we care about small deals and why do we think they have such an impact on the market? and i think i tried to point this out some time ago. it's a huge confidence builder when people can buy these deals and the syndicate business is working. when the secondary syndicate business, which is driven by the ipo business, is happening, you see a tremendous amount of things happening in the capital markets. it feeds on itself. so when you do a deal, you buy a deal, you feel good about it, you're going to take the next deal. and it feeds on itself. and that's why this has been such an important thing if we're going to move significantly higher. >> so there's mako significance to this. you might not want to chase the bank ipo, but pete, you actually bought into two of the tech -- >> i did in the technology space. the reason i'm so excited about it, these are oversubscribed. this tells you something about technology. enterprise spending. all of the rest of it. look at some of these stocks. when you look in the sector, something we pointed out yesterday, one of the areas

where we really started to spike late in the day, it was intel. it was microsoft. it was cisco. it was across the board. oracle hitting another 52-week high. look at marvell. these names. akamai, we bring it up almost every night. when you look at a name like maxlinear, we're talking about getting involved in the video space. very interesting. i like the space that it is. i don't know nearly enough about the company yet. but i like the fact that these are oversubscribed. it tells me that this is an area that's got much more up side. >> and you're actually able to buy at the open and still be up on the day. >> well, strong day. strong day -- i mean, i'm just impressed with the reaction, the premiums right now. it just shows you that -- >> i don't recall being able to see trades like that in probably a year. it's probably been a year since you've been able to buy something on the open after it's been priced and make money on that -- >> probably longer than a year. >> let's move on because we do want to put our ears to the wall on a couple of the biggest takers of government bailouts, general motors and citigroup. what's washington's next moves for these wards of the state in let's start off with gm.

>> and again, this also involves the syndicate market because eventually we're going to see some deals. and what i've heard today is two things. obviously the toyota troubles, plus the fact that gm has been doing better in this first quarter, probably moves up the gm timetable from three months -- from maybe six months out to three months out. so i think we're going to see gm come back -- >> by the end of 2010 we'll have a publicly traded gm -- >> absolutely. i think it will happen before the summer holidays. i think they're going to try to do this gm deal in some way, shape, or form before july 4th. >> does that cap ford? >> i don't think so. listen, i thought you should have taken profits in ford bay buck ago, but i liked it in terms of a macro story. i don't think it hurts ford whatsoever. i still think they've got tailwinds major league. >> i don't disagree with guy, but i think there are a number of people that will sell some ford just to participate in the deal because the way the game is played and they're going to want to give some orders to the big banks. every investment bank will be an underwriter in this deal pup may sell some ford to participate in

the gm deal to sort of pay some commissions. in the case of citi what i've heard today is this thing's been pushed out a month. not because there's any issues at citi but because it's very important that this deal gets priced like when they priced the deal in december and it trades well. so i think they want to have the quarter behind them, have some good, continued good news. so this is probably going to be pushed out a month in terms of when something happens. everybody knows the lockup is over, and they thought the deal is imminent. i don't hear it's imminent. >> if you were truly a conspiracy theorist, you'd say the government knew something about citi's numbers being a good quarter and therefore that would be support to the stock, because why would you wait when the stock's at $4.15, wait a month or more to sell -- >> because the worst thing that they can do for taxpayers right now is put this thing back into the public market and have something come out negative afterwards. better to be safe here, and so it's probably another four weeks. >> you snicker, my conspiracy theorist -- >> well, one of the other reasons why maybe is they're maybe even ling listening to a guy like dick bove. he's talking about two years out, many of the bank stocks

quadrupling. he's got buy ratings on bank of america. most active areas of the market was jpmorgan, citi, bank of america. bank of america trading almost 500,000, over 500,000 contracts today. most of those in april, most of those up side, including the 19 calls and 20 calls. tells you that people are starting to think bank of america's got more up side. >> looking at those names pete mentioned a lot of these financials banks of america, jpmorgan, wlsz walz fargo all trading to the october levels where they made 52-week highs in. we'll talk about gemworth financial a name i think joe has mentioned. very interesting option. very interesting trading action. huge volume. a name i like. but i think a lot of the shorts got squeezed in this name gad. i like gmw. >> i think the derivative trade-off is to look at those mortgage insurers. gemworth performed well. pmi looked good. a place you want to be. >> the moment is here. your front row seat to a corporate showdown of the

