You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Goldman loses money on just one trading day in Q3.
- Thread starter Ivanovich
- Start date
"Best and brightest" can only be part of the explanation behind those results.
LTCM also had the best and brightest. There are best and brightest people losing money in trading every day. But Goldman never loses. Why is that ?
LTCM also had the best and brightest. There are best and brightest people losing money in trading every day. But Goldman never loses. Why is that ?
Quote from krazykarl:
First, you're quoting a post from ZH - ZH! ZH is taken about as seriously as the Weekly World News is. It's a tabloid full of rants and half-facts. Next week there will be a blog post on there about Dimon's love-child with bigfoot that looks amazingly like Blankfein.
Second, the post you quoted is talking about rewriting stats 101 - based on a bloody quarter of performance? wtf? Read that paragraph you quoted aloud. How could you have taken that banter seriously?
ZH has some good stuff. Some crazy stuff too, but I would prefer to be presented with clean, transparent data and crazy-minded commentary than the other way around.
As for the stats, I don't care how many of the "best and brightest" make their way to GS. Those numbers (and the quarter before, and the one before that) are not possible unless you're being given an advantage. If they weren't, other firms would have similar numbers.
Goldman is world champion in volatility "creation". That's their game...
It's a well documented and public fact that Geithner spoke with three people daily/nightly during the crisis: Blankfein, Dimon, and the President. He would be talking to the 1st two, put them on hold to take a call from O, and then back to those guys. I am sure that has all changed now wink wink.
Quote from Ivanovich:
ZH has some good stuff. Some crazy stuff too, but I would prefer to be presented with clean, transparent data and crazy-minded commentary than the other way around.
As for the stats, I don't care how many of the "best and brightest" make their way to GS. Those numbers (and the quarter before, and the one before that) are not possible unless you're being given an advantage. If they weren't, other firms would have similar numbers.
See, that's the thing: it's not clean data. It's data that is changed to fit the context of the post.
The only way for the other firms to have similar numbers is if they have similar people, and they don't. You are discounting the impact people have on running a business, which is where your point is failing. People are the life-or-death of a company's performance, you cannot marginalize them.
Quote from Ivanovich:
ZH has some good stuff. Some crazy stuff too, but I would prefer to be presented with clean, transparent data and crazy-minded commentary than the other way around.
As for the stats, I don't care how many of the "best and brightest" make their way to GS. Those numbers (and the quarter before, and the one before that) are not possible unless you're being given an advantage. If they weren't, other firms would have similar numbers.
Quote from stoxx4shortrun:
"Best and brightest" can only be part of the explanation behind those results.
LTCM also had the best and brightest. There are best and brightest people losing money in trading every day. But Goldman never loses. Why is that ?
Quote from 5yrtrader:
But even the yankees lose 80% of the time, as in not winning the world series. There is no way someone could make money almost everyday unless the market is rigged in their favor.
5yr
Do you not understand the difference between being a market maker and being a speculator? How many losing days do you think Oanda has? I'd bet their winning % is even higher than Goldman's. It's not like GS is scalping e-mini's. Their primary trading biz is making markets for customers in illiquid fixed income securities and derivatives, program trading, currency swaps -all trades with an embedded few to several tick edge. So yes by the random law of averages if one gets edge, edge, edge they will print $, $, $......
Quote from Mvic:
It's a well documented and public fact that Geithner spoke with three people daily/nightly during the crisis: Blankfein, Dimon, and the President. He would be talking to the 1st two, put them on hold to take a call from O, and then back to those guys. I am sure that has all changed now wink wink.
Show me this documentation that is so public. Links please showing those were the [only]people he talked to daily. You also forgot Bernanke, which he should have been talking to daily. You've just demonstrated how FUD gets started.
I keep saying...somebody break up these fuckers.
The stock market is rigged & broken.
These crooks have been given a monopoly at manipulating prices & ripping off those with less cash than them.
I can only guess why the Fidelity's, Schwabs of the world don't come out and demand action but it must be because they're all a bunch of eunuchs sucking at whatever end of the market's titty thay can get.
These crooks are completely fucking up the country.
The stock market is rigged & broken.
These crooks have been given a monopoly at manipulating prices & ripping off those with less cash than them.
I can only guess why the Fidelity's, Schwabs of the world don't come out and demand action but it must be because they're all a bunch of eunuchs sucking at whatever end of the market's titty thay can get.
These crooks are completely fucking up the country.