>> we need the president, congress, and fcc to reform. dodd frank has been sliced and diced too much. >> that's for watching street signs. see you on monday. >> welcome to the "closing bell." i'm michelle caruso-cabrera in for maria bartiromo. >> and i'm bob pisani in for bill griffeth. they will both return on monday. take a look at the major average. right at the open drifting lower. nasdaq, similar situation. techs were leaders early on s&p

500 only down fractionally for the week. just turning negative. >> jpmorgan still getting hit hard here in the home stretch. and now reports that regulators sources telling the nyse over jpmorgan's accounting practices and public disclosures bad day for jpmorgan but not so for the overall market. does this mean that that bad trade is just a hiccup? bob? >> time for the "closing bell" exchange. outspoken activist sharon jackson. first, ron insana and our own rick santelli. what is your take on this? do we need to bring back the

glass eagle? >> i've always felt that way, bob. had the government, in the wake of the scandals, i think prosecuted some financial ceos for violations, filing materially false financial statements and had they reimposed glass steagall, having said that, i like the way jamie dimon got and undue risks and deposits. >> rick santelli, your assessment of the situation. and as ron was saying they didn't intend to take undue risk. >> no one ever does. >> and i agree with everything that ron said.

i agree you shouldn't be a principal and an agent. there's no question, everybody that i've talked to after the crisis understands and everybody can understand and i do think when you don't address things like over-the-counter issues, cbs issues, the glass-steagall aspects, they have been remiss. >> 2200 pages. >> i'm sorry. i was thinking health care. >> what bank failure would have been prevented? would wachovia not have bought a lot of crappy loans? what does glass-steagall do that would change anything? >> remember, this is a 30-year process in the making.

if you back to 1986 when banks were allowed to start getting bigger and getting into businesses that they were otherwise prohibited to get into? all of this happens over time. if anybody had been paying attention all the along the way, a lot of banks would not have failed and a lot of things would not have happened because they wouldn't have been possible. i think it was also the failure to supervise not just the elimination of glass-steagall that ultimately led to these problems. >> ron, one of the headlines that you're going to see is them playing with the depositor of money again. do we need to completely separate merchant and investment banking? >> what is the cio? they are running a bank and trying to offset their risk.

so what is a chief investment office? what side is it? >> it depends on what they are doing. proprietary capital they are not supposed to be trading under dodd-frank. this is a key question. you don't have a cio or chief investment office in a customer-driven bank where deposits are the liabilities that finance loans, which are the assets. >> what is proprietary trading? >> we don't even know that at this point. >> and i don't either. >> we know very little about what happened. >> and no one wants to touch this, it's a big debate down here, but we can't pinpoint that the fed's responsible. but in an atmosphere where interest rates are unbelievably low, liquidity for a chosen few is unbelievably high, it looks like you're taken to this type of risk taking.

in general terms, this is an issue that needs to be thought through as well. >> the fed is buffering the economy and facing undue pressures from europe and china and other areas. so a zero interest rate environment does create certain difficulties for banks and insurers who are liability-drive tone a certain extent. but the regulatory environment, where banks are being discouraged from making even economic loans is what is making them go out and search for yield or profits because they can't do the traditional business they've always done. >> guys, good to see you. >> no argument there. we should make the wall street journ the fcc because they've tuned us into this better than anyone else. you get my vote, buddy. >> it will make "the wall street journal" tomorrow. >> the financial sector has regulators crawling all over it. it's going to be the most regulated company in the country. don't go away. in this hour -- and this is really important, nbc's david

gregory doing an interview with jpmorgan jamie dimon. this will be highlighted right here on cnbc. don't miss, mr. dimon's reaction to his company's much maligned $2 million loss right here on the "closing bell." meanwhile, the president is in reno, nevada, touting mortgage refinancing for, quote, responsible homeowners. >> obama using as an example may not be so responsible. what is this all about, diana? >> they have used the word responsible and administration owe figs officials have as well. well, they told us that this family, the keller family of

reno, nevada, had a $168,000 mortgage but their homes that depreciated to $100,000 because homes have dropped 50% since the peak of the housing collapse. the president is touting an extension and making that program even larger. now, the trouble we had is when we listened to those facts, they told us that the kellers bought their home 14 years ago. that didn't ring right. because 14 years ago, home prices were far lower. and, in fact, we did confirm from county documents and then from the white house that the kellers, in fact, bought their home in 1998 for $127,000 with $127,000 mortgage. how do they now have a $168,000 mortgage? because they did a cash-out re-fi, took out $51,000 to pay down debt on their family business. but, again, they saw that their home price had appreciated to