highest order. a war of words erupting today in the battle to control movie studio lionsgate. in one corner billionaire activist investor carl icahn who recently launched a $6 a share tender offer for the company. in the other, lionsgate vice chairman michael burns, who calls that offer woefully inadequate and points to the company's ten-year performance as proof of value. take a look at that chart. carl will join us right after the break. but for right now michael burns gets the first word in a "fast money" exclusive. michael, it is a pleasure to speak with you. thanks so much for joining us. >> nice to see you, melissa. >> you knee, i chatted with mr. icahn this afternoon, and this is a question because you say that the offer is woefully inadequate. if you think it is and you are confidence that it is woefully inadequate, why not just put the vote up to the shareholders? why not let them decide? >> well, what we did -- i'm glad you asked that question. we put in a rights plan. it's not a typical poison pill, melissa. what's happening is we're

actually going to have a shareholder vote on the rights plan in early may, may 4th. and what this pill has which is very different than a lot of pills is that if carl ultimately gives an irrevocable offer and ends up with 50% of the shares that he currently doesn't own, the pill goes away. >> ah. okay. let's move on to the reason why mr. icahn is waging this takeover offer. he's concerned about your company's balance sheet. and yes, your letter to mr. icahn, your response you that released this afternoon, you made it very clear, you walked through all your lines of business, lots of positive data points there, but when you boil it down you take a look at the company's cash flow, that has been negative, you have a heavy debt burden, and at the same time you're waging a proposal to take over a library of assets from mgm for north of $1 billion. what is the strategy here? how will shareholders actually

benefit? how will this lead to appreciation of the stock price, which yes, over ten years has appreciated but if you take a look at the five-year chart your stock is actually down about 45% compared to the s&p 500, which was flat? >> yeah. i prefer, actually, the value that we've built over the last ten years. but let me say one thing. the one thing that we do have in common with carl, i believe, is that neither one of us pays retail for anything. we've had a very open dialogue with all of our major shareholders -- all of our shareholders over the years, where if nothing else we are certainly accessible. and so the point is that we would not overpay for any assets. if it wasn't accretive to our company and all of the shareholders, we wouldn't buy it. and again, it's a long-term history of creating value not only based pofrn acquisitions but organic growth. but if you look at deb-mar mercury, which is now in the sibd kated television business-f you look at what we're doing with "tv guide," if you look at

how in the forefront we were in the digital front with brake media which has 80 million uniques, tvguide.com which was a real value in the "tv guide" acquisition. epiics that we're launching with mgm and paramount. we think we're creating long-term value. and and the simple -- i'm sorry, melissa, go ahead. >> i'm sorry to interrupt but i do want to get back to not paying retail. and yes, you may be paying less than that library is worth but maybe an offer north of $1 billion is still too much for your particular company to handle. if you believe it is accretive, when will it be accretive and how will this impact your company's ability to turn free cash flow positive? >> well, obviously, as we grow the businesses, melissa, and all the core businesses, and jon feltheimer, our ceo, is a terrific operator building value going all the way back to the sony days with telemundo. but what i'll say is what we have here is we're going to have ups and downs from a free cash flow standpoint based on how we're growing the business. the ironic thing for me as i

look at it is that carl is saying that boy, oh boy, these guys are doing a terrible job, but i want to buy the whole company. well, who built the value of these core assets that he's trying to buy the entire company? and again, our board of directors has said over and over again and my sense is they've looked at this very carefully, is that his offer is ridiculous. we believe there's significantly more value than the $6 a share that carl is offering. and again, his history, by the way, is terrific in certainly a lot of deals, but he's opportunistic in his buying, and we think this is an example of that. >> mr. burngsz i'd like to ask a que quick question. 70% of your films over the ten years ha v. been profitable. i think that's at the top end of the industry. but i think the hidden value for you guys is television. in '99 you did $8 million in revenue. i think you did $350 million this year. can you comment on that trajectory? do you see that continuing on that path? >> we think it's a massive

