will last a while, but it will not of last them calling each other names, if they do we'll melissa: i'm melissa francis and here's what's "money" tonight. pharmaceutical companies paying for influence with the fda. a shocking report showed drug companies paid ones of thousands of dollars to sit in on meetings where fda officials were advised how to judge clinical trials. we have one of the lawyers helping expose the whole thing. plus, stressed out at work? i say if you're not, you're not working hard enough. how much money would you want to do the job you think is the most stressful? we'll break it all down and a little fun in today's money talker. "who made money today." let's say lending a helping hand probably never paid so good. keep watching to find out who it is. even when they say it is not it is always about money.

melissa: straight off the top tonight, proof that pharmaceutical companies are paying for the chance to influence how drugs get approved by the fda it is all in an explosive report by "the washington post." it reveals how pharmaceutical companies paid up to $25,000 for the opportunity to sit in on meetings where the fda decisions were being made and while the fda said no employees benefited financial from these meetings the smell of inpropriety has many outraged. on the phone is craig minton. he is the attorney that helped get records replease leased publicly. we have fox news contributor monica crowley here as well. craig, let me start with you. you requested the emails be released. what did they reveal to you? >> melissa, the thing that concerns me most about this is

that these emails show that we have a system whereby a access to the fda, and i will quote the emails to you, to the small table with the fda, is acquired by pharmaceutical companies through the payment of significant fees to these academics that were involved in this process. melissa: while they were sitting at these small tables were they making policy? were they getting to know each other? what is your fear that was going on there that was improper? >> the, the thing that was of st concern to me, and i will tell you that, first of all the lack of openness. there is, right now, and, if you will read through these emails, there is 409 pages much emails. i recognize that's a lot to look through. melissa: yeah. >> but you will see comments

that i think with the point -- melissa: that definitely represent it seems like they were definitely charging for the privilege to get close to these fda officials. we should say the panels were put on by two professors, professor dworkin of the university of rochest and dennis turk of the university of washington. the emails craig is talking about one the professor was responding to a drug company that said it was too much. he said, quote 20,000 is small change. they buy it easily if they want to be at table. everyone is very happy the meetings. they're getting a huge amount for very little money and they know it. monica, this is tricky because it is a, they are academics who put on these panels. they were bringing together fda firms and pharmaceutical companies. it wasn't an open invitation. you had to pay in ord to be there. they were doing real work that impacted drug companies. they were authoring papers how

effective drugs were, how clinical trials should be done. sounds very much like pay to play. what do you think? >> this is a tough issue on one hand i grant this looks bad because the implication somehow the companies are engaged in a pay to play scheme. that they bought their way to the table so they can influence the fda's policies and decision making on the drugs they're putting in the marketplace but on the other hand you're talking about the actual drugmakers. these are the pharmaceutical companies creating and distributing the drugs in the marketplace. they need to be there to describe to the fda what we're talking about in terms of these drugs, the clinical trials and to try to get some sort of consensus, scientific consensus so they can set standards for the consumer. melissa: craig, what about that? there was one email that came out from somebody at the national institute of health. they said in order, basically in order to clear away any stigma, we should have the meetings on campus and they should be open to everyone. if that had been going on, would you be okay with this?

is it the fact they had to pay to be there and the fac it is by invitation only? >> certainly open mtings, you being a journalist appreciate how important it is for citizens to have access to government meetings and information so they can make informed choices in a democracy. it is an essential. yes that would make me more comfortable but to your point about how this influenced the science that was going on in the fd. a, did you read what was put forth about enriched enrollment? melissa: what does that mean? what is the point behind that? >> enriched enrollment means it's a fundamental shift that this group lobbied for and apparently got from the typical double blind test science that is used where you have 50, you have 100 people that are going to be part of a trial to see whether or not a drug is effective. and 50 people are given a placebo. 50 people are givehe drug.

