JPM Customer Issues and Goldman Takes Another 54,100 Ounces of Gold For the 'House Account'

The receipts for another large chunk of bullion changed ownership from a JPM Customer to the Goldman 'house account' at $1,122 per ounce.

With all the usual caveats, and just taking note.

This is especially intriguing since Goldman has been publicly beating the drums for gold to drop well below $1000.  Perhaps, like Rick who moved to Casablanca 'for the waters,' they are merely misinformed.

We ought not to presume anything about how naive the customer might be, or the sly cunning of any particular buyer.  For all we know the 'customer' could be a large and highly competent ETF or fund, and not some naive or desperate or perhaps whimsical individual.

And as for the buyer and its motives, my friend Dave offered some possible insight on this phenomenon here.   

While it is a hypothesis based on a correlation founded in possibly disparate facts, it is no more untoward than those who will simply dismiss the whole thing, and apparently ascribe no significance to almost anything whatsoever, other than the price of gold and silver must go lower. There is no truth, and there are no fundamentals, when things and their values are merely what we say that they are.

And I am sure that all of this is simply more of God's work, and not sly cunning in service to earthly greed, from such a benevolent and public-spirited institution.

JPM Customer Delivers 500 Gold Contracts of Bullion, Goldman Takes Most For the House

It is not possible to interpret the action fully from this report below.  Let me stipulate that up front.

It seems that a 'customer' trading with JPM has allowed 500 of their August gold receipts to be taken for 'delivery.' And most of them, 442 to be exact, were picked up by Goldman Sachs for their 'House' account.

In and of itself this may not be so significant. For example, we do not know who the 'customer' at JPM might be, or why they might have been selling their bullion receipts. Perhaps they were just raising some cash to cover stock losses.

And we do not know why Goldman picked up receipts for 44,200 ounces of gold at $1124. And what exactly this 'house account' might be.

Goldman has been stopping, or taking deliveries, for their House account pretty steadily this month.

Don't be too impressed by the words, because a 'delivery' just means paper receipts change hands.  Most of the time nothing really happens to the bullion, at least in The Bucket Shop.  It just gets shoved around the plate.  Up for delivery, back to storage, rinse and repeat.

I do like to keep track of how many receipts are marked 'deliverable' or offered for sale at the prevailing price, compared to the potential number of claims, or active contracts.

This is how it is for gold.   Silver, not so much.

CNT seems to be using the Comex for an actual sale and delivery and withdrawal mechanism for their actual business of obtaining a supply of bullion for their wholesale customers.

What an odd thing to do, actually transact deals between people who will take and use what they sell.  Well, they are an oversized coin shop, so you will have to excuse them.

And as the pit slugs will be quick to point out, we do not know exactly what this transaction on this report 'means.'  That is in the nature of these markets and their reports.  It could have been this, it could have been that.   Don't stand too close to the table kid.

I just thought it was interesting, and wanted to make a note of it for future reference.   I am curious to see how things in the warehouse reports set up for the big month of December.

And besides, it's nice to watch someone busy doing God's work.

Greece and Goldman: Can the World Afford the American Elite's Addiction To Abusive Banking Practices

 

Und das große Feuer in Soho
sieben Kinder und ein Greis -
in der Menge Mackie Messer, den
man nicht fragt und der nichts weiss.

Und die minderjährige Witwe
deren Namen jeder weiss
wachte auf und war geschändet -
Mackie, welches war dein Preis?


Kurt Weill, Bertholdt Brecht, Die Moritat von Mackier Messer, 1928

Here is an example of the consequences of the failure to reform the outsized and kleptocratic financial system after bailing it out, even years after the latest financial crises.

The former Greek government was certainly more compliant to Western banks and political suggestions.  It was the introduction of a 'reform government' in Syriza that rustled the feathers of the international kleptocrats and their organizations.  

But we have heard all this before, many times, from investigative reporters and whistle-blowers such as John Perkins, on the 'economic hitmen.'

I would like to see Europe and Asia begin to take stronger measures to prohibit these banking cartels with long records of banking violations and market rigging from doing business in their regions and with any of their official financial instruments.

The US apparently does not have the political will to reform its banking system.

How much damage will they stand by and permit these sorts to visit on their people, who always seem to be picking up the pieces, through austerity and privatizations of their national assets.   Will these new trade agreements even allow them to exercise their national sovereignty to protect their people from fraudulent financial practices and price gouging in the future? 

The apologists for white collar criminality like to say, 'don't hate the player hate the game.'  But the only way to make the game honest again is to have these bent players take responsibility for their actions, and for the judges to start handing out red cards to any repeat offenders.

That would be more statesmanlike than visiting harsh punishments, and austerity, and slanders on their victims.  

Wall Street On Parade
Goldman Sachs Doesn’t Have Clean Hands in Greece Crisis
By Pam Martens and Russ Martens
June 30, 2015

Are Goldman Sachs executives Lloyd Blankfein, Gary Cohn and Addy Loudiadis losing any sleep over elderly pensioners waiting outside shuttered banks in Greece, desperately trying to obtain their pension checks to pay their rent and buy food? Are these Goldman honchos feeling a small pang of conscience over the humiliation by creditors of this once proud country?

Perhaps Blankfein, who famously espoused that he’s “doing God’s work” might shed a tear or two for the small child clinging to her elderly Grandmother’s hand as she searches in Athens for an ATM that will give her $66 from her bank account – the maximum allowed per day under the newly imposed capital controls.

According to investigative reports that appeared in Der Spiegel, the New York Times, BBC, and Bloomberg News from 2010 through 2012, Blankfein, now Goldman Sachs CEO, Cohn, now President and COO, and Loudiadis, a Managing Director, all played a role in structuring complex derivative deals with Greece which accomplished two things: they allowed Greece to hide the true extent of its debt and they ended up almost doubling the amount of debt Greece owed under the dubious derivative deals.

A February 2012 BBC documentary on the Goldman Sachs deal provides a layman’s view of the dirty underbelly of the deal, calling it “a toxic import” from America that is “hastening” the downfall of Greece...

For the unschooled to the ways of Wall Street, one might jump to the conclusion that Greece and its finance officials were knowing participants in the deal. That would be a reasonable assumption were it not for counties and cities and school districts across America that were similarly fleeced and hoodwinked by investment banks on Wall Street.

In March 2010, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) released a study showing that from 2006 through early 2008, Wall Street banks are estimated to have collected as much as $28 billion in termination fees from state and local governments who were desperate to exit abusive derivative deals. That amount does not include the ongoing outsized interest payments that were, and still are being paid in some cases. Experts believe that billions of these abusive derivative deals may still remain unacknowledged by embarrassed municipalities.

Back in 2010 when German Chancellor Angela Merkel first heard of these derivative deals to hide sovereign debt among European Union partners, she had this to say: “It’s a scandal if it turned out that the same banks that brought us to the brink of the abyss helped to fake the statistics.”

Well, that’s exactly what happened...

Read the entire article here.

Goldman Closes Its Gold Short - Krugman Looks But Does Not See

As you may recall, Goldman's call to short gold set off the precipitous decline through long term support as paper gold was sold in size during the quiet trading hours.

And as gold fell through 1400 traders said Goldman was in the market buying physical bullion.

And now their short recommendation comes off.

That Goldman is called a Bank, with access to the Fed window, the subsidy of cheap government funding, and the protection of deposit insurance is a disgrace.

A footnote in history perhaps, but worth remembering.

"We have closed our recommendation to short COMEX Gold, as prices moved above the stop at $1,400/toz. We have exited the trade significantly below our original target of $1,450/toz, for a potential gain of 10.4%.

The move since initiation was surprisingly rapid, likely exacerbated by the break of well-flagged technical support levels.

Our bias is to expect further declines in gold prices on the combination of continued ETF outflows as conviction in holding gold continues to wane as well as our economists’ forecast for a reacceleration in US growth later this year."

The Land of the Blind

Paul Krugman said something absolutely remarkable today. Here is the quote:

"It’s true that few anticipated the severity of the 2008 crisis — but that wasn’t a deep failure of theory, it was a failure of observation. We actually had a pretty good understanding of bank runs; we just failed to notice that traditional banks were a much smaller share of the system than before, and that unregulated, unguaranteed shadow banks had become so important."

