Why is there Resentment Towards Goldman Sachs and their String of Success?

So just read Vanity Fair’s, Bethany McLean’s 8,500 word profile on Goldman Sachs in which she claims “One of the biggest disconnects on Wall Street todaygoldman-sachs-475x314 is between the way Goldman Sachs sees itself (they’re the smartest) and the way everyone else sees Goldman (they’re the smartest, greediest, and most dangerous).” Within the article she outlines the Goldman culture and the shift in the firm’s way it deals with clients and how in her opinion all they care about now a days is MONEY!!! Here are my opinions on the article.

What is Wrong with Profits?

I say this because this constantly seems to be the number one critic of Goldman, they make to much money. What is wrong with profits? Shouldn’t we be standing by Goldman congratulating them on reporting $17 billion in profits? Nope instead we are bashing them claiming Goldman was the result of this financial Armageddon and frankly it’s not true. Goldman wasn’t the problem, plain and simple. Luckily enough they did not become a causality of the crisis like Lehman and Bear Sterns. This crisis was caused by excessive greed and risk taken on by numerous amounts of banks. Thousands in fact. Frankly Goldman was the smartest of the group shorting all mortgage back securities back in Summer 2007. Yes Goldman was seeing the signs of the collapse before everyone else and they capitalized on it making boatloads of money. Is this unethical? Nope it’s just the result of having top-tier talent and being surrounded by the Wall Street Elite.

Did Goldman Manipulate the System?

People love to hate success. We see this with the array of comments coming out attacking Goldman personally. “They say Goldman was responsible for huge banknotesystemic risk, and now they’re trying to pretend they weren’t.” Blankfein did address this issue and issued a public apology: “We participated in things that were clearly wrong and have reason to regret.” People were outraged his admittance though frankly it should have been joined with the CEO’s of over 1,000 other financial institutions that participated in the same risky ventures. As for playing the system, no Goldman made a bold predication when others doubted the market would continue to fall. Did they make money? Yes but how can we punish them going out on a limb.

Why Does Everyone Loves to Hate Goldman Sachs?

I believe that Goldman gets bashed now days for their string of success and secrecy. In the last decade or so the U.S. has shifted to resent success and people who makes lots of money. We are leading into class warfare between the haves and the have-nots and Goldman is deep in the trenches. It quotes like this that I resent.

“It’s a fear that, as one person puts it, Goldman’s “skill set” is “walking between the raindrops over and over again and getting away with it.” It is a fear that Goldman has the game rigged, even if no one can ever prove how, not just because of its political connections but also because of its immense size and power. And it is a belief that despite all the happy talk about clients and culture (and, boy, is there a lot of that) the Goldman of today cares about one thing and one thing only: making money for itself.”

First Goldman deserves every dollar they make, the reason they are so successful is they go the extra effort, put in the hours, and hire the best of the best. They have developed a unique culture, characterized by impossibly hard work, loyalty, and secrecy.

“I worked there as an analyst for three years in the early 90s, and I remember that most people couldn’t take advantage of the long line of black cars that waited until midnight outside 85 Broad Street to take them home. Instead, they had to call for cars, because they never got out early enough. I alsolloyd_blankfein recall being told that having a tan in the summer was a bad sign, because it meant that you weren’t working hard enough.”

Looks like those extra hours and hard work have paid off and that average $700,000 annual bonus per employee is well deserved. The other huge concern other than money is the secrecy of Goldman’s culture. Yes Goldman is followed by huge conspiracy theories that secretly they control the U.S. Economy. Adding to this are the concerns that we don’t know how they make all that money, as no one can understand their Financial Statements. More to the problem is the government is infiltrated with ex-goldmanites. The last two Secretary’s of the Treasury along with half the fed, an array of senators, representatives, etc. Is it their fault that these people still have strong feelings to the company that launched their career? As a result Goldman does get the benefits being helped out by its huge list of powerful alumni. How can we stop these people from helping out?

Goldman Doesn’t Care About its Clients

Goldman was founded on 14 principles, the first “Our clients’ interests always come first.” Has this thought process shifted under the new regime? Has money become the number one interest? I say no, this is not the same time as the 1890s when Goldman was founded. The commercialized economy has made Goldman into what it is, plus if they didn’t care about there clients then why do they all keep coming back? Its because Goldman is the best.

