>> got a lot in carolina. >> final trade? >> final trade? >> good game. i'm not calling a bottom, allergen, a lot of analysts talking about it, too cheap at 225. >> i'm melissa lee. more "fast" tomorrow. "mad money" starts right now. >> my mission is simple, to make you money and i'm here there's always a bull market somewhere, and i promise to help you find it. "mad money" starts now. hey, i'm cramer! welcome to "mad money." welcome to cramerica. other people want to make friends. i'm just trying to make you some money. my job is not just to entertain, but educate and teach. call 800-743-cnbc or tweet me @jimcramer. is this really a terrible time to invest? last week, donald trump said it was. he told the "washington post" that there's a big bubble in the economy and the stock market's

inflated. the market had started to deflate, but then he said it went back up again. usually that's a bad sign. that's a sign of things to come, end quote. on a day when the market drifted down slowly but surely, dow sinking 53 points, nasdaq dropping 0.46%, it's worth pondering mr. trump's fuse, whatever your political orientation. it makes sense on many different levels, and the conclusions, you know what, they're arguably right, at least for a certain group of people living in certain places, namely, rich people living in expensive places. first, we have to admit that the stock market's had a fabulous run since the bottom seven years ago. people have made huge amounts of money if they invested at the generational low, or if you held on at the meltdown and didn't own the hart rd hard-hit financials. you did terrifically. so, is there a bubble? well, if you're living in new york city real estate it feels like a bubble, particularly in manhattan, where properties could easily sell for four or five times what they might go

for 90 miles down the road, near, say, villanova. wow. i just worked that allegiance in far earlier than i ever thought i could do. anyway, a couple of weeks ago, kb homes reported, and on the conference call, ceo jeff metzger said "i don't think you're anywhere near a bubble price, certainly not at the price points we're playing at." but then literally in the same breath, he says, "sad to say, but $1.5 million is affordable in the bay area right now or the city of san francisco." i don't know, that sure sounds like a bubble to me. we know that historically, interest rates are much lower than we'd expect them to be, given the unemployment rate. there are several federal reserve members who simply won't stop talking about this and are concerned precisely about the bubble trump's talking about, but as trump points out, these rates aren't available to most people unless they're rich. again, that's pretty much an empirically correct judgment, although credit has loosened of late. trump also noted the strong

dollar is hurting stock investments. again, true. i talk about that dollar multiple times a week, talk about it later in the show. so, if things are so terrible, if there is a bubble, if the stock market's inflated, and therefore, dangerous, then why the heck should you be in it? why not sell everything? first, i'm going to say something that might be shocking to some of you out there, especially the ones who imagine me to be an all stocks all of the time guy. [ buzzer ] if the reports of donald trump's wealth are true, and i have no reason to doubt them, then he shouldn't even be in stocks at all, except for perhaps some fun. one of the best pieces of advice i learned at goldman sachs from my old partner, jack shepard. he heard me trying to sell a rich person some stocks, pitching them, so to speak. he knew i loved selling stocks and he knew i was being asked and the person i was talking to was intrigued by the ideas. when i got off the phone, he said he had something to say, and i never forgot it. he told me, "jimmy, you only

need to get rich once." think about how true that statement is. what's the point of owning stocks in order to make more money when you're already rich as kreeshs himself? jack said i should be buying people the highest quality bonds. all right, so, let's look back. the dow is about 15,000 points lower back then, so you could argue that it was a fabulous time to invest in stocks. people didn't think that, but you could argue it. but you know what? 30-year treasuries were yielding about 10%, top-rated municipal bonds, the one the government guaranteed, 6%. sure, they didn't give you the bang for the buck that stocks got. you did, however, do fabulously with those bonds given the high interest you received. still, what happened if you picked the wrong stocks back then? think about it. hey, how about the crash of '87? what about the mini crash of '89? what about the dotcom bomb of 2000? how about the financial crisis

from 2007 to 2009 or the flash crash, lost 1,000 dow points in less than an hour, or when stocks fell 16% in 2011 off the debt ceiling crisis? or how about stocks fell almost 2,000 points back in august, just five days. and now there's deflation earlier in the year that trump may have referencing when we had the january sell-off. if you took the wrong but totally legitimate action of panicking, selling aller stocks into the suboptimal vortex of panic, you might not have done nearly as well as if you had just owned those bonds and slept well every night after purchasing them. so, in that sense, i do think trump's right, stocks do have tremendous risk. and i never want to minimize that risk on "mad money." every day hot stocks soar and then come crashing back to earth a few days later or months or even years. every day there are companies with stocks that simply blow up in your face. but now let's deal with the reality of the vast majority of americans, those who aren't rich and are unlikely to get rich

