let's take a look at the dow. it has traded in a range of about 51 points today. light volume. a lot of that early this morning. represents the smallest trading range since september. right now down eight. we are still positive on the s&p. we will see when you do "closing bell." >> i will see you in an hour from now on "closing bell." >> "street signs" starts now. have a great day. happening right now, oil falls again. could $1.50 gasoline be just around the corner? i am brian sullivan. oil may be the loser of the year. stocks, bonds and especially the u.s. dollar are ending the year the big winners. wait until you see the surprise stock of the year. mandy is off today. susan lee flew in from hong kong just for us. >> it is a long way to fly. let's take a look at what is happening in the markets. the big story is oil trading at

its lowest since may of 2009. for the year the crude has fallen to 45%. it is down 2.5% on the day and trading at the lowest level since may 2009. people are thinking where is the bottom right now? >> we will talk more about that in a second. right now let's get more now on the huge break down in oil. tjm institutional services jim is joining us now. >> he is looking behind him to try to find the bottom. >> are you there? he is not there. let's move on to the other big story of the year. we know that 2014 was a great year for many things. stocks ended strong. taylor swift defeated music and james franco and seth rogen can come out on top. perhaps nothing had the year

that the u.s. dollar did. it rose against every other major currency for the first time since ronald reagan was in his first year in office. how is this story playing out in asia? >> take a look at the indones n indonesian, cheapest it has been to go to bali. the yen passing 1.20. we looked at 18,000 last night. >> the first reference in a long time. >> holding up a little better. it might be a little more expensive to get to bangkok and those thai islands. the real story is about the emerging markets in indonesia in particular. >> if you are going to -- >> we stalled long enough

talking about thailand you are stuck in freezing chicago. help us find a bottom in the price of oil. anything technically or fundamentally that you see? >> the way i look at it is like the jury has reached a decision. for two weeks there has been deliberation and a ton of opportunities for the market to retrace some of the pounding it has taken. today it come out with awful price action. technicals to me look like there is an objective. i use fundamentals. it seems to me that somewhere in the middle there someone's best interest is going to be to not have oil cascade. i am expecting someone to say or do something in the high 40s. right now it looks awful, the price action. >> define awful. >> i see a four handle. my short term objective is 47 to

48 with a maybe 40 even at the down side. i think 47, 48. today it tried and turned it around violently. here is what i'm trying to understand. help me get my small brain wrapped around this. six months ago we were over $100 a barrel in probably the most used commodity in the world. i understand there is a slight supply in balance. why is that enough to knock $50 to $60 off the price of a barrel of crude oil? that is not. there was about four different factors. one was the constant strength of the dollar. that is like the back beat. you talk about the supply, particularly domestic supply. the fact that saudis don't seem to care. this has been cartel controlled. every once in a while they like to release it and let property

price discovery happen and see where it goes. this is where it goes. i'm not sure that this will go on forever. remember this kind of thing happening to wipe out the competitor. i'm sure it was mostly aimed at russia but it is not a bad thing for them to wipe out domestic drillers here and still on the radar screen is things like technology. i'm not saying that that is a primary objective but it is nice to clean the slate so they still run the game. >> do you believe when they say they expect oil prices to recover sometime next year? >> i do believe that. at the end of the day they still sell a lot of oil. i think they want to put pressure on the competition and make it less attractive for people to be in the game with them. another time comes they raise the price of oil up again. it is the same story. it seems that -- >> with all due respect to our

friends you and i know what they say and do can often be very different things. >> no doubt about it. from a practical standpoint it seems to be a good business plan for them all be it painful to a lot of people to wash out some of their competitors and crush russia. and then when they are all gone and they are the only game in town then oil starts to slowly rise again. we have seen it happen several times. >> thank you for your input today. let's head to the oil pits in new york. we will be heading live to oil pits in new york for the crude close. let's get back to markets and stocks and what you can expect for your money in the new year. we will bring in dan greenhouse. hey, bys. we are trading at a tight range. the s&p poised for third straight year of gains.

