Alex Sebastian

Goldman Starts Getting Smaller

For the record, the expense was a negative number because Goldman had put away money for bonuses in preceding quarters which will no longer be paid out. The regular salary payments to these employees are less than the bonuses which are no longer being paid out (and were accrued in earlier quarters), hence the negative figure. Go do some homework of your own sir, before you make an ass of yourself again.

On Dec 16 11:48 AM bodysurf wrote:

> We can put aside the idea that "compensation and benefits fell to
> a negative $490 million". Unless Goldman managed to force people
> to work, not only for free, but to pay GS for the privilege of showing
> up there every day, it's not possible for an expense to be a negative
> number. Perhaps they meant to say the expense GROWTH was negative,
> but I suppose that's what passes for research at Moody's these days.
> Quelle surprise.
>
> And there is absolutely zero chance that Goldman made a profit this
> year. We can fully expect that future quarters will wipe away whatever
> phantom profits GS claimed to have earned in 2008. One of the great
> short sell candidates of 2009, considering it's one of the few with
> some meat still on the bone.

Options Trader: 9/11 Redux

Anyone have any opinions on why Merrill is getting shitk*cked so badly? I mean I have puts so I'm happy, but I'm still a little confused why it has lost around $10 in 3 days...?

Is the U.S. Banking System Safe?

The recent spike in financial stock after earnings is similar to all the previous spikes, except of a greater magnitude. Everyone thinks "oh wow they really threw in the kitchen sink this quarter" in relation to the banks' writedowns, and then as things continue to grow worse, everyone realizes the banks are going to have to take bigger and bigger writedowns and the whole sector gets s***kicked for the rest of the quarter. Buy some September or October puts, that's my advice.

Bottoming Stocks - Cramer's Stop Trading! (7/31/08)

I wrote in my blog about why I think Cramer is wrong. Just because an investor disclosed a stake, it doesn't mean they "jumped in". They probably have been acquiring this stake for a while and are looking to build positive sentiment by releasing the information now. I am still bearish.