Dear World:
WTF?
It seems like you are very upset. I have to be honest, we have pulled some crazy shit in my tenure at Goldman, but I did not see this coming. Always with the French people.
I have looked at the prospectus and paperwork from the trades in question and only a sophisticated investor would have taken that trade. I mean it is a seriously confusing transaction so they had to have read the documents.
Although we will RIGOROUSLY defend our brand, I think it’s time for me to step down as CEO of Goldman. When I took this job in 2006, I knew this day would come. What took everyone so long to see the reasons for my insertion as CEO is really the stuff that the textbooks will discuss.
If this storm passes quickly, rest assured I can take back this resignation.
While you might expect me to go work with blind kids as repentence for some disgusting trades we made, I have decided to work for John Paulson.
Other than the hair , even when I lose, I win.
Sincerely,
LB
I love you
as you should
Original
I compare Goldman’s trading record to Saddam Hussein’s poll results. Saddam had like a 99% approval rating. Even if you were a perfect individual, there will always be haters (and he was very much the opposite of perfect). So he at least should have had his propaganda machine say 75% approval. It would have given him more credibility. Same goes for Goldman. Their 95%+ record is not credible. It is impossible to have that kind of record without some kind of unfair advantage. So they are either doing downright illegal activities or they are gaming the system and effectively operating above the law (a loophole which must be closed).
The Goldman guys might have been able to keep up their skimming operation if only they had purposely lost a couple of more times. They should have brought their record down to 80%. Sure they would have made less in the immediate term, but as a long term strategy perhaps they could have kept it going longer. At 80%, you think there might be something up but it is not on its face a statistical impossibility. But their 95%+ can’t be attributed to skill. It is an impossibility and we all know that on its face something is not kosher at Goldman.
Now we will see if the politicians get greater benefit from being bought off by Goldman or whether being a Goldman fighter trumps the previously cozy relationships these politicos had with Goldman.
Should be an interesting legal battle too. I’m sure Goldman will fight tooth and nail to keep incriminating evidence hidden under the guise that it is proprietary trade secrets which would harm the firm if disclosed.
I’m also somewhat curious whether their status as a bank holding company subjects the entire firm to audit by the regulators or just the bank subsidiary. Intuition (and the cynic in me) tells me that perhaps the auditors can only audit the bank and not the non-bank subs. That the non-bank subs are walled off from the regulators. It would be too easy if the Fed and FDIC could go in there and start auditing their activities.
[And of rant]
its a thermo nuclear war that they will fight to protect.
the mistake is being public and the deregulation got out of hand.
the ego’s will prevent them from going private and that’s what they should
do. would be exciting announcement,
It’s not just the egos, but the addiction to OPM. When it was partners’ money on the line — and not mostly bag holders’ — Goldman was a little more circumspect.
Well said. If we can eliminate (or even heavily curtail) the gambling with OPM issue, we’ll have successful financial reform.
Thanks.
So much for doing “God’s Work”, huh… Seems that Mr. Blankfein and Co. have destroyed yet another iconic Wall Street brand. Wonder if the US will take back the AIG-bailout money Goldman got last year, in lieu of their crude behavior…
Sadly, the most likely outcome in this topsy turvy world is that Mr. Blankfein will not be forced to leave, and might even end up on a committee with Senator Dodd to help ensure this behavior never happens again…
Kind of makes you wonder whether Mike Milken, a man forever banned from Wall St., would have ever had the balls to do what Goldman did (and cry wolf to the world), namely bet against their own clients.
Oh, how I long for the relatively moral Wall St. of yesteryear where Greed was Good and people were up front about it… Where’s Gordon Gekko when we need him?
thats truly the manazing thing Ben.
when goldman called me in 1999 re private wealth it felt good, now I would
not take their call. brand is diluted…who/what is their expertise other
than making money for themselves.
actually thats what a hedge fund should do, just are they a hedge fund or
bank or broker or reserach shop….
meanwhile they are laughing which is the sad part.
Do you think the High Net Worth community actually cares at this point? They’ve been screwed by these folks forever with high fees, and blunders in portfolio management (see Bernie Madoff, investments in Bear Stearns, AIG, Wash Mutual and Lehman Brothers, etc). I think these guys are either happy with the ‘services being provided them’ (e.g. Yankees tickets, dinners at Jean Georges new restaurants, quarterly ass-kissing, etc.), too concerned with alternatives without the larger institution to support their investment strategies, or afraid to switch due to the hassle.
Sad, because the services offered even to the most complex private client customers could probably be automated using a faster and more cost efficient series of tools online, if only those customers would be willing to ‘chance it’ on an unknown entity.