Paul Krugman, A Heart Breaking Work of Staggering Folly

Oh I see. You weren't wrong, you just weren't looking.

Are you kidding me?  Your theory is fine, but your excuse is that you do not understand the fundamental structure of the system at the core of your work, for which you feel free to make policy recommendations?   

So tell us,  what other things aren't you looking at in the real world these days? 

How about the widespread corruption in the banking and financial system, and the egregious manipulation in the markets?   Don't you think that bears on the nature of the prescriptions which the economists are dispensing?  

Economists are certainly the authors of 'heartbreaking works of staggering folly.'   And in addition quite a few of them seem to have an underdeveloped sense of irony.

 

Gold Daily and Silver Weekly Charts - Goldman Says 'Sell' and It's a Risk On Day

Intraday commentary here.

It is worth reading.

Goldman made a big bear call on gold today.  Let's mark it, and see how it turns out in six months.

Smith: Why I am Leaving Goldman Sachs

"And remember, where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control."

John Dalberg Lord Acton

This is an interesting commentary not only on Goldman but on the entire Anglo-American banking cartel as well. An executive at the 'bank' has resigned in moral revulsion.

But Wall Street need not fear those who refuse, in acts of conscience, to participate in the looting of customers and the abuse of the public trust. There are always others more than willing and eager to take their place.   Siewert, Former Geithner Aide, Heading To Goldman.

The reaction from Wall Street is that Mr. Smith, a ten year veteran, sounds naive. Dick Bove just told one of the giggling spokesmodels that if Goldman rips off its customers, and the suckers keep coming back for more, then that is the stock to buy. They are just that good.

Let's not get too misty or wax romantic about this. Goldman Sachs was a major corrupting force that contributed to the collapse and Depression of the 1930s, earning their own chapter in John Kenneth Galbraith's The Great Crash of 1929, In Goldman Sachs We Trust.

Greg Smith's comments on leadership are spot on. The tone of an organization is heavily influenced, if not set, by the behaviour and the policies of the leadership. And the part that character and honesty play in this has somehow been forgotten, abandoned.

"A genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus."

Martin Luther King

I can advise Mr. Smith that if he is disgusted at the behaviour on Wall Street, he ought never to go to Washington, which is replete with those who would do anything for power.

When it comes to 'ripping off their clients,' the politicians of the past twenty years are the real professionals. Not only thieves, but rapists and torturers and conmen.  

And this is why the relationship between the corporate sociopaths and the government, known colloquially as crony capitalism, is such an historically recurrent theme. Heart speaks to heart.

This Republican primary is one of the most disgusting spectacles of pandering and deceitful cynicism that I can remember. And the Democrats and their faux reformers are little better. MF Global and the lack of investigations and prosecutions in times of general financial fraud prove that.

Corruption is the coin of the realm. And the nation suffers.

"The preposterous claim that deviations from market efficiency were not only irrelevant to the recent crisis but could never be relevant is the product of an environment in which deduction has driven out induction and ideology has taken over from observation.

The belief that models are not just useful tools but also are capable of yielding comprehensive and universal descriptions of the world has blinded its proponents to realities that have been staring them in the face. That blindness was an element in our present crisis, and conditions our still ineffectual responses.

Economists – in government agencies as well as universities – were obsessively playing Grand Theft Auto while the world around them was falling apart."

John Kay, An Essay on the State of Economics

And that is why there will be no sustainable recovery, but instead, the whirlwind.

NYT
Why I Am Leaving Goldman Sachs
By GREG SMITH March 14, 2012

TODAY is my last day at Goldman Sachs. After almost 12 years at the firm — first as a summer intern while at Stanford, then in New York for 10 years, and now in London — I believe I have worked here long enough to understand the trajectory of its culture, its people and its identity. And I can honestly say that the environment now is as toxic and destructive as I have ever seen it.

To put the problem in the simplest terms, the interests of the client continue to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money. Goldman Sachs is one of the world’s largest and most important investment banks and it is too integral to global finance to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of college that I can no longer in good conscience say that I identify with what it stands for...

It makes me ill how callously people talk about ripping their clients off. Over the last 12 months I have seen five different managing directors refer to their own clients as “muppets,” sometimes over internal e-mail...

Read the rest here.

The Road to Serfdom Is Lawlessness: Inside Goldman Sachs

"Giving sophisticated models and fast computers to traders is like giving handguns and tequila to teenage boys. Only complete mayhem can result (and as we saw recently, complete mayhem did result)."

Here is a piece I found interesting from a quant who left Goldman Sachs. It matches what I have seen first hand over the years doing business with the brokers and exchanges, and from friends who joined other high energy Wall Street firms including Lehman and Bear Stearns and Morgan Stanley.

The investment banks and brokers are an adolescent culture, high on macho and low on expansiveness in thinking to put it politely.

I do not have a problem with that, per se. I enjoyed hanging with most of these guys, their odd sense of irreverent cynicism and gallows humour, and the grab-asstic frat life style. It is fun, if you do not take it too seriously. I used to follow an annual race among brokers on the stairs of a large NY skyscraper with interest, a friend phoning in the results. Big money was bet on it. It's a good time, and a means of relieving the tremendous pressures of a high stress profession.

The difficulty is that over the past ten years the financial sector, including the once staid commercial banks, has been absolutely overwhelmed by the hedge fund and investment banking mentality, which in turn has been influencing serious policy discussions in Washington to the detriment of the nation. Most of it had to do with deregulation smearing the boundaries, and opening new opportunities for control frauds through innovation in complexity.

Banks must keep up with their competitors, and if one does it, they all must do it to stay in business. That is why regulation is so vital in this highly competitive sector. One cannot be virtuous as a commercial entity with obligations to shareholders and customers under brothel rules.

Goldman Sachs is primarily a big hedge fund with a lot of political clout and an inside line with the Fed. They have a trading, hedge fund culture these days. It was not always like this. At one time a firm's reputation and their word was everything in a system founded on confidence. With a trading culture it's all about the bottom line, with profit as virtue, and deceit in the name of profit is no vice. You do not wish to have fellows with this mindset running any substantial part of your country.

Quite a bit of that came with their change in status from a predatory trader to mainstream bank in name only, with a predator's instincts and reward system. And this multiplied their potentially negative impact and influence on the entire financial system.

Even worse, their self-centered and short term thinking and clever manipulation of the rules has become the tail wagging the big dog of the country, because the political climate in Washington, and elsewhere, has been largely corrupted by money. And in a bubble economy, the financial centers are where the money is.

Wall Street is like the Gauls (or the Ferengi for the sci-fi fans), ruthlessly obvious and lacking in subtlety, wallowing in the raw and often ostentatious use of amoral power for gain. Washington, on the other hand, tends to effete decadence and studied pretense, the sly and subtle subornation of character and too often the law in the service of power. The mix of these two cultures is an antichrist on the rocks, a deadly cocktail indeed.

I had the opportunity to work with several congressional and even presidential campaigns and administrations starting with Nixon. I don't claim to be an insider, but I have seen a side of things that is transparent to most. I liked that culture as well. I used to go to Washington for the State of the Union message each year, to meet old acquaintances from the Staffs for drinks and chat at Bullfeathers or The Palm to catch up on things, while the big dogs were attending the show. You get the best view of things from the servants, especially if you are benign, an interested non-player.

The deterioration in Washington is evident. These men are not the brightest stars in the firmament, and at times they are downright ignorant of things we might take for granted because they often live a rarefied existence with access to people and information managed by staffs. That is an unfortunate necessity because they are drinking from a firehose of information, and the side effect is a vulnerability to manipulation and well-crafted persuasion.

Their chief ability seems to be to know what to say and to whom, what levers to pull to get something done, making deals, gaining and trading power, and how to get elected. They are great at networking. But this leaves them terribly vulnerable to influence, and group think, and brother, inside the Beltway these days it is all about lawyers, guns (power) and money.

