Transcripts For CNBC Closing Bell 20141217 : vimarsana.com

Policy is with the entire path of Interest Rates will look like. And i really dont have much for you other than to say that they will be data dependent. That over time the stance of policy will be adjusted to try to keep the economy on a track where we see continuing progress toward achieving our goals of maximum employment and price stability. Theres, you know, the federal funds rate has been sitting in this zero to a. 25 range now for 6 years. This is and we have a large Balance Sheet. Were providing a very highly accommodative Monetary Policy. And even as we begin to normalize the stance of Monetary Policy when that becomes appropriate, its important to remember that Monetary Policy will still be very accommodative for a long time. And as we begin to normalize policy well be looking at unfolding economic developments and as the economy strengthens and we come closer to achieving our objectives i think its very likely that we will, you know, progress on the path of normalizing policy. But i cant tell you specifically other than saying it will depend on progress and moves will be data dependent. I cant say much more than that. Chair yellen, the committees projections show unemployment below your own views on where full employment should be. Does that reflect a desire on the part of the committee the economy runs above potential for a while and if so can you elaborate on why it want that is and the purpose achieved and the question of john asked earlier, you called market based measures is pronounced in the five year forward range and talking about expectations that inflation many years from now will be below target and some Market Participants see that as evidence of declining credibility in the committees longterm objective. Why do you still view that as transitory . So you your first question is why is it that the Committee Sees unemployment as declining slightly below its estimate of the longer run natural rate. And i think in part the reason for that is that inflation is running below our objective and the committee wants to see inflation move back toward our objective over time. And a short period of a very slight under shoot of unemployment below the natural rate will facilitate slightly faster return of inflation to our objective. It is i should say very small under shoot in a situation where there is great uncertainty about exactly what constitutes maximum employment or a longer run normal rate of unemployment. We also do see the different measures of slack in the labor market point to different assessments of just what maximum employment is. The standard Unemployment Rate for quite sometime now has been signaling a little bit less slack in the labor market than measures that are somewhat broader that, for example, include the unusually large number of people who are part time employed but would prefer fulltime jobs. And the portion of the decline we have seen in Labor Force Participation that looks like it would disappear or be eroded in stronger economy and so it may be that with a very small under shoot of this longer run normal level of the Unemployment Rate is measured by the standard Unemployment Rate will be seeing further progress on those other margins of slack. But its important to point out that the committee is not anticipating an overshoot of its 2 inflation objective. [ inaudible ] longer dated expectations, what i would say and we refer to this in the statement as inflation compensation. Rather than Inflation Expectations. The gap between the nominal yields on 10year treasuries, for example, and tips have declined. Thats inflation compensation. And fiveyear, fiveyear forwards as you said have also declined. That could reflect a change in Inflation Expectations but it could also reflect changes in assessment of inflation risks, the risk premium thats necessary to compensate for inflati inflation. That might especially have fallen if the probabilities attached very high inflation have come down and it can also reflect liquidity effects in markets and, for example, its sometimes the case that when there is a flight to safety that flight tends to be concentrated in nominal treasuries and could also serve to compress that spread so i think the jury is out about exactly how to interpret that downward move in inflation compensation. And we indicated that we are monitoring inflation developments carefully. Madame chair, peter coke with bloomberg television. Want to follow up on firming of normalization once liftoff takes place. You said data dependent. Does that suggest to markets, to those watching the measured pace in tightening cycle and the increments that thats not something markets should expect . What is your own takeaway of how effective that measured pace was back in the previous tightening cycle . And separately on the dissents at this meeting, there were three. Notal number, certainly. What does that suggest about the debate and the table and the ability to forge consensus. Are you disappointed with the number of dissents . So let me start with the number of dissents. There is a wide range of opinion in the committee. I think its appropriate for people to be able to express their views. And in the sense you see dissents on both sides. I think the statement does a good job of reflecting what the majority of the committee thinks is appropriate policy. So, you know, at a time like this where we are making consequential decisions i think its very reasonable to seedier have divergents of opinion. Theres no dissension of the part of the committee to use a language like that. I think quite a few people looking back on the use of that language in the i cant remember if it was 12 or 16 meetings, where there were 25 basis point moves, would probably not like to repeat a sequence in which theres a measured pace and 25 basis point moves at every meeting and i dont want to encourage you to think that there will be a repeat of that. Many members of the Committee Participants have said that they think policy should be based on the actual evolution of Economic Activity and inflation which tends to be variable over time. And thats why i say i anticipate it will be data dependent. We have continued to provide guidance. The same guidance that we have for sometime that says the committee anticipates that even after employment and inflation are near mandate consistent levels that Economic Conditions may for some time warrant keeping the target federal funds rate below the levels the Committee Views normal in the longer run. Thats a mouthful but it says in effect that the committee believes that the Economic Conditions that have made recovery difficult were getting beyond them. Theyre optimistic that those conditions will lift. They see the longer run normal lift of Interest Rates as around 3. 75 . So theres no view in the committee that there is secular stagnation in the sense we wont eventually get back to pretty historically normal levels of Interest Rates but they have said it will, you know, the economy is required to get where it is a good deal of Monetary Policy accommodation. We expect to be able to normalize policy. But until those conditions have lifted that have held back Economic Activity Monetary Policy will need to stay accommodative. So in that sense,valent to sayi path of normalization anticipated to be relatively gradual but, again, the path of rates will depend on how Economic Conditions actually evolve. And thats nothing more than an expectation on the part of the committee. Pedro with dow jones news wires. Enough about rates. I want to ask you about the new york fed. New york feds been in the news a lot lately. President dudley was invited to congress to testify about conflicts of interest there. You had things like the cigar tapes. The byrum report and the revelation that a former new york fed official was exchanging information with someone at Goldman Sachs and also had new york fed connections. I just wonder, and also scandals in the crisis regarding the new fed and purchase of Goldman Sachs stocks. Do you see the new york fed as a black mark on the system . Have you talked to bill dudley about reforming the image of that particular regional fed . And do you think a person thats spent 21 years of his career at Goldman Sachs is in a position to regain Public Confidence of conflicts of interest . Let me say that i i think its very important for the Federal Reserve system to have confidence in the quality of its supervision. And i do have i have a good deal of confidence in the quality of our supervision program. For the banking organizations, we super vise in general and that also also applies the largest banking organizations. We rely on examiners who are in the field and at the reserve banks to be providing information about whats happening in those organizations. But that information feeds into a process in which it is not individuals at any single reserve bank but at the board, its a boardled process. And it involves senior officials at a number of different reserve banks. Its also a multidisciplinary process that involves not only people from supervision but those from markets, from economic research, experts who focus on Financial Stability all come together to evaluate the information that they have and to assign supervisory ratings and decide on the appropriate program for all of those large institutions. We have strengthened the process of supervision enormously since the crisis. And i feel i feel a very good sense of confidence in how were carrying that out. Now, it is important to make sure that we have fed into the this process all the information thats relevant to making the right decisions. And when there are individuals who are examiners, who may disagree with others in their team about how to interpret whens going on at a particular institution, its important that there be channels by which they can make sure that disagreements are fed up to the highest levels. This is true throughout the work we do. We do Economic Forecasting and the fmoc receives information to help us make decisions. But obviously, there are disagreements about among economists about how to interpret developments. Its also important for us there to make sure we understand alternative views. So this is important and supervision we have announced that the board is undertaken a review of whether or not there are appropriate mechanisms in place in all of the reserve banks that individuals who disagree with decisions can make those make their own views known and feed into the process and we have also asked our Inspector General to look into that. Thank you. Jeff kearns of bloomberg news. I would like to get off Monetary Policy and ask you about the relationship with congress. Specifically, how worried are you about legislation that has been proposed and may be proposed again in the next congress that would reduce fed independence . Would you see yourself trying to fight back or would you see yourself trying to go to congress to work with them to do more with transparency or Something Else to reduce their concerns . Without making them law. And if there were bills sent to the white house would you talk to the president about vetoing them or do you have any confidence that he would veto bills that would reduce the feds independence . Thanks. So, let me simply say that congress assigned us important tasks in Monetary Policy and other roles that we perform, and the Federal Reserve is highly focused on attempting to carry out the mandates that congress has given us in the area of Monetary Policy. Its our dual mandate to promote maximum employment and price stability and thats what were working on. You know, i would say that the ability of a central bank to make the decisions about Monetary Policy that it regards as in the best longer run interests of the economy free of shortrun political interference is very important to the effective conduct of Monetary Policy and i think history shows not only in the United States but around the world that Central Bank Independence promotes better economic performance. So, i do think Central Bank Independence is very important. And that its important to make sure that we can make the decisions we think are best free of shortrun political interference. With respect to Monetary Policy. We should be accountable and we are accountable to congress in explaining what we do, i believe strongly in transparency and i believe strongly that we should communicate as clearly what were doing in the rational for doing it and am very open to looking for ways ourselves to improve our communications and transparency. And working with congress to do that. But i would be very concerned about actions. Back in 1978, congress explicitly passed legislation to ensure that there would be no gao audits