The Fox Business Network Does Not STAND A CHANCE

Author:
Publish date:

If you're like us, you like your ringtones with a side of nuts. Considering this penchant of ours, it should come as shock to exactly no one to hear that we will gladly be coughing up the $1.99 necessary to hear the sound of Jim Cramer's voice announcing our incoming calls. But which to choose? There's the Mad Money "Theme Song," which Deal Journal product tester Dennis Berman thinks sounds like "Dick Dale meets Queensryche." The "Boo-Yah," which after screaming "boo-yah," instructs you to "Pick up the phone" because you simply "Can't afford to miss this call." And, bringing it on home, “Cramer’s Favorite Sounds.” This is the money shot (/ringtone). First, the sound of a cash register opening. Then, the pronouncement, “Hey, I’m Cramer.” “Hallelujah” by gospel choir. “If you don’t pick up this call, I’m gonna (buzzer sound), because it could put you in the (voiced by a female with a suspiciously deep voice) ‘house of pleasure’ (back to Cramer) and make you Mad Money!” It's obnoxious. It's crass. It doesn't really make any sense. It basically ensures anyone within earshot will rip your skin off. In other words—text MAD3 to 26221 today.
Product Review: Jim Cramer’s Ring Tones [Deal Journal]
Mad Money Ringtones [CNBC]

Related

Does The British Business Lady Who Just Felt Really Passionately About Her Clients Having Drinks, Cigarettes, And Pet Names Deserve A Second Chance?

Gang, something's come up in across the pond that needs our immediate attention. I'll get right to it: at issue is whether or not "high powered financial adviser" Amanda Daughters should be allowed to have her job back at Aqua Financial Solutions, the firm she founded and was fired from by the chairman a couple years back. She's currently appealing the decision but ahead of hearing what an employment tribunal has to say, why not give Daughters a trial by jury of her peers? Here's the rub: On January 22, 2010, Daughters left the office to sit down with a couple clients at an off-site meeting place (a bar). Naturally, she got there a few (4) hours early to have a bunch (12*) of drinks. So far, so good. When the clients arrived, one ordered a "spritzer," which was not to Daughters' liking, which would explain why she proceeded to "berate" the woman to the point of tears. Then Daughters had a few more drinks. At this point, things apparently got "hazy" for AD who, while she can't recall much, remembers thinking that making the client cry was "not unduly serious," as the woman accepted her apology. Then Daughters had a few more drinks. Around this time, she "dragged the other client outside to have a cigarette, even though he was a non-smoker" and called him a cunt (which despite her obviously having meant as a joke was received as "shocking and offensive"). Forty** drinks later, Daughters took herself home and despite being more or less black out drunk, had this weird feeling she'd done something she'd be embarrassed about the next day and called up hr chairwoman to let her know she'd "fucked up again and offended a client." Having been there before, Daughters also sent an email to the client the following morning to say "I hope you can forgive me." Unfortunately, the client and the chairwoman couldn't, which resulted in Daughters's firing for "gross misconduct." And while Big D realizes maybe she should have done a few things differently, she's not in agreement a few drinks, a few tears, and a few "you're a cunt"s are necessarily grounds for dismissal. So! Does this lady deserve her job back? On the one hand, perhaps downing 75 drinks prior to and over the course of a client meeting is not the most professional way of conducting business. Okay. That's fair. On the other, she clearly possesses the type of self-awareness any employer would pay good money to have on staff, as evidenced by the "fucked again" call. Please weigh in now. Businesswoman sacked after complaining client drank spritzers [Telegraph] *Guessing. *Ball park.

Serious Business Network Brings In Big Guns For Facebook IPO

When you've made the executive decision to turn your business channel into the Facebook IPO Show, it can get difficult figuring out how to fill every second of airtime. Obviously there will be breathless coverage from every conceivable angle, a countdown clock, and segments on "the evolution of social media," "advice for Mark Zuckerberg," the emotions surrounding a delay in trading, venture capital's feelings about Facebook, "what's the deal with Facebook's private shares," how "Facebook makes its employees happy," "networking Facebook's ecosystem," Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook profile, and whether Facebook is "your friend or foe." But with the tech analyst who agreed weeks in advance to have Mark Zuckerberg's face tattooed to his ass live on-air while network anchors discussed the significance it might have on how Facebook would close on its first day of trading backed out at the eleventh hour, CNBC found itself with a gaping hole in programming. Luckily, an unnamed producer who should win an Emmy for his or her work had the bright idea for this: In the above clip, CNBC travels to Mackay Elementary school in Tenafly, NJ to pick a bunch of 8 year-old analysts' minds on FB. Questions include: * "Is Facebook cool? If so, how long will it be cool for?" * "Would you rate Facebook a buy or a sell?" * "How much would you spend on one share of Facebook" (Answers include $150 and $1,000) * "Is it appropriate for a CEO to wear a hoodie? Would you take a guy in a suit more seriously?"