from their jobs, because as we all know, wages are stagnant and there simply isn't as much economic mobility as there used to be when i was growing up. unlike when i worked at goldman sachs in the 1980s, bonds these days yield very little. they arguably aren't as good a buy for someone who's not rich versus a portfolio of higher yielding common stocks diversified across a variety of industries. you can craft that portfolio yourself or you can look for a fund that invests in higher yielding stocks to spread the risk. and most important, after putting away your nest egg money, you can try to find some stocks that have the capability to deliver out-sized gains, real out-sized gains. i don't think that this position is at all an threatical to trump's position or the position of so many people who come on air and tell you that we're in a dangerous, risky moment and you have to sell. in fact, people are far more involved in the stock market whose careers should depend on their calls have come on and given scary messages about where

the stock market may be going, messages that are far more alarming than anything trump said. still, though, donald trump and most of the others out there need to be careful about being too sweepingly negative. given that the alternatives for regular people who are trying to make a little -- you know, some money in this economy? they're virtually nonexistent! for them, stocks are the only game in town. you can't borrow lots of money at low interest rates to invest in real estate or development unless you're already wealthy. if you invest in certificates of deposit, you'll have next to nothing to show for it. if you buy corporate bonds, you might be taking too much risk, versus what could happen if rates shoot up rapidly, causing bond prices to go down, but what happens if the businesses go bad? that's why i believe that as long as you take a long-term view, put money away in an index fund, then set some savings aside for smart, homework-derived investment ideas based on companies you know and love that suit you, it's worth braving all the bubble talk to invest in the

stock market. so, let me give you the bottom line -- there are always bubbles, people, there will always be bubbles. there are times where stocks are very stretched. there are times when you should take some profits, some, but ultima ultimately, stocks represent a better value for the average person than anything else out there. and if you aren't already rich, the market is still the best way to try to make yourself wealthy. so, don't let the bubbleheads scare you away from making money with your money. that would be the wrong thing to do. let's go to scott in pennsylvania. scott! >> caller: va, virgin america. would the stock have climbed without rumors of a merger? >> with -- no, no! i mean, va was -- the airline stocks were actually going down before this, so i would tell you, no, absolutely not. that was a good deal, though, and i want you, if you do own va, take the money and run. let's go to donald, new york. donald. >> caller: hello, mr. cramer.

>> how are you? >> caller: super, super. my wife and i have been watching your program. we love "mad money" for the last ten years. and we've done well -- >> thank you. >> caller: -- as individual investors. after the ferrari ipo, i purchased, i'll say a handsome number of shares. i'm considering today after reading the "wall street journal" yesterday and today trading in ferrari for tesla. what do you think, mr. cramer? >> you know, tesla just -- look, you've had a lot of good news for tesla the last 72 hours, and that has caused the stock to run, but you know what, it's run so much that i think it's too speculative for the moment. let it pull back, if you want to do that. i just think it's unconscionable for me to tell you to come in on top of this run and go buy some tesla. it just wouldn't be right. all right, sorry to burst your bubble, but the truth is, there will always be bubbles, but ultimately, stocks represent the best value for the average person. on "mad money," over the past year, the hotel industry has been bad enough to make you want

to empty the mini bar, but is it time to check into the sector once more? i'll tell you which stock could help you sleep at night. then, chipotle s gone from the high-growth restaurant darling to one of the biggest battleground names in the entire market, but could it make a comeback? i'll tell you what to make of the company. and i'm digging deeper into the employment number with one of the leading headhunters. so, why don't you stick with cramer! >> announcer: don't miss a second of "mad money." follow @jimcramer on twitter. have a question? tweet cramer, #madtweets. send jim an e-mail to madmoney@cnbc.com. or give us a call at 1-800-743-cn 1-800-743-cnbc. miss something? head to madmoney.cnbc.com.