business for us in the long term. and by the way, the way the pieces fit together i'll give you guys a little bit of an exclusive. in the fall "weeds" actually will be on the tv guide channel, and it will be coupled with "curb your enthusiasm." there was a nice "new york times" piece on what our creative team and felt did in regards to that. so tv guide is coupled with the enormous library that we have, that television is in, enormous growth business. not only "mad men." i know melissa's got a big crush on jon hamm, who says hello. we have nurse jackie, pickup for blue mountain state. so yeah, television is enormous growth business for us. >> i've got to ask you about friday's second-round deadline for mgm. is your current offer your last? >> i don't think we've publicly said whether we're in the mgm gain -- game or not. i think they have to figure out, look, the issue for them is

going to be the bank debt is trading at a significant premium over where i think, at least according to the press, where the offers came in, and they'll have to decide what they want to do. so we can't speculate on any particular deal. the important thing to note is you've got to take a look at the entire history of the company since we arrived ten years ago. we don't do dumb deals. if they're not accretive and they're not done for the right price, we're going to pass. >> all right. i'm going to ask you one more time, mr. burns. so if you believe that buying an mgm library would be accretive, by when? give us that answer so we can actually, you know, assess whether this is a good thing for your company. >> well, again, it's all about structure. and again, i wouldn't comment on -- i know there's been a lot of speculation in the press about miramax and the press about mgm. we would be remiss to our shareholders if we didn't look at every single deal that we could leverage with our infrastructure and our new channel platform. so the answer is the friday deadline is news to me, that you

mentioned, melissa, this friday. i think it's going to be up to the board of directors of mgm what they decide to pursue. and maybe ultimately the creditors there. >> okay. and one last question, mr. burns. the first question i asked you actually came -- >> you can call me michael, melissa. >> michael. michael. the first question i asked you today actually came from mr. icahn, carl. so what would you like to ask mr. icahn yourself? >> what would i like to ask carl? i would say carl, i think that the one thing in the public filings is all about -- that we've talked about, which is i think he wants to be very much involved in any significant deal that we've done. i guess the question i would say does he feel like that we haven't kept him in the loop on any potential transactions? >> okay. we will ask that question. thank you very much, michael burns, vice chairman of lions gate. and just moments from now billionaire activist investor carl icahn will respond, will answer mr. burns's question and much more. but first, here's what's coming up on the show.

>> wall street craves capital. just not this kind. financials stuck in legislative limbo as traders await a clear reform bill before putting their own bills to work. find out which banks will break out of political purgatory. plus, tech shares may be frozen so far this year, but don't switch off your shares just yet. options oracles see a powerful surge this earnings season. we'll tell you which names to watch. as america's post-market show continues. every online equity trade is now $8.95 tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no matter your account balance, how often you trade tdd# 1-800-345-2550 or how many shares... tdd# 1-800-345-2550 you pay what they pay what everyone pays: $8.95. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and you still get all the help tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and support you expect from schwab tdd# 1-800-345-2550 millions of investors. one price. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 at charles schwab... tdd# 1-800-345-2550 investors rule. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 are you ready to rule?

♪ well, look who's here. it's ellen. hey, mayor white. how you doing? great. come on in. would you like to see our new police department? yeah, all right. this way. and here it is. completely networked. so, anything happening, suz? she's all good. oh, my gosh. is that my car? [ whirring ] [ female announcer ] the new community. see it. live it. share it. on the human network. cisco.

moments ago in a "fast money" exclusive lions gate vice chairman made the case against carl icahn's bid for the company. responding on the phone right now in another "fast money" exclusive, legendary activist investor carl icahn. carl, welcome to you. >> yeah, hi, melissa. good to talk to you. >> i want to keep up the dialogue because the very last question i asked michael was what question would you want to ask mr. icahn? and he wanted to ask you do you feel like you were not kept in the loop on all the transactions the company has made? because you've been there along the way. so if you had an issue with the company's strategic vision, why is it coming out now in a takeover offer? >> well, i certainly was not kept in the loop on these