can this continue into 2015? >> we think it can. i think the question for investors is whether or not the gains that you see in the coming quarters are as smooth as they have been for the previous couple of quarters. the answer to that which is a more difficult question to answer we think is likely no. as you have seen over the last couple of months volatility has spiked, the degree to which the market has stalled off has been deeper. i think that trend continues. >> james, i love the fact your thesis is one that i agree with, not that that matters. it goes like this. energy stocks. we know the pain. their earnings come down. they are a big part of the s&p 500. unless that comes down the multiple expands. is that sustainable? >> i think could see. i completely agree. the energy sector's expected earnings have come down by about

25%. the energy sector makes up about 10% of s&p 500 earnings. you will see a slow down in earnings growth. if you have gotten used to it over the course of the last year right now we are at 16.5 times. i can see us getting up to 17 times. >> that is not expensive? we have been around 16.5 the last few years on average. >> let's say we have been around 16.5 then why would 17 be expensive? this is leaving aside how i feel about it. i think the debate about vallation gets into the weeds about whether things are in relation to where they have been. the fact of the matter is valuation is -- >> why don't you go to china where you are trading ten times instead of 45 times. >> you look at the cheapest markets in the world. some of the markets that come up initially or immediately are going to be china and russia. markets that have been

attractive for some time now and yet people have tended to stay away for it for good reason. my issue about the valuation debate is whether or not it is helpful in the short term in making investment decisions. the answer is almost definitely not. >> james, follow up on your own point or comment on dan. when i hear that 10% to 15% of the s&p 500 is going to lose 25% of earnings power, valuations are going to go up, either that is okay because the economy is growing faster or other earnings are going to have to pick up the slack or we just simply withstand a higher p.e. >> just to be clear i still like u.s. stocks for the rest of next year. i think the next two quarters are going to be bumpy. investors have to be prepared for the shock. it is the surprise factor here. 15.5, 16 is not that different from a 17 times p.e. ratio if you are looking out less than a year in advance. but the point is that people aren't really ready for this.

we talk about 15 times p.e. for so long and the fact that price has risen at the same time earnings have fallen that will create choppiness. >> can i jump in here for a quick second? it has been choppy for six months. the fact that it will continue to be choppy -- >> but with solid earnings growth. >> earnings are down you are saying? >> i am saying earnings revisions are coming down significantly. if you look at the overall s&p 500 earnings revisions for the fourth quarter that is coming up soon is basically down 7%. i don't think that is expected by the market and will increase. >> let's be clear. every single quarter for the last call it four years, earnings expectations have declined into the end of each quarter. >> that is absolutely true and i am accounting for that. you have never had a quarter in recent memory where a single sector has fallen in terms of estimated earnings.

>> we did in '08. that was ever sector, unfortunately. >> the last five years. we have grown accustomed to strong earnings growth. >> for overall market one particular sector doesn't matter. to be clear, the energy sector is somewhere around 11% or 12% of s&p 500 earnings. to the extent that this is supply-led decline that will be compensated for by other sectors including but limited to consumer discretionary sector. if you look at performance of retail names since oil prices have come down they have done phenomenally well. the consumers in the near term getting a nice boost here. >> i don't disagree with you there. i still think you can have a lot because earnings miss for the overall s&p. i absolutely agree the consumer will bounce back and make up the difference. that is why 2015 ends up with --

>> you guys agreed with each other. i don't agree with you. i don't think the consumer will pick up the energy loss but i'm on this side of the camera. you guys get paid the big bucks. danny being danny. you have to know dan greenhouse. thank you very much. james, thank you. appreciate it. so it looks like we now have a gain changer in hollywood. how the movie "t"the interview" might have forever ended the way studios pump out movies. has college football coach's pay just hit stupid. you won't believe the latest contract talks. >> this is the single best performing stock in the s&p 500 this year. the answer is coming your way ahead. some of the smartest minds on wall street told us what they hope for the new year. throughout the program you will be hearing their 2015 wishes and kicking it off a familiar face to all of you loyal "street

signs" viewers. >> my 2015 wish for the economy is that republicans and democrats come together and initiate an investment program, infrastructure related, capital intensive related. this country needs to invest in things as opposed to invest in consumption. to the effect that we can come together and have economic growth is now 2% or 3% or 4%.

