GoldmanSachs666 Message Board

Fraud*
According to the Collins English Dictionary 10th Edition fraud can be defined as: "deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage".[1] In the broadest sense, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual; the related adjective is fraudulent. The specific legal definition varies by legal jurisdiction. Fraud is a crime, and also a civil law violation. Defrauding people or entities of money or valuables is a common purpose of fraud, but there have also been fraudulent "discoveries", e.g. in science, to gain prestige rather than immediate monetary gain
*As defined in Wikipedia

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

..Goldman Sachs Links and News - July 6, 2010 - with Larry's Corner

Goldman Sachs had disappointed strategic investors
Ukrainian Globalist
Goldman Sachs Just Became A Seller Of European Diapers
By Vince Veneziani
TPG and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) set to buy Candover's Ontex ...
By Amarendra Bhushan
Banks Redefine Jobs of 'Prop' Traders
Wall Street Journal
Still, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley still have sizable trading desks that "must be ceased or divested" under the Volcker rule, ...


Not too much in the news but this next link is very interesting.  It has an embed code but the graphic is too large for our page and cannot be modified.  I am therefore reprinting the content as it appears on the Visualeconomics site.

Goldman Sachs Under the Microscope from Visualeconomics
click here to view content in easy to read graphic form.  

What’s Up With Goldman Sachs?
Goldman Sachs is an investment bank that was founded in 1869 and has become one of the most powerful financial institutions in the world. Historically, it hasn’t taken deposits like a traditional bank, but instead assists corporations and governments in raising and investing money and also provides consulting services when companies are undergoing a merger or acquisition.
The company has been under fire several times in the past few years, and once again the public’s eye is on it now. Here’s the scoop on what all the pointing fingers are about:
In 2000, the Goldman Sachs stock price was at about $100 and the rest of the stock market (the DOW average) was at about $60. In 2001 the Goldman Sachs stock price was at about $50 and the rest of the stock market (the DOW average) was at about $60. In 2002 the Goldman Sachs stock price was at about $55 and the rest of the stock market (the DOW average) was at about $45. In 2003 the Goldman Sachs stock price was at about $50 and the rest of the stock market (the DOW average) was at about $35. In 2004 the Goldman Sachs stock price was at about $90 and the rest of the stock market (the DOW average) was at about $55.
In 2005 the Goldman Sachs stock price was at about $70 and the rest of the stock market (the DOW average) was at about $60. In 2006 the Goldman Sachs stock price was at about $150 and the rest of the stock market (the DOW average) was at about $75. In 2007 the Goldman Sachs stock price was at about $220 and the rest of the stock market (the DOW average) was at about $70. In 2008 the Goldman Sachs stock price was at about $200 and the rest of the stock market (the DOW average) was at about $90. In 2009 the Goldman Sachs stock price was at about $25 and the rest of the stock market (the DOW average) was at about $115.
Facts About Goldman Sachs
The company has 32,500 employees. If they all held hands, they could surround the entire island of Manhattan with room to spare. The 2009 revenue was $51.67 billion. That’s about the GDP of North Korea and El Salvador put together. Its assets in 2009 were $849 billion. That’s about 20 times the assets of Google.
Past Controversies
Insider Trading: In 1986, Goldman employee David Brown was convicted of passing inside info on a takeover deal.
Betting Against Its Own Clients: In November 2008, The L.A. Times reported that Goldman was underwriting California bonds and turning around and advising clients to short the same bonds, betting that the state would default on them. This drove up the cost of issuance to the state, and though legal, created a controversial stir.
In Bed with the Government: Goldman has been criticized for having employees move in and out of high-level U.S. government positions. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, for example, was CEO of Goldman Sachs.
Screwing Greece: Goldman was criticized for allegedly helping the Greek government mask its national debt facts from 1998-2009. In September 2009, Goldman created a special Credit Default Swap for the national debt of Greece. Interest rates of Greek national bonds skyrocketed, and Greece nearly went bankrupt in both March and May 2010.
Big 2009 Profits: Although the company was up front about changes it was making in accounting, many people were outraged by Goldman’s high net earnings of $1.81 billion in January through March 2009, accusing the firm of hiding losses in December 2008.
AIG Bailout: When the U.S. government lent about $180 billion to bail AIG out, billions of that money went to repay Goldman and other banks for their Credit Default Swap contracts with AIG. A controversy erupted as to whether these banks benefited materially or were overpaid by this government money. The New York state attorney general opened an investigation.
Conflicts of Interest: In May 2009, it was reported that NY Fed Chairman Stephen Friedman held substantial stock in Goldman Sachs as retired director and shareholder. He bought shares of Goldman stock when it was at historic lows in fall of 2008. But because of controversy arising from the move, he retired from the Fed in May 2009 even though his purchase was legal, and, according to his statement, a demonstration of confidence in times of financial distress.
Subprime Mortgages: Also in May 2009, Goldman Sachs agreed to pay $60 million to settle a lawsuit in Massachusetts for the company’s promoting of unfair home loans to the state.
Current Controversy
SEC Civil Fraud Lawsuit: In April 2010, the SEC sued Goldman Sachs and one of its employees, Fabrice Tourre, alleging that Goldman misrepresented a deal to investors, causing billions in losses. Basically, Goldman created products called “Collateral Debt Obligations,” sold them to investors and then bet short against them without disclosing it. Goldman stated that the charges were “unfounded in law and fact,” and the case is still playing out.
The existence of controversy itself doesn’t indicate actual wrongdoing, but with the global economic turmoil of the past two years, combined with Goldman’s recent track record, it’s no wonder this financial giant is in the hot seat once more. (emphasis added by GS666)