As for Hedge Funds, its surprising that they do not sign contracts with their Prime Brokers, insisting on a non-compete type deal on trades being conducted. It’s amazing what they’ll put up with, especially during the credit crunch…
i agree and probably why they went hedge fund. dealing with clients sucks
ass. :)
I love you
as you should
Original
I compare Goldman's trading record to Saddam Hussein's poll results. Saddam had like a 99% approval rating. Even if you were a perfect individual, there will always be haters (and he was very much the opposite of perfect). So he at least should have had his propaganda machine say 75% approval. It would have given him more credibility. Same goes for Goldman. Their 95%+ record is not credible. It is impossible to have that kind of record without some kind of unfair advantage. So they are either doing downright illegal activities or they are gaming the system and effectively operating above the law (a loophole which must be closed).
The Goldman guys might have been able to keep up their skimming operation if only they had purposely lost a couple of more times. They should have brought their record down to 80%. Sure they would have made less in the immediate term, but as a long term strategy perhaps they could have kept it going longer. At 80%, you think there might be something up but it is not on its face a statistical impossibility. But their 95%+ can't be attributed to skill. It is an impossibility and we all know that on its face something is not kosher at Goldman.
Now we will see if the politicians get greater benefit from being bought off by Goldman or whether being a Goldman fighter trumps the previously cozy relationships these politicos had with Goldman.
Should be an interesting legal battle too. I'm sure Goldman will fight tooth and nail to keep incriminating evidence hidden under the guise that it is proprietary trade secrets which would harm the firm if disclosed.
I'm also somewhat curious whether their status as a bank holding company subjects the entire firm to audit by the regulators or just the bank subsidiary. Intuition (and the cynic in me) tells me that perhaps the auditors can only audit the bank and not the non-bank subs. That the non-bank subs are walled off from the regulators. It would be too easy if the Fed and FDIC could go in there and start auditing their activities.
[And of rant]
its a thermo nuclear war that they will fight to protect.
the mistake is being public and the deregulation got out of hand.
the ego's will prevent them from going private and that's what they should
do. would be exciting announcement,
It's not just the egos, but the addiction to OPM. When it was partners' money on the line — and not mostly bag holders' — Goldman was a little more circumspect.
Covel rips StockTwits http://tinyurl.com/y63zx3x
well i guess we should just shut down than. thx for letting us know.
Well said. If we can eliminate (or even heavily curtail) the gambling with OPM issue, we'll have successful financial reform.
So much for doing “God's Work”, huh… Seems that Mr. Blankfein and Co. have destroyed yet another iconic Wall Street brand. Wonder if the US will take back the AIG-bailout money Goldman got last year, in lieu of their crude behavior…
Sadly, the most likely outcome in this topsy turvy world is that Mr. Blankfein will not be forced to leave, and might even end up on a committee with Senator Dodd to help ensure this behavior never happens again…
Kind of makes you wonder whether Mike Milken, a man forever banned from Wall St., would have ever had the balls to do what Goldman did (and cry wolf to the world), namely bet against their own clients.
Oh, how I long for the relatively moral Wall St. of yesteryear where Greed was Good and people were up front about it… Where's Gordon Gekko when we need him?
thats truly the manazing thing Ben.
when goldman called me in 1999 re private wealth it felt good, now I would
not take their call. brand is diluted…who/what is their expertise other
than making money for themselves.
actually thats what a hedge fund should do, just are they a hedge fund or
bank or broker or reserach shop….
meanwhile they are laughing which is the sad part.
Thanks.
Do you think the High Net Worth community actually cares at this point? They've been screwed by these folks forever with high fees, and blunders in portfolio management (see Bernie Madoff, investments in Bear Stearns, AIG, Wash Mutual and Lehman Brothers, etc). I think these guys are either happy with the 'services being provided them' (e.g. Yankees tickets, dinners at Jean Georges new restaurants, quarterly ass-kissing, etc.), too concerned with alternatives without the larger institution to support their investment strategies, or afraid to switch due to the hassle.
Sad, because the services offered even to the most complex private client customers could probably be automated using a faster and more cost efficient series of tools online, if only those customers would be willing to 'chance it' on an unknown entity.
As for Hedge Funds, its surprising that they do not sign contracts with their Prime Brokers, insisting on a non-compete type deal on trades being conducted. It's amazing what they'll put up with, especially during the credit crunch…
i agree and probably why they went hedge fund. dealing with clients sucks
ass. :)
well i guess we should just shut down than. thx for letting us know.
Covel rips StockTwits http://tinyurl.com/y63zx3x