TAKE FIVE: Toe to Toe With CNBC's Charlie Gasparino
By Marisa Guthrie -- Broadcasting & Cable, 3/31/2008 6:30:00 AM
CNBC’s Charlie Gasparino doesn’t pull punches. A former amateur pugilist, Gasparino’s outsize on-air persona has gotten him in multiple verbal kerfuffles of late. He’s tangled with guests—notably former New York lieutenant governor Betsy McCaughey Ross—and even sent an uncalled-for haymaker at colleague and Squawk Box contributor Dennis Kneale. CNBC anchor Erin Burnett has invoked his name as a noun. "Pulling a Gasparino" is to shout down an opponent.
But Gasparino says it’s all part of the theater of live television. And he hasn’t exactly been discouraged. Says network spokesperson Brian Steel, "Charlie always has an interesting perspective, and he is not shy about expressing it."
Gasparino may not be the most elegant take-down pundit, but the former print reporter (Newsweek, The Wall Street Journal), who came to CNBC in 2005, gets the job done and makes noise doing it. He also just sealed a deal for his third book—The Sellout, about the collapse of Bear Stearns—with a handsome advance from HarperCollins. Gasparino talks to B&C’s Marisa Guthrie about his attitude, Wall Street greed and L’Affaire Spitzer.
So what’s with all the verbal scuffles? Dennis Kneale seemed genuinely offended when you joked that he was also a client of a high-priced prostitution ring. Should you tone it down a notch?
When you do live TV, sparks fly. That’s what’s good about it. It’s impromptu and we’re both big enough boys to forget about it when it happens.
The subprime collapse and the pending acquisition of Bear Stearns by JP Morgan Chase have certainly kept you and everyone else at CNBC busy. How has the way you’re reporting it changed?
We’ve been doing it nonstop for a year now. There is a premium here on breaking news. The way the world is working, these mega-media empires, News Corp. with Fox, GE with NBC, Bloomberg, we’re seeing the convergence of skill sets of reporters. To be a reporter who can actually write it, who can go on the air and report it and analyze it, that’s the reporter of the future because all of these news organizations are placing a premium on convergence. This is what CNBC is trying to do with CNBC.com: write it, get on the Web, and the Web traffic drives viewers to TV.
But many print reporters haven’t been able to make the transition to TV and in fact have resisted it.
The thing with reporting is, the more you do it, the better reporter you become. But most want to do less of it as they get older.
Your third book, The Sellout, is about the Bear Stearns debacle. How did Bear come so close to bankruptcy?
They rolled the dice on all this risk and sold out their shareholders and their principles. Bear Stearns was one of the most risk-averse companies in the world. [Legendary former CEO of Bear] Ace Greenberg’s legacy was the stock trade. His philosophy was, take the loss on the trade and move on. It wasn’t a risk-taking culture; it made a lot of money. [But then] it didn’t make as much money as others, and they started rolling the dice.
So when can we expect to see this book?
They want me to do it tomorrow but I’ve got a day job, so I’m going to do it in a year.
You used to cover politics, so you became familiar with Eliot Spitzer. What’s your take on his stunning implosion?
I always thought something would happen because I’ve seen his dark side. When you get into it with him, he’s a really smart, engaging guy. It’s the same with [former New York Stock Exchange head] Dick Grasso. I never saw Grasso as this disgusting, money-grubbing guy. The problem is, a lot of journalists reduce things to black and white. And that’s the same thing with Spitzer. He reminded me of Jimmy Swaggart in many ways.
-
Date: December 10, 2008
Re: 13 Reason You Must Investigate the Not So Permanent Fund
Public Letter
To Governor Palin
And State Legislature Members:
 1. Losing over $12 Billon Dollars in a one year period after being
warned 30 times regarding errors in investment strategy should
prompt an immediate review.
2. The Permanent Fund Manager’s declarations that the Fund was
diversified when the Fund had greater than 30% tied to the value of real
estate, and the managers’ belief that real estate would always go up,
was not prudent or the Fund certainly wasn’t diversified. This was also
pointed out numerous times.   This violates the rules on Diversification.
