Berkshire Profit on Goldman Sachs Passes $2 Billion

[ByLoSellHi]

I'm not taking any sides here, but Warren's big bet on Goldman would have blown up badly had it not been for AIG's rescue by hundreds of billions in your donated tax dollars.

That's just fact.

Buffet probably paid a bunch of people off to ensure that transaction went through.

That's just a wild, speculative musing.

 

[Trader666]

ROTFLMAO!!! Do you see the irony in you sitting in your mother's basement, criticizing Buffett and Einstein as if you know better? Tell you what asskiss... when you have more money than Buffett and when you upstage Einstein as a scientist, get back to us.

Quote from atticus:

Buffett sold puts at 1500 and Einstein believed in Steady-State for much of his life.

 

[atticus]

Quote from Trader666:

ROTFLMAO!!! Do you see the irony in you sitting in your mother's basement, criticizing Buffett and Einstein as if you know better? Tell you what asskiss... when you have more money than Buffett and when you upstage Einstein as a scientist, get back to us.

Know better? Fuckstick, he sold 1517-strike SPX puts at 11% volatility. THE BUY of the Century. So yeah, I think Buffett would agree it was a monumentally bad trade. Not only did he BUY THE TOP of the market, he SOLD the historical-low print on volatility as well. His argument? That the puts were undervalued via BSM; IV > SV. That worked-out really well.

Perhaps if you had made it past the 8th grade you would've encountered the term, red-shift.

Your mom says hi.

 

[asiaprop]

you seem to have serious problems to comprehend that all that happened was that your interest was ill represented in Washington. If you have an issue about how your representative spoke for you in D.C. then take it up with him and not the rest of the world. Or did you forget to vote?

Quote from Anaconda:

The warrants never hit the markets, it was a direct deal between Buffet and Goldman. It's not like he just purchased preferred or common stock. It's actually not complicated to figure out why only he got access to that deal, but I'm sure it's way above your level of comprehension.

Buffett is yet another welfare case of these corrupt bailouts.



He took the investment while lobbying hardcore for the bailouts. It is corruption, as most taxpayers were against it, while those receiving the payouts were "coercing" Congress into approving it.




Don't forget to wipe when you get off your knees.

 

[asiaprop]

whats wrong with not just betting on market direction but also betting on the government flooring the market as it did? Anyone who poured money into financials at the time W.B. did took a huge risk and is now fairly rewarded.

Quote from S2007S:

IT would have been wiped out if the government didn't pour hundreds of billions into the system, so basically the system would have collapsed and GS would have been trading in the single digits. Thank the fed and the government for the last 40%+ rally we have had.

 

[asiaprop]

second that. Stinky jealousy. Those are the guys who even got it wrong last year when those who cashed in big time shorted before total panic set in and bought into the market when everyone else declared the end of the world.

Usually such people are to shut up but in the world of Web2.0 even the biggest losers and conspiracy theorist flourish.

Quote from Kassz007:

I form my opinions based on facts and evidence. Not on speculation and conspiracy theories.

 

[asiaprop]

yes it was because he is a long-term investor not a day trader. (it was certainly not his best trade). 40-50% drawdowns is what also other large momentum-following funds experienced in the past. By the way you forgot to factor in interest which was quite substantial.

Quote from atticus:

Ahh, the irony of misspelling genius. You think taking a 50% mark against the position was genius?

How about the $8B loss on the binary puts he wrote?

 

[asiaprop]

that I agree, I was myself surprised to see how W.B. over the years exposed himself to a number of over-leveraged products= derivatives while he publicely berated them before.

Quote from atticus:

I can't believe all the blowing being done in this thread... you guys should receive PR fees from BRK. The constellation and GS gains haven't recovered half of the losses he's seen on his SPX short put position.

"Derivatives are WMDs" yet he's booked $6-8B in losses on puts and his Gen RE portfolio.

 

[Trader666]

I see I struck a nerve, asskiss! LOL!!!

It's not nearly that simple and that's not his only position. Do your homework, moron. And take the Steady State theory and stuff it. As I said, get back to us when you have more money than Buffett and when you upstage Einstein as a scientist. You personify the worst of ET, posting your "I know-it-all" nonsense from your mommy's basement.

Quote from atticus:

Know better? Fuckstick, he sold 1517-strike SPX puts at 11% volatility. THE BUY of the Century. So yeah, I think Buffett would agree it was a monumentally bad trade. Not only did he BUY THE TOP of the market, he SOLD the historical-low print on volatility as well. His argument? That the puts were undervalued via BSM; IV > SV. That worked-out really well.

Perhaps if you had made it past the 8th grade you would've encountered the term, red-shift.

 

[asiaprop]

bullshit. You have ZERO proof what would have happened to GS if AIG simply went under and died. Only clues and guesses.

the ONLY fact here is that W.B.'s GS investment is currently in the money, NOTHING ELSE. So, shut up and stop telling everyone that you as GS hater are on neither side.

Quote from ByLoSellHi:

I'm not taking any sides here, but Warren's big bet on Goldman would have blown up badly had it not been for AIG's rescue by hundreds of billions in your donated tax dollars.

That's just fact.

Buffet probably paid a bunch of people off to ensure that transaction went through.

That's just a wild, speculative musing.