>> strong for gold but not for oil. >> no. oil, that's now a growth proxy and the dollar going down does show you that people pushing out the first rate hike which is ironic in a expense the fed wasn't giving any reason would it happen but some people must have been meaning way. we'll break it hours lows a report claiming fraud. we'll bring you all the details. and later, tonight's fast take did u.s. taxpayers get fleeced by bailing out the airline industry did it even need to happen we're digging in on the sky high outrage. we start the show as we did last night with a question.

does the market finally believe jpow if you watched us yesterday, we asked why no one seems to believe the fed chief when he says rate hikes aren't coming any time soon. today he was even clearer saying he isn't even thinking about it until 2024 at the earliest when they do move, the market will have ample warning. reuniting the dow and s&p 500 closing at all time highs. so does this mean meme really say it all ♪ >> all right just to reiterate. this is fake, honestly a deep fake. but does its meaning ring true guy? >> i love the memes. i love those, and the gifs are my favorite. i guess going back to last night, the stock market absolutely believes him. and i'm somewhat hesitant to say

it but that's something, i know tim and karen and steve have been saying it don't fight these guys and the stock market continues on its merry way. the ten-year yields are any indication, the bond market doesn't believe him. here we are north of 1.6%. one market does, the other doesn't. right now the u.s. equity market is winning and for the purposes of our show tonight, that's probably good enough >> at the same time, when rates get high enough, we've seen it in the past when they've touched six, seven, toward 1.7 the markets have a little bit of a tantrum. so even though bond market may not believe jpow, the two are intertwibed. what do you think is the answer? is jpow making it abundantly clear that there is no intention of raising rates until not even forecasted economic metrics come true but they have to see it in the

present. >> yeah, very backward looking very subjective. we've been twice on fast money so there's a lot going on and i think you have a case where also, the concept of the absolute level of bond yields on the ten-year are at one point, equities in trouble. and that is a bigger debate on some level because we don't know the conversation that the fed may have lost control of the long end of the curb is the right one to have. i think from fed funds, obviously, out to five or six years, it is pretty clear that today's action tells that you the fed is able to job own here's something else people are not talking about. they're out there saying they're going to continue to buy at least 80 billion treasuries and 40 billion mortgage backs. at least so the signs of the bond tapering is something really tough to understand. especially when the fed really

upgraded the economy, tells that you a 4.5% unemployment rate by the end of 2021 from not terribly far off the record lows that, of all time that we went into the pandemic with, is still not good enough. the fed was very clear today i'm most troubled by the 19 handle it fell 8% and the volatility of this low tells us equity should be a little bit weary in the next couple days. >> we're at pre pandemic levels. what did you make of today does it change your view on the markets? >> well, i'm always long but i have this image of jpow saying, you know what? i've taken the bull market hostage. i'm not going to hurt the bull market and the bond market yelling, let the bull market go and then he says if anybody makes a sudden move, the bull market dies. and i think that's a standoff that he's trying to reach with

the bond market, right we saw briefly what happened last month he had a lot of weird things in the bond market. a lot of sudden movements and the stock market didn't like that at all. as tim and guy said, he couldn't have been more clear about how dovish he is i don't know if the data will forc if we is start to see data change we'll have to think all right he could be made to do it sooner. i don't really know. it wasn't shop shocking to me that it wasn't so shocking to me, the general rhetoric, i don't think it was so shocking to anyone but good for banks i guess it was no giant surprise more dubbish than i thought, we thought he was dubbish going in. i want to hear what he says about the supplemental leverage ratio, that's important for banks, he punted on that.