There has always been an element of this, but over the past twenty years, with the whole deregulatory movement, it has become supersized, like a feeding frenzy. I have had the opportunity to discuss this with some older friends in the business and they tend to agree that things have changed.

There are always creepy and seriously warped people who are attracted to the halls of power. I have met a few who were simply chilling. More common are the broken people, with drugs and drink and sex filling the holes in their being, hollowed out by the power and fame that lured them in. But these were always the exceptions.

In government there always had been an element of service to the country and a kind of dignity underpinning the system, a kind of shared camaraderie, that seems to have been tossed in a ditch of expediency and greed, and the lust for power on a mass scale.

What had been the exception is now the rule, at least beneath the urbane, often pietistic, veneer. You can still be tossed out of office in the government for doing things that would still make you a legend on Wall Street.

When the politicos were doing something wrong back then at least they knew it, and they were ashamed of it, despite the usual bluff and bravado. A stiff conversation with a federal prosecutor would make a Congressional staffer's blood run cold. Now it is more like business as usual, and even getting caught is not all that bad, given the current trend to bipartisan professional courtesy, mavericks excepted.

Greed is indeed the greatest good, the fatal flaw behind the decline of the 'me generation.'

The law, that much maligned government of regulations and restraints, abused and fallible as it may sometimes be, is the bulwark of society, and often the only thing standing between the people and packs of ravening wolves.

Those who would tear down the law in some misguided pursuit of reform, or of an adolescent anarchy or utopia of 'no rules' at all, might find it hard to stand when the cold winds of avarice and tyranny of power blow across the land, with no laws to stop or restrain them. The madness serves none, consuming all.

"Equal protection" under the law is the best safeguard that the average person enjoys. Remove the law and you remove the protection, and it is every man for himself, and the individual is irrelevant.

This is why the Banks must be restrained, and the financial system reformed, with balance restored to the economy, before there can be any sustained recovery. And underpinning all of this is the integrity of the regulatory and law enforcement process, and a serious pass at campaign finance reform and limitation of the power of large corporations and organizations to buy influence with other people's money.

The story of the 21st century will be the struggle of the individual versus the organization, the machine controlled by the elite few. A cyclical theme no doubt, but the powerful few seem to become more efficient in their promotion of tyranny on each iteration.

adgrok
Why founding a three-person startup with zero revenue is better than working for Goldman Sachs
By Antonio
23 Jul, 2010

I joined Goldman Sachs in 2005, after five flailing years in a physics Ph.D. program at Berkeley.

The average salary at Goldman Sachs in 2005 was $521,000, and that’s counting each and every trader, salesperson, investment banker, secretary, mail boy, shoe shine, and window cleaner on the payroll. In 2006, it was more like $633,000.

In the summer of 2005, I took one look at my offer letter and the Goldman Sachs logo above it, another look at my sordid grad student pad, and I got on a plane to New York within the week. I packed my copy of Liar’s Poker for reference.

My job on arrival? I was a pricing quant on the Goldman Sachs corporate credit trading desk1. We traded credit-default swaps, both distressed and investment-grade credit, and in the bizarre trading experiment assigned to me, the equity part of the corporate capital structure as well.

There were other characters in this drama. The sales guys were complete tools, with a total IQ, summing over all of them, still safely in the double digits. The traders were crafty and quick-witted, but technically unsophisticated and with the attention span of an ADHD kid hopped up on meth and Jolly Ranchers. And the quants (strategists in Goldman speak)? Mostly failed scientists (like me) who had sold out to the man and suddenly found themselves, after making it through two years of graduate quantum mechanics, with a bat-wielding gorilla peering over their shoulder (that would be the trader) asking them where their risk report was.

Wall Street is inward-looking and all-consuming. There exists nothing beyond the money game, and nothing that can’t be quantified into dollars and cents...

Note to Antonio. I have been where you are now. Watch out for the venture capitalists, and who they attempt to place on your board. They will steal your company and beggar your common shareholders if you allow them, and clap you in financial chains. Keep a close eye on cashflow and burn rates, because if you ever need second tier financing, you're done unless you are very, very lucky. Sandhill Road is the new Tortuga.

Goldman's Derivatives Clearing Service: The Better To Cheat You With My Dear

Say, aren't Goldman the fellows that just pled to fraudulent dealing in financial instruments like MBS, and paid a fairly hefty 500+ million dollar fine? The company is starting a centralized clearing facility for derivatives, which may be among those mandated for use by market participants, in the US government mandated efforts to reform.

When one considers the information available to a central clearing facility, somewhat like an exchange, it does give one pause to have the owner of that facility as a somewhat notorious and aggressive market participant with a known penchant for exploiting information for its own ends.

Financial reform and change you can believe in. It pays to have friends in high places.

Economic Policy Journal
If Regulators Say Trade Through a Central Exchange...
By Robert Wenzel

...Goldman Sachs starts a central exchange.

Is it me, or does it just seem that whatever the rules or regulations, Goldman comes out on top and pretty much ends up running the show?

Regulators are preparing rules that will require the majority of privately traded derivatives be cleared through central counterparties.

Goldman Sachs announced today the launch of its Derivatives Clearing Services (DCS) business. The DCS will provide clients with a comprehensive global OTC clearing service for interest rates, credit, foreign exchange, equities and commodities, says Goldman.

“In partnership with our clients, regulators and multiple clearing venues, we are committed to improving market structure for derivatives,” said Michael Dawley, Managing Director and Co-Head of Futures and DCS, Goldman Sachs. “The DCS offering provides our clients with a host of value-added services and multi-product expertise to successfully navigate this dynamically changing environment.”

According to a press release,Goldman Sachs said it recognizes that clients will be faced with new reporting, connectivity, and regulatory requirements. The firm is committed to investing in innovative solutions to help clients address these changes.

“The move to central clearing for OTC derivatives is a significant turning point in the marketplace," said Jack McCabe, Managing Director and Co-Head of Futures and DCS at Goldman Sachs. “Our strong trading franchise, coupled with our market leading futures and prime brokerage services, enables us to provide our clients with the foundation they need to adapt to these important industry developments."

How Goldman and J P Morgan May Intend to Rape the Mining Industry (Again) and Take It Over 'On the Cheap' As Bullion Rallies

Those who have followed the mining industry over the years know how painful it was for those who had sold their bullion forward, on the advice of bullion banks like Goldman and J P Morgan, to unwind those hedges. The cost was company insolvency and a sale on the cheap for the smaller players, and billions in writeoffs for the larger, like Barrick Gold.

Perhaps a round of precision naked short selling and bullion price suppression will soften them up the cash strapped miners, and curtail their access to the alternative sources of capital and credit enough to prompt some soft-headed and desperate CEO's make their (sometimes self-serving) deal with the devil again.

You will forgive me if I wonder if Goldman would be taking the other side of this trade with their customers, waiting gleefully for the day when their 'forecast' proved to be wrong, and the miners found themselves unwittingly in their greedy little hands, God's work having been done once again.

And if they are caught, well, the going price of fraud on a massive and obvious scale seems to be about $550 million, so that will have to be factored into the business plan. Short sales on the collateral damage should cover that cost of doing business nicely, and keep the moral hazard and faux regulators happy.

And as for investors, they may wish to consider putting any miner who buys into this scheme on their 'do not buy' list. Although it should be noted that Barrick had a few good years, while its peers suffered, for its betrayal of its industry and ultimately its shareholders, when the devil had his due. In the famous New Orleans lawsuit they claimed that they had been working with JPM at the behest of the Federal Reserve.

Are the BIS, the IMF, the ECB, and the Fed starting to scrape the bottom of their bullion barrel, requiring fresh sources of physical to sell into the market, and feeling the twinges of anxiety that disclosure is near, the jig is up? Hope so. Could not happen to a more deserving group. And I hope to live to see the day.

Mineweb
Goldman predicts falling gold price beyond 2011, recommends gold hedging
Lawrence Williams
Thursday, 15 Jul 2010

Goldman Sachs has raised its medium term gold price forecast to $1,355, but reckons prices will fall from 2011 and recommends producers sell gold forward.

