15 replies to this topic

[jack]

This is the story making the rounds. A big stretch in my view. Paulson had no duty to disclose anything. In fact, it's even a question as to whether GS did. But in the case of Paulson he simply wanted to short the mortgages...pretty simple. And obviously the SEC didn't charge him.
IT

As I read this story so far, the charges stem from the "quality" of GS disclosures to those who purchased the
other side of Paulson's trade. Maybe GS didnt have to disclose anything, but whatever GS DID disclose will
be of interest.

[jack]

A wilder thought on this matter innocent clients of madoff that took a profit are being asked to return the profits from a fraud. Mr Paulson will avoid seeing this parallel.

[dasein]

Paulson took his position in the securities before the fraud was comitted, and was not involved in the fraud in any way - there is nothing that should happen against him, nor should his situation be compared with Madoff etc. some people writing articles on seeking alpha et al are brilliant, but many, like this one suffer the too common ailment of having a absolute view of some situation - this one is gold - and torturing all anecdotes and evidence to support their world view. pretty poor writing and poor speculating, IMO

[jack]

Paulson took his position in the securities before the fraud was comitted, and was not involved in the fraud in any way -...

Early investors in Madoff would like your arguement. But, even though they took a position before any fraud occurred,
The profit was booked AFTER the fraud.

I am stating a similarity, I am not advocating madoff's early victims and Mr Paulson should pay up. It is a mess most of us
are unqualified to deal with.
Janet president of Tavakoli Structured Finance has some very interesting thoughts.

[dasein]

jack - Paulson and madoff investors are totally different, in addition the case looks weaker than at first when the claim was that the clients were given an actual name of a 3rd party as the originator of the securities - contradicted by Pelligrinis testimony, etc etc. you do yourself a disservice making decisions based on a superficial and hard to justify speculation such as this. as far as qualified - speak for yourself.

[jack]

I speculated on the fallout from GS being found guilty of a civil fraud, I also have a list of "what ifs" for GS being found innocent of civil fraud. Those would probably be more acceptable here. It is unlikely I will ever make a decision on this case. I will never truly know its merits. As far as qualified- I would like people with the stature of Simon Johnson, William Black, Brooksley Born and Paul Volker, looking at the problems ahead of us. From Positions of Authority