>> twice. >> twice did you say >> yeah twice he made it clear he is not going to say anything about it any time earlier than couple weeks in interprets of the market reaction -- >> in terms of the market reaction we seen it most sharply, using that loosely because moves weren't amplified but in technology shares we saw gain in that action. what did you make of the fed overall. >> your first question was does the market believe the fed just by the jump in the market, the s&p jumped 1% interday on j powell that means to me they don't believe the fed that he's not going to raise rates now, switch over to the ten-year going back to august, the ten-year on a percent basis has rallied 223% on a percent-basis so that is a huge move that the fed can't control. to tim's point so when you look at the overall market

the overall market seems to have a little bit of time digesting whether or not we're going to go full y into value where you see iwm in the last month up off the bounce 13% q's up 18% spiders up 6%. so we see that they're still buying value on this with the overall economy just raring to get going. but when you look at the fed trying to talk it over they've always been perplexed with where inflation is and now you're finally getting what you wanted. kudos to the fed they finally got there and i think the market should still be bought at this level. >> let's bring in steve liesman who is listening to j powell words how do you interpret his

answer yesterday, he seemed to be swatting away like a fly. steve. >> yeah, i was sort of confused. i'll tell you a lot -- there's a lot of commentary on his answer or lack of because so much is riding on the bond market where the fed will come in, whether he likes the idea coming in and he wouldn't answer, he said the tools are the tools we have and he didn't want to go there he seemed to not rule it out but didn't really want to talk about it despite what i thought was a respectful follow up, melissa, i think i was respectful but he didn't want to talk much about it, left in tact the possibility. i will say this, melissa i'm struck, this is a reporter's notebook here, by the conviction of j j powell. he looked the bond market and

concern about inflation and told us he would stick to his guns and he stuck to his gunz and i actually saw something today i thought i would never see, a six percent forecast for the fed for gdp growth, 3.5 unemployment forecast two years down the road and fed not changing interest rates. today is a historic day. we saw the policy powell laid out months ago for the first time coming to numbers what we've never seen before, a reaction function from the federal reserve that is dubbish than anything perhaps in hitter. >> what i think was interesting as well in that very moment for the fed is that the fed has gone from being proactive in terms of wanting to have easy monetary policy and have it longer than maybe many wanted to basically broadcasting it will now be a reactive federal reserve it's going to wait to see that

growth materialize it's going to wait for inflation to get too hot before it does anything that seems to be a major change in the stance of the fed. >> it is when i first got into the business of covering the federal reserve the idea of proactive or preemptive monetary policy was all the rage they were going to look at the forecast and set policy to the forecast powell was throwing that out saying we're going to react to the data when it comes the story is 10 million unemployed and powell is not forgetting about them. he's formally orienting the policy not towards what the bond market wants but the idea that we need to put those people back to work and while they're out of work in the process of getting back to work it's going to be very hard to have an inflation airy spike that lafst perhaps something the bond and stock market misread. >> so steve, karen brought this

up in commentary earlier, i will ask this question, supplemental leverage ratio, which i believe expires on march 31st, that was brought up seemingly not answered -- not seemingly, it wasn't answered. any thoughts around that >> so, there was a change in the repo allotment for -- this is very in the weeds -- but there was some indication they may not extend it because of what they did basically for the money market funds, allowing them to come in for 80 billion instead of 30. this is the wrong time for fed to take risk around something that seems to have worked whic is to really allow the bafrns to come in and -- banks come in and not reserve against treasuries which is stupid anywhere in normal times i would think the fed will extend that moratorium on the fed -- on the banks having to

reserve against these things -- it wouldn't make a guy for a guy interesting in keeping markets calm to take a riske i don't know there's some indication they may not. i think they will. >> all right steve will stick around and we want more reaction from former fed insider, richard fisher, former fed president and cnbc contributor, good to see you. >> thank you and good to see you. >> happy st. patrick's day you got your green tie on there. i want to go right to what steve was raising just moments ago, that is, the fed going from a preactive or pro-active fed to a reactive fed how important is this? if it is important and is there a danger to this? >> it is important and there is a risk here because you have to remember it takes a while for monetary policy to work its way into the real conomy not talking about market reaction if you are reactive, first of all, data is out of date by the time you get it, even though

we're getting better at getting conteam prairie data -- contemporary data. if you're reactive it will take time to work in the economy. that's the risk rather than anticipating using your judgment going forward as to what is likely to happen , let's say, the bond market, i agree with what's been said, the market determines the ten-year rate, if they begin to price in inflation airy pressure the fed then does its work, get its data and finds out there's more trans transz transistory inflation in play and they need to tighten, whatever they need to do, takes a while to work into the economy therefore is less effective, at least that's a risk they're running. to answer your question. one quick point, melissa i notice when steve asked his question that was the one time during this press conference where jeremy powell knew the an,