LONDON - Plus ça change. Goldman Sachs is suggesting that mining companies sell gold forward again. The logic behind this is that although the bank reckons the gold price will increase to $1,355 an ounce over the next 12 months - a tiny increase from its earlier prediction of $1,335 - beyond that it is looking for prices to stabilise and fall as the U.S. Fed tightens monetary policy and the recession is seen to be ending.

Of course the big gold banks, of which Goldman is probably the most successful, can do very well out of its clients hedging their gold forward whatever the fortunes of its clients in so doing. It was notably the bank which reputedly advised Ashanti Goldfields to sell its gold forward at gold's low point back at the end of the 1990s - a policy which brought the gold miner to its knees leading to its takeover by AngloGold - another Goldman client. Indeed commentators have suggested that Goldman made profits on every angle of the Ashanti hedging debacle, and on the sale of one of its clients to another.

Goldman would probably counter that its primary responsibility was to its shareholders - perhaps even more so than its clients - and that the sudden turn-around in the gold price which caused Ashanti's effective bankruptcy, was completely unforeseen, but the whole episode left a bitter taste that lingers to this day, particularly in Ghana where Ashanti was seen as the country's major gold player on the world scene.

However, the fact that Goldman is still looking for an increase in the gold price, even if only over the next 12 months, is positive for gold. The bank actually forecast a six-month gold price (effectively a year-end figure) gold price of $1,290 rising to the $1,355 figure over the following six months. With predictions being regularly updated (the latest figure is an update from Goldman's previous one of only three weeks earlier) the position may again change depending on how quickly the global economy is seen as recovering.

Goldman also delivered forecasts for base metals and silver, all of which ranged higher than previous ones apart from zinc where the bank was looking or an 18% fall.

Meredith Whitney Slashes Earnings Estimates on Goldman Sachs From $4.75 to $1.70

This was reported on Bloomberg. Here is a copy of a story on this change in forecast by la belle dame sans merci, who is renowned for having called out the fakery in Wall Street prior to the financial collapse.

Although this news piece cited below does not provide details, analyst comments suggest the slump in earnings is likely to come from a drop in gains from fixed income trading, as the great wealth subsidy from Timmy and the Fed to a few crony banks runs dry. As one analyst commented:

"All you are really doing is rewinding the camera -- we are going to replay the fixed income cycle," said Brad Hintz, an analyst with Sanford C. Bernstein. "During that replay, fixed income gives up a lot of that profitability, especially on the credit side."

With the slumping volumes in equity trading and IPO's, it is an open question if Goldman can skim enough from the other markets to make up for their loss of Fed sponsored welfare payments.

StreetInsider
Ahead of Q2 Results, Meredith Whitney Slashes Estimates on Goldman (GS), Morgan Stanley (MS)

Shares of Goldman Sachs have begun a move lower on very heavy volume as we are hearing that controversial banking analyst Meredith Whitney has lowered her earnings estimates on the stock ahead of the company's quarterly results, expected out on Tuesday, July 20th.

Meredith now sees Goldman reporting Q2 EPS of $1.70, down from her previous estimate of $4.75 and compared to the current Street consensus estimate of $2.34. Q3 EPS estimate moves from $4.24 to $3.77, which compares to the Street estimate of $4.10. For FY10, Meredith is now expecting Goldman to report $15.70, down from $20 previously. The Street is looking for FY10 EPS of $16.76.

Whitney maintains a Hold rating on shares of Goldman.

Elsewhere among the big banks, the analyst also lowered estimates on Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MS). Whitney lowered her Q2 EPS estimate on MS from $0.68 to $0.40. The analyst consensus is currently calling for quarterly EPS of $0.50.

A Summary of the Goldman Sachs Fraud Case, and the Downfall of Icons

"Le secret des grandes fortunes sans cause apparente est un crime oublié, parce qu' il a été proprement fait."

(The secret of great returns which are difficult to explain is a crime that has not yet been discovered because it has been carefully executed."

Honoré de Balzac, Pere Goriot

There is quite a bit of spin surrounding the Goldman Sachs deal. The best debunking of the spin around the nature and quality of the SEC's case was written by Barry Ritholz.

One of the best summaries of what the deal actually encompassed is excerpted below by Rolling Stone journalist Matt Taibbi.

"Here's the Cliffs Notes version of the scandal: Back in 2007, Harvard-educated hedge-fund whiz John Paulson (no relation to then-Treasury secretary and former Goldman chief Hank Paulson) smartly decided the housing boom was a mirage. So he asked Goldman to put together a multibillion-dollar basket of crappy subprime investments that he could bet against. The bank gladly complied, taking a $15 million fee to do the deal and letting Paulson choose some of the toxic mortgages in the portfolio, which would come to be called Abacus.

What Paulson jammed into Abacus was mortgages lent to borrowers with low credit ratings, and mortgages from states like Florida, Arizona, Nevada and California that had recently seen wild home-price spikes. In metaphorical terms, Paulson was choosing, as sexual partners for future visitors to the Goldman bordello, a gang of IV drug users, Haitians and hemophiliacs, then buying life-insurance policies on the whole orgy. Goldman then turned around and sold this poisonous stuff to its customers as good, healthy investments.

Where Goldman broke the rules, according to the SEC, was in failing to disclose to its customers – in particular a German bank called IKB and a Dutch bank called ABN-AMRO – the full nature of Paulson's involvement with the deal. Neither investor knew that the portfolio they were buying into had essentially been put together by a financial arsonist who was rooting for it all to blow up.

Goldman even kept its own collateral manager – a well-known and respectable company called ACA – in the dark. The bank hired the firm to approve the bad mortgages being selected by Paulson, but never bothered to tell ACA that Paulson was actually betting against the deal. ACA thought Paulson was long, when actually he was short. That led to the awful comedy of ACA staffers holding meeting after meeting with Goldman and Paulson, and continually coming away confused as to why their supposedly canny financial partners kept kicking any decent mortgage out of the deal. In one ACA internal e-mail, the company wonders aloud why Paulson excluded mortgages issued by Wells Fargo – a bank that traditionally created high-quality mortgages. "Did [they] give a reason why they kicked out all the Wells deals?" the quizzical e-mail reads."

Matt Taibbi, The Feds Vs. Goldman

This is fraud, pure and simple. Goldman did not stand by and allow ACA to make its picks. Goldman and Paulson aggressively influenced the selection process, vetoing the good mortgages, and manipulating ACA, setting them up to be the fall guy in what is clearly a premeditated fraud.

The final defense being offered, after the smokescreens and misstatements of what happened have been pulled away, is that there can be no fraud when you are selling to a 'qualified investor' and making a market.

Goldman was not making a market. They were actively creating inherently dangerous products, and then recommending and selling them to their customers, qualified investors or not. It was fraud, and Goldman is a disreputable firm, that has been shown to engage in fraud across many markets and countries and venues. This particular scam with ACA is small change compared to the setting up of AIG, and the foul bailout ripped from the public with the collusion of the NY Fed.

Anyone who looked at their trading results, many standard deviations out of the norm, would have to know that there was some sort of fraud and market manipulation involved. It is the Bernie Madoff syndrome; the professionals all knew he was cheating somehow, but were more than willing to go along with it and turn a blind eye while it was to their advantage. And Goldman had the politicians in their pocket, and so they were powerful, not to be crossed. Almost as powerfully connected as the Fed's house bank, J. P. Morgan.

Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger have come out recently in defense of Goldman, attempting to paint this fraud as the work of a single rogue trader. That of course is a part of the spin, the carefully thought out and premeditated fraud which had ACA and then Fabrice Tourree as the designated scapegoats.

Warren holds quite a bit of Goldman Sachs stock. And all he and Charlie have shown is that once you strip away the trappings and the masks, the ornamentation and the legend, what you are left with is someone who is willing to lie down with pigs when the money is right. So the question is not what kind of man Warren Buffet is, but rather, what is his price.

When the tide goes out, we indeed see who is naked, and who is not. And it is not a pretty picture.

Goldman Sachs: A Pattern of Organized Criminal Behaviour?