of Monetary Policy decisionmaking, namely policy audits. I certainly hope that will continue and ill try to forcefully make the case for why thats important. With a veto . I cannot speak for the white house. Peter barnes, fox business, maam. Ill stay off of Interest Rates and first want to wish you happy holidays. Thank you. Second, want to ask you about the russian economy. Did that come up in the meeting in your discussion about Global Economic developments . As you know, theres a lot of concern with the drop in oil prices the russian economy could be in some trouble. Russia owes a lot of money to u. S. And foreign banks. And russian companies. Is there any concern about default . Any concern about possible contagion . And if so, is the fed taken any steps to prepare for that . Thank you. Well, we certainly did review Global Economic developments. Including developments in the russian economy. Clearly, russia has been hit very hard by the decline in oil prices. And the ruble has depreciated enormously in value. And this is posing a series of very difficult Economic Conditions in the russian economy. Of course, we discussed what the potential spillovers are to the United States. Which could occur through both financial and trade linkages but these linkages are actually relatively small. Russia accounts for less than 1 of u. S. Trade volume and u. S. Banks exposure to russian residents is really quite small in terms of relative to their capital. In terms of the portfolios of u. S. Residents, there are russian securities but they account for a very small share. So, i expect that the linkages back to the spillovers to the United States, both through trade and financial channels, would be small. Europe, of course, is somewhat more exposed to russia. Both because russias an important supplier of oil and natural gas to europe and the financial linkages are somewhat greater but in the case of the United States, i see the spillovers is pretty small but were obviously watching that closely. Greg rob of market watch. Also happy holidays. Thank you. Same to you. Theres a contagion risk from low oil prices that people are talking about in the markets. What does it mean to the banks that have lent, you know, into the oil patch with the low oil prices . And i guess, you know, your warnings about leveraged loans, you have made warnings over the past year of leveraged lending. Are you worried they havent been heeded . Thank you. So, i mean you are talking about the United States exposure . I mean, we have seen some impacts of Lower Oil Prices on the spreads for high yield bonds. Where theres exposure to Oil Companies that may see distress or decline in their earnings. And we have seen some increase in spreads on high yield bonds more generally. I think for the Banking System as a whole the exposure to oil im not aware of significant issues there. This is the kind of thing thats part of Risk Management for banking organizations and the kind of thing they look at. Stress tests. But the movements in oil prices have been very large. And undoubtedly unexpected. We in terms of leverage and whether or not levered entities could be badly affected by movements in oil prices, leverage in the Financial System in general is way down from the levels before the crisis so its not a major concern that there are levered entities that would be badly affected by this, but well have to watch carefully. There have been large and unexpected movements in oil prices. Good afternoon, chair yellen. Steve beckner. I will go back to Interest Rates if you dont mind. Actually, its a question about Balance Sheet affects on the overall appropriate level of Interest Rates<\/a> will look like. And i really dont have much for you other than to say that they will be data dependent. That over time the stance of policy will be adjusted to try to keep the economy on a track where we see continuing progress toward achieving our goals of maximum employment and price stability. Theres, you know, the federal funds rate has been sitting in this zero to a. 25 range now for 6 years. This is and we have a large Balance Sheet<\/a>. Were providing a very highly accommodative Monetary Policy<\/a>. And even as we begin to normalize the stance of Monetary Policy<\/a> when that becomes appropriate, its important to remember that Monetary Policy<\/a> will still be very accommodative for a long time. And as we begin to normalize policy well be looking at unfolding economic developments and as the economy strengthens and we come closer to achieving our objectives i think its very likely that we will, you know, progress on the path of normalizing policy. But i cant tell you specifically other than saying it will depend on progress and moves will be data dependent. I cant say much more than that. Chair yellen, the committees projections show unemployment below your own views on where full employment should be. Does that reflect a desire on the part of the committee the economy runs above potential for a while and if so can you elaborate on why it want that is and the purpose achieved and the question of john asked earlier, you called market based measures is pronounced in the five year forward range and talking about expectations that inflation many years from now will be below target and some Market Participants<\/a> see that as evidence of declining credibility in the committees longterm objective. Why do you still view that as transitory . So you your first question is why is it that the Committee Sees<\/a> unemployment as declining slightly below its estimate of the longer run natural rate. And i think in part the reason for that is that inflation is running below our objective and the committee wants to see inflation move back toward our objective over time. And a short period of a very slight under shoot of unemployment below the natural rate will facilitate slightly faster return of inflation to our objective. It is i should say very small under shoot in a situation where there is great uncertainty about exactly what constitutes maximum employment or a longer run normal rate of unemployment. We also do see the different measures of slack in the labor market point to different assessments of just what maximum employment is. The standard Unemployment Rate<\/a> for quite sometime now has been signaling a little bit less slack in the labor market than measures that are somewhat broader that, for example, include the unusually large number of people who are part time employed but would prefer fulltime jobs. And the portion of the decline we have seen in Labor Force Participation<\/a> that looks like it would disappear or be eroded in stronger economy and so it may be that with a very small under shoot of this longer run normal level of the Unemployment Rate<\/a> is measured by the standard Unemployment Rate<\/a> will be seeing further progress on those other margins of slack. But its important to point out that the committee is not anticipating an overshoot of its 2 inflation objective. [ inaudible ] longer dated expectations, what i would say and we refer to this in the statement as inflation compensation. Rather than Inflation Expectations<\/a>. The gap between the nominal yields on 10year treasuries, for example, and tips have declined. Thats inflation compensation. And fiveyear, fiveyear forwards as you said have also declined. That could reflect a change in Inflation Expectations<\/a> but it could also reflect changes in assessment of inflation risks, the risk premium thats necessary to compensate for inflati inflation. That might especially have fallen if the probabilities attached very high inflation have come down and it can also reflect liquidity effects in markets and, for example, its sometimes the case that when there is a flight to safety that flight tends to be concentrated in nominal treasuries and could also serve to compress that spread so i think the jury is out about exactly how to interpret that downward move in inflation compensation. And we indicated that we are monitoring inflation developments carefully. Madame chair, peter coke with bloomberg television. Want to follow up on firming of normalization once liftoff takes place. You said data dependent. Does that suggest to markets, to those watching the measured pace in tightening cycle and the increments that thats not something markets should expect . What is your own takeaway of how effective that measured pace was back in the previous tightening cycle . And separately on the dissents at this meeting, there were three. Notal number, certainly. What does that suggest about the debate and the table and the ability to forge consensus. Are you disappointed with the number of dissents . So let me start with the number of dissents. There is a wide range of opinion in the committee. I think its appropriate for people to be able to express their views. And in the sense you see dissents on both sides. I think the statement does a good job of reflecting what the majority of the committee thinks is appropriate policy. So, you know, at a time like this where we are making consequential decisions i think its very reasonable to seedier have divergents of opinion. Theres no dissension of the part of the committee to use a language like that. I think quite a few people looking back on the use of that language in the i cant remember if it was 12 or 16 meetings, where there were 25 basis point moves, would probably not like to repeat a sequence in which theres a measured pace and 25 basis point moves at every meeting and i dont want to encourage you to think that there will be a repeat of that. Many members of the Committee Participants<\/a> have said that they think policy should be based on the actual evolution of Economic Activity<\/a> and inflation which tends to be variable over time. And thats why i say i anticipate it will be data dependent. We have continued to provide guidance. The same guidance that we have for sometime that says the committee anticipates that even after employment and inflation are near mandate consistent levels that Economic Conditions<\/a> may for some time warrant keeping the target federal funds rate below the levels the Committee Views<\/a> normal in the longer run. Thats a mouthful but it says in effect that the committee believes that the Economic Conditions<\/a> that have made recovery difficult were getting beyond them. Theyre optimistic that those conditions will lift. They see the longer run normal lift of Interest Rates<\/a> as around 3. 75 . So theres no view in the committee that there is secular stagnation in the sense we wont eventually get back to pretty historically normal levels of Interest Rates<\/a> but they have said it will, you know, the economy is required to get where it is a good deal of Monetary Policy<\/a> accommodation. We expect to be able to normalize policy. But until those conditions have lifted that have held back Economic Activity<\/a> Monetary Policy<\/a> will need to stay accommodative. So in that sense,valent to sayi path of normalization anticipated to be relatively gradual but, again, the path of rates will depend on how Economic Conditions<\/a> actually evolve. And thats nothing more than an expectation on the part of the committee. Pedro with dow jones news wires. Enough about rates. I want to ask you about the new york fed. New york feds been in the news a lot lately. President dudley was invited to congress to testify about conflicts of interest there. You had things like the cigar tapes. The byrum report and the revelation that a former new york fed official was exchanging information with someone at Goldman Sachs<\/a> and also had new york fed connections. I just wonder, and also scandals in the crisis regarding the new fed and purchase of Goldman Sachs<\/a> stocks. Do you see the new york fed as a black mark on the system . Have you talked to bill dudley about reforming the image of that particular regional fed . And do you think a person thats spent 21 years of his career at Goldman Sachs<\/a> is in a position to regain Public Confidence<\/a> of conflicts of interest . Let me say that i i think its very important for the Federal Reserve<\/a> system to have confidence in the quality of its supervision. And i do have i have a good deal of confidence in the quality of our supervision program. For the banking organizations, we super vise in general and that also also applies the largest banking organizations. We rely on examiners who are in the field and at the reserve banks to be providing information about whats happening in those organizations. But that information feeds into a process in which it is not individuals at any single reserve bank but at the board, its a boardled process. And it involves senior officials at a number of different reserve banks. Its also a multidisciplinary process that involves not