Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
PUBLICITY: - NY Times Questions Big Bank Fines Being Lame Game.
Just when you think Christmas is going to be humbug - BAM - the New York Times comes to the rescue with its late Friday Business Day article "At Big Banks, a Lesson Not Learned". An expose on the issue of big bank fines not getting through their thick heads.
Journalist Gretchen Morgenson leads in with this question and her own juxtaposing (obfuscating) answer;
Are the colossal regulatory fines extracted from big banks today likely to deter their officials from violating the same rules tomorrow? Or are these billion-dollar settlements viewed simply as a cost of doing business, and not a very large one at that?
Judging from a regulatory action brought last week against 10 mostly large financial firms, the answers are “no” and “yes.”
Judging from a regulatory action brought last week against 10 mostly large financial firms, the answers are “no” and “yes.”
[br][hr][br]
[font color=RED size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"] Toys R Us IPO - A Rigging that Didn't Transpire[/font]
Back in 2013, after Taibbi's Rolling Stone September 2012 cover story ("Greed n Debt"
failed to address the issues of eToys (actually, deliberately - avoided it); the March 2013 OpEd by Joe Nocera at New York Times, put for another expose "Rigging the I.P.O. Game". It was a story about Goldman Sachs rigging (spinning fraud) of eToys going public.
Evidently, the New York Times is too humble to take notice that the Toys R Us IPO was cancelled, just a few weeks after Nocera's Smoking Gun expose OpEd was published. Yours truly would argue that Goldman Sachs control of the New York Times is trying to influence public opinion; by the red herring bait n switch from the fact that those who would have funded Toys R Us IPO (that is owned by Bain Cap & KKR) - simply chose discretion over valor.
Be that all as it may - this PUBLICITY - prior to the stories on the horizon, is a good thing.
[br][hr][br]
[font color=Navy Blue size=3 face="Comic Sans MS"] Here's what I love about the NY Times efforts[/font]
Everyone keeps avoiding the fact that I'm the source of this information; but they keep trying to prove that by independent dig up of corroborative tidbits that help me more. Like the Nocera Smoking Gun on Goldman Sachs doing wrong and emails of Goldman Sachs's Lawton Fit;
Allegations and Nocera Smoking Gun on Lawton Fitt
The plaintiffs charge that Goldman Sachs had a fiduciary duty to maximize eToys’ take from the I.P.O. Instead, Goldman purposely set an artificially low price, so that its real clients, the institutional investors clamoring for the stock, could pocket that first-day run-up. According to the suit, Goldman then demanded that some of those easy profits be kicked back to the firm. Part of their evidence for the calculated underpricing of eToys, according to the plaintiffs’ complaint, was that Lawton Fitt, the Goldman executive who headed the underwriting team and was thus best positioned to gauge the market demand, actually made a bet with several of her colleagues that the price would hit $80 at the opening. (Through a Goldman Sachs spokesman, Fitt declined to comment. Goldman denies that it did anything wrong, about which more shortly.)
[br]
Nocera's notes on the actual crime occurrence
[br]
Goldman carefully calculated the first-day gains reaped by its investment clients. After compiling the numbers in something it called a trade-up report, the Goldman sales force would call on clients, show them how much they had made from Goldman’s I.P.O.’s and demand that they reward Goldman with increased business. It was not unusual for Goldman sales representatives to ask that 30 to 50 percent of the first-day profits be returned to Goldman via commissions, according to depositions given in the case.
“What specifically do you recall” your Goldman broker wanting, asked one of the plaintiffs’ lawyers in a deposition with an investor named Andrew Hale Siegal.
“You made $50,000, how about $25,000 back?” came the answer. “You know, you made a killing.”
“What specifically do you recall” your Goldman broker wanting, asked one of the plaintiffs’ lawyers in a deposition with an investor named Andrew Hale Siegal.
“You made $50,000, how about $25,000 back?” came the answer. “You know, you made a killing.”
[br]
Citigroup stated it is pleased that the matter is behind it. The persons who just did crimes THIS YEAR, are Goldman Sachs, Bain Capital and Mitt Romney's RICO gang. They - have not - (at least until I've died), put these matters behind them.
The NY Times has it partially right; because they are wrong in the continuous bury of the eToys part of the WHOLE story. But fret not, RMoney 3 is just around the bend
and then..........
I will be sayin.........
[center]GOTCHA!
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