3. You may not be able to pay dividends this year or the next without
invading the principal. This is a violation of the Permanent Fund. You
need to protect  Jay Hammond’s vision.
4. The Permanent Fund will lose another 25% based on its flawed asset
allocation model based on inflation.   The economy is in Deflation.
5. The Fund balance sheet was and is probably still overstated by
billions.
6. The Permanent Fund has less in it than  when the current managers
took over years ago. Why is that prudent?
7. No oversight of the APFC has allowed the Fund to pay
advisors\friends  millions in fees.  Measuring performance against
simple treasuries all of your Advisors have failed miserably. You’ve
allowed someone to oversee$ 40 billion and pay out millions in fees
without any independent oversight . This is big trouble. Hiring ex-
employees as advisors is not a good practice and is like Enron.  This
must stop.  Fees tied to performance should be a must.
8. $ 10 Million paid in fixed income fees for results that
underperformed a simple US Treasury by 75%  begs to ask why. The
Fund was advised to buy treasuries over 30 times.  Why didn’t we? Or
why don’t we?
9. Deflation is a long term economic event. The rules for investing are
quite  different than investing in an inflationary period. The asset
model used by the Fund is obviously broken, but is still being used by
the Fund managers, Why is that prudent?
10. The United States may be entering a long term recession and
perhaps depression. Preservation of capital is critical. The Fund has not
been positioned correctly. We will lose even greater amounts than any
of you can possibly imagine.
11. The Fund should have closer to $50 billion secured by buying
treasuries last year, rather $28 billion. Managers and advisors ignored
warnings.  Why would they do this unless there is some personal
benefit , negligence or incompetence?
12. Did the Advisors and managers hold the same investment positions
as the Fund? If not, do their personal investment show a different
strategy from which they benefit?
13.  The Dividend will be lost for years causing many Alaskans to
suffer and help push Alaska into a deep recession.
A Simple Reminder:
It was the people of this state who made the monumental decision in
1976 to 
begin saving a portion of our one-time oil wealth. That decision has 
proven visionary. Now it is time for the people of Alaska to make
another 
decision if they want to limit spending and protect the Fund for the
future. Please help.
You must change the management, eliminate the advisors, scrap the
asset allocation model based on inflation, and mitigate our losses now.
Replace the entire bond portfolio with Zero coupon treasuries. Most of
all start thinking after you admit the basic facts.  There are two sides to
every trade. Why is Alaska Permanent Fund on the wrong side?  See
who has made money to cause this. Your lack of action cost Alaskans
billions. Further delay will destroy the Fund for decades and for the
next generation of Alaskans. Please act quickly to review and make
these changes. 
This just is my opinion,
Bob Andres
P O Box 876189
Wasilla, Alaska 99687
357 8760
robert andres - 12/13/2008 6:08:00 PM EST -
Gasparino is the only person on CNBC I've heard echo the absurd "Obama recession" remarks of the Rush Limbaugh's of the world. I enjoy him much of the time, but I have to admit, I got very weary of his "the market is down because of Obama's likely economic and tax policies" line. If I wanted to watch Faux News, I'd turn the channel.
ron powell - 12/1/2008 4:06:00 PM EST -
Gasparino is precisely what's wrong with CNBC in particular and 24-hour "news" channels in general: noise trumps information. Watching four disembodied heads simultaneously screaming at one another is no way to get facts. Nor is it remotely entertaining. That he considers himself a "reporter" is astonishing, because Gasparino has chosen to sell personality over fact. He can choose to blame his employers, but the untimate responsibility for Gasparino's insipid, unpleasant work lies with the "man" himself.
Donald Martin - 3/31/2008 4:57:00 PM EDT
A Few Rounds With CNBC Live Wire Gasparino
03/30/2008Cover Story: Shortfall Season at CNBC
11/30/2008Covering the Chaos on Wall Street
09/19/2008Bartiromo, Glick on Covering the Crisis
09/22/2008Inside Ailes' Plan To Blow Away CNBC
10/14/2007
VIEW ALL GALLERIES
