SEC charges GS with fraud

a) i never claimed GS is a buy, I only set the records straight, do your own f. homework on the rest.
b) all financials are currently down around 2%, you clown, not just GS.



Quote from spinn:

Please use your specific numbers to explain why GS is down $4 when the market is up 45.

Your post above offered nothing other than opinion and editorial gibberish, not one fact or number. Please convince me since you know why it is a good company.
 
Quote from asiaprop:


P.S.: THe objective of the SEC is NOT to protect private investors, also that you got wrong. Please do some basic research. Tip: Google "SEC regulate financial markets" [/B]

WTF is wrong with you......literally speaking one of the SEC jobs is to protect private investors. GO take some fricking sedatives. Career changes.... hahaha BLow me. Your going to need a new career pretty darn soon i hope your thinking about that.



etc.....
 
Quote from asiaprop:

i just pointed to it few posts above, the homework you would need to do yourself. But here again, please check about GS credit lines with the street, and its reserve ratio at the point in time when AIG made whole on its obligations. Its information that is available. After reading that and you still disagree then I am happy to talk about numbers in detail but I dont wanna debate things based on what the majority reads in popular media, CNBC, and hears from "consultants", who by the way published an opinion on Lehman Brothers, not GS.

GS was rushed through to become a money center in the midst of the TARP being enacted, so what exactly are you talking about when mentioning credit lines & reserve ratios. GS did not have these requirements as it was a pure investment bank but was rushed through the process and converted to a money center (along with Morgan Stanley), in order to become eligible for the TARP, TALF and get access to the Fed discount window.
When such drastic courses of action are taken, it's kinda obvious whether there was trouble or not.
 
Quote from krazykarl:

There's a lot of that all around though.

Actions speak louder than words and the actions on behalf of Hank Paulson toward Goldman Sachs & Morgan Stanley speak volumes.

BTW, I actually think GS is a buy, that lawsuit won't go far and such conflicts of interests are regular business on Wall Street.
 
Quote from asiaprop:

yes exactly that is not just what I am claiming but what is supported by hard evidence. GS would not have gone under even if AIG had not paid a single penny to GS AT THE TIME when it was decided that 100 cents on the dollar was paid on AIG's obligations to Goldman. Please take a look at the capital requirements GS was meeting at that point in time, the data is widely available.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


:) Ok, pretend AIG never get bailout money, so they can not pay Goldman "a single penny" like you say.

Now Goldman have CDO that only is worth the .40 cent to the dollar (in this time)(this is true and proof by how much collateral AIG have to post in this time) Ok, but they hedge this risk with more swaps on AIG Default, true? BUT if no bailout to AIG, then this other swaps Goldman Sach have can maybe not pay either? (systemic risk)

Now, who (in this time because no one trust any CDO) can the Goldman Sachs sell their .40 cent on the dollar CDO to? NO MARKET in this time.
So would Goldman collapse?
 
Nah... here are some real examples of biased rhetoric & opinion:

1) your statement that I quoted below.

2) wmb's moronic response to the FACT that Goldman paid back TARP + $425 million:

unless you mean 425,000,000,000.00
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!


3) syprik actually believes he has the "inside scoop" that Goldman's lying about their loss on ABACUS 2007-AC1 despite the FACT that the risk/reward of misrepresenting that is insanely bad:

everytime I hear people use this "they lost $90mil on this deal, thus .... ", I cringe as it's likely they bought the slick GS PR hook, line & sinker.

Quote from Anaconda:

You never actually gave any evidence or facts, just biased rhetoric & opinion.
 
Quote from Anaconda:

GS was rushed through to become a money center in the midst of the TARP being enacted, so what exactly are you talking about when mentioning credit lines & reserve ratios. GS did not have these requirements as it was a pure investment bank but was rushed through the process and converted to a money center (along with Morgan Stanley), in order to become eligible for the TARP, TALF and get access to the Fed discount window.
When such drastic courses of action are taken, it's kinda obvious whether there was trouble or not.

of course they were in trouble and perhaps on the verge of being extinct. It's amazing how even with the advantage of hindsight some still would say that they were doing ok. Asia has popped up in every thread having to do with GS and has defended them on every single one of them. I could care less wether they did or did not committ fraud, we all know fraud is part of the game in almost every industry, but to come out and say they weren't in trouble is too funny.
 
Quote from Trader666:

Nah... here are some real examples of biased rhetoric & opinion:

1) your statement that I quoted below.

2) wmb's moronic response to the FACT that Goldman paid back TARP + $425 million:

unless you mean 425,000,000,000.00
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!


3) syprik actually believes he has the "inside scoop" that Goldman's lying about their loss on ABACUS 2007-AC1 despite the FACT that the risk/reward of misrepresenting that is insanely bad:

everytime I hear people use this "they lost $90mil on this deal, thus .... ", I cringe as it's likely they bought the slick GS PR hook, line & sinker.



Hey,
You are the one who was either missing my point about MAiden lane accounts being a billion dollar hiding place for GS or your decimal points are in the wrong spot!
So, my moronic posts are the exact posts that everybody is talking about except for the GS flag bearers! GS would have perished if all of the above mentioned help didnt come together when it did to save their arrogant f'ing asses. To think your fing better than Lehman is wild but take your bonus and shove it up your ass! Stop trying to defend GS and their bonuses because this is what this thread is really all about!
If I'm the moron why the F are you still confused?
 
You can't even speak English, let alone intelligently debate about Goldman.
Quote from wmb:

Hey,
You are the one who was either missing my point about MAiden lane accounts being a billion dollar hiding place for GS or your decimal points are in the wrong spot!
So, my moronic posts are the exact posts that everybody is talking about except for the GS flag bearers! GS would have perished if all of the above mentioned help didnt come together when it did to save their arrogant f'ing asses. To think your fing better than Lehman is wild but take your bonus and shove it up your ass! Stop trying to defend GS and their bonuses because this is what this thread is really all about!
If I'm the moron why the F are you still confused?
 
Back
Top