$250,000. that is, their home price doubled in just eight years. so they took out $50,000. our question then, of course, are these the responsible borrowers? is the government saying that people who took money out of their home should then be qualifying for government assistance in these new refinance programs? >> it sounds like they didn't -- the obama administration didn't do their homework too carefully. >> they did their homework. >> it was 14 years ago. how do you miss that? >> i can tell you, we contacted h.u.d. secretary shawn donovan and he told us this is a family first and foremost that has met their responsibility, used the equity in their home in a way that so many americans do. >> so they are sticking to the story. >> it seems like the administration is saying, if you take out money from your home and use it for something good, then that's okay as opposed to if you buy a car or redo the kitchen or something. >> as opposed to understanding

what your full financial liabilities are over time. >> or watching house price val lou double in eight years. >> no, they are not responsible. i'll be judgmental this friday afternoon. >> it was the wrong couple to use. 50 minutes until the closing bell. >> and stay tuned, there's a lot more to come on the "closing bell." >> she's been calling for a break up of the big banks. former fdic chair sheila bair tells us whether jpmorgan's massive trading loss is proof that she is right. >> i can't allow that. >> does wall street need more regulation to ensure these kinds of losses don't occur them? or is this evidence that capitalism works? we want to know what you think. are we on the cusp of another major banking crisis? send your tweets

to @cnbcclosingbell. your responses are coming up later on the show.

45 minutes to go in today's trading session. shocker, financials down sharply on jpmorgan's $2 billion trading blunder. however, telecoms are defying gravity, thanks to a credit suisse upgrade. the industrial average is lower by more than 24 points. we had gone higher into the session, not towards the lows but in negative territory. the dow on pace for the weekly loss in a month. >> if you're too big to fail, then you should be broken up. >> former fdic chair sheila bair says this is a reminder of how vulnerable america's banking system still is. good to have you on this day.

>> thank you. >> you're a former banking regulator. your initial shouts when you saw the news on jpmorgan? >> i do think jpmorgan is well managed. if this kind of thing could happen there, it makes you wonder what would happen to the institutions that don't have quite as strong management. but you know, these very large complex institutions are very -- it's a question, no matter how talented you are, can manage them from the top of the house, which is what we're seeing right now. so, yes, i do think this reconfirms my view that at a minimum they should be required to reorganize themselves, have operating subsidiaries separately managed with own int mediate boards so they can focus on a particular business at hand. trying to manage a $2 trillion institution is a challenge for anyone and this is the kind of thing, even the best-managed banks, fall through the crack.

that he is a pretty big crack. >> people have been calling me all day saying this is a bad hedge, this is not some kind of a systemic problem with the system. >> right. >> we don't know what happened here but the basic facts we know, a bad hedge. is there something about this that tells you banks are taking on too much risk? can you use this as an example as to why they are too risky? >> this may surprise you but i wouldn't say that. there's a lot of piling on now and i don't think that's perhaps going too far, too. this is a $2 billion trading loss. nothing to sneeze at but does threaten the viability. it doesn't even threaten their profitability. the facts, as we know, have been presented by the bank that this was a bona fide effort to hedge credit exposure that they had and they appeared to be overhedged and were trying to rebalance that position when they started selling off these cds positions.

if anything that might make it more frightening. this is not a rogue trader situation. trying to make speculative prop bets. i think this was a bona fide effort to hedge and they just got it wrong, by underscores that these are complex institutions. very difficult for even good management to deal with. >> you seem to strad dell the argument here. you're not saying this is an example of why we should break up the banks. you're trying to play it right down the middle on this? >> i think it shows how very, very difficult these institutions are to manage from the top of the house. very much so. and this is -- was a significant loss. it's not a system mcboss. it's not threatening to the institution itself but it is indicative of how difficult it is to manage from the very top and that i do think it would be in shareholders's interest as well as regulator's interest to make sure institutions

restructure themselves with strong, intermediate wards. if jamie dimon is spending 20% of his time looking at how the economic hedges are doing compared to 2% of his time -- >> certainly the market is punishing them today. and you pointed out that smaller banks are getting valued better. >> right. >> i want to ask you about something else before we go. the president is in front of a home right now where he says the homes are deserving of help. >> right. >> and diana olick has pointed out that they bought their home 14 years ago. it appreciated dramatically. they did a cash re-fi, even bigger than their original loan. >> right. >> is that a sympathetic homeowner to you? what does that tell you about what the cause of this financial crisis was? >> there are so many people who made mistakes at the homeowner level, at the larger institution level. i think these kinds of decisions to be made based on what is in