looked down at the response, they're not going to sway a bit. brenner did it in her opening meeting. they're reading the answer because it shows how sensitive they are to market reaction. >> it's karen, let me ask about inflation. >> yeah. >> karen, go ahead, excuse me. >> so there's a lot of talk about transistory inflation and how far they would let it go but coming back ultimately to this 2% so how far do you think they would let it go before they felt the need to do something >> you know, i don't know. he wouldn't answer that question here's the problem, if you're the supply side of commerce you're thinking of the cost pressures that are now under way, raw materials, freight. i could go on and on and on. however a business operator also has to worry about other new

cost by higher taxes, you unionization, minimum wage hikes whatever, they are likely or possibly going to price in a reaction it's very rare to have businesses price in an increase and then take it back. so he's right in terms of compared to the low levels which we were a year ago but the problem is it's the dynamic going forward and how do businesses react so that will determine how transistory it is. i think what the market is doing with the ten-year report is questioning that premise will we have transitory inflation or will it become more embedded above the 2 plus level, i understand why he won't articulate then they have to take time to respond and it takes time to work its way through the economy

which means it could feed into itself that's the point i'm trying to make >> there's two steves apologize. liesman go ahead. >> i want to throw it to richard but everyone because here's the deal when talking about preemptive versus reactive the fed decided we were pre-exiemptive and never got toe 2% flesh hold now we want to be reactive before it was you had the fed out front whacking the weed so you can walk through the forest now the fed is saying we're behind the curve, we're not going to protect this inflation thing we want it back up. it changes the dynamic for

vifinve investors. >> end point is always two percent. they don't want to see it run above that significantly for long but again, it's really a question of whether or not they have the kind of control -- what i'm more interested in is how the markets perceives this, the way the market has been pricing bonds five years out has raised out whether or not they can control things to the extent they'd like to that's my point. >> all right gentlemen, we got to leave it there. great discussion thank you steve and richard happy birthday in advance tomorrow as i understand it your 72nd birthday so happy birthday richard. >> the odometer reaches 72 tomorrow, appreciate it. >> good speaking with you. it seems, tim, the bond market allows higher yield on the

ten-year. >> without question. five-year inflation break evens are at 13-year highs we've all got done saying he can't control the long end the question is, does the -- how is the fed measuring inflation the way the market is. in other words, what's the fed think about what the market is doing with inflation right now and does the fed have a few on absolute levels of the tenure not as it relapts to drk relates to equity performance but relative to where we were going into the pandemic. the labor market is important but the dynamic of saying 4.5% at the end of 2021 still isn't good enough along with two of the three conditions that have to be met when they haven't met any of these conditions on inflation in the past. that to me reiterates today, three conditions is extraordinary. >> one thing richard fisher said struck me in particular, that was, when 7:00s pass on price increases they rarely take it

back this notion of transitory inflation can it stilly -- actually be transitory we heard today 3m say costs of labor and lodgists will be two times more than anticipated so what does 3 m do, if they pass on the price increase will they take it back when price cops back down, i don't know. >> yeah, i'm sorry about the dogs but the short answer is no because they will condition people to pay those prices when prices do come down will leave them be and raise the next time around. so transitory to me, i don't want to use a bad word on this show but you know it's a bs-thing completely so there's nothing transitory inflation is here and fed understand that and fact they can say on one hand their data-dependent on the other hand saying they won't raise rates

until 2023 is mystifying and maddening at the same time. >> coming up, one analyst calling the crown pick and lordstown drops. they addressed confidential report from orsht seller hindenburg detail when "fast money" returns. these days, it's okay to do some things halfway... but taking prescriptions shouldn't be one of them. so cvs has a proprietary search tool that looks for savings. plus free delivery. get a free prescription savings review at cvs.

four, five, turn, kick. pwe got chased byy. these wild coyotes! they were following her because she had beef jerky in her pocket. (laughing) (trumpet playing) someone behind me, come on. pick that up, pick that up, right there, right there. as long as you keep making the internet an amazing place to be, we'll keep bringing you a faster, more secure, and more amazing internet. xfinity. the future of awesome.