and then a 12-week study goes on and the comparison between the two groups is made and the determination is made whether or not they're effective. melissa: okay. >> enriched enrollment, this new process that resulted from this influence -- melissa: craig, i want to stop you there. i don't want to get too deep in the weeds on this. i don't want to lose the audience, monica, the problem here we want to follow the money. the show is of course about money. the two professors received as much as $50,000. they put this on. fda officials didn't receive money directly. they got cozy with the pharmaceutical representatives that came there, some did go on "the washington post" said, to become consultants and get paid by them later. this cozy relationship when we're talking about, you know addictive drugs. >> yes, yes because in particular here we're talking about painkillers which is sort of the point of this article. it is very problematic when they start getting too cozy. you know what? it is government-wide, melissa. you talk about the resolving

door, people leave government and go into lobbying and lobbying old colleagues and so on this. is another example. this is more dangerous. we're talk about addictive drugs going to t marketplace. >> the other problem with this idea of having meetings to open to everyone, as we say in washington as soon as it is open meeting less gets done. this is always the argument. >> i'm all for openness, there are things to try to get a scientific consensus, like national security, a lot of things have to behind closed doors. melissa: thanks to both of you so much. an important story. we'll stay on top of it. next on "money" the process of disarming syria's chemical weapons. we have details on the total cost and who is paying coming up. [ female announcer ] who are we? we are the thinkers. the job jugglers. the up all-nighters. and the ones who turn ideas into action. we've made our passions our life's work. we strive for the moments where we can say, "i did it!"

♪ we are entrepreneurs who started it all... with a signature. legalzoom has helped start over 1 million businesses, turning dreamers into business owners. and we're here to help start yours.

melissa: turning to syria and the procedure of actually dismantling the chemical weapons arsenal began yesterday. so far secretary of state john kerris encouraged by president assad's efforts saying it is quote, a terrific example of global cooperation. never mind the fact that he gassed his own people to begin with, right? right now the focus is on the exact price of the process. of course who is going to foot the bill.

here with insight on that is former ambassador to the u.n. john bolton. he is a fox news contributor of course. is this quick to be getting to this dismantling process? is that promising to you? >> i think what will happen some of sia's chemical weapons will be destroyed and what they're doing now is destroying the mixing equipment, which by the way you could use in any pharmaceutical factory or chemical plant had this country and destroying some of the agent and i think that the real test is did syria declare its full chemical arsenal and what's going to happen with that? where is the verification going to come on that? melissa: how can we move forward on either of those things? how will we ever know they disclosed all of those things? >> i don't think we ever will. russia one of the key parties in the chemical declaration lied in its own application, lied 20 years since then and violating the chemical weapons as we speak as the state department itself regularly reports. that doesn't give me a great

deal of confidence its ally syria will comply rigorously with the convention. melissa: is it a promising step? there at at lea inspectors in there? for the time-being things are being destroyed they're not continuing to gas their people if you're looking for something positive to say. >> that's true. how far away the weapons inspectors get from a safe zone in damascus is another question. as secretary kerry also said, this was a real plus for bashir assad's regime they were doing this this is having the effect of as many predicted helping to shore up the assad regime despite all the rhetoric back in august you said about gassing their own people. melissa: that is certainly dangerous. you know they say the syrians are doing the actual destroying while there are u.n. eerts i guess observing and reporting? >> right. melissa: does that make a difference? >> as the chemical convention unfolds each state that declared

a stockpile of weapons destroys its own weapons under supervision under international inspectors. that is what the u.s. is doing and russia doing. and theoretically syria should bear the cost of it. i think that is very unlikely. the odds are we'll hear the obama administration say because of this important step forward, we should bear the cost of destroying the weapons. melissa: right. that is the real question because the show is called money so we're trying to follow the money. who is paying for it now as is happening? >> i don't think they have destroyed that much. the cost isn't that high. the probably the syrians in the first instance but we'll hear soon enough when the large stocks, this is very dangerous, this work of destroying chemical weapons. it is dangerous for the people involved. very hazardous. so you can't do much beyond small amounts without a substantial infrastructure being created. >> i hear what you're saying about the faults with this but is it worth it for the limited benefits that we should pitch in? there are some weapons being destroyed. that is got to be worth something?