your collective economic interest to do and i think getting these refinances through will have a stimulus effect and free up additional income that can help support the economy. for mortgages guaranteed by the government, getting these mortgages refinanced to lower rates would reduce the default risk for the government as well. there are economic reasons to do this. >> the spirit of my question is that we bash the banks all day long for years and years and years and yet it seems that a lot of people don't want to take responsibility for their very own actions. they did a cash re-fi bigger than their original loan. they could have owned the home flat out. they would have nothing to worry about except the taxes and electricity bill. >> and cash out. >> i understand what you're saying. it's an emotion oh nal argument. i've always been on time with my

payment. we're very conservative when it comes to our home finances. but decisions like this should be based on economic interest instead of because they re-fi and we want to -- >> we want to reward the good people. >> well, the good people are getting rewarded because they never got into the problems to begin with. i've tried to be measured and even handed in my discussions and differentiate among banks but there were some banks that made some dumb mistakes and they were bailed out. we did at the time what we thought was best for the economy and you need to make decisions on the same basis. >> thanks for joining us. it was greating having you on on this key day. >> thank you. >> thank you. dow jones off the highs and nasdaq, too. we were in negative territory briefly. >> so you heard from sheila bair why it would be better if we saw banks get smaller. we have the other side of the story coming up next. >> and if you buy jpmorgan right

now at this price, a year from now will you be glad or furious. what could be an opportunity. and and don't go away. in this hour, david gregory is doing an interview with jam kie dimon. as soon as they are done, david will join us with exclusive highlights from their interview. right here on the "closing bell." as we head to break, here's how the other banks are trading. citigroup down by nearly 4%.

♪ %. [ female announcer ] you're the boss of your life. in charge of long weekends and longer retirements. ♪ ask your financial professional how lincoln financial can help you take charge of your future. ♪

brian shactman here at the market flash. i want to take a look at two new lows. one is chesapeake energy. chk. reports that they are delaying the 10q. also, "the wall street journal" reported that aubrey mcclendon made $8 million on the shares that were sold. that stock is down sharply. radio shack, we're talking 26 years in terms of lows for rsh. pretty unbelievable. 4.67. >> we just spoke with sheila bair renewing her call to break up the big banks. we talked to her because of jpmorgan's $2 billion trading blunder. >> and now we're talking to

someone who has taken an object sit stance. he says breaking up the big banks will not fix that problem. mark, thanks for joining us. >> nice to be here. >> when i started at krns cnbc e 1990s, i was covering the fdic crisis. >> i would say so many of our financial crisises, whether you look at the s&l or 1930s, small banks get into trouble. of course we need to be concerned about the big banks but it's not a lot better than having a huge large banks. what we need to do is to the extent that subsidies are distorting the marketplace, we need to roll back that safety net. even in this crisis, you have over 300 small banks that have failed so far. that's had a knock-off effect on

the economy. so, again, i think the size of the bank should be driven by the economics. to the extent that there are subsidies, you need to deal with them directly. >> so if i understand you correctly, the stock is getting punished today. jamie dimon is having to field all kinds of questions. in your view, that's enough? >> that's the way it's supposed to work. somebody makes a mistake, they take a hit, they take a loss. me, the taxpayer, doesn't cover it. this is the way it should have worked during the crisis. >> what do you say to folks who say, wow, they had a $2 billion trade that went wrong in six weeks and this is a firm that is famous and a ceo famous for wanting to avoid risk and if they can have such a large loss -- and we don't know if they are going to have a loss for the quarter but a loss for a short period of time, does that not raise the question about whether or not there's too much risk? >> well, i think you need to

start from the premise that everybody makes mistakes. bankers, us think tankers make mistakes on occasion. you need to have a financial system that doesn't try to get at zero errors. if the losses are distributed quickly, there's no extra risk in the system. this 2 billion was 2 billion that someone else made off of jpmorgan. it wasn't systemic, as sheila bair said. >> there are banks that may cause a systemic is being. do you reject the idea that that is even a possibility? >> well, first, i think it was far more a creation of government's willingness to bail out banks. if we set up an orderly resolution process, this is the irony of all of this, we won't have to care about the volcker rule.

