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.
SEC charges GS with fraud
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
unless you mean 425,000,000,000.00Quote from asiaprop:,thank you!!!
otherwise half of what they owed was 220,900,000,000.00!!!!Its billions and billions is a frcikin lot! You and all the other GS employees should stop listening to your mamas tell you that your doing good stick in up for that crap ass company!
""GS prides itself on different parts of the company acting independently of each other. I don't know of a firm that doesn't take both sides of a trade."""
No shit..... they don't know what anyone is doing in that firm! The point is that maybe they should! THE HOUSE IS BURNING... THE CROWD IS ANGRY WHERE TO GO ,WHERE TO GO.....OH MY!
Don't confuse GS today with Goldman Sacs of 10 years ago. this company is riddled with incompetent beasts! Making money at my expense!
I'm not interested in fronting them money an ymore they are rude, out of touch and kinda of stupid! Why Warren Buffett would get hooked up with them is anyones guess!
No shit..... they don't know what anyone is doing in that firm! The point is that maybe they should! THE HOUSE IS BURNING... THE CROWD IS ANGRY WHERE TO GO ,WHERE TO GO.....OH MY!
Don't confuse GS today with Goldman Sacs of 10 years ago. this company is riddled with incompetent beasts! Making money at my expense!
I'm not interested in fronting them money an ymore they are rude, out of touch and kinda of stupid! Why Warren Buffett would get hooked up with them is anyones guess!
Quote from wmb:
[B
Don't confuse GS today with Goldman Sacs of 10 years ago. this company is riddled with incompetent beasts! Making money at my expense!
I'm not interested in fronting them money an ymore they are rude, out of touch and kinda of stupid! Why Warren Buffett would get hooked up with them is anyones guess! [/B]
GS employees are paid to make money at your expense. And as evidenced by this week's earnings report, they're pretty good at their job.
wow, I'm not surprised at the anti GS vitriol but I wouldn't think it would be so unanimous. While I fully agree GS probably partakes in some pretty shady activities and takes full advantage of the current system, I'm still at a bit of a loss to understand exactly what was illegal. I haven't watched CNBC in a couple years so have no idea what Cramers opinion is, and if I'm on his side God help me and I will retract everything I am about to say!
To my knowledge GS was not acting in an advisory role to the buyers of these products, rather they were marketing them..and we all know how they marketed them to the PMs..in a club..in Paris..over 1,000 euro bottles of liquor. Now if they misrepresented what was IN the products, yeah that's bad. But since when do you need to know who is on the other side of the bet? We know that (at least I think we know that) not all of the instruments Pauslon initially wanted went into the final product, so there at least was some sort of back and forth which leads me to believe there was some transparency on the product.
When I buy KO I don't demand to know who is selling me the shares, and I kind of assume they are selling it because they think it's gonna go down! If KO themselves is hiding information, then yeah I'm pissed.
And I'm not an expert on these instruments so I could be way off base here, but it's pretty convenient to say they were 'designed to fail' after the fact. I highly doubt the PMs involved in buying these are that stupid or naive to hear GS say 'we are working with another party in picking the instruments' and not assume what their intentions were. My guess is they knew exactly what they were buying, and like so many unfortunate souls they were dead wrong on their economic forecasts.
As for the GS trader in question, he was 29 and went by the fabulous fab. Now tell me, if I came on here and said my name was 'fabulous fab', I'm all of 29 and I know the market is going to tank...would you trust me?
Finally WTF, where is the outrage at the PM's for buying such crap?? And again I highly doubt GS sold them this at a conference table at 70 Broad (or 77..whatever) it was done at (insert club/bar/strip club here) and I also doubt this stuff would have been deemed suitable for any of the public who lost their asses.
To my knowledge GS was not acting in an advisory role to the buyers of these products, rather they were marketing them..and we all know how they marketed them to the PMs..in a club..in Paris..over 1,000 euro bottles of liquor. Now if they misrepresented what was IN the products, yeah that's bad. But since when do you need to know who is on the other side of the bet? We know that (at least I think we know that) not all of the instruments Pauslon initially wanted went into the final product, so there at least was some sort of back and forth which leads me to believe there was some transparency on the product.
When I buy KO I don't demand to know who is selling me the shares, and I kind of assume they are selling it because they think it's gonna go down! If KO themselves is hiding information, then yeah I'm pissed.
And I'm not an expert on these instruments so I could be way off base here, but it's pretty convenient to say they were 'designed to fail' after the fact. I highly doubt the PMs involved in buying these are that stupid or naive to hear GS say 'we are working with another party in picking the instruments' and not assume what their intentions were. My guess is they knew exactly what they were buying, and like so many unfortunate souls they were dead wrong on their economic forecasts.
As for the GS trader in question, he was 29 and went by the fabulous fab. Now tell me, if I came on here and said my name was 'fabulous fab', I'm all of 29 and I know the market is going to tank...would you trust me?