Yes, this "financial giant" is in the got seat once more".  It needs to remain there until the hot seat becomes an electric chair and is executed by order of the high court of the land.

I don't think that will ever happen but certainly a break up of this giant should occur.  For one, it should not be a commercial bank and should not enjoy the benefits such as of borrowing from the Fed.  It simply IS NOT a bank, never was a bank and has no intentions of ever becoming a 'real' bank. 

GS should become a much smaller entity with less influence in governments and financial policy world wide.  They should revert back to being an investment bank - not a hedge fund nor a commercial depository bank.  remove all former executives from any political position they hold anywhere in the world and strip them of all influence on affects they have on global economics.

Goldman Sachs if attempting to privatize global economics like Blackwater is privatizing the military and Halliburton is privatizing most support services.  Soon, flags of nations will be replaced by the logos of these unmanageable corporations whose size has increassed with the aid and support of our very own government.

It is simply wrong for corporations to have the power they do and to hold nations hostage to their demands (The Too Big To Fail syndrome). 

People of earth - BEWARE.  The great Vampire Squid along with their other large corporate squid allies have invaded.  Wake up America, before it is too late.

5 COMMENTS:

Anonymous said...

Janet Tavakoli

President, Tavakoli Structured Finance
Posted: July 7, 2010 09:27 AM


Should Taxpayers Continue to Subsidize Goldman Sachs's Alleged Obscenity?

Banks enjoy taxpayer-funded benefits including tens of billions of bailouts and ongoing funding subsidies. For example, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley receive taxpayer subsidized funding by virtue of their new post-crisis ability to borrow from the Fed. Taxpayers may decide that just as we don't wish to fund obscenity posing as "art," we don't wish to subsidize "finance" that is simply obscenity.

Mr. Saucier puts it this way:

"They are committing acts of obscenity...They are morally bankrupting society...It's obscene like kiddie porn is obscene...On the financial front that's what [corrupt financiers are] guilty of."

Financial firms pay a lot to circumvent technical laws, and they are more aggressive and faster than our ability to legislate.

http://tinyurl.com/23ceo32

Anonymous said...

Bernanke Created Half of 234 Years’ Worth of Money Supply


Most people still do not understand what was accomplished with the Bailouts. What helicopter Ben & Co. did — pouring trillions into the banking sector — served only to stave off a secular economic restructuring of the finance sector.

The can was kicked down the road, and their hope was the wild structurally imbalanced economy was allowed to persist.

By comparison, General Motors had gone down a path of bad management, poor products, lack of long term strategy. Their slide into bankruptcy was appropriate; it served to purge terrible management and awful business planning.