♪ hotel motel holiday inn i'm trying to pack my bags here. i mean, is it just me, or are the hotel stocks way too cheap? in recent weeks, the hotels have rallied nicely, thanks to the bidding war for starwood, a war ultimately won by marriott when they upped their bid to beat an offer from china's anbang insurance group. but we have to remember that for

the bulk of the past 12 months, this entire sector's been in the doghouse, just a total group of underperformers. after peaking in april or may of last year -- that's pretty much where all of them did -- every u.s.-based hotel stock moved lower in the second half of 2015. boy, some were down substantially. hilton fell 22%, hyatt 17%, wyndham 11%, starwood 15%, marriott 10%, la quinta plunged 40%! a lot of it because it has so much exposure to the oil-heavy economy of texas. now, you'd think hotels would be beneficiaries of lower gasoline prices. that's what we thought. but at the same time, the industry's been hammered by the strong dollar, put the bib yosh on tourists coming here from overseas, not to mention the disruptive effects of companies like airbnb or, of course, the horrifying and tragic terrorist attacks in europe. however, now that we know marriott's willing to pay around $83 per share for starwood in cash and stock, and that's a 20% premium to where it was trading

before the takeover speculation started last fall, we wondered if this entire cohort was dramatically undervalued. certainly, if you value the whole group with marriott valuing starwood, there could be fabulous opportunities lurking for trading and investing. before we use that valuation, though, let's get our heads around how starwood got there. a little less than a year ago, the company announced it was spinning off its timeshare division and potentially looking to sell the rest of the business, too. that announcement was viewed as bullish for the industry, given consolidation could give the other players more pricing power. so, no surprise that april of 2015 was indeed the highwater mark for most of the stocks. the bidders spent the next few months preparing offers and things heated up late last october when david facebooker my "squawk on the street" co-host, broke the story that hyatt was interested in buying starwood, while also noting that chinese companies were mulling takeover bids. then in november, starwood and marriott announced they had agreed to a $12.2 billion deal.

starwood, just 72 bucks a share. a bid so low, i was surprised they accepted it, and was not at all surprised when starwood's stock went lower. for a couple of months it seemed like starwood would sell itself for pittance, not a good sign for the industry, but three weeks ago, china's anbang came in and realized the asset was being particularly undervalued and stepped in with a bid of $76 per share, all cash. a few days later, we found out that starwood accepted a $78 offer from anbang, but then marriott turned around and made their final offer, a cash and stock bid that values the company at more than $85 a share, over 13 bucks higher than their first offer. so, it seems starwood is in reality worth even more than the people running it thought it was. and if that's true for them, it ought to be true for the rest of the group, which is why after an abysmal start to 2016, hotel stocks have been roaring higher to the point where the cohort is slightly outperforming the broader averages. throw in the fact that the super

strong dollar is finally getting weaker versus the euro and other currencies and emerging growth currencies, we could see a resurgence in foreign terrorism in this country. oh, that would be a huge boom for the hotel stocks. so, given what marriott was willing to pay for starwood, how do we grade the rest of the group? starwood was supposed to make $82 a share, so it's 30.4 times this year's earnings, 28 times next year's earnings estimates. of course, it's a control block, so you have to pay more, but that's quite a pretty penny, frankly. if you apply that rubric to the other hotel stocks, many of them do like quite cheap here. obviously, these are on a takeover basis, but let's take hilton worldwide, all right? that currently trades at less than 20 times next year's numbers. hilton is among the cheapest, but it's also one of the hairiest stories out there, with hair in wall street parlance being negative, like hair in

your soup. this was a name taken public by bla blackstone. that means they're down with debt and blackstone owns over 35% of the share. that's a position you better believe they plan to sell gradually over time. that's their job, but it's a lot of potential selling. in order, if they value them at $1.12 per share, this could be a $31.36 stock. that would be up 41% from where it's currently trading. call hilton a high-risk/high-reward situation. not my favorite, but i can certainly understand the appeal it had to people. another cheap one, intercontinental hotels, ihg. that trades at only 18.4 times next year's earnings estimates. this is a british-based company that runs more than 5,000 hotels across 100 different countries. intercontinental hotel is intriguing because there have been rumors that three chinese suitors have been eyeing the company as a potential takeover target -- shanghai haa group and

china investment corps, some of the same that were interested in starwood. and if these firms are willing to pay these prices, it's possible in the event of a takeover, we could see something in the realm of a 52% premium for this stock. may sound like pie in the sky, but remember, even starwood didn't understand how valuable it was to potential acquirers until they got into a bidding war, although anbang dropping out does make a chinese bid seem more suspect. let's hope that the buy of starwood, marriott. here's a stock that trades at 15.3 times next year's earnings estimates. i think it's very unlikely marriott will ever be a takeover target, given it's one of the largest players in the group and is about to get bigger, thanks to the starwood deal, but it's one of the cheapest stocks in the space. still, i can't escape the idea that marriott got bluffed into paying too much for starwood, even though it could be lucrative. think of marriott as a long-term value play. the cheapest of the hotel