today is what they call black monday in the nfl when teams that didn't make the playoffs start firing coaches. the new york jets fired rex ryan after finishing 4-12 this year. ryan lasted six seasons with the jets which is more than we can say for mark trussman who lassed more than two years as coach of chicago bears before being fired this morning. atlanta falcons said bye-bye to mike smith. he is gone, as well. college football coaches may be the new ceos at least with pay. former 49ers head coach him harbaugh will be introduced at michigan's new head coach as early as tomorrow. his pay is reported at an average of $8 million per year. here is the question.

is that salaryed for a state-run taxpayer funded university? a sports economics professor at smith college disagrees. steve, make the case for six years, $48 million. >> i'm in the wrong profession. i would love to have that. >> who wouldn't? >> exactly. >> it is justified. if he is almost like a high pric priced -- if he can bring in and win and justify and if you look at michigan's revenues, if he can jump that up into the atmosphere of alabama or texas this is a no brainer. small price to pay for him. >> i will kind of agree and say michigan's program makes about $58 million a year.

if harbaugh could stop that slide in ticket prices and giving away tickets, isn't he worth the money? >> look, first of all, you have a completely artificial market in college coaching. you have the players who don't get paid or they get a scholarship that is worth $20,000. the coaches are getting paid for the value produced by the players whom they recruit. on top of the fact that you have a league market that the players aren't paid you have state subsidies and university subsidies and federal tax preferences. this is a completely artificial market. in 41 of the 50 states either the head basketball coach or head football coach is the highest paid public official in the state. these coaches if they couldn't coach at the top level in college sports they would be coaching in high school sports. they would be getting $40,000, to $50,000 a year. the fact that they get paid $8 million a year all the

difference is rent. you don't need to offer them that to get them to dedicate their lives to the profession of coaching. if you had an anti-trust exemption that enabled control on the salaries so they wouldn't go higher than the college president then you wouldn't have difference in the quality of pay. >> aren't we looking at this from a ceo perspective? if you bring $100 million of revenue why isn't it justified for you to get a cut of that? >> you don't bring that kind of money. the median revenue is about $50 million. to have a coach paid $8 million which is more than harbaugh is being paid by the san francisco 49ers which is an outfit or company that generates over $300 million a year makes no sense economically. if you look at economic theory

it says you should be paid according to the value that you produce. >> i think you are looking at it wrong. if you don't have those high priced coaches, think about how many programs are funded by sports programs. a lot of them. the uk basketball program brings in a ton of money. alabama funds other programs. it's ludicrous to think if you can't get the high priced coaches to bring in the high prized recruits, students that aren't on scholarships want to go there because of the camaraderie and college programs. numerous people afford to go to university of florida versus georgetown. >> andrew, i can talk to it. my college, virginia tech, applications soared when the school got better. andrew, would you support this? >> you guys are misrepresenting

all of the scholarship on this issue. the scholarship on this issue does not say when you have a good football team and a good basketball team that it raises the quality of the student body. it does not say that. >> how does it not? >> because the people who apply to a school because they have a good football team on in the bottom of the academic scale. >> you are telling me that at duke university [ inaudible ]. >> you are telling me that no one goes to duke to watch college basketball? it is a phenomenal academic school. it is ludicrous. you are wrong. >> unc is a great academic school. people go to schools, the best they can get into. they also like amenities. one i like is a good basketball -- >> that's not true. >> there are students that go to ohio state instead of michigan because of ohio state.