Chris Whalen provides some excellent commentary on the Goldman Sachs fraud inquiry by the SEC at the beginning of his weekly newsletter, The Institutional Risk Analyst.

In addition to the information he provides about other deals, including those that specifically targeted AIG, he puts an interesting twist on this. He intimates that at times the Hedge Funds were acting in concert with the Big Banks as off-balance-sheet accomplices in crafting these complex frauds. And the Paulson - Goldman scandal may only be one of a type, and not perhaps the best or most flagrant example.

A reaction from many is that this is just the tip of the iceberg, a single point in a much larger picture of calculated fraud involving many more deals and significantly more money up to and including the bailout of AIG.

It is not enough to throw a few token fines on some selective deals, and then dismiss them as outliers, and then suggest we 'move on' to reform the market. The spin will be that what Goldman did was 'legal' but immoral. And for many today, morality is simply a matter of taste. And Paulson will be served up as the fall guy. It will take a serious investigation to uncover all the facts, and make the case stick. And the SEC is not competent to do this, for a variety of reasons.

And the reforms that the Congress will create as a result of this, at the least the ones permitted by Jamie and Lloyd, will quickly be circumvented with new fraudulent devices and it will quickly be business as usual. Its hard to say that the business has never stopped, even now. The Big Banks continue to manipulate markets and abuse derivatives as instruments of financial fraud.

The absolute worst place to conduct a serious investigation will be in front of the Congress is a show trial, designed to give some of the Senators and Representatives an opportunity to create sound bytes of anger, to be played in commercials for their re-election, and then at then end of the day, continue to collect fat campaign contributions, and then do nothing.

It does not require Republican permission for President Obama to direct the FBI and the Justice Department to begin a serious inquiry with an eye to RICO violations in what may be one of the largest financial frauds in history, dwarfing the Madoff Ponzi scheme in terms of value and number of victims.

Oh, and by the way, we hate to say we told you so, but please fire Larry Summers now that Bill Clinton has thrown him under the bus, and have him take Rubin's other protégé, Turbo Timmy, along with him.

My concern is that the American people even now do not understand how serious this crisis is. They are quickly distracted into ridiculous partisan spirit and frivolous diversions. This is the freedom and the welfare of their country that is at risk, and it is time to put aside childish things, and begin the serious work of reforming their financial system, the ownership of their media, and the political campaign process.

Institutional Risk Analyst
Goldman SEC Litigation: The End of OTC?
By Chris Whalen
April 19, 12010

Last Friday's announcement by the SEC of a civil lawsuit against Goldman Sachs (GS) for securities fraud did not surprise us. Nor were we surprised to see the markets
trade off large on the news, evidence to us that there is a certain lack of conviction in the financials.

Q: How can you have "normalized earnings" in an abnormal industry?

No, what surprised us about the SEC action is that it took as long as it did. Maybe surprised isn't precisely the right word, but you know what we mean. The inertia in the system seems to dampen reactions to extreme outlier behavior to a far too great a degree. This week in The IRA Advisory Service we discuss the implications of the SEC action and the likely impact on the OTC dealer community in the months and years ahead.

Readers of The IRA will recall back in 2004 when were started to talk about the regulatory focus on complex structured financial products and the perceived reputational risk to the big firms arising from these unregulated, OTC instruments. Big thank you to Chuck Muckenfuss at Gibson Dunn for the heads up. The "advice" issued by all of the regulators ("Interagency Statement on Sound Practices Concerning Complex Structured Finance Activities") was focused almost entirely on protecting the dealers from reputational risk and not on protecting investors.

The fact of the 2004 notice by the SEC and other regulators illustrates the problem. Regulators clearly knew that a problem existed back then, yet the SEC waited until April of 2010 to actually do something constructive to rebalance the equation, to lean just a bit more in the direction of investors and abit less in favor of the dealers. Keep in mind that it's not like the games played by GS and the Paulson organization were remotely unique. Just about every OTC dealer worthy of the description has at least one deal comp to this thing of beauty.

On March 31, 2010, Bob Ivry and Jody Shenn at Bloomberg published a very important article on American International Group and its losses from insuring collateralized debt obligations structured by, you guessed it, GS. Entitled "How Lou Lucido Let AIG Lose $35 Billion With Goldman Sachs CDOs," the article outlines the process whereby AIG was left on the hook for billions in losses on CDOs sold to TCW Group in Los Angeles.

Whereas in the trades with Paulson GS was helping a client create and then sell short a CDO that was being sold to another client, in the case of TCW the GS firm was helping a client buy toxic loans to be contributed to a CDO in the knowledge that doing so would cause losses to a regulated insurer, AIG. The activities of GS to harm AIG make the subsequent payments by AIG to GS, using money from the US Treasury, seem all the more outrageous.

But the other thing that really bothers us about both the TCW transactions and the more recent revelations about GS and the Paulson firm is the fact that the SEC apparently still does not fully understand the symbiotic relationship between the dealer and the hedge fund. In our view, the funds that were involved with these
transactions and many, many more examples in the OTC marketplace, did not have an arm's length relationship with the dealer. Hedge funds exist at the sufferance of the dealers, who finance and execute and act as custodian for their various strategies and use the funds as short-term storage for inventory.

In the case of Paulson, the information provided by the SEC makes it seem as though Paulson was the party which initiated these transactions and, according to the SEC, paid GS $15 million to arrange and market these CDOs to investors. Paulson was also apparently working as an advisor to GS and collaborating with GS regarding investment strategy. A spokesman for Paulson told The New York Times that all of their dealings with GS and other parties were on "an arm's length basis." We believe that reasonable people can differ on this issue. We also suspect that the nature and the extent of the relationship between GS and Paulson will be the subject of extensive legal and political inquiry in the weeks and months ahead.

But for us, the bottom line is that hedge funds often times are merely extensions of the dealers with which they interact. It is often difficult if not impossible to tell where the dealer's interests end and those of the hedge fund begin, especially when the dealer and the fund seem to be working in concert to create securities that are being sold to third parties. This episode is a terrible mess and, to us at least, illustrates why the OTC markets for securities and derivatives need to be regulated out of existence -- or at least into compliance with norms of disclosure and fair dealing that would render such strategies impossible. If the global financial markets have been reduced to nothing more than beggar thy neighbor, then we all have a big problem.

A Modern Tale of Financial Loss

A developer (Goldman) built houses that looked well built, but were in reality designed to be firetraps, using plans provided by an architect (Paulson). They were sold as conforming to code with certain characteristics represented and endorsed by the building inspectors (Ratings Agencies) and overseen by fire inspectors who did spot checks (the SEC).

After the sale, the developer and the architect bought huge amounts of fire insurance on the homes from a friendly insurance agent (AIG London) who was eager to collect the commissions. The amounts that were insured were sometimes well in excess of what a home might actually be worth. They even took out policies on nearby homes that they had not even built or sold.

The developer had also encouraged the city government to allow the firetrucks and safety equipment to fall into disrepair, and for too few inspectors to be hired to do spot safety checks. So when the houses inevitably burned, the fire department was unable to adequately respond. The fires became so bad that they destroyed entire neighborhoods and threatened whole sections of the city.

The developer and architect were able to submit their insurance claims for sums that were so staggering that the insurance company for which the London agent worked was itself facing bankruptcy. This would have placed at risk the holders of its other policies in completely unrelated areas such as life and auto insurance, and retirement annuities.

So the developer had government people, whom he had helped to elect, provide government backing for the insurance company, for the good of the public. The people who had lost their homes and those who were forced to help to pay the developer were very upset.

But the developer was a large advertiser in the local newspaper, and a old school friend of the owner, so it ignored the complaints, and reported on the story from every perspective except what had really happened. It blamed the people who had lost their homes for being foolish and not inspecting the homes more closely, and taking the developer and the housing inspectors at their word, and trusting the fire departments and its inspectors to do their jobs.

And anyone who complained too loudly was at first ignored, then ridiculed, and finally threatened with arrest. After all, the developer was one of the most important and influential people in the city, and had many powerful friends. Any suggestion that they had done anything wrong was simply unbelievable.