>> i don't think it is worth much and i'll tell you why. even if we destroyed, 100% of syria's chemical arsenal they could replace ity buying it from russia and iran when the chemical weapons depart. what russians and syrians are after is stability and withdrawal of international pressure and morale impact on opposition. think that part worked. on cost benefit basis syria and russia are ahead. melissa: ambassador bolton, thank you so much for your time. >> thank you. melissa: from the u.s., every corner of the globe money is flying around the world, heading to stockholm where the first nobel prizes were award. two americans and a german-american shared a prestigious prize for medicine. they discover ad brain cell process on release of communication an won them one million dollars. on over to russia. the word the company installed a all encompassing surveillance

cil at the sight of the winter olympics t reportedly allows officials to listen in on all athletes and visitors by the way, via phone and internet communications during the game. so far russia spent an estimated $50 billion on expenses for the games. i guess we know what they spent it on, right? landing in north korea where a luxury ski resort is seto open. this ski run and is a chalets and ski rid is in 10 months in the making. to everyone watching it is obvious when the country need to prove it is civilized as culturally advanced anywhere in the world is a multimillion-dollar ski resort in a secluded part of north korea. makes perfect sense. coming up on "money," ming sure syria really disarms its chemical weapons has to be a stressful job, right? how much would it take for to you do it? surprising work place stats on which makes me feel that if you're not feeling it you're not

working hard enough. it is our money talkers. stick around.

melissa: all right, everyone. relax, take a deep breath. are you stressed at work? a new study from the american psychological association says 75% of us have moderate to high levels of work-related stress. two thirds have extreme stress! you probably should. if you don't i think you're not working hard enough. the fact that stress costs our econom up to $30 billion a year makes this important though. maybe it's a small price to pay. here to put their money and their stress where their mouths are, psychologist, jeff gardere, fox news contributors julie roginsky and tony sayegh. thanks to all three of you.

are you stressed now? do you feel stress at work? 75% feel they are stressed. i feel stressed. i'm in the leg chair. my legs are not what they used to be. i'm not going to lie to you. melissa: i like that. julie, i think you should be stressed at work. >> i'm stressed out that you don't think i should be in the chair. i have stressful, i do crisis management for politicians, right? melissa: right. you should be stressed. >> i'm a little, i'm not stressed because it is their stress. my job -- melissa: you're chilled? >> i thrive on stress. i should probably see you for consultation. melissa: does she thrive on stress or is that one of those things that people who have a stressful job -- this is live television. it can be stressful f you're in a stressful job you have to psych yourself into the idea it is not a big deal. there is no one out there. it is not a big deal? >> i don't think you fight

stress too much. that becomes stressful. you should manage your stress and don't let it manage you. stress can be your friend. melissa: what does that mean? that is bunch of gibberish. >> that is psychobabble. >> stress can be your friend. i want to hear this. >> stress releases adrenaline and adrenaline pumps you up to do things tt are sometimes herculean. if you have too much stress it wears you down emotionally and that makes a lot of sense. melissa: we looked at three most stressful jobs. how much money, because the show is called "money" people are paid to endure the stress. most stressful jobs, enlisted military personnel. they make $42,000 a year. military general, second most stressful, about 200,000, 196,000. a firefighter, super herculean. makes 45,000. does it pay to b be really stressed, tony what do you think. >> when i saw that statistic,

honestly, melissa, granted to be a soldier, doing a service for your country, 45,000, with eight years of experience, that is the average for soldiers, that is really i think the difficult thing to actually be able to, have your financial compensation merit the stress you actually have. melissa: doesn't it make sense to tie stress and compensation to a certain extent? wouldn't you thinkhat, julie. >> i thought air traffic controllers were the guys but they're pa really well. look at teachers. remember being kindergarten teachwer 10 crazy kids running around? they're not paid that well. >> teachers in new jersey are paid that well. >> not enough. >> when you're doing something that is very, very important and you're not getting the proper compensation. look those soldiers are addicted to the work. firefighters are, firefighters are addicted to their work. if you don't get paid money, that is where the stress comes in. you don't feel that you're being compensated for something you love. melissa: maybe. or it could be that your life is on the line every time you're out there.