academically speaking most say michigan is a better school. >> let's end it. are you going to give me anecdotal evidence when people have done studies about the applicants over 30 and 40 years? >> anecdotal evidence -- i am a lawyer. >> we are going to leave it with this. >> would you support a pay gap but a bigger percentage going to the coach of any bowl money so you get paid and -- >> by the way, the figures that we have been using, the $8 million that harbaugh will get, 9.6 that coach k got, those are without bonuses. some of the bonuses go up to $3 million a year when the coach brings the team to a national championship. >> where does that money go? it goes right back to the school. >> out of the 128 schools in the

top level of division one according to the ncaa figures on an operating basis only 20 of those athletic programs made money in 2012-2013 which is the last year for which the data is available. >> that's not counting capital expenses. >> i will agree with andrew in this point. money does not buy wins. see texas, university of. thank you both very much. >> i'm just saying. >> let's get to breaking news now. >> thanks a lot. i just got off the phone with david tepor talking to me about his outlook for 2015. he told me he thinks 2015 will be a quote/unquote good year. remember in an e-mail he talked about the s&p 500 being fairly valued at pe of 16.

he points out fair value is a range and can go up. up 8% to 10% in 2015 which is not a bad return here. he also said in terms of how he positioned in the market going into the new year even at record highs in the s&p 500 he is longer than he was back in april. remember at the salt conference in april he said he was 70% to 80% long. longer going into this new year. tepper was talking about how central banks around the world were fighting deflation and the result of fighting deflation all over the place is rising asset prices which is why he is giving this optimistic outlook for 2015. >> awesome stuff, by the way. do you feel that tepper wanted to clarify comments because many people seemed to misunderstand what he said. >> he was definitely trying to reach out and say i know my

comments were reported a certain way and interpreted in another way. saying that tepper was not bullish. when you are forecasting 8% to 15% return while s&p 500 is sitting at new record highs that can't really be interpreted as not being bullish. he wanted to say this is where i stand on the markets right now. 8% to 10% in 2015. this is a great quote. it's not the time to be careful now. enjoy the ride but he also warned that investors should be aware and cautious about overvaluation in the market sometime in 2014. he says don't get too comfortable when the ride starts but it hasn't started yet. >> the headline that we reported was that he is comparing 2015 to 1999. >> if you take a look at what

happened in 1999 he goes on to say the nasdaq was up 85%. yes, that was the year the markets reach overvaluation but it was a great year in the market in '99. >> i think whenever you take an interview and a smart guy like tepper and widdle it down it becomes -- he is comparing it to '99 which the automatic assumption is that is a bad thing. he was mostly talking about valuations when he talked about '99. >> remember '98 was a terrible year, the year the russian financial crisis and when wide spread easing across europe. '99 was a great setup. but also the year of overvaluation. >> and as the guy from death of a salesman said 1929 was a very good year. >> by the way, we will have much more on comments on cnbc.com and also tonight on "fast money." >> what time is that show?

>> pretty soon. >> 5:00 eastern. >> so good stuff. so this next one. and your final call. yesterday's mystery chart, up, up and away. you should love this stock, the best performing stock year to date in the s&p 500. and i want you to think southwestern. stick around. > my 2015 wish for housing is for better consumer confidence. when buyers feel better about their station in life they buy homes. that is my wish for 2015.

the brief bounce back in oil not holding up. >> we were talking about it this morning. we did have a pop in oil prices after the clashes in libya. traders then started selling oil and we did see an intraday low of 53.16. we are coming off session lows

now as we go into the close. brent crude is down under 60. and what is interesting is a lot of this is technical pressure. traders saying when we broke that was a key technical level where the selling pressure started. it shows you how fickle the markets are. the disruption in libya not a big deal. other issues could become a big deal for oil prices. this one wasn't. so traders are saying it is a supply and demand story. nobody is really worried about the oil supply and that is why we saw selling pressure. let's take this to gas prices. $2.29 is the national average according to aaa. last time i reported it it was $2.39. we dropped ten cents. traders are saying we continue to see those prices lower. nat gas is about $3.17 but well off highs last winter over $6. these are all good things for consumers.