but since dodd frank is probably not going to work, you really need to set up a process to who distributes these losses. any institution going on is going to have a knock-off effect but thousands of other institutions will also have a knock-off. how do you deal with that blow? how do you distribute those losses? that hurts spending as well. there are no freebies. it's what is the least painful result. >> thank you, mark. greatly appreciated. >> my pleasure. the dow jones industrial average lower than 20 points. nasdaq lower by 7 with two minutes left to the "closing bell." >> by the way, there's been news outside of jpmorgan. facebook. new information about exactly how hard it is to get a piece of that offering. two words, vastly

overprescribed. >> meet someone who is on a big comeback. >> and we want your input, are we on the cusp of another major banking crisis? tweet us your answers. we believe the more you know, the better you trade. so we have ongoing webinars and interactive learning, plus, in-branch seminars at over 500 locations, where our dedicated support teams help you know more so your money can do more. [ rodger ] at scottrade, seven dollar trades are just the start. our teams have the information you want when you need it. it's another reason more investors are saying... [ all ] i'm with scottrade.

the jpmorgan chief investment officer, watch this one, this is journalism, investors hot and heavy to get in on the new offering trading a week from now. is the facebook ipo what is needed? moving to another topic. >> we're going to do that right now. where do we eve begin today? facebook coming out in a week, jpmorgan today. what is the message? >> we're getting through it.

nothing came this week besides the news is difficult. it's bad when banks lose money like this. i don't know what an acceptable loss was but this probably goes beyond it. when they get the deal done, it will be good to have them behind us. >> steve, i want to get your thoughts on facebook. i don't know if you have them but let me ask you a better question about the earnings situation. where are we going to go right now? they are going to beat them very easily and the numbers are going up. these banks, these financials, they are going to start earning morning in the second half of the year. >> it's a real concern. if you look at all cap, up and down the cap spectrum, expectations are pretty high. we have a declining gdp in the u.s. where we start to see the growth rate start to come down. there's a real conflict. what you're going to see is estimates get pulled here. although more recently, thanks to a good quarter reporting

season, the division ratio has gone up. we're sticking with those company and sectors that have very good balance sheets and also more of a secular growth story as opposed to cyclical growth so the economy slows. you don't want to have that kind of exposure. >> i want to switch to facebook. mom and pop. what i'm worried about is mom and mop are going to be the buyers of this thing. who knows how many times it's going to be. suppose it opens at $60 oh. suppose that p has. is that going to be good for the markets? >> it means there's a demand. i can't speak about individual stock and certainly an issue that is being underwritten at this point in time. it's always best if it's a little high. not too high. you want to get it close to right. >> will it bring more retailers into the market? >> you don't think something so

big, like a google gets people excited about the stock market? >> i think they get excited about the stock. it has to heal. i think they are quite receipt sent and it takes time. i started this before. it takes time for people to come back into the market. >> at least people are talking. at least facebook has a group of people. i'm excited about that. i'm just worried about people getting burned and discouraged again. >> got to go. thanks very much. gold set to suffer the worst weekly decline since mid-december and some are taking it as an opportunity to get on gold. brian is here to explain his thinking. >> bob, making a bullish bet versus buying and holding gold is a tale of two cities. ask any trader how painful it's been. look at the price action in the last year and how volatile that risky investment has been.

we look to model a better risk adjusted return on your money. you want to use it as inflation protection and don't want the wild, speculative squeeze that we've seen in the gold market. one thing that you want to think about doing is selling a june put. you can collect $1.60. now, what i would do is set aside cash. below 150 you're obligated to purchase the gld. i want to set the cash aside to do that. i've lowered my break even. if i get put to the stock, i'm going to sell a call against that, lower my break-even point. in the meantime, these are much better risk adjusted ways to invest in the gold market rather than buying and holding. thanks, bob. >> thank you, brian. be sure to catch "options action" followed by money in motion at 5:30. >> let's go to brian. >> michelle, as if there is

nothing more to talk about besides jpmorgan, 195 million shares traded so far and for a prospective, ten-day average is 27 million. before today, the previous high was $194 million and change in november of 2008, the height of the financial crisis. incredible trading today. >> thank you so much. we have about 20 minutes left to the closeing bell. >> and could jpmorgans $2 billion loss be your gain? >> specifically, the volcker rule as he told maria earlier this year. >> it should be overprescribed. you know, some of the things i read, if you want to be a trader, you're going to have a lawyer and psychologist to sit next to you to determine what

was your intent every time you did something? >> but will dimon will be able to be a critic after the big botch? >> david gregory is doing an exclusive interview with jamie dimon. as soon as they are done, david will join us immediately with highlights from his exclusive. you're not going to see this anywhere else. you'll hear from jamie dimon right on this show in just a few minutes. stay tuned.