the least stressful jobs out there, university professor, $62,000. i think that is low for university professor. that is very non-stressful. class is at noon. you have an hour and then you're off. seamstress or taylor, 25,000. medical records technician, 32,000. julie what job, what doou think is the most stressful job and what would it take? >> you and i went to college. not same college because you're a lot smarter than me. you remember the place worst house. >> worked there? >> i worked there. melissa: they had the worst food. >> wur, absolutely did. i was the worst waitress there. no joke. you couldn't pay me enough a million dollars, could not pay me to be a waitress again. i have nightmares. melissa: it is really hard. i did that as well. it is really stressful. >> made me wear a lot trampier clothes for the record. melissa: tony, what about you. >> you look great, by the way. melissa: you don't look stressed. >> the stressful job happens to be a soldier.

lack of compensation. you're away from your family. you're adding a new element of stress. >> that's true. >> i came up from a family of immigrants, hard-workers i would do anything except the naked cowboy in times square. that job requires seven figures. melissa: that is lot of alcohol. you could be really drunk and it would be okay. >> that would be impromptu naked cowboy. melissa: most stressful job and what would it take you to do it? >> correctional officer. melissa: that is good one. >> doing time every day. unsung heroes. melissa: couldn't be paid enough for that one. >> that's right. exactly. melissa: scale of one to 10 what is your stress level every day? you seem very calm like you could talk are you tightly wound or hiding it well? >> i'm also a college professor. melissa: all right. scale one to 10? >> three. melissa: three. >> i'm a five. >> i would say i'm about a ght. melissa: eight? you always have a smile. >> tough to be republican these days. melissa: that's a good one.

thanks, guys. that was fun. up next on money we'll tell you once and for all when the government shutdown will end. we have the answer. how do we know? the amazing kreskin is here with his prediction! you know he has got it right. don't move!

♪ >> the votes are not now house to pass a clean bill, and the president is risking default by not having a conversation with us. >> under no circumstances would he pass a clean debt. >> we are not going down that path. it is time to deal with america's problems. >> there are not the votes on the floor to reopen the government. but the issue him a friendly challenge. but it on the floor. i bet there are the votes to pass it. so, speaker, just vote, but it on the floor and let's see if you're right. >> they will solve that one. as the government shut down approaches, both sides are

digging in and babbling down. the house speaker reiterating sunday at the house will not vote to reopen the government and tell presidentbama comes to the bargaining table. the president, meanwhile, has shown little interest in negotiating with members of congress. it is anyone's guess as to when our government will be back in business, but here to provide his prediction and up beacon to the crystal ball is the amazing crest in. it mak as much sense to have you predict when this will and as those jokers. >> by the way, this guy was brilliant. let me tell you something. and i am not a fortune teller. i spend all of my time reading audiences dots. the public is very much disgusted. i don't think this will be of any more than 15 days. melissa: 15 days. that is your prediction? >> but, i don't know why, between now and february i

believe there will be another shutdown, but it will only be a day, day and a half. the cause will end up being stupid. but we will set down. melissa: does not much of a guess. it's all stupid. i'm good at this. >> can you imagine trying to read the thoughts of kind -- congress? would need a psychiatrist. melissa: so you think there will be another shutdown. could it be the debt ceiling debacle? >> no. melissa: a wild card. >> one that does not even make sense. as haunted me for five days. but it may not be until february of this coming year. the other thing, you know, the impact that this is sad, we all know the effect that it has had on people. there is a good side to this. it sounds terrible to say. i will tell you what it is, and all of you in washington d.c., i am telling you how i feel. we have now learned from the

second citizen 20 seconds what kind o personalities these people are, baldheaded, narrow minded, not flexible, and if you look at the history of this wrong with all this country is that the day after we are elected we start working on the next election. melissa: that's true. >> two things need to take place. the american public needs to do is. we need to insist that campaigning only lasts for a month to month and a half.