only people from supervision but those from markets, from economic research, experts who focus on Financial Stability<\/a> all come together to evaluate the information that they have and to assign supervisory ratings and decide on the appropriate program for all of those large institutions. We have strengthened the process of supervision enormously since the crisis. And i feel i feel a very good sense of confidence in how were carrying that out. Now, it is important to make sure that we have fed into the this process all the information thats relevant to making the right decisions. And when there are individuals who are examiners, who may disagree with others in their team about how to interpret whens going on at a particular institution, its important that there be channels by which they can make sure that disagreements are fed up to the highest levels. This is true throughout the work we do. We do Economic Forecasting<\/a> and the fmoc receives information to help us make decisions. But obviously, there are disagreements about among economists about how to interpret developments. Its also important for us there to make sure we understand alternative views. So this is important and supervision we have announced that the board is undertaken a review of whether or not there are appropriate mechanisms in place in all of the reserve banks that individuals who disagree with decisions can make those make their own views known and feed into the process and we have also asked our Inspector General<\/a> to look into that. Thank you. Jeff kearns of bloomberg news. I would like to get off Monetary Policy<\/a> and ask you about the relationship with congress. Specifically, how worried are you about legislation that has been proposed and may be proposed again in the next congress that would reduce fed independence . Would you see yourself trying to fight back or would you see yourself trying to go to congress to work with them to do more with transparency or Something Else<\/a> to reduce their concerns . Without making them law. And if there were bills sent to the white house would you talk to the president about vetoing them or do you have any confidence that he would veto bills that would reduce the feds independence . Thanks. So, let me simply say that congress assigned us important tasks in Monetary Policy<\/a> and other roles that we perform, and the Federal Reserve<\/a> is highly focused on attempting to carry out the mandates that congress has given us in the area of Monetary Policy<\/a>. Its our dual mandate to promote maximum employment and price stability and thats what were working on. You know, i would say that the ability of a central bank to make the decisions about Monetary Policy<\/a> that it regards as in the best longer run interests of the economy free of shortrun political interference is very important to the effective conduct of Monetary Policy<\/a> and i think history shows not only in the United States<\/a> but around the world that Central Bank Independence<\/a> promotes better economic performance. So, i do think Central Bank Independence<\/a> is very important. And that its important to make sure that we can make the decisions we think are best free of shortrun political interference. With respect to Monetary Policy<\/a>. We should be accountable and we are accountable to congress in explaining what we do, i believe strongly in transparency and i believe strongly that we should communicate as clearly what were doing in the rational for doing it and am very open to looking for ways ourselves to improve our communications and transparency. And working with congress to do that. But i would be very concerned about actions. Back in 1978, congress explicitly passed legislation to ensure that there would be no gao audits of Monetary Policy<\/a> decisionmaking, namely policy audits. I certainly hope that will continue and ill try to forcefully make the case for why thats important. With a veto . I cannot speak for the white house. Peter barnes, fox business, maam. Ill stay off of Interest Rates<\/a> and first want to wish you happy holidays. Thank you. Second, want to ask you about the russian economy. Did that come up in the meeting in your discussion about Global Economic<\/a> developments . As you know, theres a lot of concern with the drop in oil prices the russian economy could be in some trouble. Russia owes a lot of money to u. S. And foreign banks. And russian companies. Is there any concern about default . Any concern about possible contagion . And if so, is the fed taken any steps to prepare for that . Thank you. Well, we certainly did review Global Economic<\/a> developments. Including developments in the russian economy. Clearly, russia has been hit very hard by the decline in oil prices. And the ruble has depreciated enormously in value. And this is posing a series of very difficult Economic Conditions<\/a> in the russian economy. Of course, we discussed what the potential spillovers are to the United States<\/a>. Which could occur through both financial and trade linkages but these linkages are actually relatively small. Russia accounts for less than 1 of u. S. Trade volume and u. S. Banks exposure to russian residents is really quite small in terms of relative to their capital. In terms of the portfolios of u. S. Residents, there are russian securities but they account for a very small share. So, i expect that the linkages back to the spillovers to the United States<\/a>, both through trade and financial channels, would be small. Europe, of course, is somewhat more exposed to russia. Both because russias an important supplier of oil and natural gas to europe and the financial linkages are somewhat greater but in the case of the United States<\/a>, i see the spillovers is pretty small but were obviously watching that closely. Greg rob of market watch. Also happy holidays. Thank you. Same to you. Theres a contagion risk from low oil prices that people are talking about in the markets. What does it mean to the banks that have lent, you know, into the oil patch with the low oil prices . And i guess, you know, your warnings about leveraged loans, you have made warnings over the past year of leveraged lending. Are you worried they havent been heeded . Thank you. So, i mean you are talking about the United States<\/a> exposure . I mean, we have seen some impacts of Lower Oil Prices<\/a> on the spreads for high yield bonds. Where theres exposure to Oil Companies<\/a> that may see distress or decline in their earnings. And we have seen some increase in spreads on high yield bonds more generally. I think for the Banking System<\/a> as a whole the exposure to oil im not aware of significant issues there. This is the kind of thing thats part of Risk Management<\/a> for banking organizations and the kind of thing they look at. Stress tests. But the movements in oil prices have been very large. And undoubtedly unexpected. We in terms of leverage and whether or not levered entities could be badly affected by movements in oil prices, leverage in the Financial System<\/a> in general is way down from the levels before the crisis so its not a major concern that there are levered entities that would be badly affected by this, but well have to watch carefully. There have been large and unexpected movements in oil prices. Good afternoon, chair yellen. Steve beckner. I will go back to Interest Rates<\/a> if you dont mind. Actually, its a question about Balance Sheet<\/a> affects on the overall appropriate level of Monetary Policy<\/a> in reaffirming the reinvestment policy, the fmoc says once again that this will help maintain accommodative Financial Condition<\/a>s. In the past it said that the large portfolio securities will exert a downward effect on longterm Interest Rates<\/a>. As you look forward to raising shortterm rates, to what extent does the fmoc need to take into account residual accommodative effect of a large balance sneet. So i agree and thats why we stated it that we typically think of the Monetary Policy<\/a> impact of our asset purchases as depending on the stock of assets we hold on our Balance Sheet<\/a> rather than the flow of purchases and so were reminding the public that we continue to hold a large stock of assets and that is tending to push down term premiums and longer term yields. We make clear when or tried to make clear when we issued our normalization principles in september that we intend to use changes in our target for the federal funds rate as the main tool that we will actively use to adjust Financial Condition<\/a>s. Rather than actively planning to sell the assets that weve put on to our Balance Sheet<\/a>. Sometime after we begin raising our targets for shortterm Interest Rates<\/a>, depending on economic and Financial Condition<\/a>s, were likely to reduce or cease reinvestment and gradually run down the stock of our assets. But our active tool for adjusting the stance of Monetary Policy<\/a> that its appropriate for the Economic Needs<\/a> of the country, that will be done through adjusting our shortterm target range for the federal funds rate. Sorry. Kevin, i cant believe nobody asked you the most important question of your San Francisco<\/a> 49ers. Since everybody wished you a happy holiday. Can you talk about housing . Few things are more important to americans than their Wealth Creation<\/a> than housing. You have in your statement noted that it continues to be a drag. Mr. Dudley has relatively upbeat in his forecast. I dont know if thats a view shared on the committee. What do you think is holding housing back . What can congress do and what will you Tell Congress<\/a> in the coming year and you didnt mention mr. Dudley individually. Are you pleased with his handling of the events . So let me start with that. I have great confidence in president dudley. Hes done a fine job in running the new york fed and i want to be very clear that i have great confidence in him. Hes a distinguished Public Servant<\/a> and hes worked very hard in the aftermath of the crisis to make sure that the new york fed is doing all that it needs to do to contribute to the work that we do both in Financial Stability<\/a> and in supervision. And lets see. The other question that you asked was about housing. About housing. So, you know, ive been surprised that housing hasnt recovered more robustly than it has. In part i think it reflects very tight credit continuing tight Credit Conditions<\/a> for any borrower that doesnt have really pristine credit, you know, credit ratings. And my hope is that that situation will ease over time. In addition, household formation has been very depressed. In my expectations is that as the labor market continues to improve and households feel better about their Financial Condition<\/a> that we will see household formation pick up and somewhat stronger recovery than we have seen thus far in housing. Okay. Thank you. All right. Fed chair janet yellen completing her last News Conference<\/a> for 2014. More confusion here and there in terms of language. Im Bill Griffeth<\/a> with kelly evans on the closing bell. We are looking at a dow up 272 points and basically a moment during her press conference where the market had given up all of its gains after that statement hit where they kept the considerable language. That was the big surprise initially sent stocks higher and started to talk about a couple of meetings, bill, might mean two. Two meetings ian posturing, okay, an april rate hike and you saw the market walk back and then again as it wraps up here look where we are. Pretty much the highs of the session. Just joining us, really the headline is that they are slightly altering the language in their statement to say that the fed will have patience in waiting to normalize, to begin the normalization of Interest Rates<\/a> and raise them and that is not does not alter the considerable period of time language they have before and referring to previous considerable time language. They are not changing it but they took it out and added patience. Yeah. And, you know, the fed chair speaks in broad terms and we journalists are trying to pin her down to specifics. And shes not going to do this. Also a couple of interesting moments there. She was asked a couple of times about the confidence in the new york fed as the fed has been dealing with scandals there. Her confidence, she said i have great confidence in bill dudley, the president of the new york fed and, again, questioned at times because of the background of Goldman Sachs<\/a> and that was certain think focus and additional questions which didnt come up in the statement, specifically about oil, about russia. She tried to be reassuring on both notes noting that the exposure of russia to europe and greater than the u. S. Its transitory, too. They expect to get to normalized Inflation Expectations<\/a> down the road. Lets ask the expert what is they thought of all of this. Diane swong from chicago. Jack bouroujisian in chicago and Rick Santelli<\/a> in chicago. Steve liesman will join us momentarily. Rick, lets talk about the market, response. Yields gone up a little bit. Wild gyrations for the stock market. What did you guys think of what she i know you said i heard you say it earlier. You thought the fed Statement Like<\/a> a rumba and how did the market treat this . Well, really, i mean, if you blur your eyes a little bit, rates arent much different. 