Now these might even deserve a bonus, they seem good at convincing people http://www.businessinsider.com/why-...it-didnt-make-a-fortune-off-aig-either-2009-4 What they dont say is how they would collect on their AIG CDS when AIG going under would set off problems for everybody including the counterparties they choose to hedge with. They seem to be assuming that counterparty risk doesnt exist for their hedge and that risk wouldn't rise if AIG sent the US into a deeper depression, that would only be true if the government saved their other counterparties as well
Yeah, they don't need the TARP money. That's why they converted themselves into a commercial bank just to get the money and that's why they have to engage in a dilutive stock share sale just to raise enough cash to pay the TARP funds back to the government. If you don't need the money, Blankfein, pay the damn money back today. Also, they'd be dead right now if it weren't for the fact that their sleeper in the Bush Admin (Paulson) made sure AIG got enough taxpayer money to funnel through to Goldman, his ex-employer.
Notice there are no IBs left? Goldman wasn't about to have a bullseye on it by being the ONLY IB out there. IMO, the TARP funds were pushed on large banks - a way to tell people "hey, everyone that has a market cap over 5 billion is taking TARP monies so there is nothing to worry about. The govt. will prop everything up." Forget that there were companies out there that were prudent and didn't need the TARP money.
I was wondering the same thing. If you didn't need the money, where did it go? With a loan from Buffet and the government, you still need to raise capital to repay the TARP loan? Why is that, Mr. Blankfein? It would be nice if the financial media would ask a tough question every once in awhile.
it went and is tied up in stock trading. The revenue jump is from trading revenue. So I would guess they would need to liquidate their new low prices stock long positions to free up capital so again ****the shareholder and dilute. Like I said before I am waiting for several of these bastards to do a reverse split like C and start again with a price where all can participate in. total scam with all the conflicts of interest running around or perhaps good business just not ethical or moral?
Financial media only asks questions to assist in their hidden agenda. Remember they are of the same clan. w
If they didn't need the money why do they have to do a secondary to pay it back? Why can't they just pay it back? And if the argument is, we are doing a secondary because "we can" Then they suggest the shareholder is fool in their opinion.