SEC charges GS with fraud

Sure its political.. But you hate the crooks as you said before. So question is, do you take them out at SnP 666 or do you let it sit... wait.. and then after a rise and confidence back, you fry their balls. Did they wana wait until after Nov? No. But would you want them doing day 1? I'm not complaining about timing. I just want the garbage to stop, and I applaud the move. I coulda sworn this whole thing was just a criminal corrupt cess pool. Apparently there are rules, and no complaints here about timing, git r done.

Let me add, since I started trading, I have had one feeling. I hate the Sec. They lied, overlooked, did nothing. Corrupt. Well maybe they are going to do something.
 
The mortgage insurers use fraudulent filling out of an application as a reason to not pay a claim, perhaps this applies in this case, though I suspect the contracts here have all sorts of stuff favoring the house, so to speak.
 
I think GS has a big problem. They identified bad publicity as a risk factor going forward themselves.

After these charges and the little problem with Greece, any potential client looking to do business might suspect that GS will stab them in the back the first chance they get if it will make them enough money.

The "long-term greedy" model they used was abandoned. Now it is likely many years before they can try to build a good reputation by their actions, if they even get that chance.

Maybe Lloyd was taking the Lord's name in vain when he made that comment, and God didn't like it. :D
 
Amazing - perfect insider trade.

Also, I remember reading an article about how they risked so much and were so brave to put this trade. What a joke.


Here is from MarketWatch:

Paulson helped Goldman structure the deal and then bet against it, making huge profits when the housing market fell in 2007. But Goldman didn't tell investors that the hedge-fund firm was involved in putting the deal together, or that it was betting against the structure.

Robert Khuzami, director of the SEC's enforcement division, said Paulson wasn't charged because it wasn't obligated to disclose conflicts to investors.

"We charged those that we felt were appropriate based on the evidence," Khuzami said during a conference call with reporters. "Goldman made representations to investors, and Paulson did not."

Still, Paulson's deep involvement in the case may trigger concerns among investors in the firm's hedge funds.

The firm has grown quickly in recent years and now oversees more than $30 billion in assets, making it one of the largest operators in the $1.5 trillion hedge-fund industry.

A spokesman for Paulson didn't immediately respond to an email seeking comment Friday morning.
 
Quote from maxitronixy:

where's asiaprop? should be entertaining to see him defend Goldman,

ASIAPROP WHERE ARE U?
More...

He is Japanese so he killed himself.

Too bad Lloyd Blankfein isnt Japanese.
 
Wow the DOW only off 90 points, you would think news like this was good for 900 points off the dow, im sure they buy the market right into the close making this GS news look like absolutely nothing.
 
How quick they say how they werent involved with marketing the firm's securities to third parties.



SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Hedge fund Paulson & Co. said Friday that while it did buy credit protection from Goldman Sachs Group Inc.(GS 162.30, -21.97, -11.92%) it was not involved with marketing the firm's securities to third parties. Paulson said that it did not sponsor or initiate Goldman's Abacus program. The Securities and Exchange Commission charged Goldman with securities fraud on Friday, alleging the investment bank misled investors in the Abacus program. Paulson & Co. was not charged in the SEC complaint.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top