After all, it is inconceivable that an upstanding member of the commuity would ever endanger so many people's lives and homes like that just for personal profit.

The End (for now)

"Goldman Sachs Are Scum:" Max Keiser on Goldman Sachs From July 2009

Here is a video interview on France 24 television with Max Keiser speaking on Goldman Sachs from almost one year ago.

By the way, NO ONE who is a serious player on Wall Street is legitimately surprised by this, and probably no one in regulatory bodies are either, unless they are just showing up to collect a paycheck and obtain free Internet access.

The antics of Goldman Sachs have been getting by on a 'wink and a nod' from the regulators and the market for some time. Why? Because they are powerful, and because like Lehman and their off balance sheet frauds, they are almost ALL doing it on Wall Street as part of the franchise. Goldman has just been a pig about it, and probably burned some insiders and powerful investors in their fraudulent Abacus trade.

The excuses being made for Goldman by some on Bloomberg Television and CNBC are setting new lows in journalism. It was just a simple failure to disclosure Paulson's involvement right? Almost a technicality. No one forced the customers to buy those fraudulently packaged and labeled assets or stocks (this was a favorite excuse from Joe Kernan during the Internet/tech bubble collapse). No involvement from the Ratings Agencies in the purposeful crafting of a fraudulent financial instrument. Guest Calls Cramer a 'PR Man for Goldman Sachs' and is ejected from the show by the resident money honey.

As you may recall, Mr. Cramer represents himself as highly experienced in manipulating stocks using CNBC reporters from his days as a hedge fund manager. So it might not be so outre to inquire if he is working the other side of that Wall Street scam these days.

Why, these derivatives were SO complex that the poor Goldman management barely understood them themselves. They were tricked by Paulson. Tourre is a rogue trader. Bernie Madoff ate their Series 7 cheatsheets. Compliance was seconded to the Riviera. Lloyd was busy doing missionary work in Bangkok. More regulation will just hurt the recovery.

Don't just regulate them. Break them up. And audit the Fed.



I am glad the professor is from HEC. I did my international business MBA sequence (an extended field trip for adults, but the refreshments were good) at the 'other' business school in Paris at La Defense, ESSEC.

Max Keiser

SEC Formally Charges Goldman Sachs In Derivatives Fraud with Paulson and Company - another 'Rogue Trader at Work?'

“Only fraud and falsehood dread examination. Truth invites it.”
Dr. Samuel Johnson

The SEC is formally charging Goldman Sachs with fraud in the derivatives markets, specifically with regard to Collateralized Debt Obligations related to subprime mortgages.

Investors in Goldman's Abacus CDO lost one billion dollars.

In addition to the company, an individual VP in Goldman's international group is being charged, Fabrice Tourre.

Paulson and Company, a major hedge fund, paid Goldman to structure a CDO based on mortgages that Paulson selected, so that they could bet against it.

"The product was new and complex, but the deception and conflicts are old and simple. Goldman wrongly permitted a client that was betting against the mortgage market to heavily influence which mortgage securities to include in an investment portfolio, while telling other investors that the securities were selected by an independent, objective third party,” said Robert Khuzami, director of the division of enforcement.

This could be construed as a deft way of throwing red meat to the angry mob, nailing a specific individual at Goldman while limiting the criminal charges against the company although there will be significant civil cases, and dealing with the billionaire hedge fund owner Paulson who made a fortune betting against the subprime market.

This could be more damaging if this includes other Goldman bets against its customers on products it represented and created, and it shows an overall intent to create fraudulent products for the purpose of shorting them. For now the SEC will not say if this fraud is a singular event or more systemic.

Goldman will almost certainly attempt to spin this as the actions of a 'rogue trader' who was an aggressive exception.

Last week the White House asked Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein to 'cool it' on their intense lobbying efforts against derivatives and financial reform.

Perhaps this will help them in their decision.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. The Wall Street Banks are knee deep in fraud.

No one can obtain the kind of consistently odds defying returns that Goldman was producing without either cooking the books or engaging in some type of gaming the system, which is a polite word for fraud. That is the same 'tell' as the steady and outsized returns that Madoff is producing.

Let's see if this goes any deeper, and if serious punishments and reforms result.

The SEC can only enforce the Securities Laws, but cannot bring criminal charges. Since Paulson is not being charged, since he made no representations regarding the products, only Goldman is being sued by the SEC. Their alleged gain in this is $15 million dollars, the fees it obtained from Goldman. And Goldman will say that they were only serving their customer, Paulson.

Certainly Goldman will be subject to civil lawsuits and discovery. But the real test of the Obama government will be any role that the Justice Department does or does not take in this. They could of course defer, using the show trials of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission as a rationale to take no action.

This is blatant fraud and white collar crime being conducted by an organization that is paying contributions to half the Congress and the Administration, and staffing key positions in the government with its employees. Do you really think it will be brought to full disclosure and equal justice?

In a statement Goldman says that "The SEC’s charges are completely unfounded in law and fact and we will vigorously contest them and defend the firm and its reputation." Fabrice Tourre was last seen being thrown under a bus, and could not be reached for comment.

Watch the Justice Department and the Obama Administration to see what they do or do not do, and you will be able to know their character and intents. But in fairness the big Broker-Dealers in the US are RARELY indicted for anything. They virtually own the country's political and justice system.

"I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street." Barack Obama to CBS News.

Time do something besides talk the US to death about what you are going to do, and how the Republicans and lobbyists are getting in your way, and how great it will be when you finally do it. The SEC is relatively toothless, and probably by design. The FCIC will be tramping in the weeds for the rest of the year.

You do not need the Republicans, and you do not need the Congress, to fully engage the Justice Department and the FBI in investigating this fraud, Mr. Obama.

The most likely outcome will be a disgorgement of profits and a wristslap, and a promise by Goldman to change its business practices, while admitting no wrong. That will be the 'business as usual' outcome, and a sign that reform is an illusion.

Meanwhile, the market manipulation continues. I thought it was cute the way in which the metals bears used this news to sell the market in an attempt to sustian their huge naked short positions. "Never waste a crisis."

The US Congress reacts to the scandalous news.


Breaking news on breaking the rules, more to follow.

Simon Johnson: Goldman Faces Special Audit and Possible Ban in Europe

"The crash has laid bare many unpleasant truths about the United States. One of the most alarming, says a chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, is that the finance industry has effectively captured our government - a state of affairs that more typically describes emerging markets, and is at the center of many emerging-market crises. If the IMF's staff could speak freely about the U.S., it would tell us what it tells all countries in this situation; recovery will fail unless we break the financial oligarchy that is blocking essential reform." ~ The Atlantic Monthly, May 2009, by Simon Johnson

Regular readers will be aware of our thesis that the American Wall Street banks have become dominated by a culture of compulsive sociopaths who are incapable of reforming or restraining their greed. Like all addicts, they push the envelope looking for a new high, emboldened by each successful scam, the weakness of regulators, and the craven support of politicians, going further and further until at long last they go one step too far, with spectacularly destructive results.

Goldman Sachs may have reached that point. And as also suggested here, the rebuke may be coming from European and Asian nations who become weary of the extra-legal antics of the rogue American banks.

In the interests of harmony, the Europeans may once again bow to US pressure and continue to permit the Money Center privateers to roam through the interational financial system wreaking havoc, as they have been doing through the domestic US economy. It will be too bad if they do.

This is in no way an excuse for the Greek government. But what Simon Johnson is saying in this essay below is that Goldman is not only not blameless, but is enabling, complicit and perhaps even presenting the opportunity for market manipulation and fraud to other parties. Typically they like to 'package' these scams and take them from one customer to another, so that greed meets need, as a corrupting influence. It is no different than a bank engaging in money laundering in support of the criminal activity of another organization.

Is he right? Will the EU begin to act to curtail the transgressions of multinational banks based in the US? I think he may very well be. It is one thing to take on pension funds and speculators, and to run raids on companies. It is another thing to start taking on countries, and especially those not so alone and weak as Iceland.

And even more than that. If it ever comes to the light of day, the complicity of a few central banks and governments in the actions of one or two of the money center banks in manipulating several global commodity and asset markets may ignite a firestorm of a political scandal of epic proportions.

