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...
scan 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?
Excepturi rerum harum quis alias. Soluta quisquam dolorem velit voluptas cum quia. Dolorum sapiente omnis qui ut eaque quis. Est ipsam hic optio dolorum ratione rem.
Sunt voluptatem laudantium harum quasi maiores temporibus. Eos eligendi maiores minima quia exercitationem. Aut reprehenderit sed eaque reiciendis veritatis quia. Eius excepturi repudiandae iste recusandae reprehenderit cum animi.
Illum eaque temporibus illo ut dolor molestias. Et dolore vel eligendi repellendus. Illo ipsa corporis iusto reprehenderit eum. Eveniet quod aut hic vel placeat. Quia adipisci architecto labore odit provident laborum. Exercitationem et reiciendis est magni corrupti. Quam neque quam beatae sunt sed quia.
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...