money-losing movies they went and wanted to produce. not that i'm a micromanager. they went out, and i think they're swinging for the fences, and they should stick to what they're doing. when they went out, they produced "from paris with love," they produced "spirit," they produced "the killers," they just spent 75 million on that i hear isn't so great, we'll see, and nobody has -- certainly nobody -- not that i expect them to, but they certainly never called me about it. and this company should not be producing movies. movies -- hey, i knew -- over the years i met a number of these guys like steve ross, i was friendly with, and marty davis, and one of the things they all told me, carl, don't produce movies. this is what these guys are doing. because you know, hey, it's fun. you get it into your blood, and this is why a lot of rich kids love to buy movie companies. they like to go to the oscars. they stand up there shaking hands with the actors -- >> they wear a fancy outfit. yeah. >> and i'll tell you, mark

brushevski went to the oscars. i'm good friends with mark. he worked for me. but they all get bitten by this bug. this is a good business. i will tell you this, that the answer he gave you to your first question was completely disingenuous. you asked a damn good question. >> let me ask you this, carl. what is your strategic vision? because you do realize, as i'm sure you realize that if you take over this company that will trigger covenants in their debt facilities. it will lead to higher interest rates on their debt. it will lead to possibly higher fees on their facility if it does change control. so that would impact the company's finances ultimately. >> we address that. and we're saying that if we do get control we'll put up a bridge to -- look, these defaults that they put in were land mines to protect and entrench themselves. there was no need to have these defaults on these bonds, and the

only reason they put them-n because they don't want to be taken over. they like what they do. and i don't blame them. look, they're playing with shareholders' money, making these big deal movies, and if it goes up, you know, they make a lot of money and they stand at the oscars. if they go down and those movies fall, it's the shareholders' money. so they put in this land mine of protection where they said, well, nobody can ever get 51% because by definition you'll have a default, which i'm not even sure you will. but if you do we say we'll put up the 500 million and then what you should do is do a rights offering to pay back the bridge for all shareholders and have a little debt but not a lot of debt. >> hey, carl, it's gary. let me just ask you, in mid february i asked you about taking control of lionsgate and you said you weren't interested at that time in taking control. so obviously something changed. was it more mismanagement? was it that you just looked at the industry differently? like what has changed that you now are willing to take full control? >> hey, gary, look, i've listened to these guys for five

years. nice guys. i like michael burns. good guy. i've had drinks with him. i had dinner with him. a lot of fun. okay? that's not the issue. the issue is that when they start going out now -- i see where this is going. and we have an investment to protect. you know, where it's going is to spend a billion dollars on mgm is absurd. okay? it's absurd for this company. as melissa said, if you're warren buffett you can spend it. but these guys can't go spend a billion dollars, or even time warner could if they wanted to, but these guys can't do that. so you say you reach a point, and the final point was the poison pill they put out, which is completely disingenuous. they wasted the money of the company. the question that was asked, and rightly so, is if you believe that six bucks is such a terrible bid, then i won't get it, then nobody will tend it to me. why do you have to spend all the money and all the time and all the waste to now have a vote to approve a poison pill? and even if you do -- and they don't even let me vote in that.

so the vote is rigged to begin with. and why are you doing it? if you honestly believe that 6 bucks is undervaluing it, nobody will tender. so the whole thing is an absurdity. and then you look at this company, for the last -- i mean, it's going down a toboggan slide. they lost $133 million for the fiscal year in 331. then they lost 131 million. then they -- >> carl, we got the financials. all good points. but by you as well as mr. burns. thank you very much for phoning in with your response. we do appreciate it. we hope you come back on the show sometime soon, carl. you actually like lionsgate. >> i do. >> let's say the company did -- he was sort of -- michael burns didn't want to be cornered into actually saying that he made a bid north of a billion dollars. but let's say they make a bid north of a billion dollars. given the company's debt load, would you like the company less? >> it's a tremendous debt load. but i think they also have a 12,000-title library right now. it's an intellectual property play. carl likes this for a reason.

he's just not being magnanimous here. i think they're on to something. their tv side is definitely generating revenues. they have great zbroeth on the tv side. i happen to like the stock. will that hurt the stock price if they win this? probably will. i think long term, though, lgf is still buying. >> listening to mr. burns and then listening to mr. icahn, clearly i think mr. icahn is probably feeling better about his fight with genzyme right now given what happened today with the fda. sounds to me like lionsgate is a much taller -- >> in the entertainment world it's disney. i look at lionsgate, it's an interesting product. i like mr. burns. i like where he's going. but i look at disney, i look at the franchise and i look at the pipeline of "alice in wonderland" and all the rest of it coming down that's why i think it's a better trade and better opportunity. >> and just my interpretation having listened to these two gentlemen, what i think is you're going to see some sort of deal here. i think carl realizes that if you do take control of this company management has to be there because that's the nature of the business. i see some sort of deal happening, they're going to work this out. >> let's settle this right now. >> mr. burns is back.