“And while some say they do business with Goldman because the firm’s omnipresence means they have to, there is another reason, which even its most bitter critics concede: Goldman is better. Why is that? I ask a hedge-fund manager who has just finished his own heated explanation about how he doesn’t trust Goldman. “I can’t really tell you why it’s better. It’s just better,” he says. “It’s six p.m. in New York City, and Goldman will figure out how to get the right person in Hong Kong—a guy we’ve never spoken to—on the phone to walk us through exactly what we want to know. He’ll be fully knowledgeable.” He laughs. “Try the same thing with Citi. They can’t even figure out what they know, let alone how to take advantage of it.”

So go right ahead have your resentments, hate Goldman’s success as in my opinion it only makes them stronger. We need someone in this country striving for perfection, success, defying all odds. Honestly all in all a strong Goldman Sachs is good for the country.

Filed Under: Consumer Goods | Financials | U.S. Politics | World Politics | Other Investment Related NewsFeatured

Tags:

  • http://voicedup.com/ thevoice@voicedup.com

    Claris,

    You have provided nothing substantial to the facts that I presented. My aforementioned references are real and availble online. Your argument that I and WOW are illinformed is feeble and poorly constructed based on your repetiton of what James previously posted. In actuality your agreement is proving my point “Your only valid point is that the money helped Goldman it didn’t save it.” this reinforces what I stated and the funds aloted to GS helped to the point of bailing them out. Your choice of words are semantics.

    The actions of GS and the US governemnt are akin to France advancing to the world cup vs. Ireland. For the fans watching the game they witnessed an illegal hand ball which won France the last spot for the world cup. After a replay it was clearly visible that the winning goal occured after an illigal hand ball. Nothing can be done because rules are rules and the referees decision is final within the game.

    Same applies to GS, the government provided funds to GS which propelled the company to avoid collapse. While after the fact this is visible to everyone but nothing can really be done.

    To reinforce my initial stance, GS did nothing wrong and the one responsible is the US consumer. Read here:
    http://www.voicedup.com/index.php/us-consumernot-goldman-sachsthe-real-great-american-bubble/

    Payouts should not be limited for any private company. Its the shameful timeline of events of the US governement that irks people.

    • Claris

      You either have yet to show significant proof.

      As of right now its he say she say.

      • http://voicedup.com thevoice@voicedup.com

        lol nice reply…

  • http://RandomChatter.org Alex

    Quoting:
    THEIR RECORD BONUSES AND PROFITS WOULDN’T EVEN EXIST IF NOT FOR THE TAXPAYER.
    /quote

    I imagine GS folk are taxpayers as well.

  • http://RandomChatter.org Alex

    Put yourself in their shoes…What would you do?

    • http://RandomChatter.org Alex

      Directing this question to Wow.

  • http://voicedup.com thevoice@voicedup.com

    James,

    The night before AIG received its 80+ billion bailout, GS was putting together their package to proceed with bankruptcy. Had AIG not been handed these funds GS today would be in the same place as Lehman and Bear. The only difference is a previous employee(s) of GS decided that AIG would cause financial cataclysm throughout the US economic system and therefore decided to bailout AIG knowing that this directly benefited GS. I am in no way shape or form against GS but the rules do not apply to all and certain people/companies receive benefits that are extraordinary and obvious to even the most average investor. You have posted numerous articles that too big too fail means you must fail therefore you must understand how this reflects on a company that is alive today due to a favor…. They were no better hedged than bear stearns or Lehman, they just had someone on their side, which is great to have dont get me wrong. If you get a chance to go back to last year and read up on the some articles and how much the hedge GS had with AIG was worth… this hedge should have failed which means they incorrectly assessed the risk tolerance of AIG which means they were wrong and should have failed along with LEH and BS…. its nice to have someone bailing you out isnt it?

    • Wow

      Exactly. GS was toast if not for Paulson. Even Lloyd Blankfein publicly admitted that they made massive mistakes just last month.

    • http://stocksonwallstreet.net James

      Agreed they were saved with AIG due to the large hedge but it has come out with many sources saying that even without that and TARP that GS would still be fine. Paulson himself stand by this statement.

      • Wow

        Of course Paulson will say that. What is he supposed to say? Goldman was on the hook for exactly $13B in CDS losses if AIG failed. That would have sent them into certain bankruptcy. Then Paulson handed them $13B on a silver platter as they paid Goldman on the dollar for the CDS exposure to AIG.

        These are the facts James. You need to do your homework.

  • Wow

    This has to be one of the most misinformed pieces you have ever written. Goldman was bailed out to the tune of tens of billions. Not only did they need $10B in taxpayer money, but they were funneled over $40B more via TARP and AIG.