stocks, though, when we did the work came up again and again, cramer fave, wyndham worldwide. that's wyn, which is trading at a paltry, frankly, ridiculous 12 times next year's earnings estimates. wyndham's a bit more complicated than some of the others because in addition to hotels, it also has a gigantic, lucrative timeshare business. starwood also did, so did marriott. didn't prevent the company from selling itself. it doesn't hurt that we recently heard from wyndham's ceo, steve holmes, a couple months ago right here on the show after he delivered a spectacular quarter. i thought he told a really compelling story. plus, wyndham pays you a solid yield. imagine raising the dividend by 19%. talk about a sign of confidence. and if you value it like starwood, this $75 stock, i know, i'm just going to put it out there, if you value it like starwood, the $75 stock is worth $175. now, i know that's too rosy a view, but i wouldn't be too surprised if wyndham can't work back to its old high of $92 and

then trade over $100. so, here's the bottom line -- in the wake of this bidding war for starwood after the beatdown the group has suffered from the shadow boxing with airbnb, we need to revalue the whole hotel cohort. and despite the recent rallies in these stocks, they're still depressed after last year's underperformance. that's why i like intercontinental hotels as an inexpensive consolidation play, marriott, but only for the long haul, and my absolute favorite right now, the cheapest and maybe the best run, wyndham worldwide. much more "mad money" ahead, including my take on chipotle. is it the worst opening for the company? i'll tell you if wall street's appetite could change for the stock. then, every seven minutes, corn fairy places a new person in a job. i'll talk with the ceo for the employment picture. and a slew of downgrades on the street, but is it time to sell? i'll give you my take. (son) pa, i know we settle for cable...

but directv has been number one in customer satisfaction over cable for 15 years. (father) how 'bout over 15 satisfying years with that woman over there boiling your clothes. her layers and layers of...layers. hair that i've rarely seen because it's always under that bonnet. and how she fought off that grizzly and made him into these slippers. that's satisfaction son. (vo) don't be a settler, get a $100 reward card when you switch to directv.

what happens when the hottest restaurant stock around gets battered by a series of health scares? well, isn't that the question we need to answer when it comes to chipotle? here's a stock that's been surging year after year after year after year, then last fall it got hit with outbreaks of e. coli and norovirus at some of its restaurants, which caused chipotle's stock to tumble from $757 at its peak last august down to a low of $399 in

january. that's a staggering 47% decline! but now the health issues seem to be a thing of the past, and the stock has started to rebound, now back up to $465 today. a lot of people are wondering if the former market darling can ever get its groove back. can chipotle, beloved by millennials for its ability to deliver high-quality, good-tasting food with integrity, find a way to come back from the brutal blow to its reputation? complicated question. but when you put it all together and you look at what's happened to other fast, casual restaurant chains with e. coli problems or other problems involving illness in food, i think the answer is a resounding yes! chipotle can, indeed, get its mojo back. just might take some time. first, though, let's understand exactly what happened here. in late october, we heard rumors that chipotle customers in the northwest were suffering severe gastrointestinal problems. then on november 1st, the company closed 43 of its locations, in seattle and portland, after they got word of

an e. coli outbreak. by november 20th, the cdc was telling us that the outbreak was bigger than we thought, spreading through california, minnesota, ohio and new york as well. and it just kept snowballing. in late december, we got word that coaches at boston college were telling their athletes not to eat at chipotle in boston, which turned out to have a totally different disease, norovirus. that was a real hit that called into question the health care practices of a whole company. now, to be fair, chipotle was very aggressive about closing down any infected locations and then implementing new training and safety procedures to make sure this kind of thing never happens again. >> we can assure you today that there is no e. coli in chipotle. we have thoroughly tested our food, we have thoroughly tested our surfaces, and we are confident that chipotle is a safe place to eat. >> the damage was already done. at the beginning of january, chipotle preannounced fourth-quarter earnings guidance

of anywhere from $1.70 to $1.90 per share, way below the $2.55 wall street was expecting. we learned that same-store sales declined by a hideous 30% in december, less of a haircut, more of a beheading, although not a total surprise, because when this kind of health scare happens, you've got to expect customers to head for the hills. in response, the target was hit with downgrades and price target cuts from the analyst community, helping bring chipotle down to a 52-week low of $359 january 12th. that looks to be a definitive bottom. and since then, the stock has rallied nearly 17%. what's driven the rebound? a lot of it those do with the fact that when chipotle reported fourth-quarter results, they delivered a monster earnings beat, and the same-store sales were only down 14.6%, which while ugly was better than feared, although january numbers were down 36%. then on march 15th, chipotle announced that their february same-store sales had declined by 26%. again, not good, but a definite

