This news story has 14 comments:

Register or Login to rate comments »
•  
  

  • The Geoffster: 
  • Comments (1100)
  Jail them! No, shoot them!

  Nov 01 06:56 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • bearfund: 
  • Comments (662)
  So what? Caveat emptor.

  Nov 01 07:05 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • a fat panda: 
  • Comments (435)
  •  • Instablog (5)
  •  • StockTalk (3)

  • •
  • Joe The Economist
  Caveat emptor? more like Let The Customer Beware.

  Nov 01 07:45 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • MarketGuy: 
  • Comments (565)
  •  • StockTalk (151)
  I'm certain this is the tip o' the iceberg as far as Goldman's business "practices" go. The shadows are slowly being lit to view their years of decimation of legitimate capitalism.

  Nov 01 08:44 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Poor Texan: 
  • Comments (311)
  Monday McClatchy will be taken over by the government for spreading misleading about America's greatest financiers:-(

  Nov 01 09:58 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • ebworthen: 
  • Comments (757)
  •  • StockTalk (6)
  Hang'em high, let them swing, then shoot them! (Mussolini's end style)

  Nov 01 11:03 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Vladimir Se...: 
  • Comments (128)
  •  • Instablog (1)
  Sure let's hang them, what's the charge? Unethical hedging?
  It is obvious today that financial well being of virtually everyone is dependent on US housing prices.
  Wasn't it a good idea to hedge against those prices collapsing?
  I think in this particular instance Goldman has demonstrated that risk management can actually work sometimes.
  
  Yeah, I realize this comment will not be very popular and will probably bring plenty of "thumb downs", but grow up people! Goldman is well "connected" to say the least, is hated for that and it's fine.
  But blaming them for hedging their bets? I think this is just too much BS.

  Nov 01 11:19 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Rolo: 
  • Comments (7)
  You know Vladimir, I call it FRAUD not "unethical hedging" lol.

  Nov 01 11:45 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Alexander_M: 
  • Comments (32)
  •  • StockTalk (4)
  This is a scenario similar to purchasing Puts and Calls on the same strike of a stock option, I would think. The strategy can work well when implied volatility is high and it's right before an important announcement, i.e. earnings.

  Nov 02 12:24 AM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Not_a_planner: 
  • Comments (5)
  I am new to this stuff
  
  and I understand there is no fiduciary duty for these firms to the pension funds they sold this crap to
  
  But I still wonder who rated this crap AAA and was Goldman involved in this in some way? If so it wouldn't really be a "hedge" to my mind. It is fraud

  Nov 02 12:37 AM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • TKO: 
  • Comments (17)
  There will always be haters for those that do not lose as much or earn something when others are losing. I love how the spotlight on Goldman Sachs increased as the world markets began to fall.
  
  Your comment, sir, is a very good example.
  
  Goldman Sachs, whether you hate them or love them, are extremely talented at managing money. Anyone who deals with the major banks, investment firms, and capital markets know that their client service, valuations and risk management is top notch compared to the rest -- Barclays is right up there as well. There's a good reason why they are highly regarded.
  
  Being "well connected" may not be the reason for their profitability but the effect of their abilities.
  
  On Nov 01 11:45 PM Rolo wrote:
  
  > You know Vladimir, I call it FRAUD not "unethical hedging" lol.

  Nov 02 01:43 AM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Mr. Ed, Jr.: 
  • Comments (472)
  Describing Goldman's activities as "hedging" seems very kind and generous, indeed. The lawsuits will eventually come, if only because there is far too much money that has been lost, and Goldman's has those very deep pockets. (And Goldman's is also working up a bit of a bad reputation these days, so trial lawyers would love to get them in front of a jury somehow) Then, the subpoenas will start to fly and we will get to the depositions and the inner-sanctum conversations and the emails about the 'hedging".
  
  However, the real problem in this matter is the misfeasance, malfeasance and nonfeasance of our Congress and Department of Justice. Why are there no Congressional hearings, at the very least ? Well.....perhaps Sean Penn and Jewel are too busy to testify.

  Nov 02 02:34 AM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • davidbdc: 
  • Comments (250)
  I have a tough time finding sympathy for the insurance companies and other "sophisticated" investors that bought these securities. They are big boys and can make their own decisions.
  
  What you should read is the article link to the right about the couple that had to fight for years to get Goldman to even admit they held their mortgage. That story is why people have such vile feelings towards these financial firms. Nothing wrong with Goldman owning the mortgage, but why all the nonsense. Why doesn't a firm like Goldman step forward and say "we are willing to change all ARM mortgages to fixed rate mortgages for the next 6 months and will no longer offer ARM mortgages to unsophisticated home buyers". Think of the goodwill, leadership, and probably profits that would result. Instead they have armies of lawyers foreclosing on homes that have lost 50%. Don't see how that is profitable in the longer term.

  Nov 02 05:08 AM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Graham and ...: 
  • Comments (1653)
  •  • Instablog (625)
  •  • StockTalk (1306)

  • •
  • R.W. Wentworth & Co.
  The complexity of the derivatives (and other instruments) is leading to complexity of prosecutions. Imagine trying to explain them to a jury. That's why the process is so slow.

  Nov 02 12:09 PM | Link | Reply