tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25740524.post2777239173555302874..comments2024-03-11T13:16:19.098-04:00Comments on Ad Orientem: John Paulson who made billions is not chargedUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25740524.post-13345681557705021042010-04-19T14:09:02.900-04:002010-04-19T14:09:02.900-04:00Paulson did nothing more than bet against the suck...Paulson did nothing more than bet against the suckers who thought housing prices would rise forever. Why pile on the one guy who pointed out that the emperor had no clothes? Wait, I think I know the answer ...The Anti-Gnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04386593803225823789noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25740524.post-12008127704443308042010-04-19T11:36:32.245-04:002010-04-19T11:36:32.245-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.The Anti-Gnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04386593803225823789noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25740524.post-75330049352043243842010-04-17T16:27:47.651-04:002010-04-17T16:27:47.651-04:00But today's SEC is much more like the Wicked W...But today's SEC is much more like the Wicked Witch: "I'll get you and your little dog, too!" So Paulson... ought not be too comfortable. There's an unholy alliance between regulators and the plaintiff's bar these days: They share information, and this will be no exception, and suits aren't afraid to name individuals and sue them personally as part of the case. That's just the MO. It's why we all have that E&O. I don't get the double jeopardy bit, but we moved beyond the constitution a LONG time ago I guess. <br /><br />My guess is that Goldman will settle. Politics could well spoil the courtroom long before anyone gets there and make those risks too great. And look at how cheap Spitzer used to let folks off for high crimes with a pittance + a campaign contribution :) So smart money says settle and pray the judge okays it.James the Thickheadedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11128470567186118742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25740524.post-65942782120151808302010-04-17T13:33:02.682-04:002010-04-17T13:33:02.682-04:00James,
My defense was of Paulson, not Goldman Sach...James,<br />My defense was of Paulson, not Goldman Sachs. A court will have to decide if GS broke the law. But I do agree that at the very least their actions raise troubling ethical questions.<br /><br />In ICXC<br />JOhnJohn (Ad Orientem)https://www.blogger.com/profile/14329907942477160166noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25740524.post-87231814698300747962010-04-17T10:54:28.438-04:002010-04-17T10:54:28.438-04:00Hogwash my friend. Goldman went rogue and descende...Hogwash my friend. Goldman went rogue and descended from the Seraphim long ago... when they sold themselves first to the Japanese, and then went public. Today... it's no white shoe firm, but more like you're average garbage. Reputation made them, and now it will break them and the rest of the Street... not because it's about making money, but because they wanted to make ALL the money. They used to leave crumbs on the table so that those who rode along with them would be tahnkful, and they were. Then they got greedy, and began slurping up the crumbs... word gets around, and aside from the few chumps still shilling for them and impressed with their legerdemain, there tends to be a narrowing of who will trade with you. As a famous investor once said, "You can spend a lifetime making a reputation, but you lose it in a minute." They've spent years losing it, and their profits, and likely all the Street's - are going to go sharply down. It's history, it's repeating, and no... we're not going to avoid the negative consequences any more than Goldman could maintain its once-good culture and trade on it at the same time. It may take time to play out... it's a multiyear scenario, but we're following it to the letter so far.James the Thickheadedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11128470567186118742noreply@blogger.com