welcome back to "fast money. we're following developing story on lordstown motors making comments on the short sell report from hindenburg shares on the move in the after hours now down 3.5%. phil has all of the details. >> right off the start of the conference calls with analysis at 4:30 this afternoon they addressed the hindenburg research report saying they have been contacted and received a request from sec regarding the allegations raised by hindenburg research to recap what those allegations were they say lordstown motors misled investors by over selling some of the preorders they've seen potential customer express interest in.

these were not solid orders, no binding commitment or be deposit made this was sold by steve burns when he would do interviews or talk about first sales of the endurance pick up truck. they were portrayed by steve burns as being more solid than they actually are. that's the acquisition from hindenberg research and board of directors will form a special committee to review the matter and until the review is finished nail have -- they'll have no further comment from hindenburg research at the top of the call they went over the results of the first quarter the first financial report from lordstown motor since completing the spec ipo, they had a loss of 23 cents. remember they are pre-revenue. they've not sold any vehicles yet. which by the way, steve burns

made very clear in this conference call that they have not sold any vehicles. so, what's next for lordstown motors you got the endurance going in beta production this month it will will be 57 beta models some will go into crash testing, some will be tested in extreme conditions some will go to early potential customers for review they're expected to start full production of the endurance electric pick up truck in september. that cadence or guidance from the company has not changed. you don't want to miss what we have for you tomorrow morning on "squawk box" talking first with steve burns, ceo of lordstowns motor while they're not going to comment about the s.e.c. looking into allegations from hinden berg research he has a lot to say about the fact taking the steps necessary to be a successful electric vehicle company and successful

automaker. but they have a lot of hurdles to overcome this year. so this is an interesting call from this perspective, he's been very careful to say over and over, these are pre-orders, potential customers, not signed contracts, no deposits have been made, and that, again, is at the heart of the allegations from hindenberg research. >> phil, thank you, from chicago with this. you know, the hind en allegationss are damming they use language such as the order book is largely a mirage, largely fictitious karen this is not a space you're invested in but it harkens back to nikola and hindenberg research basically torpedos nikola as well both of these are spats. do we draw any conclusions about the information available to investors in general because they go through a spac process opposed to a traditional ipo.

>> you know, i haven't really considered that. that's a really good point sometimes companies say i reason to do a spac opposed to ipo is the certainty of the deal and the price which they know exactly what they're going to get. i don't know you make an interesting point. if i were lordstown you don't really want to have a hindenberg piece. they prove to have very accurate information. maybe not entirely but certainly in the nikola case they did. you have to believe there's reason to belong -- i'm not surprised the stock isn't down more i'm into electric vehicles but pre-revenue is not my thing. i'm not surprise the s.e.c. contacted them they have to respond pretty well considering. you don't want to get that call,

oh, hindenburg. >> the name alone, pretty terrible a lot more ahead on "fast money. here's what's coming up next >> a new retail king is coming to power this one is a prime pick for the spot plus, airline stocks were hit hard during the pandemic but did the airlines really need a bail out we're unpacking the details on this one we've got thndat a a lot more when "fast money" returns.

yes! hey ava, how's my bracket looking? this is gary, i invested in invesco qqq. a fund that invests in the innovations of the nasdaq-100. like this artificially intelligent home system. become an agent of innovation with invesco qqq. ♪ welcome back to "fast money. amazon share soaring as they're crowned king of the retail rain for echt as the company -- forest as the company surpassed wall mall as number one retailer

in the united states growing sales 15% in 2020 to more than $41 billion, 25% above rival walmart. joined now by the senior analyst of wells fargo great to have you with us. you actually don't cover amazon or walmart so take away, amazon's massive gains which included in the research third-party sales, is that to the detriment of some of the companies you do cover. >> we co-cover amazon. it's a great question. we estimate $40 billion of apparel that amazon's doing. to put that in perspective there's only six retailers who do over 10 beside in all of the united states so this is a big number and it's 12% share of all u.s. apparel so this is a big number you got to look under the covers

