Comments on: Don’t bank on clients to punish Goldman http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/04/20/dont-bank-on-clients-to-punish-goldman/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: SumantaDey http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/04/20/dont-bank-on-clients-to-punish-goldman/#comment-29944 Thu, 22 Apr 2010 07:22:33 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=6993#comment-29944 Nice article James. What GS did was by any means unethical. Having said that, please take a moment to consider this: –

Were the firms (or people making decisions there) which bought these complex products from GS not greedy – wanting to make quick buck on exotic products? Most of these executives had a mandate: Maximum Profit. That is why they chose these products in the first place. I doubt many of them would have re-considered their decisions, for the same reason as you mentioned above – “because they hope, like every gambler, to beat stacked odds and because they flatter themselves that they are not the sucker at the table.”

When a celebrity endorses a product in the Media, but is seen publicly using a competitors product, does that not give rise to an ethical question? One may answer they are doing it for the money or any other reason – but all of that would again apply to the larger Financial system.

When a trader sells a security, it’s because he doesn’t see value in it – while the one buying it sees potential returns from the same product! Isn’t that strange?

Again, I would like to state that what GS did is unethical at best and definitely wouldn’t amount to anything more for the simple reason that – “this is how business is done”

]]>
By: BarryLyndon http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/04/20/dont-bank-on-clients-to-punish-goldman/#comment-29940 Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:21:54 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=6993#comment-29940 James,

Do you know anything about CDOs? It is said to be quite normal for investors in a CDO to take opposite sides of the trade. Quite normal for the investor taking the short side to also influence the form of the security. Also, the underlying clients wouldn’t expect to be told the identities of the other parties taking a position in the security.

This piece recalls an earlier article by this gentleman (still visible on the Reuters website) when James Saft was, in a rather crude and unsuccessful attempt at being amusing manner, blaming Wall Street’s errors on Asperger’s Syndrome. What these articles from Mr. Saft achieve is, in effect, simply take whatever the current hysteria is circulating amongst popular opinion without question and then make up a story.

The reason that Goldman clients will continue to support the firm is that there is no issue, no scandal, nothing here.

]]>
By: Ghandiolfini http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/04/20/dont-bank-on-clients-to-punish-goldman/#comment-29929 Wed, 21 Apr 2010 15:40:03 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=6993#comment-29929 $1bn versus an earnings of $how much per annum, double up from last year ?

It’s like environmental restitution fines, they have no upfront intent of fixing up the mess, unless of course in the Canadian Tundra, but the threat there is ice road truckers with their haunting laughs.

]]>
By: Kina http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/04/20/dont-bank-on-clients-to-punish-goldman/#comment-29927 Wed, 21 Apr 2010 13:45:49 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=6993#comment-29927 It is fraud pure and simple. Text book case of fraud if the facts are as stated.

Lets not let our love of GS cloud our thinking and want to stand up for them no matter what they do.

The SEC always starts cases out this way and end with the DOJ with criminal cases as criminal cases require a higher standard of proof and are much harder to prosecute. The tactic is to always start with the simplest easy to understand case, since this will be a jury case.

But regardless of the SEC case those who lost because of this deal can now go for damages against GS based on the more simple information the SEC has gathered, that could altogether exceed $1bn. They don’t have to prove fraud, only that GS was negligent in their duty as a provider of a service.

]]>
By: smudger9 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/04/20/dont-bank-on-clients-to-punish-goldman/#comment-29919 Wed, 21 Apr 2010 10:57:57 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=6993#comment-29919 What continues to amaze me is that governments continue to use GS. Rather than “handwringing” and name calling a simple step that all G20 governments could do is bar GS from government contracts/advisory/market making in government stock until they come into line.

]]>
By: Woltmann http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/04/20/dont-bank-on-clients-to-punish-goldman/#comment-29917 Wed, 21 Apr 2010 05:08:45 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=6993#comment-29917 Any financial manager that doesn’t have a Life Without Goldmsn plan in the works today needs the electric cattle prod motivator. This is going to spread, not go away. People are really mad ..

]]>
By: DanToronto http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/04/20/dont-bank-on-clients-to-punish-goldman/#comment-29915 Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:38:31 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=6993#comment-29915 Great article!

]]>
By: Ghandiolfini http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/04/20/dont-bank-on-clients-to-punish-goldman/#comment-29914 Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:14:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=6993#comment-29914 The moon rocket analogy is the best in a long time, in fact the best.

]]>
By: HBC http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/04/20/dont-bank-on-clients-to-punish-goldman/#comment-29911 Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:25:47 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=6993#comment-29911 That anyone would still throw in their lot with Goldman – or any other similar white-collar clip joint – bespeaks greed, indeed.

But not just any old greed: the sort of greed that’s, putting it mildly, morally indictable. Such people and every vestige of the system contaminated by them in the wake of Glass-Steagall’s repeal are beyond redemption.

]]>
By: lcabrera80 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2010/04/20/dont-bank-on-clients-to-punish-goldman/#comment-29910 Tue, 20 Apr 2010 17:41:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=6993#comment-29910 Limited risk (i.e., backed by the full faith of the U.S. Government) coupled with the potential for unlimited reward (i.e., no profit caps) makes for a very broken system.

]]>