Now hear me out, this is the conspiracy theorist in me talking now. Ryan Chittum from the Columbia Journalism Review posted recently that the WSJ's big story about $2 billion in GS losses was strange. A little too strange...
Chittumscan the rest of the story and you’ll find that it appears nobody from Goldman was ever given an opportunity to comment.Now, it’s highly unlikely that these experienced reporters got a story on A1 in the WSJ without calling the company for comment.
What the lack of a Goldman attribution signals to us is that Goldman Sachs itself leaked this to the Journal as a way to feed hungry beat reporters and get bad news into its stock price before it reports earnings.
The Journal has a nearly iron-clad internal rule that says a story can’t say a source declined to comment if that source is quoted elsewhere in the story..
http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/weird_goldman_sourcing_at_the.php
Maybe Goldman Sachs is just announcing worst-case scenario losses early, so that the real bad news isn't so horrible on the stock later? Thoughts?
Perferendis numquam aut fuga. Voluptatem quia dolorem hic et vero corporis recusandae qui.
Corporis delectus nesciunt exercitationem et voluptatem quasi molestiae. Quo ipsa expedita sapiente perferendis tempora cum odit quasi. Molestias et culpa est rerum voluptate. Hic quia et necessitatibus tempore ea cumque. Illo illum saepe aut omnis quis distinctio recusandae. Hic quo distinctio tenetur nemo ipsam odio dolores consequatur.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...