>> not only mr. burns. >> and carl icahn. >> carl icahn is on the phone as well. mr. burns, you're back on the west -- michael. sorry. my mother taught me to call people by mister and then the last name. we want you to answer mr. icahn. you did listen to the interview, correct? >> yeah, i did. i just heard it. thank you. >> mr. icahn, you're on the phone. what would you like to ask mr. burns? >> i'd just ask michael one question, which i don't think he answered before. if you think my bid is so low and inadequate, why don't you let the shareholders just tender or not tender? why do we have to go through this charade of a vote that's not really a vote? i mean, i've been seeing better votes in a dictatorship. i'm not allowed to vote. so why not just simply say go do your tender, carl, it's inadequate and nobody will tender and good-bye? but why are you going through the charade? >> okay. two things. i'll get back to the pill in a

second. i'll be happy to answer that, carl. but first off, i mean, the point that you made about us spending all this money on productions. we didn't produce "from paris with love," carl. in fact, our average cost of the next 20 movies that we release net of marketing and net of foreign sales is less than $12 million per movie. the next 20 movies coming out. so i want to make that point. as far as -- >> well, i'd like to answer that bit. let me ask you a question. you lost 133 bucks for -- cash in fiscal -- >> wait, hold on, carl. >> i just -- >> i'm sorry, carl, but you asked -- >> isn't that a trend? why did you lose all the snoin. >> carl. with all due respect, mr. icahn, you asked mr. burns a question. let's at least let him answer -- >> but melissa-n all due respect, he didn't answer it. >> in terms of putting that vote of $6 a share up to shareholders. >> we thought that was the fairest thing to do. this is not a typical pill. carl knows this. and i have a tremendous amount of respect for carl.

the way this pill works is if carl irrevocably offers to buy and ends up with 50% of the stock he doesn't own, doesn't already own, the pill goes away. that's as democratic as it can possibly be. >> so melissa, could i ask a question now? >> go ahead. >> so the president of the united states isn't allowed to vote for himself. what he's saying is his family and he can't vote for himself when he goes to an election. that's democratic? i think that's a totalitarian state. why can't i -- i own 20%. why can't i vote? >> carl, you know the way these work. but what i was going to say is we still have -- we have 80%. okay? we have 80% of the stock that you don't own that has the potential to vote whether they think this pill makes sense, this shareholder rights plan does. again, i can't say it more emphatically, carl. if you end up with 50% of the stock that you currently don't own, the pill goes away. and i don't know how i can make that point more clearly.

>> mr. burns, to be fair, do you have a question for mr. icahn? >> i guess my question is is that carl, if you look at our track record of acquisitions over the years, do you feel that we've done a bad job with the acquisitions that we've made, or do you feel that we've done a bad job, for example, with the television, the feature films business, and particularly channels? and the other question, if i was going to get specific, carl, i know last year you were in the press criticizing the tv guide transaction and then i saw in the "journal" recently it looked like you said that seems like a good deal. i was just curious, do you think that was a good deal or a bad deal? >> i think it was a bad deal. i never said it was a good deal. a bad deal for you guys. you leveraged yourself up too much for it. and you know, with all respect, you know, i love the guys on "fast money" and i've been on a number of times, but i really think that they're emphasizing the wrong thing. you don't make a lot of money. if you talk to the real pros, you don't make a lot of money on these tv productions.