back to you. thank you, i think. appreciate it. >> coming up, five big analyst calls that you must know about right now. we call it street talk. >> we are going to check in on how retail did on the last few days going into christmas. we are going to give you one last chance to guess the name of the stock represented by this mystery chart. you have another hint? >> you are wrong. it is not southwestern energy. we're back after this. in my world, wall isn't a street... return on investment isn't the only return i'm looking forward to. for some, every dollar is earned with sweat, sacrifice,

courage. which is why usaa is honored to help our members with everything from investing for retirement to saving for college. our commitment to current and former military members and their families is without equal. start investing with as little as fifty dollars.

time to reveal the mystery chart. the single best performing stock in the s&p 500 this year. would you like to do the honors? >> it is -- you gave it away. >> i said southwestern. >> it was pretty much given away.

>> i meant the colors. >> so yes it is southwest. the stock up 120% since january. >> southwest airlines really made a comeback this year. a lot of airlines have done well but none as well as southwest. the ticker love named after love field in dallas, texas. time for something that this amazing program does every day at this time, something that this is the first time i am involved. we hit analyst calls on stocks you need to know about. the upgrade for gilead. the stock got hammered last week. i think i saw pretty steep declines in the last two sessions or two day drops in 2 1/2 years. an upgrade today. >> today morgan stanley coming to its defense up to overweight from equal weight and boost target to $104 a share. not a lot of upside. maybe 5% from where the stock is

now. but a defense of the name. getting love for morgan stanley today. >> tell me about the telecommunications stock. >> you are like an international celebrity. we have different names to trade in to provide telecomes and lovely sonic network. what are we looking at? >> a way to play music around your house. this is another week, another positive comment on sonus networks. beginning with a buy. a $5 target. my math i hope is correct. about 20% upside. it started with outperform at wells fargo. >> close to 52-week high. >> it actually looks like music visualized. igy azalea. is that somebody? >> that is somebody. i'm surprised you know who she is. >> let's talk about energy. we have been taking a look at

slide and oil pricing. mark west. >> markwest not the pinot noir although it is delicious. it was upgraded to overweight at stevens. target goes to 81. it is a lot of upside seen on markwest energy. 5.3% dividend like all energy names it has been absolutely walloped. stevens trying to defend the name. >> not just stevens. goldman sachs calling it a buy. barclays raised price target. >> maybe 25% drop in a matter of weeks. >> not bad. >> renewable energy company has to do with solar plays. >> jp morgan resuming target. their target terp.

about $7 seen. >> they have uped the dividend. be a little more generous to shareholders. >> so final stock because it is called inspire. >> we do this, you will be with us all week. a name that maybe a lot of viewers don't get to talk about much. we try to dig it out for you. california based semi conductor company. target boosted. they see about 40% upside in iphi in fire. that is your under the radar play today in street talk. and analogue chip maker and consensus call for growth of 50% next year. speaking of technology it wasn't the way sony would have wanted it probably but the opening weekend of "the interview" didn't go that badly.

we will have the numbers and ask the question will more movie goes into the theaters and online at the same time. the big winners and big losers this holiday season. stick with us. my wish for 2015 is steady and sustained growth. >> global growth particularly in the u.s. >> maybe global growth and growth in the united states.