    You clearly don’t understand the details behind the Goldman bailout. This firm would have failed if not for the taxpayer. You ask why we are outraged at Goldman and their “record profits” and record bonuses? BECAUSE THEIR RECORD BONUSES AND PROFITS WOULDN’T EVEN EXIST IF NOT FOR THE TAXPAYER.

    Do your research before you write crap like this.

    • http://RandomChatter.org Alex

      Whatever man. Your jealous about not being part of the action.
      Matter of fact,its none of your damn business.
      GS had profits & handed out bonuses…it’s called big business.It is part of what GS or any business will do.
      I say well done GS,just do it.

      Get into a better character when responding a disagreement. No use answering in a spastic way.

      • Wow

        Where were the profits when they were spiraling into the abyss last year? They lost over $2B in Q4 last year. They would have filed for bankruptcy if not for the AIG and other bailouts.

        There wouldn’t be any profits if not for the taxpayer. It has nothing to do with envy. They were handed money and you put them on some pedestal like they achieved something outstanding. That’s sheer ignorance.

        • http://stocksonwallstreet.net James

          Actually no there is substantial proof that Goldman did not need TARP, they filed properly to switch to a Bank Holding company which helped them substantially. Here are direct quotes from Lloyd Blankfein.

          On a Thursday in October—the very day when the firm announced it had made $8.4 billion in profits so far this year—he speculates whether Goldman would have survived the financial conflagration in the fall of 2008 entirely on its own, without any kind of help, implicit or explicit, from the government. “I thought we would”

          When I ask Gary Cohn, Goldman’s chief operating officer, and David Viniar, the firm’s chief financial officer, if, barring a financial Armageddon, Goldman would have survived without all the various forms of government intervention, Viniar says, “Yes!” almost before I can finish the question. “I think we would not have failed,” says Cohn. “We had cash.”

          Why would these guys lie when Lloyd himself came out publicly and said they were at fault for other things?

        • Wow

          “No substantial proof”? OF course their executives are going to say they wouldn’t have failed. Did you hear the Bear Stearns and Lehman execs saying the exact same thing just weeks before they went under? They have to say that.

          Take your head out of the sand. It’s clear that you didn’t think this article thru before writing it.

    • Anthony M

      The taxpayer money was not neccessary or needed for GS.

      Point proven by the WSJ, FT, and the Goldman Bankers themselves. GOLDMAN WAS NOT IN THE SAME SITUATION AS THE REST!!!!

      Ultimatly they had money on hand and were not as exposed due to the protection and the smart risks they took.

      • Wow

        What are you talking about? Are you trying to say that Goldman could have survived the AIG failure? You don’t think the $13B exposure would have sent them into imminent bankruptcy? You are oblivious.

        Goldman got bailed out. It’s a fact. If AIG had failed they would have failed. The fact that anyone can fail to see this is a clear sign that you don’t understand finance 101. I know this site is written by a college student, but come on. This is embarrassing stuff here.

        • http://voicedup.com/ thevoice@voicedup.com

          Wow I believe we understand what went on between GS, AIG and the government but you cant expect everyone to fully grasp the economics behind this. As you stated this site is being written by a college student and the only time he will trully be exposed is once on wall street. But let take a closer look….

          James,

          There is substantial proof that GS needed all the funds it could get. Again you need to perform thorough research if you wish to be accurate on your reporting. The special inspector general of TARP conducted an audit of AIG’s counterparties last year, focusing primarily on GS. There were a few articles written on this….

          “Had AIG collapsed, the default protection Goldman purchased from third parties would not have been worth the paper it was written on. Why? those third parties would have gone up in flames. Insurance is only as good as the insurer backing it.”

          I also know you are an avid reader of the WSJ: WSJ clearly pointed out, “Goldman itself sold credit default swaps, too. Had AIG defaulted and markets imploded, it would have had to make payments to its counterparties as well….with not enough cash on hand.”

        • Claris

          Voicedup and WOW you could not be more ill-informed. Yes the bailout substanitally helped Goldman like it would have helped anyone however there is no way that they would have failed without it. Its simply stated even with the exposure Goldman had enough assets to back up their positions. Blankfein assumed risk but smart risk and never jeopardized Goldman.

          Your only valid point is that the money helped Goldman it didn’t save it.

  • http://stocksonwallstreet.net James

    What are your opinions on the whole GS situation?