but the other thing is, they did something when i was a kid, and i have never respected politician sense. you can only be president twice in a row from but they did not do that with their office. melissa: term limits as well. but this crisis before we move on to those. you say 15 days of the most. >> at the most. think it will be less. melissa: another shutdown coming not related. offs -- how will this get resolved? >> this one year? melissa: yes. >> they will both have to give in, but the bottom line is they have lost. their losers to begin with. first of all, i cannot explain to you obamacare. i cannot explain to you a debt in the trillions of dollars because it will never be paid. melissa: incomprehensible let me

ask -- >> also, it is breaking down negotiations whether wars are military or what have you, do you think these people are going to -- we have a cloud that says we shut down the government. [inaudible conversations] melissa: salary clinton, next president? >> if she isn't and may have to eat at. you know something, simple things like pick a number from one through nine. people do that all the time. it's easy. change your mind to another number. what is the number you decided? melissa: three. >> the first member? melissa: seven. >> why did you change from seven to three? >> he told mto think of a different number >> when i looked down, 73. you change your mind exactly the way i wanted. melissa: all right. we have to go. >> next time i come on. melissa: that is the amazing kristin. thank you so much.

we have to do one more. a sell-off on wall street. but this sell-off over the gridlock in washington, a great way for you to make money. here to tell you how, chief market strategist for united advisers. now. your segment is over. >> get back in here, melissa. melissa: he is gone. i'm sorry. we will get it. do you think this is a bigot opportunity for investors? you heard him talking about another shot down. >> i am thinking of a percentage number. 110 to answer. melissa, of tell you. [inaudible conversations] >> the reason is the stock market is already reacting to what i think we are talking about, the eventual make up party here in d.c. so what you have seen is the market slowly drifting off of highs, all-time highs, by the way, several indexes to create what i think is a relief buying opportunity. is that tomorrow, friday,

wednesday of next week? and not sure, but recent weakness would suggest that if you have cash on the sidelines you should put it in. melissa: reading articles today about warren buffett making some much money off the last financial crisis, 10 billion so far. given, he got cut great deals when he came in, i guy with cash ready to go when it's time that we were in a financial crisis. you always think back to those times and let the people who were smart and made money and wonder, if we do see a stutter debt ceilingg decline as a fight, is that an opportunity? what do you think and how would you put that into play? >> your point about buffett is well taken because he had tons of money the use and he has the warren buffett name. let's face it, one thing that was in the article, he talked about that was also the individual investor opportunity. yes and no. i mean, he gets a lot of great deals, listen, from a lot of

great companies because he is warren buffett. it is like if you are looking for investors, wouldn't that be the one guy you would want to invest? you can go out and tell everybody a, warren buffett gave me money. the days are gone with bill asman or maybe even carl icon that you wanted investing. buffett is the guy, and a lot of companies will do anything just to get in and. melissa: they will. the same time there was a new report from the ap out saying that families are hoarding cash, pulling money out of mutual funds, up to 50%. 15 percent more in cash which is trillions of dollars. it does not sound like a lot of money on a percentage basis, but does that cut to that old adage, be fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful? >> it does. but also says, we still have not recovered from the financial crisis. a lot on the sidelines which can be a good thing, but t market has to stay strong through the shutdown. melissa: thank you so much. >> see you. melissa: coming up on "money,"

have you seen the box office said gravity? it may be dealt with fallacies, but that is not stopping moviegoers. former astronaut on my people are paying no matter what. what are you looking at? >> the burger performing arts center wednesday night. wednesday, and i will create ghosts. can you imagine her seeing a ghost? melissa: at the end of the day it is all about "money" and ghosts apparently. we will be right back.