a bit. this has been an ongoing debate and dialogue about brands and retailers about amazon for some time. if you look at $40 billio your view it is that a a lot of replacement business i think amazon not making inroads on the fashion apparel side, dresses, that sort of stuff. so i think that continues. it's an ongoing debate that i think will go into 2021 and beyond >> so, ike, when i look at your ratings, it seems like the amazon-walmart debate as you just answered melissa should have a problem with high-end luxury names a name i've been long quite some timeout is capri holdings with berberry and c another tail wind for capri i saw you had $60

price mark on it don't you think it could go much higher given amazon and walmart not competing. >> we totally agree, capri is one of our top deas. what idaho -- what i'd say is you want to go high or go low when you talk about michael kors, accessible luxury and you are working on the high end. on the low end think of, tj max, ross, burlington, that's a good way to look at it because the value can't be matched the going high, going low is the way to go. for capri it's one of the calls to stick with. our group's up 75% in the last couple months. i haven't said that since 2010 great for retail but now you got to start looking at names that have duration.

because theluxury assets that capri owns and looking to stabilize the michael kors brand that brand could keep working. >> bottom line astounds like you're not concerned about amazon's share in the market it is a third of all online apparel purchases in the united states you're not worried about it because they're selling basics >> i'd be worried if i sold basics. >> right. >> an under-weighted name to call out would be haines brands. we have a sell rating on haines brands what amazon is doing is going after packed up t-shirts, bundled socks, under way with private label amazon essentials, that would concern me if i was in that space because that's what they're targeting. >> fascinating research thank you. karen, how do you sort of connect the dots with this research report and the retail names you like >> well, a few dots there, i

mean, walmart of course, which i have position in, target, which does differentiate itself on fashion, he talked about amazon trying to do, and then, you know, i think that -- i don't love hearing amazon sort of taking over walmart's position but i think amazon, walmart and target have all gained share and i don't think they're going to be giving that share back at all because they've been able to pivot. amazon already doing online very, very well but now i think walmart and target are doing it very well also i think they'll maintain that share and the differentiation, even if you take out aws the amazon valuation is entire i'm long all three but biggest position, target, walmart then amazon. >> yeah, guy, for some reason i want to go to you on this. i feel like you're have comments on haines brands or what not

it's worth noting that target does have a multiple billion-dollar brands under it's own umbrella that it's built it itself >> yeah, there's no joy quite like the joy of opening up those bundled socks and underwear from the amazon every few weeks i mean, i just can't control myself when they make their way to my door but he makes a great point, you don't need haines when you have amazon great job by steve on capri holdings another interesting name tomorrow do you dower jen reports before the bell off significant all-time high since october, i think if they miss you buy the dip. they come out with a great quarter you buy into the strength for opportunity tomorrow after earnings dollar gen to me is really interesting to me. >> coming up morgan stanley goes crypto, investment banking

banking on big banks - us williams-sonoma up 12%. that's next. i knew about the tremors. but when i started seeing things, i didn't know what was happening. so i kept it in. he started believing things that weren't true. i knew something was wrong, but i didn't say a word. during the course of their disease around 50% of people with parkinson's may experience hallucinations or delusions. but now, doctors are prescribing nuplazid. the only fda approved medicine proven to significantly reduce

hallucinations and delusions related to parkinson's. don't take nuplazid if you are allergic to its ingredients. nuplazid can increase the risk of death in elderly people with dementia related psychosis. and is not for treating symptoms unrelated to parkinson's disease. nuplazid can cause changes in heart rhythm and should not be taken if you have certain abnormal heart rhythms or take other drugs that are known to cause changes in heart rhythm. tell your doctor about any changes in medicines you're taking. the most common side effects are swelling of the arms and legs and confusion. we spoke up and it made all the difference. ask your healthcare provider about nuplazid.