they all sound great. you really make money from what you have. what you have is a good thing is the distribution business. all that other stuff you're doing in my opinion you're leveraging up this company and the losses that you've had, it's a trend, michael. and what you're going to be doing is everybody is going to say, well, yeah, "mad men" is good because they like "mad men." i watch it myself. but what i am saying to you is that basically tv does not make a company a lot of money. and i think that's what -- the whole group i just listened to is making an error. >> carl, i just want -- >> last word, michael. >> yeah. melissa, i just want to add one thing. television is a tremendous business for us. if you take a look just at the packaged media for "weeds" and "mad men," it looks like on each one of those series we will do over $100 million of revenue just on dvd sales from "mad men" and "weeds." and if you take a look, for example, the way the digital world is working, we had "precious" that came out on dvd last week.

it has 1 million digital transactions that have taken place in the last ten days. so again, we're trying to bet on the future, which is obviously digital. at the same time leveraging our packaged media business. but to say that television isn't a profitable business long term, that's just not right. >> all right, guys, we've got to -- >> but i -- >> i've got to blow the whistle. we are under time constraints, as you both know. but we do appreciate your time. and thanks for being good sports, answering each other's questions, in what i believe is a television first, to actually have both sides. >> i've got to say, that was remarkable. i've sat in meetings, you know, back at neuberger, but this -- >> to be on live national television -- >> can we have popcorn next time with that? >> i smell -- i don't know about you guys, but i smell settlement here. i think there's going to be a settlement. >> we will trade this whole debate, this whole showdown. in fact, take a look at the after-hours chart on lionsgate. we are watching that stock tick higher as we heard those two gentlemen spar. more show coming up next. thing as taking a chance?

as having to decide to go for it? at the hartford, we help businesses of all kinds... feel confident doing what they do best. by protecting your business, your property, your people. you've counted on us for 200 years. let's embrace tomorrow. and with the hartford behind you, achieve what's ahead of you. ♪

welcome back to "fast money." we've got carl icahn on the phone again. no, just kidding. just, just kidding. all right. waent to go to patty edwards on the prop desk, tracking red hat

in the after-hours session. patty, there are high expectations for this stock going into this earnings. and we're seeing it fall in the after-hours. >> we are seeing it down and i'm a little bit perplexed about that, melissa. if i look at these numbers, they are giving us guidance that says despite headwinds from foreign exchange they are going to be making almost exactly what the estimates are for both sales and revenue next year. they're looking to hit the first quarter number for them. i'm not seeing the problems here. they are doing everything they need to. we have margin expansion. they came up quite significantly from same time last year. i think these guys are doing everything right and this may be a buying opportunity if you look at it tomorrow morning. >> and they've got a share buyback and you look at the revenues she's talking about, this follows up on adobe from yesterday. you're seeing the software area, software application very, very strong. plays back into this whole technology. a lot of strength coming in technology right now. guy, valuation? >> well, red hat's a name we've talked about. and to patty's point, i think the valuation's what it comes down to. they're going to make 68 cents this year. they're only going to make about

80 cents next year. it's hard to have a 40 times forward multiple when your eps growth is nowhere near that. i like the name. i think it's extended. i would love to find this stock lower. but right now it's just in that up trend. i still think you have to wait for it to pull back. >> you sounded like ryan seacrest. >> i do watch a lot of certain shows. >> certain shows on another network. all right. let's move on here. note to wall street. bigger may not be better. that's seemingly the message from a number of former wall street titans who've shunned the big investment banks and have instead taken up shop at smaller shops. the question now, should you invest alongside them? anthony scaramucci is a managing partner at skybridge capital, a leading fund of funds business. >> hi, melissa. >> anthony, would you make the case that you should follow some of these groerm wall street titans and go into these smaller names? >> first off, before i get into that, the next time you get guys on the show like that, can we ask for oscar tickets for your friends and family, please? >> i'm asking for a meeting with jon hamm. but you can ask for what you want. >> that was great television. but what's going on right now is

you have a group of guys that used to fly 747s. okay? this is jon corzine, thain, peter cohen, even alan schwartz over at bear stearns. all these guys were superstar ceo titans, and they've now all found themselves in smaller positions. so the question is why are they doing that? three main reasons. number one, the t.a.r.p. has effectively become a tarp on the field of compensation for wall street. number two, the spotlight and the glamour that we used to see these guys in is no longer there. in fact, if anything, that spotlight comes with a lot of scrutiny, and so these guys are trying to avoid the spotlight. and the third reason is these smaller kidnaps are nimble. so these guys have traded in their pilot's license for the 747s into cessnas. and i think that's telling the market something. to play close attention to these smaller, more nimble financial services companies, that may be the future of wall street, and