At the very least, it remains a practical imperative that the banks be restrained, the financial system reformed, and the economy brought back into balance, before there can be any sustainable recovery and stability.

And it is now apparent that Obama and the US Congress, for whatever reasons, are incapable of doing this. And yet, hope remains.

"It is said an Eastern monarch once charged his wise men to invent him a sentence to be ever in view, and which should be true and appropriate in all times and situations. They presented him the words: And this, too, shall pass away. How much it expresses. How chastening in the hour of pride. How consoling in the depths of affliction." Abraham Lincoln

Baseline Scenario
Goldman Goes Rogue - Special European Audit to Follow
By Simon Johnson

"...We now learn – from Der Spiegel last week and today’s NYT – that Goldman Sachs has not only helped or encouraged some European governments to hide a large part of their debts, but it also endeavored to do so for Greece as recently as last November. These actions are fundamentally destabilizing to the global financial system, as they undermine: the eurozone area; all attempts to bring greater transparency to government accounting; and the most basic principles that underlie well-functioning markets. When the data are all lies, the outcomes are all bad – see the subprime mortgage crisis for further detail.

A single rogue trader can bring down a bank – remember the case of Barings. But a single rogue bank can bring down the world’s financial system.

Goldman will dismiss this as “business as usual” and, to be sure, a few phone calls around Washington will help ensure that Goldman’s primary supervisor – now the Fed – looks the other way.

But the affair is now out of Ben Bernanke’s hands, and quite far from people who are easily swayed by the White House. It goes immediately to the European Commission, which has jurisdiction over eurozone budget issues. Faced with enormous pressure from those eurozone countries now on the hook for saving Greece, the Commission will surely launch a special audit of Goldman and all its European clients...

...Goldman will probably be blacklisted from working with eurozone governments for the foreseeable future; as was the case with Salomon Brothers 20 years ago, Goldman may be on its way to be banned from some government securities markets altogether. If it is to be allowed back into this arena, it will have to address the inherent conflicts of interest between advising a government on how to put (deceptive levels of) lipstick on a pig and cajoling investors into buying livestock at inflated prices.

And the US government, at the highest levels, has to ask a fundamental question: For how long does it wish to be intimately associated with Goldman Sachs and this kind of destabilizing action? What is the priority here - a sustainable recovery and a viable financial system, or one particular set of investment bankers?

To preserve Goldman, on incredibly generous terms, in the name of saving the financial system was and is hard to defend – but that is where we are. To allow the current government-backed (massive) Goldman to behave recklessly and with complete disregard to the basic tenets of international financial stability is utterly indefensible. (There is a case to be made that the money center banks, in particular Goldman and JPM, are sometimes acting as instruments of US foreign policy - Jesse)

The credibility of the Federal Reserve, already at an all-time low, has just suffered another crippling blow; the ECB is also now in the line of fire. Goldman Sachs has a lot to answer for."

Read the entire essay from Simon Johnson here

Goldman Expects to Keep Cake, Eat Same, Stick Public with Tab

Dick Bove says that Obama's proposal will be good for Goldman Sachs because it will take away the prop trading from banks that have deposits, but will not affect Goldman Sachs who will once again eliminate more competition.

So buy the stock. Hard to imagine anything short of Armageddon that would cause the word 'sell' to emanate from his bloviateness when he is talking his book.

And Goldman Sachs says that it is 'unrealistic' to take away their place at the Fed's teats as a subsidy sucking bank holding company.

"Goldman Sachs Chief Financial Officer David Viniar said it’s “unrealistic” to imagine the firm won’t be a federally supervised bank, even as new regulatory proposals cast doubt on that status."

Perhaps they will lobby for a special category of bank. Some banks are more equal than others? The public might be dumb enough to buy it, but doubtful Lloyd's peers on the Street would not raise a fuss.

More likely that the corrupt Congress takes this idea of Volcker's, and leads it up a blind alley, and strangles it with delays, transitions, and deceptions, and grandiose discussion of new regulatory architectures, rather than simple but elegant focus on primary mission, and the elimination of conflicts of interest.

The threats of 'lack of competitiveness,' 'stifling the recovery,' and 'portfolio diversity' are already resounding from the canyons of Wall Street and their pond skimming sibyls on financial television.

Bloomberg
Goldman Will Benefit From Obama’s Proposal, Bove Says
By Rita Nazareth

Jan. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Goldman Sachs Group Inc. will benefit from President Barack Obama’s proposal to limit Wall Street risk because it may force deposit-taking banks to unwind trading operations, Rochdale Securities analyst Dick Bove said.

Obama called for limiting the size and trading activities of financial institutions as a way to reduce the risk of another financial crisis. The proposals would prohibit banks from running proprietary trading operations solely for their own profit and sponsoring hedge funds and private equity funds.

He also proposed expanding a 10 percent market-share cap on deposits to include other liabilities such as non-deposit funding as a way to restrict growth and consolidation.

“Banks with large deposit bases have distinct advantages in certain sectors of the market,” Bove wrote in a report today. “If the banks are told they cannot use deposits in this fashion in the future, it ‘levels the playing field’ for companies like Goldman Sachs. This is not a time to sell this stock, it is a time to buy it.”

Goldman Sachs shares erased an early advance as Obama prepared to outline his proposal. The shares lost 4 percent to $161.15 in New York at 2:56 p.m. after rising as much as 1.9 percent at the start of trading.

Bonus Pool Slashed

Goldman, the most profitable securities firm in Wall Street history, reported record earnings that beat analysts’ estimates as the bank slashed its bonus pool. Net income of $4.95 billion, or $8.20 per share, for the three months ended Dec. 31 compared with a loss of $2.12 billion, or $4.97 a share, for the same period in 2008. The average estimate of analysts in a Bloomberg survey was $5.18 a share.

The record profit came as Goldman Sachs, facing criticism from politicians and labor unions for near-record compensation, set aside $16.2 billion to pay employees, the smallest portion of revenue since the firm went public in 1999.

“The adjustment of compensation lower leaves more money for shareholders,” Bove wrote.

Bove said that if the bank had not slashed its bonus pool, earnings may have been only about 3 cents to 5 cents a share in the quarter, “under certain assumptions concerning compensation,” because of a slowdown in trading.

“Investors are reacting sharply to the fourth quarter results at this company,” Bove wrote. “However, all indicators -- M&A, new financings, increasing volatility in a number of markets, growth in the money supply -- all suggest that this quarter may be a one-time event.”

Goldman Sachs Chief Financial Officer David Viniar said it’s “unrealistic” to imagine the firm won’t be a federally supervised bank, even as new regulatory proposals cast doubt on that status.

Whitney Cuts Goldman Sachs Earnings Estimate

This took a bit of the edge off the rally led by financials and tech today.

Goldman is a strong bellwether for the US financial markets, since they make most of their earnings by ravaging all participants in them. While the fish can still swim, so the squid can feed. So like it or not, as Goldman goes, so the US equity market probably goes, at least in the short term.

It will take all their resources to keep the winning streak intact.

Barrons
GS: Whitney Cuts Q4, ‘10 Estimate
By Tiernan Ray

Joining the string of Goldman Sachs (GS) estimate cuts, Meredith Whitney Advisory Group today lowered its EPS estimate for Q4 from $6 to $5.50, though that’s still above the $5.42 average estimate.

For this year, Whitney lowered her estimate to $19.20 from $19.65, though that’s above the average $18.78 estimate.Previously: GS: Pali Cuts Estimates on TradingJoining the string of Goldman Sachs (GS) estimate cuts, Meredith Whitney Advisory Group today lowered the EPS estimate for Goldman’s Q4 from $6 to $5.50, though that’s still above the $5.42 average estimate.

For this year, Whitney lowered her estimate to $19.20 from $19.65, though that’s above the average $18.78 estimate.

The Financial Times Man of the Year - Lloyd Blankfein

How fitting, to mark the high tide of the will to power of the Anglo-American banking cartel. No better symbol of hubris, of the overreach driven by obdurate insensitivity and sociopathic greed, of the cult of ego and the darker impulses of the human heart, that creates nothing.