the verdict is in for the interview. while the numbers weren't what you would be expected out of a big box office weekend they weren't that bad either. jane wells joins uz now. >> christmas eve at my house we gathered around the computer and watched "the interview" on youtube for about 11 1/2 minutes. i am watching it on my android, bits and pieces. not the viewing experience that producers really want to hear about. they probably hate it. obviously a lot of consumers like it when you want it at your convenience. in a fee change which can be the

biggest change. >> this is the biggest interview since frosty/nixon. >> 80% of the $18 million coming in for the film came through downloads. a lot of money was lost due to piracy. at least 1.5 million copies were downloaded for free. there might have been more online money if apple allowed the film on itunes. they didn't do that. i ended up watching it on my youtube, on my mac and sam sung. the only people we found that have seen the movie watched it online. >> it was really great and funny. >> where did you see it? >> i saw it on youtube on christmas day around 12:00 midnight. >> i saw it online. >> what did you think? >> maybe a little overhyped. >> both of them said they would have seen it in theaters eventually. more people might have seen it in theaters if it were on the

original 3,000 screens. i wouldn't want to watch the new "star wars" movie on my phone. you would want the whole theater experience for that. but this, this makes sense. back to you. >> jane, i'm going to ask you a question being a native californian. do you believe this movie inadvertently with all the hoopla surrounding it could actually change the way that movies are distributed? could james franco and seth rogen be responsible for disrupting effectively a 100-year-old business model? >> not them. could north korea be responsible for it or china? i think what you are going to see possibly is that this will work for movies like this. even independent film makers don't want movies seen on small screens. they are not going to do

simultaneous release on those. theater owners be warned, your days are numbered. >> with that nebraska comeback. i didn't want to bring it up, but i did. >> thank you very much. >> you won the game. we didn't lose the game. >> not losing means winning unless it is a tie but that is only british soccer. for more on the interview's big weekend let us bring in matthew bellamy. i kind of make a tongue and cheek comment about changing the distribution model but if this works, could this be sort of the unexpected event which causes the crack in this business model? >> you are exactly right. this is an inadvertent experiment that has gone on. sony made about $15 million off of this release. i would caution a bit. this is an extraordinary situation. there were tens of millions of

dollars in marketing put behind this film, expecting a theatrical release. there were world wide news head lines. everything was directing people to watch this. those numbers are not surprisingly the biggest release sony has had on vod. i don't think it will be the same for most movies that come out but it is a nice experiment. >> i don't mean to be a downer here but we are talking about $15 million in downloads. the movie cost $43 million to make. i thought it would take $75 million to break even. >> or more. >> and there are -- the box office prognostication had this movie making in the 20s. we don't know what the revenue split is between these digital distributors like youtube and the studio. traditionally 50/50 split between theater owners may be

less but maybe more. >> that is an excellent point because the model is basically pay to make a movie. distributors buy it. the theater owner gets a small amount and it tends to grow. so you have the business model. we don't know what youtube is keeping. we don't know what apple is going to keep. they created their own website. they can be getting 95% of the revenues. >> they might be and might be getting significantly less. this was put together at the last minute. sony wasn't exactly in a negotiating position. once president obama said it was a mistake to keep the film off of digital platforms they were in a rush to get this thing out. we doept know what the negotiation was. >> a lot of owners didn't play the movie because they didn't like the fact that it would be simultaneously streamed. who do you think has the upper hand? theater owner or movie studio? >> that is the push/pull.

the theater owners do have tremendous sway over the studios because they determine how many screens these movies get. they determine whether it will get the big i marx screen. the more we see experiments like this, the more movies go vod, i think we will see that leverage loosen a little bit. >> what do they call it? >> all the same. >> learn something new every day. really interesting. thank you very much. we appreciate it. >> coming up next, finally, the retail winners and the retail losers of this holiday season. stick with us. we needed 30 new hires for our call center.

i'm spending too much time hiring and not enough time in my kitchen. [ female announcer ] need to hire fast? go to ziprecruiter.com and post your job to over 30 of the web's leading job boards with a single click; then simply select the best candidates from one easy to review list. you put up one post and the next day you have all these candidates. makes my job a lot easier. [ female announcer ] over 100,000 businesses have already used zip recruiter and now you can use zip recruiter for free at a special site for tv viewers; go to ziprecruiter.com/offer2.

