Goldman Director resigns and lets it all hang out

nun said:
Here is a NYTimes OP Ed by a senior Goldman Sachs guy who has resigned as he is disgusted with the way he feels they rip off their customers. It adds to the general perception on here that financial advisers don't necessarily have their clients' best interests at heart.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/14/o...ng-goldman-sachs.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=general
Click to expand...

Not earth shattering news, Goldman and the like have been ripping off investors for over a century.........

You can't compare a Goldman Sachs hedge fund manager to a financial advisor, that's like comparing a elephant to an ant..........
 
Great letter and check out this deliciously satiric "response" from Goldman penned by Andy Borowitz:

Borowitz Report
 
kevink said:
Great letter and check out this deliciously satiric "response" from Goldman penned by Andy Borowitz:

Borowitz Report
Click to expand...

popcorn.gif


Delicious indeed....
 
Soooo, Goldman's hiring? :)
 
Interesting resignation letter, I wish I thought it would have any impact, I don't.

I wonder if the leaders at Vanguard publicly refer to us as 'muppets?' I doubt it, certainly hope not.

And I wish this quote from the letter surprised me at all, it doesn't. I'd say it describes our political leaders and much of the mainstream population at all levels, why should the folks at Goldman be any different than the majority? Lying, cheating & stealing are far more common now than they were when most of us were kids, no comparison...
How did we get here? The firm changed the way it thought about leadership. Leadership used to be about ideas, setting an example and doing the right thing. Today, if you make enough money for the firm (and are not currently an ax murderer) you will be promoted into a position of influence.
Click to expand...
 
kevink said:
Great letter and check out this deliciously satiric "response" from Goldman penned by Andy Borowitz:

Borowitz Report
Click to expand...
I thought it was a pretty lame response, there are far more creative people here...
 
He's obviously quasi-whistleblower...although he admits he saw nothing illegal. I'm mostly on his side, with a few caveats.

At the MegaCorp I work for, we DO focus on our profits, which we call "gross margins", and rarely discuss in detail the profits we can make for our customers, although I am proud of our company because there is a general belief that we only make money by making/saving our customers money. It's not a zero sum game where I work.

I'm glad there are people like this. He will take a lot of heat, and will get a lot of praise as well. He'll likely be called bitter and a bunch of other names. He'll probably write a book next...it will be a big seller.

Based on what I read, he's very young? Does anyone have a link to a photo of him?
 
Finance Dave said:
I'm glad there are people like this. He will take a lot of heat, and will get a lot of praise as well. He'll likely be called bitter and a bunch of other names. He'll probably write a book next...it will be a big seller.
Click to expand...
I guess this is one positive regarding moves away from defined benefit pensions and toward 401K plans -- it allows people disgusted with bad business practices more freedom to leave *and* speak their minds about it...
 
Last edited:
Finance Dave said:
Based on what I read, he's very young? Does anyone have a link to a photo of him?
Click to expand...

He says so himself, right in the op-ed:

He worked at GS for 12 years right out of college. Those 12 years include 2 as an intern, which would make him . . .32.

I have trouble taking seriously a critique of 143 years of culture at the firm by a guy who's only about eight years removed from doing breakfast runs for the trading desk.

Edit to add: If he thinks any of this is new, he should pick up a copy of Liars Poker - which is almost as old as he is. I'm not saying he's wrong in his assessment of what is currently happening, it's just hysterical that he thinks any of this is a revelation or even a recent development.
 
Last edited:
Gone4Good said:
He says so himself, right in the op-ed:

He worked at GS for 12 years right out of college. Those 12 years include 2 as an intern, which would make him . . .32.

I have trouble taking seriously a critique of 143 years of culture at the firm by a guy who's only about eight years removed from doing breakfast runs for the trading desk.

Edit to add: If he thinks any of this is new, he should pick up a copy of Liars Poker - which is almost as old as he is. I'm not saying he's wrong in his assessment of what is currently happening, it's just hysterical that he thinks any of this is a revelation or even a recent development.
Click to expand...
I do take him seriously. He was obviously sharp enough to A) get a scholarship B) graduate with honors C) Get on at Goldman D) Rise to a very high position E) Get chosen for the recruiting role as a great "face" of Goldman to outsiders and so on...he's proven his mettle IMO.
 
Good one Alan. :LOL:

I'm sure his photo will be on the news tonight.

Edit: P.S. You likely won't see him eating dinner at the local Applebees for a few days until this simmer's down.
 