improvement versus january, indicating that management's free burrito promotion was getting people back in the doors, even if it was taking a big bite from the earnings and some of the analysts really had to slash numbers. which brings us to right now. why do i believe chipotle can bounce back from this health care disaster, even though many, many analysts have downgraded it? what makes me think the stock's a buy for the long haul? first and foremost, chipotle has history on its side. they're not the first fast-food chain to be laid low by an e. coli outbreak. if you're looking for a decent comparison here, i think taco bell comes pretty close. they had a nasty e. coli scare in november of 2006. just like with chipotle, the effect on the numbers were immediate. with taco bell's same-store sales falling 5% in the fourth quarter, 11% in the quarter after that. but you know what, that marked the low. and by the second quarter of 2007, taco bell's numbers were on the rebound again, although it took a few quarters before they went positive. it's now been nearly a decade since the health care scare, and

well, taco bell's doing just fine, no permanent damage. in fact, it's one of the better divisions at yum! brands, which you know i like because it's splitting up. or how about a more recent example at yum!? the chinese chicken health scare of late 2012, when their poultry was found to have excessively high levels of antibiotics. they came in the first and second quarters of 2013, when same-store sales plunged 20%. but by the fourth quarter of 2014, one year later, they lapped the health care and the numbers turned positive again, up 9%. now kfc in china may not be the best comparison to chipotle, but this health care was recent, meaning it was wildly disseminated across the public's republic thanks to social media. in the sage of twitter, we see that a high-quality brand can recover from this fiasco after a little more than a year. one more example. this is a tough one. more than 20 years ago, jack in the box had the mother of all e. coli outbreaks when more than 700 people were infected thanks

to jack's undercooked burgers. this was a genuine tragedy, as the majority of victims were children, four of whom died. another 178 victims were left with permanent kidney and brain damage. just horrible. the culprit? jack's monster burger, marketed under the slogan "so good, it's scary." talk about a bizarre instance of truth in advertising. this outbreak took a hatchet to jack in the box's numbers. but if you look at the long-term chart here, this tragedy was only a temporary setback for the stock's performance, as jack has managed to roar higher over the ensuing 20-plus years. so, if taco bell and jack in the box can come back from health scares that were as bad or i think worse, chipotle can, too. sure in a way, this is worse because it soiled chipotle's previously sterling reputation, but consider the facts. chipotle still has a fabulous brand. many local customers who kept coming to the stores even as the e. coli outbreak was everywhere on the news, same-store sales, while far from good, are moving in the right general direction.

and let's not forget, chipotle's stores remain cash machines. even after these twin health scares, the company still has the best level economics in the industry, even after, with its restaurants generating an average cash-on-cash return of 40%. all right, that's down from the insanely great 70%, but chipotle put up -- and those were 2014 numbers -- but it's still better than anyone else in the space, so why run from it? finally, i believe in chipotle because i believe in chipotle's management and chipotle's management believes in itself. when the health scare was making headlines and the stock was getting crushed, chipotle was buying back stock hand over fist, $338 million worth of repurchases in the fourth quarter. and when the company reported in early february, they told us they bought back another $238 million worth of stock. currently, chipotle has $478 million left in its repurchase and i think the board of directors will keep topping that off, as it gets spent, given the company has a stellar balance sheet. am i partial to these guys?

you bet i am. they are different. they have an ethos, an ethos i like. natural organic as best as they can. it's the ethos that got them where they were. i'm convinced it will get them back to where they will be. it just takes some time. and i think that you will, indeed, forget this. so, here's the bottom line. yes, these health issues hurt chipotle's stock. yes, the brand's reputation has been damaged. yes, the numbers needed to be cut. and the stock may have to spend some time in the wilderness. but long term, my view is that if lesser players like taco bell and jack in the box have rebounded from worse disasters, then the best-in-class chipotle can come back, too. it's hard to figure how the timing of the turnaround will play out, and it will take time, but if you're investing for the long term, i recommend scaling right now into chipotle, because when that turn does eventually come, this stock's going to rebound very fast. oh, and by the way, had it for

lunch, really good. david in new york! david! >> caller: hey, jim. thanks for taking my call. >> of course! >> caller: i've got a question. just got a recent upgrade and i want to know what you think. >> i read that upgrade and i thought that is typical of what i do like, i have to admit. this is a stock down on its luck. we've been chronicling it. that upgrade said that the regular stores were starting to do better and old navy's starting to do better. if that is the case, then the stock, indeed, is a bargain. but remember relying on that analyst making that judgment, and i don't have that information. it does yield 3%. it did seem to be a good idea to buy it. bit of a change for me, but did seem to be good. let's go to joe in my home state of new jersey. joe! >> caller: hello, cramer. thanks for all that you do and for all your great advice. >> ah, thank you, my friend, thank you. >> caller: my stock is kraft heinz company. the analysts reduced the price