retail stocks are a -- all hitting new 52-week highs today. was it a merry christmas for them after all? let's bring in mark cowan and courtney reagan. courtney, let's start with you. what kind of retail season was it? >> we talked about this a couple times on and off air and what we basically sort of both think is sales were probably pretty good because retailers did everything

they could to buy it. the question is profitability. was it a good season? depends on how you look at it and i think the winners keep winning and losers keep losing. there's extremelies in retail. >> sales will be great and everyone feels in about ten days that the season came out but the real tale of the tape doesn't become apparently until february when profitability emerges and there are to your point some real winners and losers, more losers, in fact, i think. >> who are the names you think are the bigger losers? >> sears is an enormous loser. i think jcpenney will disappoint. kohl's is likely to have a mixed bag season. >> tell you what, though. the sears stock is hot this quarter. up about 30%. this quarter. jcpenney is down. >> sears stock doesn't trade in a normal way with normal folks

so i don't think it's indicative -- >> more indicative of financial engineering? >> it's been that way for nine years now. so nothing's changed. >> holiday 2014 you said is another catastrophe. how do you gauge that? looking at stock prices, we have seen gains and sales are up 5% on the year. >> when promotions gear toward starting the holiday begin after halloween instead of after thanksgiving, and discounts start hitting 50% and 60% after thanksgiving, when customers don't respond to 20% and 30% off normal promotions, you're looking at a train wreck. the train wreck that was last year set up a very poor spring. this year has gone even more promotional. most retailers have extended their hours which expanded the expenses. discuss merles have been very, very, very picky.

there's been a tremendous shift away from apparel and accessories which hurt people like macy's, for example, who walked away from many of those businesses and hard line and homes and this is another very challenging play at the plate. and of course, however it turns out, it's going to set up a tough spring. >> let's lay the barcodes on the table. you said you believe the national retail federation forecast was overly bullish. >> uh-huh. >> are you standing by that? >> i am. i think that -- >> you sound like you're wonderful housing. >> i think this is what's going to happen. let's say they say they groer 4.8% and it was a great holiday season but we're not sure that's the case. if they didn't make any money and no profitability, was it a good holiday season? >> you know, the sales don't tell the tale because everything that you see on those shelves that's got any kind of seasonal or holiday basis behind it has

to be sold. and it will be sold and it will be sold at whatever discount it takes to liquidate and the fact is that four, five, even 5.5% might be the number but without profitability, what does it mean? there's some tremendous difficulty on bottom line coming out of this year. >> perms i should have qualified my answer better. i probably will lose the bet and the sales will be good but i don't think it's a good holiday season. >> you're saying pay attention to margin, not just revenue. >> exactly. >> the end of the day it is all about margin. it's not about sales and the fact is that when you're running multiple events every week from the beginning of november into january, how do you transition into a quote/unquote normal selling season in spring? now, a few retailers have partners to shoulder most of the cost of the promotion principally macy's with a heavy branded component but the folks

all in on private label are going to be struggling to pay the bill entirely on their own. >> all right. courtney, mark, thank you for making time. don't setting for 20% or 30% off. i have to wait for the bigger discounts. >> this is the problem. >> 100%. back of a truck. >> it is getting there. >> it is coming there? >> it is getting there. >> some guy in the alley 2:00 in the alley. >> just wait. >> down the alley. >> just wait. >> okay. we'll be back. stay with us.

thank you for watching. >> thank you. "closing bell," final hour of trade starts right now. >> see you tomorrow, too, by the way. welcome to "the closing bell," everybody. i'm kelly e vanls at the new york stock exchange. >> i'm bill f griffeth. another big year of the markets, kelly. following the stories. i mean, we didn't get the tremendous numbers we got in 2013 but 2014 turned out to be a big year, didn't it? >> especially, bill, if you look back at how long the stock market has been rallying now. eight quarters in a row. we haven't seen a run like that in quite sometime. >> those small caps are just kicking in. they're kicking in just the right time with the end of the year. plus, new evidence of weakness actually forom