Friday, December 25, 2009
A power struggle at Goldman?
Hopefully, this article will drive a final stake through the notion that Goldman Sachs is the classy firm on Wall Street that always has the best interests of its clients in mind. … But that’s the obvious story here. The underlying story may be what looks like a power struggle for the soul of the firm. An awful lot of past employees and other former admirers are now coming forward to spill the beans, albeit anonymously in many cases. Goldman was never the noblesse oblige firm that it likes to portray itself as to employees and the public. But at least it used to have some scruples. Not now. The firm has been in full so-long-suckers mode for a while now. …
BTW: This story definitely falls in the ‘another-week-another-great-story’ category of financial reporting. I’m little surprised the Times didn’t hold it for a Sunday spread, though popping it on Christmas Eve, allowing it to drift around the Internet for the long holiday weekend, ain’t a bad idea. As of this morning, it’s rightly the top emailed story at the Times.
Update -- Goldman Sachs (via Business Insider) blasts back. But I’m not buying their argument. Goldman is basically saying: But our clients wanted these products and knew what they were getting! But no one deliberately invests in bad products. Notice Goldman never told its non-hedge fund clients: ‘We don’t think these are good products for our clients. Instead, we're shorting them. We think you should too.’
Hopefully, this article will drive a final stake through the notion that Goldman Sachs is the classy firm on Wall Street that always has the best interests of its clients in mind. … But that’s the obvious story here. The underlying story may be what looks like a power struggle for the soul of the firm. An awful lot of past employees and other former admirers are now coming forward to spill the beans, albeit anonymously in many cases. Goldman was never the noblesse oblige firm that it likes to portray itself as to employees and the public. But at least it used to have some scruples. Not now. The firm has been in full so-long-suckers mode for a while now. …
BTW: This story definitely falls in the ‘another-week-another-great-story’ category of financial reporting. I’m little surprised the Times didn’t hold it for a Sunday spread, though popping it on Christmas Eve, allowing it to drift around the Internet for the long holiday weekend, ain’t a bad idea. As of this morning, it’s rightly the top emailed story at the Times.
Update -- Goldman Sachs (via Business Insider) blasts back. But I’m not buying their argument. Goldman is basically saying: But our clients wanted these products and knew what they were getting! But no one deliberately invests in bad products. Notice Goldman never told its non-hedge fund clients: ‘We don’t think these are good products for our clients. Instead, we're shorting them. We think you should too.’