2s, 5s, 10s and 30s than before the statement. What is dramatically different, the equity markets. Dollar index, isnt all that different either. In the end its about equities. In my opinion about the riskon trade but i dont know. Just this is my own opinion. I thought that janet yellen in the press conference just seems so unsure about the gps of where the economy is and where they need to go. And i consistently go back to the original 1977 legislation about stability and pricing. Stability and prices. Doesnt say 2 inflation. Could be 2 disinflation or deflation. It seems to be talking more about a variance issue than level issue and all created by the fed. I personally think its very hard to defend looking at the data of late for the u. S. Economy but theres no argument as to whether its commiserate with crisis style zero Interest Rate<\/a> policy. End of story. Steve liesman joining us from the meeting there. What jumps out to you from her answers . Any surprises . You know whats funny, kelly. I couldnt disagree with rick more. I thought the statement not surprising. A real muddle and confident and actually much more explicit about the outlook for rates than i thought she would be. She said no rate hike for two metings and agree a rate hike next year. Thats not what she said, steve. She said it was possible. It was possible. She didnt say rick, you bet on possible. A couple of meetings. Right. But possible isnt raising rates. What you should be doing, best bet and the best bet remains exactly what it was a mid2015 rate hike. And i thought anybody else here disagree . Jack, what do you think the takeaway was . You know what . I think janet yellen said everything that every other fed govern for a has been saying, data dependent. Not date dependent. They changed the wording to reflect that. One thing that ill say is that shes talking about an economy thats starting to do better. Look. You know, and the bottom line is this. If they are going to raise rates, it is going to be because the economy is expanding to the point of liftoff. I love that term. And the other term by the way i love and, steve, she refuses to deflation. She calls it inflation compensation. Thats part of the confidence. She is not letting whens happening with oil prices alter her belief that you have have a stronger u. S. Economy. Shes not looking through this oil price the way she looked through and i would argue correctly the october volatility and markets and that so many people thought was the harbinger of the end of u. S. Growth. Spot on. I think spot on. Diane . You know, i take away similar to steve. I think she was much more clear than the statement. The statement sort of a muddle of, is the next statement patient and gradual . Just really silly. Okay. So what is it shes saying now . She is saying what she has said. Expecting to raise rates and, you know, what are they waiting for at this point . Theyre waiting for wages to accelerate and inflation to firm. They do not need to see inflation go back to the 2 target before they raise rates because as she pointed out they do look at the long legs and Monetary Policy<\/a> and there is still even though theyre going to be slow, gradual, walking as if theyre walking on thin ice even as the economic ground firms they also are going to be preemptive and inflation could be lower. Lowered the inflation outlook with the transitory nature of oil prices and Global Economic<\/a> risk and acknowledge that and not important enough to highlight and she was more confident by saying she addressed the issues, talked about what russia meant, she talked about the exposure of Lower Oil Prices<\/a> in our Banking System<\/a>, in europe. All of that and they still said were on course. The best we can be. We cant tell you exactly when it will happen but they said nothing new to the shape of it and thats why the market is rallying now. A quick question. As we turn towards 2015, first on the 3 dissenters in the statement. Yes. A whhabitual thing and how ds that change the outcome . It is interesting because we are getting more doves rotating into the voting position and people that dissent dont vote in a void. We have two hawks retiring soon and this was their last stand. They used the voting position to amplify their positions which have been very clear all along. On the flip side of it, the dove, the dissenting dove does reflect incoming votes like evans from chicago. Theres another chicago reference there. I think thats important to understand is this the people coming on are caution and patience, gradualism, slow, low rates for longer and the idea of having room showing traction to catch up on what we lost to the great recession. You asked her about oil and immaterial pact of inflation and Monetary Policy<\/a> down the road and repeating that this decline is transitory and fully expect the inflation rate to get back to, you know, where they expect it to be and projections down the road. Do you buy that . Plenty of people expect the next year to be the year of low oil prices and going to have a huge impact on the economy here in the United States<\/a>. She seems to be down playing that. What do you think . So, bill, though the question, the sub text of that question is, probing that very issue i was arguing about with rick, how aft in her forecast . Saying answering the question, you know, theres some possibility that theres a signal from oil that we have a deflationary problem down the pike, that changes the calculus. I think that, you know what . The policy right now until proven oerz is to look through this and make it and believe its a transitory factor and that theyre on target. I think the fed of two kids. Employment and inflation. Employment kid is doing great. The inflation guy, the inflation kid, he comes along soon enough. I love she reiterated the fact that the fed doesnt want to overshoot the inflation target an just this morning, rick that was important, too. The cpi number declined. I mean, overshooting is clearly not the issue here. If anything, its a question about how much they might let, for example, the Unemployment Rate<\/a> keep dropping. More so than they might otherwise feel comfortable with to perhaps try to get the cpi rate to be at i know back up to 1. 5 or 2 . Kelly, thats in the forecast, as well. I think thats really important is now starting to see that forecast of unemployment lower and in fact the fed i think is starting to move that sort of threshold on what it thinks is full employment because, lets face it. We have seen unemployment come down quite a bit and yet to see the wage acceleration. All right. Brian jacobson joins us, as well. What do you think the takeaway is today . Well, i think the big takeaway is its a dovish fed and trying to set us up for 2015 being like 2004. In 2003, they said that rates would stay low for a considerable time. Four months they dropped it cold turkey and january 2004 meeting replaced and now melding them together. Patient and considerable time and we have had considerable time for 27 months and thinking about rate rises, theyre very poirnt and very gradual and setting us up for when they hike rates in june, maybe they wait a meeting, let it pause. Brian, thats not consistent with the yearend forecast to imply they have to raise rates three different times and get the funds rate or whatever rate you want to get it over 1 by the end of the year and imply to kind of get on it. Well, actually, those arent really forecast. Remember. Theyre projections and tried to clarify forecasts or projections on the basis of other assumptions so its not taking into consideration sort of what might happen. Its what they wish would happen. So its more like Wishful Thinking<\/a> opposed to an actual forecast. More than yeah. Sorry. Did the basis of good public speaking is we know three points. Tell they will what youre going to tell them. Tell them and then tell them what you told them and clear that the fed is still in the first camp. Tell them what youre going to tell them. Then the next meeting, tell them what youre going to tell them. Are they overdoing this preparation, playing the groundwork for the daytoday start raising Interest Rates<\/a> . I dont think they can possibly overdo it. Go back to the tamper tantrum and shaken by that. They want a smooth transition. I dont think the statement i think was muddled. I agree with steve on that. Yellen has come through time and time again and sort of shown this is what i know. This is what i think. This is where the risks are and been very clear on that. The bottom line is they cant overprepare the markets far transition that is the first time in a very, very long time. I think it was important she also said were not going to put that measured pace in there and just raise rates like every quarter point, every meeting, either. I think it is very important to refact a variable fashion to data as it comes in and i think thats setting the fed up to be. I wish the statement was a little more clear but i think yellen carried it to the next level with the baton put in her hand. The statement may not have reflected all of her views alone. Bill . I think it was pretty clear. Hang on a second. The dow up 300. Back to the highs of the day here. Steve, go ahead. They didnt need that. The market was ready to simply drop considerable period and then the way she explained it after the meeting. Kelly, a little bit of math, next year, the median forecast of the fmoc, two meetings and said not raising rates, six meetings to get there. Go about 20 basis points per meeting or 40 or 50 in 1 and get there over time and even though brian just said steve, she also said as an idea that they would like to be should we be taking that 1. 13 as a game plan or not . No. Yeah. Its the it would be a mistake. Not to do it. You dont have a choice. Brian . I think its a bad idea as a game plan because things will change, change their opinions and dots move around and hopefully higher and the economy is stronger. Hopefully but keep in mind. Now its all about inflation. Go ahead, jack. Until they see evidence of inflation they wont change it she also said that she could do something or the fed can do something between meetings. Remember that. You dont have to have a meeting for there to be an action by the fed. She talked about calling a press conference and letting us know. Just to be clear, she wasnt, jack. Look. They can always move in between meetings. We have seen that. I think what she was trying to clarify is a lot of people think the fed makes a major policy move at a thats right. Like today. Reiterated that they can make the move at any one of those meetings. That was important. Quite clearly one of the first points in the press conference. Thats why i think the fed isnt overdoing it. I agree with steve. I dont like the statement this time. I think it was muddled and didnt prepare the markets and silly. That said, her press conference did clarify it. But i think it was really important to say that the press conference isnt only time to be clear. Hopefully they can get the transition on that whole theory into reality when they have a statement and more clear than today. To the point of the clarity of the statement, i think it was actually pretty clear and dovish. And they didnt want to create any conditions that would suggest to tighten things earlier and create a transition period now to then remove the considerable time language. Bill . I thought it was pretty clear and wise what they did. Steve . Bill, i want to ask the Market Mavens<\/a> out there. Stock movements have befuddled me for decades. This 300 points, do you think the market is there because it believes the fed is going to be less hawkish than before because my takeaway is i dont change my best bet scenario of a mid2015 rate hike from this. I dont know why the market would rally on this unless theres a sense that the fed to emerge more hawkish from this meeting than sooef sli. What do you think, brian . A lot of people expecting perhaps a march rate hike so i think this just shifted expectations. Yeah. But that was sort of side lined in recent days. I think theres been you know, its been amazing to see where we have been over the last two weeks with the employment report and things surging and people moving up their expectations. I didnt but certainly there were people who did that and then moving back out. The markets been all over the board. Bottom line is, you know, steve, i think you said it. The survey showed that the market expected them to perhaps drop the considerable time and language and clearly worried in the context of whats happened in recent weeks if they dropped it outright and needed to bridge it. I dont know that they need to worry about that. They were. I dont know. Maybe the market going up is validation to be worried because the markets happy. Jack . Rick . If wages continue on the flat line, we are not going to see my house on a different aggreddres the fed moving. Thats what the markets pricinging. Jack, what do you think . I think the market should have never gone down and one of the reasons it snapped right back. Jack seeing the vshaped recovery, it tells you that something was happening. Whether its a fund getting blown out. I havem a fundamentalists. I dont look at the technicals. Thats voodoo. We can argue about that. When i see the movement of october, like seeing now, that tells me that the market should not have been pricing there. It was an ash ration. Whatever it was. Whether it was a hedge fund tied to oil blowing out but the reality is that this fed is going to move because of growth. Theyre going to move because they see expansion in the economy. Because the data requires them to move. And if thats the case, youve got to be long equities. So, jack, rate the economy 1 to 10 for 2014. 