a living breathing intelligence bringing people together to bring new ideas to life. look. it's so simple. [ male announcer ] in here, the right minds from inside and outside the company come together to work on an idea. adding to it from the road, improving it in the cloud all in real time. good idea. ♪ it's the at&t network -- providing new ways to work together, so business works better. ♪

ifr and welcome back. the nasdaq doing a little better than the rest of the market. seema mody is at the desk with the details. we seem to be drifting lower? >> yes. take a look at nvidia, the chipmaker surprising the street with a new red and outlook beat. providing a lift to the overall -- or broader semiconductor space.

in the biotech world, it's about the obesity drug winning the back of the advisory panel. back to you. >> all right. thank you so much, seema. we are in the final minutes of trading. jpmorgan is getting hit very hard. want to do a talking numbers segment. should you be getting this throughout the clothes? joining us now, how are you? >> good. yourself? >> good. what are the charts telling us about jpmorgan? should you buy? >> no, i do not want to buy this trade. >> why not? >> let's take a look. bottomed out in the summer of 201 20111, moved higher and started violating short-term support levels. now, it's very hard for a stock, after having a short term negative trend develop with the gap down to gill it higher. this is not a trend i'm willing to buy. >> when you read about the actual trade that they did, this

was this improvement in the market that ended up causing the trouble, right? >> right. >> so what would you buy instead? >> i would like to buy a chart like usb, u.s. bancorp. that tanked around the same time as jpmorgan. however, we had a very sustained move higher. it's still going higher. we put a 50-day moving average on this chart and every time price comes down and tests the 50-day moving average, we get a pop higher. two days ago we've been higher the last two days. >> all right. >> the short-term chart looks healthy. it's healthy as well. we see a multi-year trading range. january of this year, we broke to the upside. we are consolidating and saying that we're catching our breath before this trend and we believe we're going to move to the $37 area which lines up with the

highest weekly close in 2008. >> got it. so you like u.s. bancorp. thank you so much. >> thank you so much. and i'd like to say, happy mother's day, mom. >> thank you. that's very sweet. >> remember your mom. good guy. good boy. >> with jpmorgan front and center, we've been asking folks on twitter whether they are on the cusp of another banking crisis. here are some of the responses we've gotten so far. jack briggs tweeted, i don't know if it ever ended. this is captain j.schumann. we are on the verge of a crisis for the banks. continue to sends your comments. we'll reveal more later in the show. oh, just a few minutes before the "closing bell." dow jones industrial average drifting lower all throughout the day. nasdaq, the same situation. dow is down a little more than 1% for the week. surging auto sales, consumer

sentiment is climbing higher. would another flip with the banks bust our recovery? that's next.

greensboro

jpmorgan overshadowing good news today, nissan soaring on strong demands for autos. >> and our next guest says that's going to win out over the bad news in the banking sector because the recovery is for real. joining us, autos are not bad, brian, but what else in your list shows us that the recovery is for real? >> i'm not trying to say that the economy is booming but we've got 26 straight months of private sector job growth. the technology of this economy is really amazing. you know, if you look at the cloud, you look at the smartphone, tablet, facebook ipo, it's raising productivity.

it's not just a sugar high, i guess is what i'm getting to. that's what a lot of people seem to believe these days and i'm kind of looking underneath. we're really inventing new things. fracking, that kind of stuff. >> aren't we at the maximum productivity for each worker so let's start hiring workers? >> we are hiring workers. it's just not going as fast as we would like. i call this the plow horse economy. in a way it's old technology but it's not going to win the freakness or keel or and die either. that's where our economy is. it's sort of plodding along. and there are bad things with fear of regulation that are kind of combatting today.