morgan stanley is getting in on the bitcoin game starting with wealth management clients access to big bank funds the first to make the step limiting bitcoin investment to 2.5% total it's the only one offering it. it's a game of assets it wants more assets under it's umbrella. >> look what it's meant to the square flat form, the cash app, to have the ability to transact in bitcoin more importantly morgan stanley have won the battle of the sector for the last nine months. really the two game-changing trans accesses with e-trade. and you have a case they're moving to the asset management world, refocussing almost exclusively on annuitiy businesses

they derisk the model. share price rerated up 50% since october. so, yeah, this is another step and i think part of what would have been incredibly tacticful moves and i think some real thought has gone into this also, trying to demographically get exposure to, let's face it, a new generation of investors who care a lot more about this very smart. >> karen, is this a differentiator for morgan stanley? >> if it works, no, because i think everyone else will follow, which i expect to happen anyway. tim brought up a good point of them wanting to go after clients that are younger, as you think of morgan stanley or jp morgan client as older. you also don't want current clients to migrate if they think they need bitcoin as part of their portfolio. interesting they have that limitation on it do they have limitations on other asset classes, i don't

know it's interesting. >> i don't know if they have it on gold for instance yeah it's an interesting limitation there there's all sorts of limitations on this, but still, first one to move in this direction coming up, billions of dollars of taxpayer money has gone to help the struggling airline industry in the past year, has all of it been needed? we take on that debail and williams-sonoma numbers after this te and williams-sonoma numbers after this mom and dad left costa rica, 1971. and in 1990, they opened irazu. when the pandemic hit, pickup and delivery was still viable. and that kept us afloat. keeping our diners informed on google was so important. the support from our customers,

it honestly kept us going. i will always be grateful for that. gohealth has blossomed from an idea in a chicago apartment nearly 20 years ago to a listing on nasdaq today.

we help seniors compare and shop for medicare options in their areas using licensed, trusted advisors and an online platform. gohealth has compounded at 52% a year for 20 years. we believe we're just beginning to realize the opportunity to improve access to healthcare for consumers.

welcome back to "fast money. we've got another earnings alert. shares of williams-sonoma rallies up more than 12% josh with the details. >> melissa, remember heading into this report enjoyed a recent rally 20% in last few months and surging high after hours. comparable brand revenue growth increased 26%. for fiscal '21 companies looking for -- new purchase stock valuation of 1 merchandise and -- on the call, ceo, said she

expects strong demand to continue through 2021 and beyond citing favor bel macro trends like high consumer confidence, strong housing market and shift in e-commerce. back to you. >> we should let you know williams-sonoma has eight percent short interest guy where do you stand. >> stay with it. i won't make funny jokes, will leave it to the team inventory down 3% year-over-year on top of sales growth 24% up year-over-year, which means margins will continue to improve. i don't know what the dog is for, not taking the bet, not going to do it we've been standing fast with wms stands to reason with the margins, stay with the name. >> can it keep going tim everything goes back to normal after this boost because of the pandemic and things go back to normal you will not be spending

on pots, pans and blankets. >> guy needs to spend on those big doggy cushions so someone doesn't disrupt the show again you know i think we got a case everything we talked about in the a-block, start of the show, is why you buy williams-sonoma, why you buy lazy-boy and other home improvements fed lick -- liquidity going straight into people's homes and going straight to williams-sonoma or restoration hardware or other names so i think the trade ask alive and well and it's not terrible expensive and multiples in this sector should be trading higher, some are executing more. let's not for get about digital helping other over retail business. >> the airlines trade, we take on the debate.

bumpy year for fedexut o bne saying it's about to change. "fast money" back in two doug? sorry about that. umm... what...its...um... you alright? [sigh] [ding] never settle with power e*trade. it has powerful, easy-to-use tools to help you find opportunities, 24/7 support when you need answers plus some of the lowest options and futures contract prices around. don't get mad. get e*trade and start trading today.

want to save hundreds on your wireless bill? with xfinity mobile, you can. how about saving hundreds on the new samsung galaxy s21 ultra 5g? you can do that too. all on the most reliable network? sure thing! and with fast, nationwide 5g included - at no extra cost? we've got you covered. so join the carrier rated #1 in customer satisfaction... ...and learn how much you can save at xfinitymobile.com/mysavings. not too late to sign up for the inclusion and action forum

tomorrow at 1:00 p.m. eastern we will look at what companys can do to create equity for all. big names register now at cnbcevents/inclusion. airlines industry players lost 80% of value last year and forced to appeal to congress multiple time for aid. was the eventual bail out really needed in a column in the "new york times" once again we've socialized an industry's losses and privatized its profits basically what the government did was bail out shareholders. tim, i will go to you, you're a shareholder and taxpayer what do you think? >> kind of caught in the middle on this one. i guess my expectation was especially the better balance sheets in the sector could have gotten through without the bail out. i think the credits and grants across the board blindly for the sector are an example of what we've done in the past and are