♪ >> astronaut. of subjects. >> what do i do? >> you must attach. you are too far. let go. drag. detached. i can't see you anymore.

melissa: all right. i am going to throw up. how about you? some of the record-breaking sci-fi hit gravity that brought in an era shattering 55 and a half million dollars of the weekend. moviegoers are up in arms saying that everything in the movie is accurate. does it affect the bottom line? with me now is former nasa astronaut tom jones to break it all down. thank you so much for coming on the show. there was a very famous astrophysicist who runs a huge museum in new york, neil to grassy tyson ripping the movie apart over the weekend. tweeting like crazy about how unrealistic all thing is. what is your opinion? you liked it. >> i did like a great deal. kneele is a friend of mine, and i would love to have a beer with him and talk over all of the inaccuracies. for me as an astronaut seen the movie i had fun looking for the areas where they finessed physics. but the overriding story is a human survival story which is compelling.

the realism of the use of the earth and space in the spacecraft are so far realistically accurate. melissa:ity recreate the sensation? did you feel like he was doing it again? >> the thing that i liked most about the movie was the realism in the way that things move in free fall or in 0g weightlessness. those were really accurately depicted and it brought me back to my own experiences during a spacewalk. melissa: that was one of his complaints. he said, you know, they are in zero gravity. her hair should be flying everywhere. what you think about that? >> i would have to nudge him with my elbow. it is not quite as clear cut. i wore my hair like this, and it does not float. you get your hair cut short. it does not turn around. the filmmakers are okay. melissa: the tale of space debris. is that a realistic possibility? >> it is a danger, and we actually have armored shields on

the state to the space station to prevent a catastrophe. there is danger. catastrophic nature of the impact is probably overblown, but it has a kernel ofruth and. melissa: over a million followers on twitter. one of the things that he tweeted his mysteries of gravity. they are all in sight of one anotheher at the same time. is that possible? >> here is where they finessed physics. melissa: finessed, i like that. >> this simplified this situation. just to make the survival story a little more plausible and easy to carry along. that is a forgivable explanation. melissa: what about the wrenching impact? are they that rugged? with everything staying together and these people staying alive? >> there is another place where i think they took a little bit of a liberty.

the impact that george clooney and sandra bullock sustained in their space suits would rupture the real sense that we wear. again, to make the story more dramatic they're going through generations that would cause ourselves to fail, but i will give them that. the rest of the surroundings, the backdrop, so compellingly realistic. melissa: i love that. thank you for coming on. >> to thumbs-up. melissa: okay. so now you heard it straight from a nasa astronaut. does any of this matter when you are shelling out your hard-earned money for this movie? let's ask our "money" marketing guru. bruce, what do you think about that? does it matter how realistic? i think that it does. people want the experience like the are really the astronauts, and if you have scientists out there saying that this is crap it diminishes the movie. >> i tell you what, when i saw the wizard of oz it was so

inaccurate. i mean, have you ever seen flying monkeys? come on. come on. nobody cared. melissa: but you're not going to see the wizard of oz because you want to know what it is like to be a wage. you're going to see is because you want a new perspective on what it is like to be in aerospace, which is a real thing as opposed to a flying monkeys and which is in very godmothers which is not actually exist. >> here is the secret. the people complaining do know that sandra bullock and george colony were not really in right? they know that. if you do, what you realize is -- and another at this will be its shattering. it is a movie. that is what is billed for. melissa: you are marketing expert, and if you have people out there like our favorite professor from the natural history museum who has over $1 million comes out of the movies and stars trashing it, that is not good marketing.

>> i have to disagree. he has a million listening to what he has to say. that means they are hearing about the movie. he is getting the conversation started. the list of astrophysicists that are good storytellers, how many can you think of? nine? melissa: they are not that social or fun to have dinner with. i will get in big trouble over that one. >> and the other thing to keep in mind. but he complained about was that her hair was not lifting. the movie was made in hollywood. the only thing our faces and breasts. it's just not an issue. melissa: it is not an issue. not surprised that the movie as a thundering success and you think we're just getting more people to go watches? >> that's right. the folks who created cloudy with a chance of meatballs would like to hear meteorologist get upset about their movie.

melissa: although i saw that this weekend, and that was an awesome movie. i want to give that a plug. why did they go through the trouble of hiring professionals to go try to make it as accurate as possible? they hired an astrophysicist. help them get things right. i mean, they must care. then did they just tell that person, we don't care that we are fudging this? >> what they do is bring in professionals to get the movie is accurate as possible. entertainment matters. the reason you get to a movie, not a documentary but the movie is to enjoy yourself. and it is a tossup and a decision between making it accurate or making it something that certain people will gusty, that will win every time. bottom-line, why did they pick those two? i don't think with all due respect most astronauts would like those two.