>> brian, you say that on this day when we're talking about jpmorgan and of course it's been used as the whipping boy by wanting regulators, future regulators, they see this as an excuse for more regulation. bigger question, though -- >> right. >> you see this problem with jpmorgan. does it cause people to think twice about the banking system? does it have any kind of ripple effects or follow-on effects that make people nervous about investing? >> sure, michelle. it definitely has some effects on how people are thinking about it. but in the end, in reality what this looks like to me is that they've made bad trades. these traders always act like they are the smartest people in the room, that they know the future, they can construct the perfect hedges and we know that that's not possible forever. it seems to me -- i mean, we don't know all the information

but jpmorgan can take this loss, it's a well-capitalized institution. the u.s. banking system is well-capitalized. i don't see this as another 2008. >> you could look at it on the other side. wow, they took a big loss. they would still be profitable this quarter. >> right. >> a big institution that can handle that. >> right. >> okay. goo good to see you. thank you. >> sorry, brian. we've got to go. let's get an update with brian shactman. >> you want to know what kind of afternoon chesapeake energy has had? they filed to delay their 10 tlz q and then we actually learned that they filed the 10q. asset sales may be delayed to comply with the debt covenant. the stock is down 12.5% and it's a very confusing story. they delay their 10q and now we

learn that asset sales will be delayed. they probably need to raise some cash. >> it just gets worse and worse. what a disaster. up next, we're coming up with the final minutes of the trading day. >> and then another big hour ahead for you. is jpmorgan's massive trading loss a tip of the iceberg or another banking crisis? plus, can wall street's golden boy, jamie dimon, brush off his debacle? all of that and more in the next hour of the "closing bell." ell.♪ ♪ i can go anywhere ♪ i can go anywhere today ♪ la la la la la la la [ male announcer ] dow solutions help millions of people by helping to make gluten free bread that doesn't taste gluten free. together, the elements of science and the human element can solve anything. solutionism. the new optimism.

like in a special ops mission? you'd spot movement, gather intelligence with minimal collateral damage. but rather than neutralizing enemies in their sleep, you'd be targeting stocks to trade. well, that's what trade architect's heat maps do. they make you a trading assassin. trade architect. td ameritrade's empowering, web-based trading platform. trade commission-free for 60 days, and we'll throw in up to $600 when you open an account.

welcome back. let's take a look at amr moving in the last half hour or so. let's go to phil lebeau. what's going on, phil? >> american airlines has told a creditor committee that it would be willing to look at the possibility of a merger or sale sooner than previously mentioned. remember, in the past amr has said, listen, we're not going to look at those options until the exclusive reorganization rights expire in september. well, now amr, pressured by the creditor's committee has said

that they will look at other options and that will happen when the exclusive rights expire. that does not mean that we're going to see a sale of amr in the future. it means that they will at least look at other options as it considers the reorganization. remember, in the past it had exclusive rights since september and now they say they will look at other options as well. take a look at shares of lcc. again, this is a report from sources. no comment from amr or from u.s. airways. bob? >> phil, thanks very much. four minutes to go before the closing bell. arthur, me worry? spain is sitting out there and yet very modest declines. >> it was a little bit of a roller coaster day. they came in very worried about jpmorgan and the impact. they found out that the wheels did not come off the locomotive and then shortly before 10:00 we

got the university of michigan data. best since bear stearns was still alive and we've muddled about and in the afternoon they got a feeling that we wouldn't get a deal on greece and we pulled back a little. >> are we going to continue to get this choppy data? is it going to get more definitive? is it going to get plain awful or are we going to move up in the second half of the year and a little better? >> next year we move up. this year we have to pay the piper. it's a transition year. i think the earnings will hold in there but they are going to have to see it before they go there. >> in the second half is what everybody is worried about. banks are supposed to contribute a major part of the earnings for the second half of the year. is there any evidence that they will be able to pull that off? >> i believe it when i see it. there are a lot of issues that have to do with regulation and

trading. it's going to be -- you're going to have to prove it to me. >> and, art, spain is still floating out there. we are moving towards national zags of the banks. how are we going to react to what are going to be increasingly aggressive moves by the spanish government to wrap their hands around the banking crisis? >> greece is like the 37th largest economy. spain is number 12. and that's too big to fail. we have to carefully watch out for that. >> on the horizon, the italians are trying to institute reforms for their government but everybody seems to be fighting against us a strausterity. ireland is voting on the

austerity -- >> on the 31st. >> -- on the 31st. all of this is up in the air now? >> it certainly is. what the viewers have to watch for is if things start to worsen in greece, look whether there are runs on the bank in spain and or italy. people want to take out their euros to protect that value so they don't wind up over the weekend like people wind up. >> facebook is next week. i'm excited about it because it's got people talking. mom and pop talking about the whole business. are you at all concerned about how it's going to be valued with something like this. >> i can't talk about specifics but you always want to get the pricing right. the age of deals have passed. >> so we're talking 35? you'd love to see it open at 40? something like that? >> i can't say. it's on my facebook page. >> i'd like to see that. i just don't wa t