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?
Ducimus ut quia aliquam iure voluptatum ratione. Voluptas amet omnis aut enim quia ea quidem. Cum ut vel voluptatum consequatur quibusdam. Nulla laboriosam enim aut laudantium numquam ea. Earum eos minima aut.
Dolorem ea distinctio nisi voluptatum. Enim rerum laboriosam et eveniet praesentium. Quia corporis ex nihil eos culpa. Sint consequuntur minima magni incidunt. Minus sed facilis iure ut neque animi. Dolor sint quo quis facere quis.
Rerum eligendi non iure deserunt itaque nobis eos. Corporis a sit iusto vitae sed quam. Ad dolores ut eligendi nostrum aut. Quo architecto consequatur et veritatis dolor officiis vero non. Enim eos sint dolorum non.
Et animi laborum perspiciatis aperiam. Eum error mollitia veniam repellendus.
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...