Has Goldman fatally damaged their Franchise?

[sd_matt]

I’ll take nothing over lip service since even that is a bit more honest.

[briansd1]

Do you really believe that an SEC lawsuit is just lip service?

A lawsuit consumes a lot of executive time and company resources, and can certainly bring down a company. Remember what happened to Anthur Anderson when it was found guilty?

[briansd1]

Do you really believe that an SEC lawsuit is just lip service?

A lawsuit consumes a lot of executive time and company resources, and can certainly bring down a company. Remember what happened to Anthur Anderson when it was found guilty?

[briansd1]

Do you really believe that an SEC lawsuit is just lip service?

A lawsuit consumes a lot of executive time and company resources, and can certainly bring down a company. Remember what happened to Anthur Anderson when it was found guilty?

[briansd1]

Do you really believe that an SEC lawsuit is just lip service?

A lawsuit consumes a lot of executive time and company resources, and can certainly bring down a company. Remember what happened to Anthur Anderson when it was found guilty?

[briansd1]

Do you really believe that an SEC lawsuit is just lip service?

A lawsuit consumes a lot of executive time and company resources, and can certainly bring down a company. Remember what happened to Anthur Anderson when it was found guilty?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=patb]

Had AIG declared Chapter 11, the court could have
pulled all that back and more.

Goldman was very vulnerable to AIG, and had Paulsen not gone in and paid all AIG CDS at Face, Goldman would have choked.[/quote]

Pat: Utter gibberish and utterly divorced from reality.

Goldman had NO counterparty risk with AIG at all. Their position was nearly fully collateralized through cash and securities and the balance was covered by insurance (in the form of CDS).

You might want to assemble the actual facts before weighing in on a topic.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=patb]

Had AIG declared Chapter 11, the court could have
pulled all that back and more.

Goldman was very vulnerable to AIG, and had Paulsen not gone in and paid all AIG CDS at Face, Goldman would have choked.[/quote]

Pat: Utter gibberish and utterly divorced from reality.

Goldman had NO counterparty risk with AIG at all. Their position was nearly fully collateralized through cash and securities and the balance was covered by insurance (in the form of CDS).

You might want to assemble the actual facts before weighing in on a topic.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=patb]

Had AIG declared Chapter 11, the court could have
pulled all that back and more.

Goldman was very vulnerable to AIG, and had Paulsen not gone in and paid all AIG CDS at Face, Goldman would have choked.[/quote]

Pat: Utter gibberish and utterly divorced from reality.

Goldman had NO counterparty risk with AIG at all. Their position was nearly fully collateralized through cash and securities and the balance was covered by insurance (in the form of CDS).

You might want to assemble the actual facts before weighing in on a topic.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=patb]

Had AIG declared Chapter 11, the court could have
pulled all that back and more.

Goldman was very vulnerable to AIG, and had Paulsen not gone in and paid all AIG CDS at Face, Goldman would have choked.[/quote]

Pat: Utter gibberish and utterly divorced from reality.

Goldman had NO counterparty risk with AIG at all. Their position was nearly fully collateralized through cash and securities and the balance was covered by insurance (in the form of CDS).

You might want to assemble the actual facts before weighing in on a topic.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=patb]

Had AIG declared Chapter 11, the court could have
pulled all that back and more.

Goldman was very vulnerable to AIG, and had Paulsen not gone in and paid all AIG CDS at Face, Goldman would have choked.[/quote]

Pat: Utter gibberish and utterly divorced from reality.

Goldman had NO counterparty risk with AIG at all. Their position was nearly fully collateralized through cash and securities and the balance was covered by insurance (in the form of CDS).

You might want to assemble the actual facts before weighing in on a topic.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]Do you really believe that an SEC lawsuit is just lip service?

A lawsuit consumes a lot of executive time and company resources, and can certainly bring down a company. Remember what happened to Anthur Anderson when it was found guilty?[/quote]

Brian: You might want to check the SEC’s track record on litigation before getting overly excited about this.

Also, there is a huge difference between civil fraud and criminal fraud, hence your comparison between Goldman and Andersen is inapt. The differences between Enron and Goldman are huge. Not defending Goldman, mind, simply pointing out the facts.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]Do you really believe that an SEC lawsuit is just lip service?

A lawsuit consumes a lot of executive time and company resources, and can certainly bring down a company. Remember what happened to Anthur Anderson when it was found guilty?[/quote]

Brian: You might want to check the SEC’s track record on litigation before getting overly excited about this.

Also, there is a huge difference between civil fraud and criminal fraud, hence your comparison between Goldman and Andersen is inapt. The differences between Enron and Goldman are huge. Not defending Goldman, mind, simply pointing out the facts.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]Do you really believe that an SEC lawsuit is just lip service?

A lawsuit consumes a lot of executive time and company resources, and can certainly bring down a company. Remember what happened to Anthur Anderson when it was found guilty?[/quote]

Brian: You might want to check the SEC’s track record on litigation before getting overly excited about this.

Also, there is a huge difference between civil fraud and criminal fraud, hence your comparison between Goldman and Andersen is inapt. The differences between Enron and Goldman are huge. Not defending Goldman, mind, simply pointing out the facts.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=briansd1]Do you really believe that an SEC lawsuit is just lip service?

A lawsuit consumes a lot of executive time and company resources, and can certainly bring down a company. Remember what happened to Anthur Anderson when it was found guilty?[/quote]

Brian: You might want to check the SEC’s track record on litigation before getting overly excited about this.

Also, there is a huge difference between civil fraud and criminal fraud, hence your comparison between Goldman and Andersen is inapt. The differences between Enron and Goldman are huge. Not defending Goldman, mind, simply pointing out the facts.

[Author]

Posts