Finally WTF, where is the outrage at the PM's for buying such crap?? And again I highly doubt GS sold them this at a conference table at 70 Broad (or 77..whatever) it was done at (insert club/bar/strip club here) and I also doubt this stuff would have been deemed suitable for any of the public who lost their asses.
Quote from dcunited:
wow, I'm not surprised at the anti GS vitriol but I wouldn't think it would be so unanimous. While I fully agree GS probably partakes in some pretty shady activities and takes full advantage of the current system, I'm still at a bit of a loss to understand exactly what was illegal.
It's not illegal because these are unregulated financial instruments. However, there was a blatant conflict of interest and this is nothing new to Goldman. SEC's actions will results in nothing more than slap on the wrist fines, similar to the fines enacted on several IBs after the Tech Bubble.
SEC's action is based on GS being in between the investors and Paulson, collecting fat fees. GS did not disclose to the investors that Paulson was the one advising the CDO manager on which MBSes to buy, while taking the other side. Obviously, if they had, the business would not be there, the deals would not be done and no fat fees. As a side note, that is why the ratings agencies handed out false credit ratings.
Depending on how much information & proof is shown, I can see the CDO investors suing Goldman, ACA and Paulson. That is what actually should happen, instead of SEC's lame effort. If the SEC was ever meant to enact some sort of regulatory justice (which is NOT why it was founded), it would be going after the ratings agencies.
As to the anti-GS vitriol, I can simply say that calling GS utter scumbags is an understatement, along with the rest of major Wall Street firms. But I feel that most GS haters are simply signing the tune, without fully knowing why.
Quote from wmb:
""GS prides itself on different parts of the company acting independently of each other. I don't know of a firm that doesn't take both sides of a trade."""
No shit..... they don't know what anyone is doing in that firm! The point is that maybe they should! THE HOUSE IS BURNING... THE CROWD IS ANGRY WHERE TO GO ,WHERE TO GO.....OH MY!
Don't confuse GS today with Goldman Sacs of 10 years ago. this company is riddled with incompetent beasts! Making money at my expense!
I'm not interested in fronting them money an ymore they are rude, out of touch and kinda of stupid! Why Warren Buffett would get hooked up with them is anyones guess!
You really have no idea how things inside a firm like this work, do you? Spare us sweeping statements on how "bad corrupt etc. etc. etc. things inside wall st..." are. It makes you sound inexperienced and a puppet of the TV news.
Quote from Anaconda:
It's not illegal because these are unregulated financial instruments. However, there was a blatant conflict of interest and this is nothing new to Goldman. SEC's actions will results in nothing more than slap on the wrist fines, similar to the fines enacted on several IBs after the Tech Bubble.
SEC's action is based on GS being in between the investors and Paulson, collecting fat fees. GS did not disclose to the investors that Paulson was the one advising the CDO manager on which MBSes to buy, while taking the other side. Obviously, if they had, the business would not be there, the deals would not be done and no fat fees. As a side note, that is why the ratings agencies handed out false credit ratings.
Depending on how much information & proof is shown, I can see the CDO investors suing Goldman, ACA and Paulson. That is what actually should happen, instead of SEC's lame effort. If the SEC was ever meant to enact some sort of regulatory justice (which is NOT why it was founded), it would be going after the ratings agencies.
As to the anti-GS vitriol, I can simply say that calling GS utter scumbags is an understatement, along with the rest of major Wall Street firms. But I feel that most GS haters are simply signing the tune, without fully knowing why.
Why should they have disclosed that Paulson was taking the other side? What does it matter? It didn't affect the performance of the instrument in any way. If the buyer didn't like what was in the products they shouldn't have purchased them. Period. End of Story.
The only way this is fraud is if Goldman sold them an apple while telling them it was an orange. Nothing I have read indicated this occurred. Who the fuck cares if Paulson made a bet that the apple was rotten - the investors had the same information on the quality of the apple that Paulson did.
As for that conflict of interest you mentioned? Read the ABASCUS material - page 9 states clearly they may be on the other side of the trade.
Krazycarl-While I don't think it will prove illegal that Paulson's role should have been disclosed, it is quite shady. With something like a CDO there could be all sorts of crap in the final product, and the buyers are acting off of GS's reputation that they wouldn't intentionally screw them..which of course they were. Kind of like when you order one of those specialty beer cases online, you sort of expect them to be 24 DIFFERENT beers. GS made helped to insure you got 24 keystones. I'm sure the fine print will say they never said what exactly to expect, and this is how GS will get off.
Come to think of it GS is becoming more and more like my cable provider. They seem to find new and inventive ways of providing me with crappy service each month, yet legally they aren't at fault, and my other choices are even worse so I have to play ball.
No wonder why you guys are calling for blood.
Come to think of it GS is becoming more and more like my cable provider. They seem to find new and inventive ways of providing me with crappy service each month, yet legally they aren't at fault, and my other choices are even worse so I have to play ball.
No wonder why you guys are calling for blood.