1 to 10. 1 to 10 . The economy is a 3. The stock smarkt 59. Theres been a disconnect. We have been talking about this. Yeah. Certainly has. I can tell by all the testimony of the defendants in this case. One at a time somebody parse that out there a little bit. Dow up 320 a moment ago and moving higher. Steve . I was going to wager with rick 100 to a Favorite Charity<\/a> if the fed doesnt raise next year. Theyre going. Youre on youre on youre on i think veterans. Wounded warriors, isnt that right, rick . Or the taxpayer depending on the fed does. Is she underestimating the impact that russia could have on the Global Economy<\/a> . I mean, everything you guys threw at her that was tangental to the u. S. Economy, nothing is worrying her right now. Russia of a question and oil being the other one. I dont think russias underestimated but the issue is, bill, whether or not theres a broader pressure on emerging markets. The outflow of currency from those emerging markets and also not clear to me that she has a handle on the issue of leverage related in the Financial System<\/a>. Right. Relative to the oil business and not very confident answer i thought in that regard and we have looked at it. We have quantified it. Its not a big deal. She wasnt very firm in terms of seemed to grasp of the extent of potential and risk agree with steve on that one. Yeah and reiterating not a good answer for the exposure to energy and European Bank<\/a>s, as well. A response there. Diane . She talked about europe with greater exposure and not the effects for us that theyre more exposed to russia than we are and more exposed to the diane . She also did mention the strong dollar backwards saying that falling import prices could hold inflation down, as well. Thats something we worry about a bit. Thats actually it was in there. To back out a little bit and talk about 2015, in a way you have two means of tightening were already happening. U. S. Dollar rallying and Inflation Expectations<\/a> down and means that rates are higher. We shouldnt overlook thats pretty significant stuff going on out there. Well, i think that gets thats why me said and the second hang on, bliian. The issue on the dissent and the voting members coming on, the role of Charlie Evans<\/a> in the vote and where they stress on how the statement is actually formed. I think thats important and inflation at the end of the day, inflation played higher role in the statement this year moving into the year and employment a lesser role. You will see that go very much into the inflation direction. The single most important mandate although they have a dual one is inflation and very important for them and it being too low will become an issue if it continues to decelerate even as oil prices stabilize and if it continues to decelerate is a more broad based nature and something have to be acknowledging much more. I have a minute left. Lets go around the horn now. Steve and rick already have a bet about when they think the fed will begin liftoff, starting to raise Interest Rates<\/a>. Steve, you think it will be in 2015. Yes . Certainly in 2015. I think the fed is going to normalize policy. Rick, you dont think they will . No. Jack, when do you think the fed raises rates . Third quarter of 2015 unless theres 4 and 5 gdp numbers and then its faster. Brian . June 2015 but in 12. 5 basis increments instead of 25. Very, very gradual at that point. Very gradual. Diane, when do you think . Late in the third quarter. I think the fed will have to deal with the inflation issue and ultimately i think theyll raise rates if inflation is flow last year and set it up as a preemptive strike. By the way, brian, who win it is bet doing it that way . They do it that way, maybe 25 basis points and skip every meeting and affects to the same thing. I dont want to win the bet. I dont want to win the bet at i want to lose the bet i want normalization. I hope i lose we should thats the way to the economy is strong. There they go. Like the closing bell Holiday Party<\/a> sounds like just there. Thank you all for your insights. Appreciate it. Thank you. We have just under 7 minutes to go here into the close. The Dow Jones Industrial<\/a> average having one of the best days of the year up almost 300 points. The nasdaq is up almost 100 so were talking about 2 rallies both the s p and for the nasdaq. Extraordinary, bill. Makes you wonder if the point is that the fed left in considerable time and youre looking at the result across the market here. Look at the s p 500 heat map. All 500 stocks there, it would take us less than 30 seconds to name all the stocks negative right now in the s p 500. Thats crazy. When we come back, much more Market Reaction<\/a> to the fed today when the special coverage continues and wait until you see the panel coming up next hour, as well. Steve forbes is right there ready to go. He cant wait to talk about fed policy. My names louis, and i quit smoking with chantix. I had tried to do it in the past. I hadnt been successful. Quitting smoking this time was different because i got a prescription for chantix. Along with support, Chantix Varenicline<\/a> is proven to help people quit smoking. The fact that it reduced the urge to smoke helped me get that confidence that i could do it. Some people had changes in behavior, thinking or mood, hostility, agitation, depressed mood and suicidal thoughts or actions while taking or after stopping chantix. Some people had seizures while taking chantix. If you notice any of these, stop chantix and call your doctor right away. Tell your doctor about any history of Mental Health<\/a> problems, which could get worse while taking chantix or history of seizures. Don take chantix if youve had a serious allergic or skin reaction to it. If you develop these, stop chantix and see your doctor right away as some can be lifethreatening. Tell your doctor if you have a history of heart or blood vessel problems, or develop new or worse symptoms. Get medical help right away if you have symptoms of a heart attack or stroke. Decrease alcohol use while taking chantix. Use caution when driving or operating machinery. Common side effects include nausea, trouble sleeping and unusual dreams. I love myself as a nonsmoker. Ask your doctor if chantix is right for you. Female announcer sleep trains ends sunday. E for 3 event its your last chance to get three years interestfree financing on beautyrest black, stearns foster, serta icomfort, even tempurpedic. Plus, get free delivery, and sleep trains 100day low price guarantee. But hurry sleep trains interest free for 3 event ends sunday. Guaranteed sleep train your ticket to a better nights sleep inside the threeminute mark, crazy day. We knew it was going to be light because of the fed meeting waiting for a language change which we sort of got and sort of didnt get. This is the dow today. Pretty good rally going into the meeting when the statement came out, instantly 150point gain became a 270point gain and gave it back and back up again. 289 points there or 1. 7 gain for the dow at the moment. Very quickly, what oil stocks today, xop etf, up 8 today. Oil prices moved higher for a time but oil stocks have definitely benefited from this with that gain there as you can see. Finally, the credit markets and the treasuries, fiveyear note shows you the tremendous volatility that was going on after the fed statement came out and theyre trying to figure out what it means and raising rates and what patience equals, considerable period of time and peter costa, you famously got out of this market. Yes. Still still out of this market . Still out of the market. Even though we had opportunities to buy it over the last week, im not stepping back in. Why not . I think that even where we were, we came from, you know, bordering on 17,000. I still felt that a lot of stocks were fairly priced and i dont see for me to go back to get 2 is not worth it. You know, the risk i find and i know that im on the very small part of the spectrum, very few people feel this way, i dont think the risk is worth the reward. Okay. Two things, why is the stock market rallying . Patience, the fed says, equals dovishness to traders. Number one. They made the clear the economy is improving and didnt mention the foreign risks at all. This concern about oil. They called it transitory. How many times in that conference, transitory . Put it together. The stock market is up. May or may not agree and obvious why the market is up. The message is that the longer the fed waits to raise ratds is bullish for the stock market. I think once you start seeing an uptick an im hoping and i think without it the expansion in the economy will stall and once you start seeing an uptick in wages and see it in some sectors, i think thats where the problems will lie. You will start seeing more Inflationary Pressure<\/a> and wait a little bit. Huge short covering. Trying to find a bottom. Somebody sees bargains. All right. And when were bargaining hunting today and make some money. The dow up 285 on the close. Very smart people standing by now for hour number two of the closing bell with kelly evans. See you later. Thank you, bill. Welcome to the closing bell, everybody. Im kelly evans. Looks like the market will have one of its best days of the year. A big day on wall street, a big meeting from the Federal Reserve<\/a> with the surprising decision to keep the considerable time language in the statement and the markets moved around a little bit as the press conference continued and things shake out here the dow going without a gain of 287 points and should be good enough for the best gain of the year. The s p 500 certainly is going to take that trophy. 40 points higher today and the nasdaq up almost 100. Gains of 2 in the s p and across the nasdaq today. Get right into it with todays panel. Joining me now is forbes media chairman steve forbes. Michael santoli and Sharon Epperson<\/a> and with us for more to the conference is fast money trader guy adami and welcome one and all. Steve forbes, kick us off here. I have to know what youre making of all of this. I have a guess. It just shows Central Banks<\/a> around the world and the Federal Reserve<\/a> really dont know what theyre doing. They think suppressing Interest Rates<\/a> help the economies and its hurt credit flows to small and new businesses which is where you get the job creation from. We just had one of the best u. S. Jobs report in years. 321,000 jobs last month. Everythings coming up roses. 