Honoring the man as the epitome of 2009, a man whose bank helped to precipitate one of the greatest financial crises, if not crimes, of the century, and used it as a means of profit for their own ends. No matter what damage was caused in the process, what corruption was required to undermine the nation's well-being, thereby sowing the seeds of their own eventual destruction.

And no better day for it, than on the eve of the commemoration of the renewal of life, of genuine value, of the perennial yearning of the human spirit from within the images and the shadows, a turning away from the stench of corruption and decay, and into the light.

"For what shall it profit a man, if he gains the whole world, but loses himself?

Not even the whole world, but bragging rights, a false bravado, and a bonus.

The man of the year indeed. King of the ash heap, almost universally held in contempt. And in the end, alone. Not even rising to the level of high tragedy, but merely furtive, grasping, manipulative, pathetic. A monument to banality, and the hollowness of Western materialism.


NY Times
Financial Times Names Blankfein Person of the Year
December 24, 2009, 2:37

The Financial Times has chosen Lloyd C. Blankfein as its person of the year. The Goldman Sachs chief has become the public face of Wall Street during its most testing period since the 1930s, the newspaper said, and Mr. Blankfein’s position and his personality were the basis of his selection.

Goldman Sachs, said the newspaper, “navigated the 2008 global financial crisis better than others,” and is about to make record profits while paying up to $23 billion in bonuses to its 31,700 staff.

The newspaper called Mr. Blankfein “a tough, bright, funny financier who reoriented Goldman. Under his leadership, trading and risk-taking have pushed to the fore, reducing the influence of its investment banking advisers.”

Facing public anger in 2009 — as taxpayers raged at having to bail out the big Wall Street banks — Goldman’s profitability, and suspicions that its ties to governments around the world give it unfair advantages, made it a symbol of greed and excess.

But Mr. Blankfein has rebutted the criticism effectively, the newspaper wrote, “shifting from insisting that it would probably have survived the crisis without help from the U.S. Treasury, to apologizing for its conduct,” and finally, the newspaper noted, in an interview with the Sunday Times of London, asserting that Goldman was “doing God’s work”.

A Brilliant Warning On Robert Rubin's Proposal to Deregulate Banks, circa 1995

There is little doubt in this mind that the GDP number will be revised lower, and the chain deflator lowball will prove to be transitory, and the recovery will be ephemeral, at least based on real numbers. The Clunkers programs pulled sales forward, which is a useful thing only if there is the follow up of systemic reform. The consumer is flat on their back, and median wages and employment are going nowhere. One can stoke monetary inflation with enough Fed expansion, but without the vitality that bestows permanence and self-sufficiency.

A reader sent in this prescient warning from 1995, when then Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, late of Goldman Sachs, mentor to Larry and Timmy of the current US ship of state, wanted to unleash the power of the big money center banks to ensure their "efficiency and international competitiveness."

If only the US had rejected the Rubin - Greenspan doctrine then, and firmly said no to freewheeling finance, and not succumbed to the hundreds of millions of dollars in lobbying and donations spread about Washington in that 1990's campaign by Wall Street that culminated in Fed preemptive action, followed by a massive lobbying campaign led by Sandy Weill.

In December 1996, with the support of Chairman Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve Board issues a precedent-shattering decision permitting bank holding companies to own investment bank affiliates with up to 25 percent of their business in securities underwriting (up from 10 percent).

This expansion of the loophole created by the Fed's 1987 reinterpretation of Section 20 of Glass-Steagall effectively renders Glass-Steagall obsolete. Virtually any bank holding company wanting to engage in securities business would be able to stay under the 25 percent limit on revenue. However, the law remains on the books, and along with the Bank Holding Company Act, does impose other restrictions on banks, such as prohibiting them from owning insurance-underwriting companies.

In August 1997, the Fed eliminates many restrictions imposed on "Section 20 subsidiaries" by the 1987 and 1989 orders. The Board states that the risks of underwriting had proven to be "manageable," and says banks would have the right to acquire securities firms outright...

As the push for new legislation heats up, lobbyists quip that raising the issue of financial modernization really signals the start of a fresh round of political fund-raising. Indeed, in the 1997-98 election cycle, the finance, insurance, and real estate industries (known as the FIRE sector), spends more than $200 million on lobbying and makes more than $150 million in political donations. Campaign contributions are targeted to members of Congressional banking committees and other committees with direct jurisdiction over financial services legislation.

PBS Frontline: The Long Demise of Glass-Steagall

One might be tempted to conclude from this that they bought the attention of the Congress for their agenda then, and based on additional substantial contributions, have held it ever since.

As you may recall, it was in December, 1996 when Alan Greenspan made his famous 'irrational exuberance' speech. And then shortly thereafter laid the groundwork for the tech bubble of 1999, and the series of bubbles that are the basis of the American economy even today, and the long twilight of the US dollar.

Based on our read, the financial reform plans crafted by Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, and their friends on Wall Street is merely a continuation of the Rubinomics. Is there any wonder, as we have Rubinomics Recalculated by Obama.

Thanks to Mark for sharing this on a day in which I had not intended to post anything. There seem to be about 12,000 regular visitors to Le Cafe each day. Although this is not a lot by internet standards, I have to say that based on their valuable comments and exceptionally well-informed messages sent in by email, that when it comes to astute readers, we have an embarrassment of riches. And for this we give thanks and are grateful.

NY Times
End Bank Law and Robber Barons Ride Again
Published: Sunday, March 5, 1995

To the Editor:

Re "For Rogue Traders, Yet Another Victim" (Business Day, Feb. 28) and your same-day article on Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin's proposal to eliminate the legal barriers that have separated the nation's commercial banks, securities firms and insurance companies for decades: The American Bankers Association, Senator Alfonse M. D'Amato, Representative Jim Leach and Treasury Secretary Rubin are gravely misguided in their quest to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act.

Their contention that insurance companies, commercial banks and securities firms should be freed from legislative obstructions is predicated on fallacious, historically inaccurate statements. If the Baring Brothers failure does not give them pause, a history lesson is our only hope before the Administration and bank lobby iron out their differences and set the economy back 90 years.

The argument that American financial intermediaries will become "more efficient and more internationally competitive" is false. The American financial system is the most stable, most profitable and most dynamic in the world.

The notion that Glass-Steagall prevents American financial intermediaries from fulfilling their utmost potential in a global marketplace reflects inadequate understanding of the events that precipitated the act and the similarities between today's financial marketplace and the market nearly a century ago.

Although Glass-Steagall was enacted during the Great Depression, it was put in place because the Aldrich-Vreeland Act of 1908, the blue-sky laws following 1910 and the Federal Reserve System of 1913 failed to keep the concentration of financial power in check. The investment climate that ultimately led to Glass-Steagall was one filled with emerging markets, interlocking control of productive resources and widespread bank ownership of securities.

Ever since railroad securities began driving secondary capital markets in the late 1860's, "emerging markets" have existed for investors looking for high-yield opportunities, and banks have been primary agents in industrial development. In the 19th century, emerging markets were scattered throughout the United States, and capital flowed into them from New York, Boston, Philadelphia and London. In the same way, capital flows from the United States, Japan and England to Latin America and the Pacific rim -- today we just have more terms to define the market mechanisms.

The economy and financial markets were even more interconnected in the 19th century than now. Commercial and investment banks could accept deposits, issue currency, underwrite securities and own industrial enterprises. With Glass-Steagall lifted, we will chart a course returning us to that environment.

J. P. Morgan and Andrew Mellon made their billions through inter locking directorates and outright ownership of hundreds of nationally prominent enterprises. Glass-Steagall is one crucial piece of a litany of legislation designed to place checks and balances on the concentration of financial resources. To repeal it would be tantamount to bringing back the days of the robber barons.

The unbridled activities of those gifted financiers crumbled under the dynamic forces of the capital marketplace. If you take away the checks, the market forces will eventually knock the system off balance.

MARK D. SAMBER
Stamford, Conn.
Feb. 28, 1995

The writer is a management consultant specializing in business history.