it may be a "back to the future" moment, meaning all of these guys were running companies you know, 10 or 15 years ago that were a lot smaller than the ones -- >> those are all fantastic anecdotes, anthony, but at the same time i've got this really handy-dandy stats because there are just as many former wall street guys, or wall street titans, so to speak, who are still at the big firms. of 100 -- this is my little factoid of the day. 104 senior executives whose pay was set by the federal pay regulator in the last two years. about 85% of them are still at those firms. so can we actually draw the conclusion that all of these guys are fleeing the big firms and therefore you should follow along with them in terms of your portfolio? >> well, you know, your point is well taken. but these guys are super smart industry leaders, cutting edge guys. each one of those guys could have gone back into the upper tier, the top highest market cap financial services firms. again, there's an adrenaline rush being with those large cap

financial services firms. i just think it's an interesting thing. i think it's something as an investor we should focus on. people voting with their feet, as smart as a guy like jon corzine or john thain, we should look into their companies more carefully and see that as a potential directional bias positively in the future. >> on reflecting 24 hours later on this announcement about mf global and corzine, i think there's two things. number one, corzine, i agree with anthony, could have had a bigger job if he wanted a bigger job. it was available for him. but i think the real story here having thought about it for the last 24 hours is chris flowers. j.c. flowers' involvement in this situation and reuniting with corzine, they worked together at goldman, anthony knows most people at goldman will tell you flowers was the single best financial services investment banker ever. so i think the plan here is much bigger, it's not going to happen overnight but i believe mf global is the kind of name you want to pay attention to. maybe you buy it you put it away. because they'ring go to use this currency to grow this business and they've got a number of alternatives they're looking at. >> just for the viewers'

benefit, mr. corzine's also going to be a partner at flowers's private equity firm. >> anthony, thank you so much for joining us. anthony scaramucci of skybridge. more "fast money" up next.

welcome back to "fast money." we are live at the nasdaq marketsite in new york's times square. we do want to touch base once again with dennis gartman of the gartman letter because we've got to get that sneak preview of the letter coming out tomorrow. what are you working on? >> i'm working on the fact the dollar has broken out to the up side against the yen, something very important here. it's the end of the fiscal year. normally you end up getting yen strength at this time of the year. instead now you're getting demonstrative yen weakness. you're breaking all sorts of trend lines. i think you need to pay attention to the fact we went through 2 1/2 big figures today in the yen. i think this is the start of something very large. >> okay. thank you, dennis, for that preview. we'll be looking for that preview tomorrow morning. the biggest earnings story of the week by far comes tomorrow after the close. oracle a bellwether not only for technology but business spending overall. let's take our positions here.

guy, what do you think? >> oracle's a name we like for a while, trades around 13 1/2 times forward earnings, it's a new contract, new service licensing agreement that's going to be the number to watch with these guys. it always is. my sense is they're going to do very well. it comes down to how the market interprets their earnings. i think they'll be fine, i think guidance will be fine, but we've seen at least over the last more o'so we've seen good earnings bad price action. we'll see what happens tomorrow. >> tomorrow morning you're also going to get best buy. consumer discretionary has been phenomenal. wroi look for best buy to beat and move higher. >> expect oracle's numbers to be outstanding. whether or not that means for the stock reaction, it's going to be small likely, but i still think you can look at some of the other tech names, their earnings down the road. intel obviously. i think marvell's still a name to keep a very close eye on. >> since we are talking about technology earnings it is important to note that last quarter 95% of tech companies in the s&p 500 beat eps estimates and actually guided higher. the problem now, those stocks seem expensive. so to spend less and try to make some more, let's do some "options action" with brian stutland of stutland equities.