1960s with a population less than half of what it is today you got many months in the early 6s with those kind of job creation number. Participation in the tank. Median incomes still in the tank. We are in the sixth year of a recovery and not above in terms of incomes where we are six years ago . My goodness. Men in the private sector are fired for that kind of performance. What do you think about the decision today, mike . The way the market played it is context, s p 500 down 100 in 11 days. Rally back to fridays levels. Very oversold market and looking for a reason to celebrate something and i think the message of the statement that it was that the fed will ease gently along in the process of raising Interest Rates<\/a> next year is well received and i also think theres some good news to be taken out of the fact that janet yellen did not rely on the Lower Oil Price<\/a> to say we dont have to worry about inflation. That gains credibility saying you dont ignore oil on the upside and the downside. So to me it was a reflex move, oversold market and basically nothing really much changed from a week ago. Whats the take away, sharon, for the average investor here . Looking at the trader perspective with the volatility of the press conference, i think Retail Investors<\/a> should be aware that were going to see a lot more volatility in 2015 regardless of when the rate hike occ occurs. Of course, watching very carefully what happens in april and june and consumers need to be ready to happen eventually. This is the time to refinance that mortgage at lows we have seen, lowest rates since may of 2013. This is the time to pay off that Credit Card Debt<\/a> and the rates are going to start to go up and the average Consumer Needs<\/a> to be aware of that. Lets dip out of this for a second and waiting for Quarterly Results<\/a> of oracle. Josh lipton has the details for us. Hi, josh. Kelly, yeah, oracle just reporting here. 69 cents on 9. 6 billion. Wall street looking for 68 cents on 9. 5 billion and a beat there on the bottom and the top. Just quickly, kelly, looking through here, software and cloud revenue, 7. 3 billion. New cloud bookings up 140 . New Software Licenses<\/a> 2 billion and hardware at 1. 3 billion. Conference call kicks off at 5 00 p. M. Eastern and expecting calls of analysts about oracles move to the cloud as well as just a general state of i. T. Spending. On that call for head lines as they cross. Back to you. All right. Josh, thank you. Want to get some Quick Reaction<\/a> to the oracle shares up 3 after hours here, as well. Then back things out from that for a second and daniel ives in here. What is it that has oracle shares popping higher do you think . This is a step in the right direction given the disappointing numbers we have seen over the last few quarters and comes down to cloud. Thats putting fuel in the engine. Now you start to see investors going Glass Half Full<\/a> on oracle here and the key question is can they continue this to see the type of growth and go gins what we have seen a large cap tech . Softness in the hps, emcs. This is definitely good news we havent seen in a while from oracle. Up better than 4 , dan. Read through for the other companies you cover here . Positive. In terms of if oracle can have a good quarter, almost anyone can. Theyre the one that struggled the most. Its a good indicator of i. T. Spend in q4 and focus on cloud and if oracle with ellie son not as ceo to continue this sort of momentum going into next few quarters and a positive read for the environment. Dan, thank you. Good point there from dan ives and thats a look into whats happening in that piece of the market today but the view overall was decidedly positive. We had an s p 500 heat map up earlier and s p up 40 points today. Best gain in point terms in three years and pivot and bring in greg ipp in the meeting with janet yellen addressing the media taking questions and answers. If you had to guess why the market had a strong performance, what would you say is the reason . I think theres everybody thought the fed was going to make the move, open the door to high Interest Rates<\/a>. And they did. But they did it in such a reluctant way and replacing it with patience and in the statement saying that it meant the same thing as considerable time. And then janet yellen in the press conference going further and saying, patient means no rate increase for a couple of meetings. They basically bent over backwards to make it as painless process as possible. They gave the market the spoonful of medicine and lots and lots of sugar to help it go down and appropriately so, you know. She really played down the affect of inflation on oil prices and look at the forecasting. They have inflation coming down and unemployment dropping a lot and run with unemployment very low which is and allow that to happen and great for the economy and the markets and largely because theyre still so low on inflation. I want to get back to that in a second. Guy, someone was saying seeing a bounce in energy names, maybe a bid in oil s. That why we had a good shout out, man ill shout out to him yeah . Huge shoutout. Steve forbes brought up a lot of good things. Two things today. Look at fedex today on what was a remarkable day in the broader market. Stocks down. Janet yellen said the move in oil was transitory. Right . That was the word she used i think. So the biggest commodity of the face of the earth is cut in half in four months and that is somehow transitory . That to me is emblematic of the problem with them in the first place. Thats so preposterous to me an its scary. If nobody is scared but me maybe im the problem. What do you think . Clarify what she meant by that. Referring the drop in oil she didnt mean the drop in oil is transitory ie oil to rally back but the affect on inflation is transitory and downplay the notion that this decline doesnt that imply that well, i mean, all right. Play semantics but that implies she theres some bounce coming. The bottom line is, again, the largest commodity and mankind is cut in half. Theres something structurally going on so to downplay that to me is either not that inte intelligent she didnt down play it at all. She said that this does have implications for the United States<\/a> and they are on net positive. That is not down playing it but it does put a positive rather than negative spin on the implications. My question is whether or not the inflation targets is hit the fed is trying to achieve based on the fall in oil prices and the belief by many that we have not seen near a bottom yet. If this continues to fall, how will we get to what some of the inflation targets or spots may be there . Well, look. If you look at the forecast, they do not expect to hit the 2 inflation target for three years. And its clearly something that continues the bother some people on the committee. Thats one reason of one dovish dissent. Yellen went back to the point over and over again. She thinks that if you have an economy thats steadily better, unemployment falling below the normal natural rate and the publics expectations of inflation stable, those things together will drag inflation back to 2 and personally skeptical that it will happen but she and the colleagues seem pretty confident. Mike . Perhaps some kind of a floor on core inflation and i do think we have to keep in mind that ben bernanke pill ried trying to sort to speak ignore food and Energy Prices<\/a> pushing cpi up. 3 . Exactly. He said European Bank<\/a> raised rates. Focused on the core and pilliried for maybe saying could you concede that point or no . No. The feds policies have slowed the economy down. We should have a much more growth than we have had. Arent we the base accelerated each year. Come on. If you are batting. 200 in baseball an you get it up after 6 seasons to point 250, thats not a satisfactory performance and the fed does not realize the policies were hurtful, not helpful. And then one of the reasons why theyre so waffling about raising rates is looking around the world and thinking if it continues we may have to go back to what they think is easing which is actually tightening. Central banks thinkease ing but theyre tightening around the world and like doctors in the days of old bleeding patients and wondering why the patient doesnt get better. We have a quick earnings alert with dominic chu. Dom . Here, watching whats happening with jabil circuit. Moving higher. Did beat on the earningse es estimates and the shares up by about 8 in the after market trades. Keeping an eye on it. Back over to you. Quite a move. Thank you very much. All right. Coming up here, the fed fueling the big rally. How should you be investing in the volatile market . Blackrock bond guru and others join us straight ahead. President obama taking a major step to noshlallize relations with cuba. Potentially opening up trade and investment in the communist nation and could have an impact on Many American<\/a> businesses from airlines to baseball. Steve forbes herishing to weigh in. You may be surprised by what he has to say. Youre watching cnbc. Welcome back. What a day it is today in the markets. Looks like actually a recordbreaking day not in terms of closing levels and last couple of weeks taken us below that but the dow adding about 288 points. S p adding about 40 which is the best point gain in 3 years and granted the higher we move the les those points matter in percentage terms but still for the nasdaq which had been really beaten down of late. More reaction to this market day in light of the feds meeting with rick reiter and ron kashevski. Rick, the central question for you here is where does the 10year go from here, for example . We were shocked yesterday flirting with the 2 level. What happens now . So we think rates will drift higher. The hard thing of rates significantly higher particularly in the long end of the yield curve is such tremendous demand internationally and when you look at where german bunds or japanese jgbs its hard. We think the fed signals some change in guidance, the yield curve will flatten like this afternoon and but we think the 10year will drift higher and hard to move significantly higher. Great point. Ron, we had criticism of janet yellen for not talking about the financial sectors exposure to the drop in oil prices, for example, and maybe to some of the Global Concerns<\/a> ala russia. What would you say are those risks in the system from the declines . Overlooking them . Are there areas of concern to highlight . Look, i think the biggest concern and the one the fed is doing a good job of combatting is deflation. It is a deflationary concern. Plunging oil prices, great for the consumer and gail force wind with respect to deflationary concerns. Equities are undervalued in any Growth Scenario<\/a> and deflation would cause serious problems. How likely do you think that is, ron . Sounds like rick here doesnt see deflation on the table. Correct me if im wrong. Thats correct. No doubt a lower inflation range and the goal of 2 is darn hard to hit and so much growth momentum and lagged effect of wage pressure. Europe is a concern. And asias a concern. Ron . Look, look. Look at the market. The 10year tips, Inflation Expectation<\/a> is 1. 6, down from 220 this summer. Thats a huge move and wages, really no increase in real wages. We have had wage income and hours are up. We dont have deflation around the corner but the major risk is deflation today just like it was inflation back in the 80s. Ron, steve forbes here. Lets get away from that loaded word deflation. Use contractionary policies or trends around the world. Do you think what you see in terms of contraction around the world almost everywhere any relation to Central Banks<\/a> are doing or not doing . Well, look. I think Central Banks<\/a> are dealing with a slack in demand. What is oil . Plunging oil prices really is a you can argue is a lack of worldwide demand. So, you know, i understand the deflation is a bad word today and i think thats what were combatting just like volcker to keep real Interest Rates<\/a> above the rate of inflation today fed funds needs to stay below core inflation rate longer than we think. Rick . So, you know, i would argue that theres no doubt, i think what people confuse a bit is why are prices decelerating as they have been and Global Growth<\/a> no doubt continues to be moderate. That being said, if you lock at the demand function relative to supply of energy talking about a very, very different pair dime and look at demand and how much its come off from a global perspective its come off and moderately. Big difference is a supply glut. You have clearly one that is going to be its a Different Energy<\/a> price range for a long time. Theres a different Production Capacity<\/a> than historically. We went from 2013 the treasury market really panicked proactively about just the prospect of short rates higher. Now we are a point where the 10year today didnt react radically. Is there a chance that the market today is not really conditioned for that midyear rate hike potentially . It is an incredible dynamic. If you go back to october and think about when the fed, the statement was hawkish, equity market did well for a period after that and when the minutes, prior minutes more dovish and equity market after october 8th trading down and 1 funds rate is extraordinarily low. In fact, we tracked it at this sort of payroll growth, a 6 6month average, the average funds rate over 6 . Zero. The markets can handle a 1 funds rate and seeing it in front of our eyes. The markets