target from $104 to $93, even after a solid beat. it seems like after the merger that it's hard to place a value on the company. what do i do? >> you know what, i am not going to disagree. my travel trust has a big position, big position in it. berkshire hathaway's there. i think the guys who bought the company, combined the company of heinz and kraft are taking out a lot of cost, but in the end, does it have the growth that i like? we scaled it back a little. i'm still sticking with it because buffett's got great reviews as well as the guys from brazil who run it, but it's not going to take off like a rocket. it's just a good stock. chipotle may still be the top enchilada, sure, the turnaround could take time, but when it happens, the stock is going to really heat up. much more "mad money" ahead, including a company that's placed leaders atop office depot, puma and major league baseball. we'll take a look at the importance of korn/ferry's ceo. then, from facebook to general electric, a number of companies and a host of issues face downgrades and price target

slashes today. i'm telling you if the wave of analyst action means it's time to ring the register. plus, all your calls rapid fire in tonight's "lightning round," so stick with cramer! you shouldn't have to go far

to get the help you're looking for. that's why at xfinity we're opening up more stores closer to you.

where you can use all of our latest products and technology. and find out how to get the most out of your service. so when you get home, all you have to do is enjoy it. we're doing everything we can to give you the best experience possible. because we should fit into your life. not the other way around. ♪ last friday we got a broad view of the employment situation when the labor department released their critical nonfarm payroll report, but if you want to get down to the nitty gritty of what hiring looks like in this country, it's helpful to talk to companies that actually specialize in staffing. when it comes to the high end of the job spectrum, the 1% jobs, so to speak, nobody's better than korn/ferry, kfi. they have an executive search firm leading in the business. they have been the leader in the executive search business for 25

years. they are the recruiter. and the company just reported a solid quarter less than a month ago, but this has been a tough time for the staffing stocks and korn/ferry's no exception. down 16% year to date and trading at 11 times next year's earnings estimates. gary bernsen is joining us to tell us what the stock's looking like. welcome back to "mad money." >> jim, how are you doing? >> i want to talk about your business, but you put out a survey about remarkable things about what makes executives happy, what doesn't really make them happy and what does. i'll give you the floor, because i thought that the one that was the least is the one that i thought would be the most in terms of what they wanted. >> well, you know, listen, i think people don't leave, you know, companies, they leave bosses. you know, that's absolutely an undying truth. and so, you know, with this millennial coming on board now,

you know, people want to be part of an organization that has a purpose, that has a why. and you know, that's what we're seeing, and we're also seeing that employees want to be developed. they're looking for alternative ways of keeping them engaged and motivated. >> the fact is, i thought that jockeying was paying compensation came in last at only 4% of the people cared about that the most. >> well, look, you know, it's never about the money, but it is about the money. you know, money's in the top five, but it's never number one. i mean, people want to be part of a winning team, they want to be stimulated. they want to be loved! they want to know that what they do matters to another human being, and they want to be developed. those things tend to rise above money. listen, money's important, but it's not number one. >> all right. now, let's talk about both the margin trends and the revenue. your margins are extraordinary. some of the analysts felt that the revenue trends aren't as strong as they expected. and i'm wondering if, first of all, if you think that's the case, but second, if there's

something in the economy, that we are kind of trying to deal with when we see the employment number being pretty good but not great. >> well, you know, look, we've transformed the firm. i mean, today, you know, 50% of our business comes from an advisory business around strategy and organizational design. that's completely new. and you look at our workforce of 7,000 today, literally 4,000 of them are new in the last four months. so, we're going through a transformation, taking this great brand, as you pointed out, that is associated with the 1%, and now we're making that much more elastic and not, you know, not just finding great players for an offense but helping a board and ceo actually design the offense. >> well, let's talk about that, because i followed you internationally, and it looks like that some of your international -- the way that i look at korn/ferry internationally is it's almost like you're kind of a combination banker, adviser, consultant and recruiter, and it seems like it's a broad mosaic that you set out.