brian, what's your general, your fundamental thesis and what's your trade? >> melissa, by the way, that icahn interview was fantastic. it fired me up after what was actually kind of a quiet day in my vix options pits today, guys sitting around me taking a bit of a breather. but when you talk about technology, the fundamental picture looks fantastic. and i know pete's been pounding the table on some of the tech names earlier and he has every right to. i was taking a look at three names i really like. emc, texas instruments, qualcomm. some option activity going on there that i wanted to check out. if you look out to july on some of those names, those calls, 5% out of the money calls in july, trading at roughly 3% or 4 hers only the premium of the stock, so calls are really cheap. we're in this low volatility environment. it makes it enticing to start buying calls everywhere. but i want to start to look at some strategies that are a little bit less risky, a little bit less where i'm outlaying cash everywhere which way. you want to look at technology and i want to play it to a broad base view on the whole picture of technology. >> so you're looking at xlk and you're thinking of collecting

some premium? >> yeah. exactly. and xlk, here i don't have to pick specific names. i get the whole broad-based index. what i want to do here is sell a june 22 put for 50 cents. what does that mean? it means i'm willing to get put to the stock below $22-w where i'd actually have to own the stock. i'm definitely feeling comfortable owning the xlk, owning technology if it were to pull back a little bit, and i want to take a harvest mode, an overlay mode by selling that put. i collect that premium right now. if we are in this low volume environment and all we do is trade sideways for the next couple months up and through to earnings i'm collecting that premium in the meantime. and i am willing to get long xlk down at that $22 level. >> you know, just an interesting point. remember, in january technology, the technology earnings wrt best of any sector, and it was the worst-performing in terms of stock price. as guy has pointed out it was good earnings, bad stock price. a lot of that i thought had to do with the fact these had been marked up window dressing late this year. i don't have that kind of feel in terms of technology going into this quarter, but i'm not certain whether the earnings are

not already absorbed. but i don't feel you're going to get that kind of sell-off you got in january and april. >> okay. brian stutland, thank you so much. brian of course a contributor on "options action," which you can catch every friday night 5:30 p.m. eastern on cnbc. more "fast money" up next. to a well-equipped buick lacrosse. get inside each. and see what you find. if perfection is what you pursue, this just might change your course. meet the new class of world class. the twenty-ten lacrosse, from buick. may the best car win. because now you can trade u.s. and foreign stocks online, in 12 markets, 24 hours a day, all from the same account, and settle in u.s. dollars or the local currency. plus, we'll guide you with international research

and realtime quotes, so you can diversify your portfolio, wherever -- whenever. and we'll be on call around the clock, while you trade around the globe. fidelity investments. turn here.

all right. let's hit the poll because this is a good one. tonight's question, who won the fight? we want you out there to call it. carl icahn or lionsgate's michael burns? log on to fastmoney.cnbc.com right now and cast your vote. what do you guys think? >> well, i think carl's more colorful but i think mr. burns did a great job. i'd give my vote to michael burns. ? gary? >> management got that one. >> i'm writing in for the shareholders. >> pete? >> i've got to think mr. burns took him on that one. i mean, carl's just trying to get something at a great price. >> we should note we want to remind you as well, while you're there you can play "fast money" madness. we are down to just 16 teams as we head to round 3 of voting. big match-ups in this next round, a battle between two tech titans. 3 seed cisco looks to take down 2 seed apple. text 26221, standard texting

message rates may apply. whatever ryan seacrest says. i say that too. republican, if y remember, if you missed the first two rounds you can -- >> get in. >> 26221. final trade, joe. >> that mr. icahn interview got me thinking yahoo. >> got me thinking lionsgate, lgf. >> gary. >> mf global is interesting here. >> pete. >> mosaic pulled back. i think mosaic's got some up side. >> ooh. i'm melissa lee. thanks so much for watching. see you tomorrow on the halftime report and then again at 5:00 p.m. eastern for more "fast money" right here on cnbc. have a great night. >> announcer: next, radio silence? with big ad dollars on the rise, cramer's got one company that could have you tuning in profits. tune your dial to "mad money" next on cnbc. first in business worldwide. ry in the south. i'll never forget. it used one tank of petrol and i had to refill it twice with oil.

a new car today has 95% lower emissions than in 1970. exxonmobil is working to improve cars, liners of tires, plastics which are lighter and advanced hydrogen technologies that could increase fuel efficiency by up to 80%.

sure, but let me get a little information first. for broccoli, say one. for toys, say two. toys !