handle 475 basis points. Equities are undervalued with earnings. Again, if you reduce the equity risk premium reducing earnings per share thats where we have a problem. Otherwise buy equities. So, ron, is that you would tell a retiree listening to this, low Interest Rates<\/a> for a very long time and even if theres a hike sometime in the middle of 2015, what do they do . Well, look. Im not saying its deflationary. The concern is deflation. I think you will have an Interest Rate<\/a> increase next year and not the liftoff. Its the pace of rate increases. So look. If im a retiree, im not pan panicking here but saying what the fed did today, i think the statement deals with deflationary concerns. Understood. Ron, thank you so much. Rick, as well, rick, we might have to bring you back for the greenspan conundrum if the long end doesnt move amid all of this. Now a quick market flash. Hi, dom. Kelly, we have kirby corporation, provides marine transportation and Diesel Engine<\/a> here in the United States<\/a> and moving lower to 6 after hours after cutting the Fourth Quarter<\/a> and fullyear guidance due to a sharp drop rather in oil prices. Again, those shares down again by 6 . Light trade, 8,000 shares traded so far in the after hours back over to you. Damage from that decline, thank you. A ton of other news today outside of the fed and wall street and historical day here in the u. S. Is president obamas move to open relations with cuba a good move . Well talk about that next. Plus, its being pulled by more movie chains after threats of violence and more may follow suit. Will sony release the interview on Christmas Day<\/a> . And are theaters making the right decision not to show the movie . Your chance to weigh in. Once there was a girl who always mixed and matched. Even in her laundry room. With downy unstopables for longlasting scent. And infusions for softness. She created her own mix, match, magic. Downy, wash in the wow. President obama shocking the world today by announcing plans to normalize u. S. Relations with cuba after more than half a century. John harwood is at the white house with details. John, maybe more surprising than the news the news that it wasnt leaked first. Reporter exactly, kelly. You know, he may be a lame duck president , the party may have just been walloped in the 2014 midterm elections but president obama today was able to announce three things. The release of a u. S. Contractor alan gross held for five years in cuba. A swap of spies who were imprisoned in both the u. S. And in cuba. And his decision to fully normalize diplomatic relations overturning a 50year policy that began with president john f. Kennedy. Though this policy has been rooted in the best of intentions, no other nation joins us in imposing these sanctions and its had little effect. Beyond providing the cuban government with a rational for restrictions on its people. Today, cuba is still governed by the castros and the communist party that came to power half a century ago. Neither the american nor cuban people are well served by 0 rigid policy rooted in events that took place before most of us were born. Reporter but the image of raul castro, the cuban president in military garb hailing the same decision on Cuban Television<\/a> riled opponents of the decision like senator marco rubio of florida. The cuban government in exchange for all of these concessions that the who is has now made has said nothing or done nothing to advance democracy. No freedom of the press or organization. There will be no elections, no democratic opening, nothing. Zero. All they have done here is make it easier for the castro regime and their system of government to be permanent forever on the island of cuba. This president has to be the worst negotiator we have ever had. Reporter now, senator rubio whos of cuban dissent vowed the try to block funds for the establishment of an embassy, u. S. Embassy in cuba. Josh earnest, the White House Press<\/a> secretary later said he did not think it was necessarily the case that the administration needed additional funding to open the embassy. But the one thing we know the administration does need from congress is a law to be passed in order to end the embargo that president obama wants to end which also began in the kennedy administration. One things clear, though. Politics of this are changing not just nationally but in florida where the anticastro sentiment is so intense. President obama carried florida in two president ial elections, kelly. And john, thank you very much. Thats exactly what we want to do now is check in on just how exactly this news is going over down in florida. But also, asking our panelists here, steve forbes, your response . It sounds as if the Republican Party<\/a> for the most part upset or am i reading too much into what we heard from a couple of senators there . Well, senator rubio. I think has a right. Not changing the regime one wit. As the president said, the rest of the world is trading with cuba. Had the opportunity to invest in cuba and time they start to exercise freedom, get a little bit of an Exchange Market<\/a> with the and the euro, the government clamps down. So this regime is going to no more change than the north korean regime. Senator rubio is right and try to prop up the regime and again the president is looking like hes weak. He gives it all away so worry less about cuba. Worry if he gives it away with the negotiations on iran on the nuclear program. Youre a free market guy. What about the argument and people make which is that you open up cuba and trade more with the u. S. And that becomes the incentive they have had a thriving tourist industry because of investment of canada and europe for years. That money doesnt go to the workers but the government. They get worthless currency in return. Its a good point, mike. It is. Look. I dont think theres a big swing factor here in play in terms of the policies there or really economically for us or the world or businesses here but i think it was an opportunistic move and russia is compromised and so lets do something here that does seem like a sharon . The timing struck me why it was done today and perhaps some to do with elsewhere around the world and what happened with the Falling Oil Prices<\/a> and just the timing was very interesting. And the fact that it was kept quiet and not leaked as you said earli earlier. Right, steve, there are people making a trade on an etf cuba, tons of volume. Speculation, of course, is that you start to open up cuba, talk about the ability to get in at 1950 prices in the u. S. And ride that whole wave of innovation and growth. Is everybody making the trade betting in the wrong direction here . Well, the key words you said were critical. Opening up. The government controls this rigidly. Any time, again, theyll sacrifice Economic Growth<\/a> if they think its going to imperil their regime. They wont ease up at all. They have plenty of opportunity to do it in the past. Everyone else is open. Didnt change that regime one lick. We have though in the last couple of years is raul castro that talked more of privatization of parts of the economy. Does that show any softening, any indication that this is the beginning of a process of opening up . The only thing thats going to change a regime like that is going broke and no source of funds at all. After the berlin wall fell in 1989 russia cut off their subsidies in 91. That regime put the island through a horrific downturn recession and not easing up even if it was misery for their people. The reaction and we were hoping to get an on the ground perspective as well and read already online how people for example in the heavily cuban miami feel about this. News reports indicated those that those that left cuba in protest and feel as though to some extent the life question is called into question and going to quote unquote normalize relations with cuba. Thats right. They know the regime better than most people because they have lived through the horrors of it or parents have and grandparents have. And again, this regime made no change at all. Maybe allowing us for Major League Baseball<\/a> players from cuba. Very nice for the mlb. But for the cuban people as a whole, no real change. Thats the sad part. Typical american. Embargo in the threat of cuba and soviet union and we happily deal with china without asking for very many concessions. Seems like an outdated policy. Is it, though . We have to jump but have we gotten too soft . In other words, because we now depend so heavily on china, have we missed an opportunity to be more aggressive, to stand for the values and to the rest of the countries including cuba . Its soft or pragmatic. I dont know how you come down on that but yeah. Its obviously inconsistent, though. For one thing. Thats for sure. Thank you. Oil gaining back some ground today. Coming up, my next guest says anybody who claims to know where prices are going is a liar or delusional. David rosenberg will explain why in a moment. Tomorrow, russian president Vladimir Putin<\/a> making a speech on the state of the countrys collapsing economy. A preview of this potentially marketmoving event coming up. vo rush hour around here starts at 6 30 a. M. On the nose. But for me, it starts with the opening bell. And the rush i get, lasts way more than an hour. announcer at scottrade, we share your passion for trading. Thats why weve built powerful technology to alert you to your next opportunity. Because at scottrade, our passion is to power yours. Russian president Vladimir Putin<\/a> will hold an Important Press<\/a> conference. In the wake of plunging oil prices. We have the details and what to hear tomorrow. He gave the annual speech to parliament and spoke about how important this was, how important the context was. Now, its unprecedented because of the Economic Situation<\/a> that russia finds itself in. Take a look at this. This video is from russias channel 1, biggest stateowned channel in russia basically running a hollywoodlike preview of the speech complete with a sound bite of one of the putins interviews, quote, the bear never asks for permission. Well, not asking for permission, especially coming to crimea. That is, of course, one of the ripple effects of a situation right now. Sources and experts i spoke with say tomorrow expect putin to announce or at least get more specific about financial reforms and measures to stabilize the currency and the economy. Perhaps even announce or hint at a change within his cabinet. Prime minister medvedevs name is thrown by and the head of the central bank and they say its a way to pin the blame on the Economic Situation<\/a> on these folks even though we all know hes the one making the decisions. Where, of course, expecting him to place some blame on the United States<\/a> and europe, but the tone might be a little bit different this time considering that hes really backed himself into a corner and we could hear him sort of extending a hand to the west reiterating that russia doesnt want isolated economically. Now, i spoke with an oligarch saying the crisis is deep and will last for a listening time and hoping that whatever he says will not make the markets worse and they say that the bottom is yet to come and one of many reasons why this press conference is so important and why were watching it so closely. Thank you. My next guest says no one knows where oil is going next and anyone that claims to know is either a liar or delusional. His words. David rosenberg joins me now. Good see you again. And i guess just begin here if we could since we heard about russia with the impact that crisis is having on Financial Markets<\/a> here. Right. Well, i should just say that theres a lesson to be learned about what i wrote that you quoted which you dont publish anything after three glasses of pinot noir. That aside, i think that, you know, this Oil Price Situation<\/a> is interesting because nobody questions what the driving forces were that brought us over 100 a barrel to begin with last summer. And those forces were never sustainable to begin with. This transcends, you know, the market being in a physical surplus globally. The fact that opec isnt meeting until june is Something Else<\/a> that we know since ultimately they could be the swing producer like they were when they cut by over 4 Million Barrels<\/a> and helped put in the low back in the spring of 2009. But what nobody talks about is financial demand for oil. Right, right. What is the financial demand for oil, david . How much did that continue to the runup now and getting out no wonder were seeing the other side of it. Well, you know, whats interesting is that, you know, we had the first 25 decline and before this opec meeting oil at 75 and then everything that happened since then so i think a lot of