not fair think of the executives in the airlines that are incentivized and paid and comped through share prices they were really bailed out. i know we bailed out a lot of folks in the airline industry and i think we kept jobs at almost full pay. but think of the restaurant industry, nothing was done for these people and i don't think their businesses are going to come back and so, in many cases, ever. so i think the inconsistency here is a dynamic that is very, very frustrating but i recognize the strategic importance of the airline industry, especially getting the economy back on track when it was time. >> yeah, andrew makes a point with $25 billion the original package about 75,000 jobs were saved at a cost of $300,000 each not sure if that is the right metric to gauge the success of this particular program. karen, what do you think, numerous times in the past

airlines have gone through b bankruptcy and done fine, we've seen it done time and time again. >> yeah there's a lot of things in that article i really agree with, that's one of them we've seen airlines in bankruptcy the other one, why this particular industry. you have hilton, hyatt and marriott who employ hundreds of thousands of employees and didn't see anything close to that kind of assistance. you don't understand why you have to bail out shareholders, it's a risk asset. the government is shouldn't give us a free put if things don't go well could i'm really against that. when we look at other really important bankruptcies like gm in the financial crisis, i don't know how many jobs it was but the government gave them money and took a giant stake i don't understand why they

weren't entitled to a giant stake here i know they got a tiny bit cited in the piece but nothing remotely close i don't know why they didn't do a big convert. seemed like excellent lobbying by the airlines. unfortunate for the others and not necessary for the government to do. >> steve, quickly, you actually think it was right to bail them out? >> i do. i think that, you know, we can argue over how they did it and what they should have gotten but when you look at the entire industry it's not so much the direct industry, it's the fact that it's probably $1.7 trillion, i think are the estimates being made, as far as economic activity dependent on the airlines and it's 10 million jobs all of those ancillary jobs and everything that evolves around it so i do understand what everyone else is saying i think they had to act first. this is the first time we've been hit with a pandemic like this so i'm okay if they use a sledge hammer on an ant right

now, i think it's warranted. >> coming up, earnings for fedexcup why this quarter should be shipping up for the shipping giant. stay tuned shipping up for the sg giant. stay tuned

bike shop please hold. bike sales are booming. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. the moment you sponsor a job on indeed you get a shortlist of quality candidates from our resume database. claim your $75 credit when you post your first job at indeed.com/bike. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

welcome back to "fast money. fedex reports earnings after the bell, it's been a bumpy quarter so far, but some options activity could point to a big break out, mike, what did you see? >> actually the options trader favor calls over put business two to one in the last few days more today actually. right now the market implying move 6.25 after reporting earnings tomorrow. right now we've seen in last eight quarters average move 8% most of the activity in march strike calls pay 3g for those so buyers are betting fedex will make a move of that implied amount by the end of the week. >> karen, you have a sizable position in your words in fedex. what are you looking for >> yes, i do i'm looking for a good quarter only fly i see is something from the weather. this quarter does include february, you had very bad weather there, i think we'll see

improvement from ground and i'm optimistic and i'm long, very long >> all right, thanks mike for that for more options action tune into the full show on friday at 5:30 eastern time. get what, time for the final trade. let's go around the horn, tim seymour. >> happy birthday. wayfair going higher with all those other home improvement shots i like wayfair. >> karen. >> yeah i can't let guy's dog take the fall for my dog's barking. so get who is coming clean i'm going on with the one that brought me, i think, fedex my final trade. >> steve. >> oln, it's up 31% in the last nine days and i think it goes another 50% higher from here oln. >> guy.

>> karen, i love what she did. by the way dance with the girl you took to the prom lockheed martin. lmt. aerospace defense stocks back to you. >> thank you for watching "fast money. see you at 5:00. meantime, "mad money" my mission is simple, to make you money i'm here to level the playing field for all investors. 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. wel wel welcome. call me at 1800-743-cnbc or tweet me @jimcramer. pay no attention to the inflation behind the