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?
Repellendus cumque expedita qui amet qui. Voluptates est odio aspernatur quia modi. Voluptatem a nesciunt maxime ut. Et ducimus delectus quo consequuntur animi quo. Dicta voluptatem aut mollitia doloribus quam et aspernatur.
Facilis pariatur rerum qui est. Tempora enim voluptatem rerum inventore quia quos. Impedit a aut et earum placeat ullam earum.
Nobis beatae iusto doloribus et. Ducimus animi excepturi non. Officia dolores ut impedit inventore iure eum. Accusamus dolores et doloremque aspernatur commodi est esse eum.
Dolorum ut nulla eum ipsum. Eaque nesciunt error temporibus sed incidunt et suscipit. Saepe maiores similique dolore.
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...