>> it absolutely is, but as a ceo, you know, strategy's one thing, but 90% of strategy is execution, and 90% of execution is people. so, linking those two -- you know, the intersection of strategy and people -- that's what a ceo plays in all the time, that's what a coach plays in. you'll see it tonight in the final four. that's what it's all about, marrying those two. >> it's interesting you mentioned that, because i think jay wright is kind of what you're talking about, the coach of villanova. he's trying to be able to create a team, and it's obvious from your work that people are seeking that team environment, and that's, when they come to you looking for help, they're asking what place is most like that? >> you know, that's true. i mean, you know, people don't fail or succeed because of technical skills. they largely fail or succeed because there wasn't this culture fit. you know, the team didn't gel as a team. >> right. >> there wasn't that chemistry. it's the same thing in the corporate world, right? you've got to create that mosaic of culture that anchors around a common purpose.

>> do you think that some of the, let's say the firings in the financial sector have hurt the general 1% kind of recruiting that you have to do? >> oh, for sure. i mean, the financial services is a very, very small part of our portfolio. it's about 14% today. you know, 30% of the portfolio's in industry industrial. and the thing i'm most excited about is health care. health care's only about 7% of our top line. but if you look at the u.s. economy and consider that 20%'s going to be in health care, you know, we're looking to add $200, $300, $400 million to that is right paf our business. >> given the total adjustable market, do you think people are just confused about what your numbers will look like with hay group? because i think the multiple's way too low of what people are paying for your future earnings given that you've transformed the firm. >> well, look, we just added $100 million of ebitda through this combination with hay group, and i think the overriding question that everybody has is, you know, is this the end of the inning? is this the seventh inning or is

it the fourth inning? you know, is this the end of the cycle or not? >> i've got to tell you, i don't understand why your stock's this cheap, because you've really transformed the firm. but meantime, look, let's let people decide. that's gary burnison, ceo of korn/ferry international. kfy. thank you so much, sir. >> thank you, jim. >> this is a very cheap stock and i scratched my head all weekend trying to figure out why it is. maybe it's because you should buy it. "mad money's" back after the break.

it is time! it's time for "the lightning round." hear this sound and then the lightning round is over. are you ready, skee-daddy? time for the lightning round. let's start with bill in michigan. bill! >> caller: yes, jcpenneys, jim. the price has been going down lately. i know it had a big run. i buy a lot of stocks, and -- >> well, you know what, i think that the retailers that are working are tjx, raw stores, dollar tree and dollar general, and i kind of don't want to go beyond that group right now. let's go to bob in maryland.

bob! >> caller: hi, bob in baltimore, maryland, here. >> hi. >> caller: jim, is it time to light the fuse on dynavax and their hepatitis b vaccine? >> you know, oh, geez, the stock is up so much today. no. i'm going to say you've got to wait for that thing to come down, and i think it will come down because i think the drug stocks have had too big a run here in the last two days. let's go to brian in maryland. brian! >> caller: boo-yah. >> boo-yah. >> caller: ak steel, mr. cramer, you said -- >> no! the only one i'm recommending is new corp, which preannounced a big number and continued to go higher. susan in massachusetts. susan! >> caller: hi, jim. thank you for taking my call. >> of course. >> caller: and thank you for your show. do you think it's time to sell spelling even at a loss in order to free up the money for lockheed martin? >> actually, i would do that. i would do that. my charitable trust owns

lockheed martin. boeing, i'm still waiting clarity on the accounting issues they're having and i don't need to worry about the clarity for lockheed martin. let's go to alec in rhode island. alec! >> caller: how are you doing, jim? big boo-yah from snowy providen providence, rhode island. >> really? i didn't know it was snowing up there. what's going on? >> caller: i've got atlantic company. i'm wondering where you're going on them. >> these speciality pharmaceutical companies cannot be bought here! >> don't buy, don't buy. >> i don't want you in them. and that, ladies and gentlemen, is the conclusion of the "lightning round"! >> announcer: "the lightning round" is sponsored by td ameritrade. ♪ he has a sharp wit. a winning smile. and no chance of getting an athletic scholarship. and that is why you invest. the best returns aren't just measured in dollars.

td ameritrade. atand that in a new house,tee a fyou probably don't sharece, the same tastes as the previous owner. ♪ [ dolphin chatters ] so when you need a little house painting or a complete remodel, we'll help you get the job done right, guaranteed. get started today at angie's list, because your home is where our heart is.