Finance Dave said:
I do take him seriously. He was obviously sharp enough to A) get a scholarship B) graduate with honors C) Get on at Goldman D) Rise to a very high position E) Get chosen for the recruiting role as a great "face" of Goldman to outsiders and so on...he's proven his mettle IMO.
Click to expand...

Goldman Sachs doesn't hire schlumps. Everyone who works there has an impressive resume. But director isn't a very high position. It sounds like a very high position, but consider that once someone gets out of gradschool his first promotion is to Vice President. His second promotion . . . Director. (Edit: I see that he is in fact an Executive Director and Head of US Equity Derivatives etc. I stand corrected on that point, which only makes the next point all the more true).

And I'd add, those [-]two[/-] several promotions tell you that he was at one time very good at doing the things he now says are beneath him.;)
 
Last edited:
Finance Dave said:
I do take him seriously. He was obviously sharp enough to A) get a scholarship B) graduate with honors C) Get on at Goldman D) Rise to a very high position E) Get chosen for the recruiting role as a great "face" of Goldman to outsiders and so on...he's proven his mettle IMO.
Click to expand...

As for A, B & C, that would account for almost everyone outside the mail room at Goldman.

D is not really true, he was a Vice President at GS, while that sounds high, at GS that is more middle manager.

E just proves he is good looking.


Also, I work at a financial firm that always puts the funds and the investors first. I cannot tell you how many times in a meeting you would hear someone question whether or not doing something is in the best interest of the investors. Some firms may be after the almighty dollar, but some firms really do put investors first.
 
Gone4Good said:
(Edit: I see that he is in fact an Executive Director and Head of US Equity Derivatives etc. I stand corrected on that point, which only makes the next point all the more true).
Click to expand...

From this link:
Goldman Rejects Claims Made by Outgoing Executive - Deal Journal - WSJ

Mr. Smith described himself as an executive director and head of Goldman’s U.S. equity derivatives business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa.


A person familiar with the matter said Mr. Smith’s role is actually vice president, a relatively junior position held by thousands of Goldman employees around the world. And Mr. Smith is the only employee in the derivatives business that he heads, this person said.
Click to expand...
 
That's amazing...and confirms what G4G posted.
Mr. Smith described himself as an executive director and head of Goldman’s U.S. equity derivatives business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. A person familiar with the matter said Mr. Smith’s role is actually vice president, a relatively junior position held by thousands of Goldman employees around the world. And Mr. Smith is the only employee in the derivatives business that he heads, this person said.
Click to expand...
 
ChiliPepr said:
From this link:
Goldman Rejects Claims Made by Outgoing Executive - Deal Journal - WSJ


Mr. Smith described himself as an executive director and head of Goldman’s U.S. equity derivatives business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa.


A person familiar with the matter said Mr. Smith’s role is actually vice president, a relatively junior position held by thousands of Goldman employees around the world. And Mr. Smith is the only employee in the derivatives business that he heads, this person said.
Click to expand...


:LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL:

Oh, make it stop. It's too funny.

But it does explain a lot . . . how young he is, why someone would be disgruntled at still only being a VP after 12 years, and the naivety with which the article is written.

Just one example: "Axe"

An axe is a trading desk term for transactions a trader is trying to execute. Axes can be buys or sells or a package of both. The desk could be trying to execute these transactions for any number of reasons. For example, Goldman has a customer who wants to buy a block of IBM calls at $??. That trader is now "axed to buy IBM Calls." Salespeople are then motivated and compensated for "filling" that axe (finding someone to sell IBM calls at the right price). It's hard to see why executing a customer order is a bad thing.

Other axes could be to offset risk exposure on the trading book. This need not be because the trader thinks the risk is bad. Oftentimes while providing liquidity to customers, traders end up with positions or specific exposures ("I'm long Vol") that they didn't want to take. "Axes" that do nothing other than "flatten the book" are common. Other axes could be positions the trader wants to enter as a speculative bet, they could be part of a complicated arbitrage, and yes, they could be trying to get out of positions where the trader is "long and wrong."

An Axe is just a term for something the trader wants to do. It's shocking how a VP at Goldman would take what I've described and say this:

a) Execute on the firm’s “axes,” which is Goldman-speak for persuading your clients to invest in the stocks or other products that we are trying to get rid of because they are not seen as having a lot of potential profit.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
My DW (not quite a VP yet) shares a cube with a VP at a different I-bank - that should tell you the level VP's are at in i-banks. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom