Comments on: The next Goldman acquisition http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Gary Anderson http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/comment-page-1/#comment-4403 Sun, 19 Jul 2009 23:35:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/#comment-4403 I appreciate Andy’s humor, I really do. But Goldman Sachs has been the point man for financial pillaging of the US consumer. I am sure that Borowitz gets it and I certainly get it with my recently published website: http://hubpages.com/hub/Why-Goldman-Sach s-Is-Committing-Treason

]]>
By: a http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/comment-page-1/#comment-4320 Fri, 17 Jul 2009 08:08:17 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/#comment-4320 “Not really. In a universe of greedy bankers, some will fail and some will succeed.”

The difference between Goldman and the rest is its influence in Washington. Every time things go badly at GS it can go crying to the federal government and get bailed out. 3 blow-ups in twenty years is not a record to be proud of, nor is it a sign of intelligence. GS doesn’t benefit from greater intelligence, just greater corruption.

]]>
By: dWj http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/comment-page-1/#comment-4304 Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:49:25 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/#comment-4304 The cultural differences would be too big to make this work. Also, Treasury is too heavily leveraged.

]]>
By: thalp http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/comment-page-1/#comment-4301 Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:12:23 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/#comment-4301 Felix,

I love your blog and have been reading it daily for the last couple years. However, whenever I see a post concerning Goldman I am almost always loathed to read it.

Your posts about them often strike me as needlessly one-sided and disingenuous. While you generally apply level-headedness in your analysis; something about Goldman makes you go all wonky (as witnessed by the beatdown you took at the hands of Heidi Moore).

In some ways your Goldman posts remind me of the work of Ben Stein. I see a lot of typical Stein tactics when you do things like argue against obvious straw men (Mark Gimein’s weak post) and feigning ignorance by not acknowledging the ludicrous nature of some anti-Goldman arguments (you don’t really believe that Goldman “the great bubble machine” caused the great depression or the tech bubble do you?)

]]>
By: winstongator http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/comment-page-1/#comment-4298 Thu, 16 Jul 2009 21:33:15 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/#comment-4298 From late 2007
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/1 2/03/the-long-and-short-of-it-at-goldman -sachs/

]]>
By: winstongator http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/comment-page-1/#comment-4297 Thu, 16 Jul 2009 21:28:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/#comment-4297 I disagree that the guys at Enron were smart. They were cheating. At the peak of the bubble there were risks. Lehman bet that the bubble wasn’t ready to burst, while Goldman said we need to get off this train. If I remember, in 07, when the Bear hedge fund imploded there was talk about how Goldman was shorting these MBS’s. The anger was that they were still selling some, but Bear, Lehman Merrill were doubling down bad investments while Goldman was getting out. There is no equivalence.

The analogy is to the bubble market neighbors. One sold in 2006, and moved or rented, raking it in, while the other heloc’d and used the proceeds to buy another specuvestment. One has 400k in cash, while the other has two foreclosures. Did they really take the same risks?

]]>
By: Ian D-B http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/comment-page-1/#comment-4294 Thu, 16 Jul 2009 21:07:47 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/07/16/the-next-goldman-acquisition/#comment-4294 I find it interesting that in the past you’ve argued that there is no important relationship between risk and return for stocks, but you’re perfectly willing to apply the theory to banks. what’s the difference? (note that your argument implies that at least for bank stocks, there must be a positive risk-return relationship).

]]>