sell, sell, sell, sell, sell! let the downgrades begin. we've got so many of them today, and they collectively did have a real negative impact on the market. here's a select few. sanford bernstein, downgrade. general electric saying good news was already baked in. sell, sell, sell. goldman sachs takes jm smucker from hold to sell. fundamentals, tougher comparisons upcoming. longbo downgraded eden, suggesting it had come too far, too fast based on faltering divisions. deutsche bank says it's time to say good-bye to air products, too big a run. and taking profits in ingersoll-rand. come up enough. they also say take profits in white wave after its run from the low 30s to the low 40s. perhaps most powerful of all,

deutsche bank says that facebook has an unfavorable quarter coming up. doesn't justify the run. [ booing ] and here's what i say, if the dollar starts soaring again -- it hasn't -- and if the european recovery somehow falls a year into a comeback, after one year into the comeback, and if janet yellen goes back on her promise to be data-dependent, i think the downgrades make a lot of sense. stocks have had a huge run, including these. they deserve a rest. if the companies fall badly in upcoming quarters, they're vulnerable, but what happens to these stocks if the dollar stays on a course of weakness in i think estimates will go higher, not lower. what if interest rates stay low? some in the companies provide very good income, including general electric and eden, and i'm not the least bit concerned that those dividends are at risk. what if the consolidation in the food industry continues? am i really supposed to sell jm

smucker, which has done so well over the years but is only up 3% year to date, sports a 2% yield? can i thread that needle? or how about this whitewave? it's spent time consolidating, a monster since it was spun out in 2012, until recently when it began floundering along with whole foods. but whitewave hasn't missed its numbers, and with so many food companies going natural and organic, any one of them could buy this purveyor of natural and organic products, including soy and almond milk, and instantly change its stripes! oh, it got walloped, but good today! falling $10.40, big position from my charitable trust. you can follow along. i thought it was unjustified. how about the general electric downgrade? i get the reluctance to stay bullish in the stock, given the remarkable run from 25 bucks to 31, where it is now. and that's a big move for a large capitalization stock. and nearly 20 times earnings, i can't pretend that the valuation isn't somewhat stretched, but

what happens if ceo jeff immelt, who's been fabulous at extricating the company from its up-and-down financial business and making it a pure industry -- what happens if he decides to buy back a huge amount of stock? what if he gives a huge dividend boost? what happens if he follows the large share holder plan to bring out value? then i think $20 is doable for ge, especially if the dollar stays soft. >> buy, buy, buy! >> and that's not counting on china to come back any time soon. we want to buy more general electric for my charitian trust. it's too cheap, makes no sense to me. finally, there's facebook. no doubt, facebook's expensive. i'm going to give the guys who don't like it here, i'm going to give them that. sure, maybe there's a chance that it comes in for profit-taking when the company reports three weeks from now, but facebook's only up a little more than 7% for the year. and you know you can't value this stock on near-term earnings. you've got to think longer term. i think facebook could have as much as $6 in earnings power out three years, which means it's

trading at 18 times those future numbers? what, then, do you sell the stock here, somewhat betting you can get back in at a lower level? oh, maybe. i just think that the risk here is to not own facebook. kind of like when everyone foolishly traded out of apple back in the '90s, remember that? remember when i said don't trade it, own it? feeling that way about facebook when it comes in. so, go ahead, feel free to sell. i'm not going to stop you. profits are a terrific thing. go ring the register on these terrific stocks, if you want to. i just think for the most part, these downgrades are opportunities to buy, not sell. i know that seems contrary today, but not if everything falls into place. and you know what? i think there's very well a chance that that's exactly what happens. stick with cramer! property being stolen. that is cyber-crime and it affects each and every one of us. microsoft created the digital crimes unit to fight cyber-crime. we use the microsoft cloud to visualize information so we can track down the criminals.

when it comes to the cloud, trust and security are paramount. we're building what we learn back into the cloud to make people and organizations safer. ♪ [engine revs] ♪ ♪

[engine revving] the all-new audi a4 is here.

all right, after the close of the market, the treasury department issued some new regulations about inversions. these regulations are driving down the stock of aller again and driving up the stock of pfizer, because the they're thinking the deal is off. my travel trust has a position in allergen. we were looking to get better, but never thought we would get a break of 50 points after hours simply because the stock is not going to be purchased. it sells at 14 times earnings. i think that's a mistake. i think it's too cheap. i promise to find the bull market for you right here on d "mad money." i'm jim cramer. see you tomorrow!

>> on this episode of "secret lives of the super rich," on board one of the most extravagant mega-yachts ever built. >> you've almost convinced me that i'm getting a bargain at 200 million bucks. >> come aboard the 280-foot ship that'll make a billionaire feel like king of the sea. [ ship horn blares ] fall in love with a $22 million bel air mansion and its subterranean disco pool. >> i can immediately tell if somebody wants to have sex with the house or not, which would tell me if they want to buy it. >> 319 miles an hour. >> meet the billionaire heiress who risks it all on the drag strip. >> i just kept cutting through the air like a knife. >> and enter the $18 million