However, Banks were not allowed to suffer the fate that all insolvent businesses are supposed to. This was a terrible error, the greatest financial tragedy of the 21st century. That they were allowed to survive mostly intact is the result of the excess influence they have on a corruptible congress and a misguided Federal Reserve.

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/07/half-of-234-years-worth/

Anonymous said...

Hobos and welfare for America's Rich

The broader U6 rate of unemployment is 16.5pc. Jeff Weniger from Harris Private Bank estimates that over 9m Americans without jobs are receiving no support.

At some point this will become very political. Everybody knows that the wealthy have in fact been bailed out. Part of the purpose of quantitative easing was to raise asset prices, in the hope that this would course through the economy – and ultimately trickle down. The rich have benefitted enormously from federal action. Bond holders facing stiff losses on bank securities, or Fannie and Freddie bonds, and so forth, have been protected by the Fed and the Treasury.

I do not for one moment believe that Morgan Stanley or Goldman Sachs – for example – would have survived the Lehman storm without (implicit) intervention. This is not a criticism of federal action. It was right in such circumstances to step in to prevent a collapse of credit system.


http://tinyurl.com/23gysmk

Larry Rubinoff said...

"It was right in such circumstances to step in to prevent a collapse of credit system."

This last comment by Anonymous at 8:13 PM is interesting. Do you really believe that? I mean, do you think it was OK for us to give money to GM in an attempt to try to save them only to let them go into BK? Do you really think it was OK to bail out the banks - and make believe banks like GS? Do you really believe that by doing so, it saved our financial and credit system?

My opinion: Had we let them fail like any other poorly managed, bankgrupt company, the financial system and most probably the credit systems would have survived. There are still thousands of banks around the country that wwere and are solvent who would have picked up the slack.

Some of the trillions that went towards the bailout could have been diverted to those smaller banks WHO PROBABLY WOULD HAVE made loans to their customers INSTEAD OF USING THAT MONEY TO INVEST FOR THEIR OWN PROFIT AND BONUSES. (Sorry for screaming in bold but what happened still angers me.)

But the beginning of your comment is RIGHT ON.

"Hobos and welfare for America's Rich

The broader U6 rate of unemployment is 16.5pc. Jeff Weniger from Harris Private Bank estimates that over 9m Americans without jobs are receiving no support.

At some point this will become very political. Everybody knows that the wealthy have in fact been bailed out."

Yes, the wealthy have been bailed out and some who did not need bailing out just were made richer. I think it is called transfer of wealth.

Ask those unemployed you mention how they feel about "saving the banks". Would not that bailout money been better used to bail out the unemployed who would in turn recycle that money back into the economy which would have bailed us all out.

We don't need Goldman Sachs, Lehman, Merrill, JP Morgan or Bank of America. The trillions they got if put on the street through the citizens of this country would have ended the Recession and put us back on track economically.

The money needed to be on the streets not in the pockets of the bankster rich. That is what was meant to happen but how do you give a fox a hen and expect the fox not to eat it?

Anonymous said...

hermes bags have been one of The Ultimate Luxury Products in the world. Many of their Hermes Kelly , especially Birkin bags, are pursued by many famous characters. Hermes hand bag are fond of collecting Birkin bags and make this as the symbol of their identity and status.
As an anabolic drug, lida daidaihua provides the feeling of immediate positive effects on the system. As short term, the consumption of the daidaihua for a short term makes the user nauseous, anxious and an over-heated healing. In the longer term lida slimming may cause heart failure, heart damage or heart arrhythmia. The slimming capsule should not be taken throughout the year. Among the positive effects, slimming capsules moves the heart and the system faster. You can resort to lida during the final stages.
Nevertheless, Chanel handbags is still sumptuous and elegant. Copying the facade from replica Chanel handbags destines its noble and subtle style. The quilted leather is embroidered with flowers composed of C fromChanel handbag logo instead of quilted diamond and herringbone pattern on the exterior.
Because of the high demand for affordable Tiffany uk jewelries a handful of skilled jewelers came out with silver earrings jewelry. The idea is to create jewelries that are exact replicas of popular Tiffany necklaces designs and make silver necklaces available at a very affordable price.

Post a Comment