speculators expecting saudi options. Yep. They peaked at 500,000 contracts and now down to 280,000 and demand destruction on the financial side and principle cause for the latest, you know, swoon in the price of oil. But, you know, the reality is that were not going to get a fundamental bottom. Whatever that price is until the net spec long contracts eliminated altogether or 100,000 contracts of flat. I did try to estimate the price of oil would happen in that environment and try to answer the question, you know, without being disingenuous and you could talk about 40 to 45 by the time those contracts are out of the system. Take a quick listen today Ceo Jeff Immelt<\/a> of ge had this to say about the illtimed shift being an oilbased business. Take a listen. We have modeled the business at 60 a barrel. I like the business a lot. Were going to go through a cycle in the short term. But look. This was a business before thanksgiving that needed better execution around the big projects. All the ceos in the industry looking at the supply chain saying the costs have to come down and do a better job of lowering the breakeven cost and been on this path more than a year and i look at it as an opportunity. We think we have hedged the upside and downside appropriately. So david, sum it all up for us. Whats at stake for u. S. Companies and economy if the price settles where you mentioned. You know what . Kelly, thiss the thing. Im not saying necessarily settle there for long period of time. I think that that would be a real what we would call a capitulation low. Not like we had back in 2009. We got, you know, below 40 temporarily and didnt exactly stay there. I think that longer term probably settle somewhere in that 65 to 70 range and not saying that 40 to 45 is anymore permanent than 100plus was. And so, in answer to your question, look. Like any other shock, kelly, theres winners and losers and we know the winners and the losers. Losers are producers and the services and the manufacturing that cater to the Energy Industry<\/a> and the winners are practically everybody from consumers with a pickup in the purchasing power and in the Manufacturing Sector<\/a> and cost base goes down. Remember that oil fundamentally is something we consume. It is a cost. Right. Actually a classic table of the u. S. Economy and you do a real dynamic analysis and you look at who the losers are, winners are, you can counter the multiplier impacts, the u. S. Gdp comes in plus point five to the better out of this and not saying monumental but a net positive and not negative. On the same page as janet yellen on that one. Thanks for being here. Sony hack offering gossip and now a threat against moviegoers and now more than more theaters are choosing not to release the nil m on Christmas Day<\/a>. Do you think theyre making the right decision . Weigh in right now cnbc. Com vote and tomorrow closing bell live from the yale ceo summit. Exclusively here. Dont miss the show. We have bob diamond. All coming up. Welcome back. A quick market flash from dominic chu. Kelly, we are watching shares of ak steel high tore the tune of 6 after the company gave guidance above wall street expectations. This due to lower materials costs so they cite things like Falling Oil Prices<\/a>, also lower iron ore, carbon scrap and energy costs in the Fourth Quarter<\/a> compared. Those shares as a result ak steel up 6 after hours. And there you have it. Just after hearing from dave rosenberg. National release of comedy the interview in serious jeopardy as the play jor theater chains say they wont be showing it on Christmas Day<\/a>. Julia boorstin joins us from los angeles. How can they release it at all now . Reporter sources said that sony will move forward and without the five biggest thats in smaller theaters or offering it through video on demand. With the theaters pulling, sony could be freed of restrictions and could stream it much sooner than originally planned. Selling the movie via vod is primary way to earn back the 42 million spent to make it and tens of millions of dollars more to market it. Its too soon to quantify just how much sony will lose on the entire hack attack. Take a look at sonys stock decline since the hack was first reported at the end of november. Of course, a cost to rebuilding the network, dealing with lost Employee Data<\/a> and facing two classaction lawsuits. Some estimates say those costs could be as much as 100 million. The New York Times<\/a> premier of the new york premier of the interview is canceled and tonights screening in detroit, baltimore, cincinnati and austin. The National Association<\/a> of theater owners says the members are working closely with security and Law Enforcement<\/a> agencies and are, quote, encouraged that the authorities have made progress in their nchings. Kelly . All right. Thank you very much. We want everybody to tell us what you think. Did the chains make the right decision . You can vote right now. For more we bring in Entertainment Consultant<\/a> Katherine Arnold<\/a> and worked as a Film Producer<\/a> and executive. I want to point out its early minutes and more than 90 of people say its a wrong decision. What do you say . Well, it is a really tough call, kelly. Theres financial implications and also censorship implications. We are denying the creative freed freedom. Is the next step to pull jon stewart back or tell seth rogan not to make a movie like this . Its a tough question. Would the chains, katherine, be liable and cover terrorism like i mean, to what extent are they making a decision they have to make and to what extent is this more an issue of free peach . Well, the legal and the security implications are not really my area but i would assume that the lawyers looking very closely at the liability they could have if anyone did get injured. I think the real question is to make sure that the theaters are safe and people enjoy the christmas viewing habits as they always would every year. Yeah. This is a very tough call for sony as to what to do but what do you about a serious movie of north korea or political movie and not a satirical film . Pull that, as well . That sets a precedent and the reason youre seeing the poll aenl 90 of the view earls saying, no, i dont think it was the right idea but the question then becomes now sony in a better position of off the hook now they dont have to have tv advertising. They can pull that. They can not have those dollars to spend. I wonder if the 90 of people who think its wrong decision and would show up to watch this film. I think they want the opportunity and theyre not looking at the forgone revenue and the estimates 50 million or 60 million over 4 weeks and pl. But you have to consider all the other movies shown during christmas. If youre afraid of something happening, i do think you have understandably skittish theater owners given that there have been random attacks in theaters before. And its a function of what small risk were willing to bear versus others for the exchange of watching a comedy. What is the right call here . It was a cowardly decision. They can make all the rationales they want, but a barbaric small regime like north korea can bring down a Major Entertainment<\/a> conglomerate and have millions of moviegoers not go to the theater because theater owners are afraid, i mean everyone now knows. This underscores the narrative. This country is perceived as weak. Than have a giant showing in bryant park, for example. You can say it right here that youre going to screen this movie in new york city for anyone and everyone who wants to say this. Ill say this. If its at any theater, ill go to it. I wasnt originally going to go to it. But i will now as a protest. And buy extra popcorn as well. There you go. Well leave it right there. 88 as we close this poll of people say it was the wrong decision. 87 there for theaters not to show the chain. Thats coming up on Christmas Day<\/a>. New diplomatic relations with cuba. That was todays Big International<\/a> story on cnbc com. Marco rubios comments that congress will not support an embassy in cuba caught the attention of our digital audience. If it attracted enough visitors after the dow was up nearly 300 points after that fed meeting. Well be right back. Heres a question for you as nations develop over the next 25 years, the world will have almost twice as many cars. How much fuel will be needed to power them . About the same as today . 50 more . 100 more . The answer is. About the same as today. By 2040, advances in fuels and vehicles could enable about 75 better fuel economy than today. Take the energy quiz round 2. Energy lives here. A huge rally after the feds Statement Today<\/a> that had cnbc. Com on fire this afternoon. Allen joins us with the hot list. Quite a reversal from the hot stories driving us for the last couple of days here. Yeah, it was. Still kind of the same effect. I kind of had a trifecta of fire today. The market coverage with the same people piling in, this time to find out why are we rallying. From that into the fed coverage too. People piling into the live blog of janet yellen. Some thought she got a little snippy with the meetings thing. And cuba, a big cuba lift that got a lot of fire too. So it was a threeway burnout today on the website, kelly. Plenty more for people to check after hours. Thank you. We have more on this day. Final thoughts with our panel when we come right back. New cadillac. My baby drove up in a brand new cadillac. Look here, daddy, im never coming back. Discover the new spirit of cadillac and the best offers of the season. Lease this 2015 standard collection srx for around 359 a month. Welcome back. Some breaking news on the interview now. Julia boorstin with the latest. Hi, julia. Thats right. Big news here. Sony announcing in a statement to nbc news that they are no longer planning to release the movie the interview on december 25th, saying in light of the decision, the majority of our inhibitors not to show the film the interview. We decided not to move forward with the planned release. We understand our partners decision and share the interest in the safety of employees and theaters goers. Theyre deeply saddened that this brade brazen effort to suppress the distribution of a movie do damage to our company, our employees and the american public. We stand by the right to Free Expression<\/a> and are extremely disappointed by this outcome. Really unprecedented in the film industry. Julia, stay right there. I want to bring in the panel on this as well. Julia, can you give us any indication as to the language they used. They say they wont release it on december 25th. That doesnt mean theyre not going to release it altogether, does it . It seems like theyre certainly leaving that door open and they could do some video on demand release, as i mentioned earlier in the hour. And the theater owners themselves while they say theyre cancelling the planned december 25th release have not ruled it out entirely. It seems like the focus is allowing Law Enforcement<\/a> officials, the fbi, the department of Homeland Security<\/a> to investigate exactly the nature of the threats and whether or not theyre credible. We heard from nato on this. Yes. We dont know what this means in terms of streaming this movie, right . They may still be able to do that, while they wont recoup all of the losses for putting this movie out. Thats something with two stars who are very, very present on social media. It will be very interesting to see how they now remarket this film. But where go ahead, julia . They havent made any announcements yet about streaming premium video on demand. But thats certainly an area to watch. I think the theater chains are willing to have this be i think the lesson is that the selfinterests of a corporation often does not go according to any principle. Shocking news there. Thank you for joining me this afternoon. Straight over to fast money with melissa lee and the gang. Live from the Nasdaq Market<\/a> site in new york citys times square, this is fast money. Im melissa lee. These interest traders tonight. Steve grasso, dan nathan, karen finerman, and guy adami. And yes, youre listening to the song patience right now. It is that word that led the dow and the s p to the best days of the year today. The Federal Reserve<\/a> saying it will be patient when it comes to raising rates. And oil showing signs of life again today, though its down 40 over the last three months. Our own Steve Liesman<\/a> asked fed chief janet yellen for her take on the oil drop","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia800502.us.archive.org\/5\/items\/CNBC_20141217_200000_Closing_Bell\/CNBC_20141217_200000_Closing_Bell.thumbs\/CNBC_20141217_200000_Closing_Bell_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240621T12:35:10+00:00"}