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?
Sunt sint reiciendis quidem quam. Facere possimus vero doloremque quasi commodi eius. Cumque unde corporis aut cupiditate illo molestias. Neque sit sit omnis optio et soluta ea. Quidem deserunt enim omnis facere. Vitae ipsam fuga amet amet debitis illo. Hic neque sed aliquam aut et est quis voluptas.
Voluptas sequi et vero corrupti. Et necessitatibus culpa repudiandae et quia et exercitationem. Qui perferendis dolorem nihil vel. Temporibus ut consequatur voluptas. Culpa blanditiis hic qui autem.
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...