melissa: the number one thing there were saying was could that happen? if you hear no, i don't know, it loses some of the impact. we have to go. we're out of time, so i will concede they you one. thank you for coming on. up next, an update. we told you about it a few weeks ago. let's just say that trader joe's is getting poled by pirate shows. we have it all and "spare change." you can never have too much "money." ♪

♪ melissa: time for a little fun with "spare change." today we have a "money" update

that goes to show that sometimes the little guy does win. you may remember as telling you about perry jail, a small-business owner in canada who brazenly buys trader joe's broadax and then sells them at a markup to friends in the north. the food giant sued to stop them from bringing its bounty over the border. the owner is back. you want. are you doing a victory dance, putting on your pirates at and really sticking it to them? >> we are going to go easy on them. we are making a lot of new friends. the store is pretty much empty i have to go shopping tonight. we love trader joe's and the products. you know. melissa: and glad you brought that up. one of the big problems was you going of the border to buy products. it brings it back and sell it for a markup.

there were trying to stop you from coming into the store in making purchases. do you think that now because this decision has gone in your favor there will let you come in and actually buy? >> i will test that out tonight. if they want to shop and just leave us alone, leave us to our misery because we are doing this cross border thing like everyone else and it is not a lot of fun. melissa: go ahead. >> they're comment about losing the case are having it dismissed , they said, well, not getting the complete experience. that complete experience is in 80-mile road trip in 90 minutes at the bor melissa: that is the whole experience, and it is not a good one is your point. they say that you are marking their stuff of which is part of the problem. a lot of cost that goes into it. buyer beware.

i am sure they understand your marking it up. chocolate covered chips, you pay $2.99 and sell them for $4.80. >> we had to go higher. $5.49 now because we have to pay people to shop. margins are getting squeezed. i want prices to come down. it is hard to do this, but people understand. we have now got a new strategy. stuff we used to run the house, margins are tight. the luxury items. melissa: these lavender dry air bags which i cannot imagine why anyone would need a lavender dry air bag. the judge said that the real problem is they cannot show economic harm. you would be a franchise for them. the only thing they could do is come over the border and open up a shot next year. >> i hope they do. that has been our view from the beginning. they created a market for their

products. vancouver is a nice town. we are looking forward to them opening. in the meantime just let us give people options. melissa: when you said that it would stay down for a while, i was a little nervous. ani got it. we are all said. thank you for coming on. congratulations. keep us posted. all right. next on "money," who made "money" today? is not the first time, but it may make you more apt to be a giver to someone in need. the answer right after this. you can never have too much "money" 42 much fun. ♪

♪ melissa: whether it is on wall street are main street, here is to make "money" today. warren buffett and everyone who owns brookshire hathaway. we mentioned the oracle of of

law has made back about $10 billion from the companies that he helped save during the crisis. the latest windfall coming from candy maker mars. that one payment is expected to net brookshire profit of about 680 million. buffett owns 38 and a half% of berkshire hathaway which means he made $2,603,000,000, living proof that it pays to have cash in a crisis. losing "money" today, anyone who owns bawling. in a big blow japanese air planes by past and made the very first order. not just in the order, a nine and a half billion dollar order, clearly paying the price for its dream liner battery issues a while back. and winning a jackpot. a waitress in oregon was given a lottery ticket in lieu of a tip from one of her regular customers. the ticket ended up being worth 17 in a half thousand dollars.

that is a winning night if i ever heard one. that's all we have for you. i hope you made "money" today. you will see you back here you will see you back here tomorrow. the following is a paid advertisement from starvista entertainment and time life. it was an era of incredible stars. fantastic voices... ♪ i know i'd go from rags to riches ♪ beautiful harmonies... ♪ sincerely ♪ oh, yes, sincerely magical melodies... ♪ catch a falling star and put it in your pocket ♪ ♪ never let it fade... and music we will always remember. ♪ writing love letters ♪ in the sand it was the golden age of pop.