4 ms·

If you buy something you don't understand (when all the info is clearly available to you) its your own damn fault. The organizations buying this stuff were requ

If you buy something you don't understand (when all the info is clearly available to you) its your own damn fault. The organizations buying this stuff were required to have ISDA contracts (not easy to get). Their money is managed by professionals. If you want a place to put blame the most apt place would be Fitch, Moody's and Standard and Poors. The ratings agencies were far more complicit in perpetuating false understanding than GS was.

apsec112 17y ago
"If you buy something you don't understand (when all the info is clearly available to you) its your own damn fault." Suppose I sell you a word processing program. Inside the program, I include a snippet of code that will cause the program to stop working in thirty days, without telling you anything about it. By your logic, you would not be within your rights to demand a refund, since it is "your own damn fault" that you didn't understand the ten megabytes of assembly code that I sold you.
- jamiequint 17y ago
  That analogy doesn't work. They were selling bonds to financial professionals, who had to have complicated ISDA agreements to even enter into these purchases. Part of their job is to analyze the assets they are buying. Its reasonable to expect them to do so.
btilly 17y ago
Read the complaint again. Goldman Sachs failed to disclose Paulson & Co's role, and then actively lied to investors about Paulson & Co's net position in the deal. This is material information that was not available to investors in the CDO. Hence the complaint. Edit Got the players wrong. Fixed.
jamiequint 17y ago
@btilly (won't let me reply directly to your comment) I realize what you're saying is true, but most of the arguments being made are about being made about whether the trade itself (under normal circumstances) were unethical, I'm trying to counter those.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  You keep doing that @ thing, there is a reason why you can't respond directly to the comments that you want to reply to, HN is set up to discourage flame wars by only showing the reply link when a comment is a little older. So be patient and then when the thread has cooled down a bit you can reply directly. If you really must reply there is always the 'link' link to the comment, the page that leads to does have the reply box. But beware of fanning the flames.
  - jamiequint 17y ago
    I don't need you to teach me about HN man, I've been here for over 3 years. Your suggestion that I stop replying though is well taken, the misinformation/misinterpretation in this thread is rampant and off-putting.

apsec112 17y ago

"If you buy something you don't understand (when all the info is clearly available to you) its your own damn fault." Suppose I sell you a word processing program. Inside the program, I include a snippet of code that will cause the program to stop working in thirty days, without telling you anything about it. By your logic, you would not be within your rights to demand a refund, since it is "your own damn fault" that you didn't understand the ten megabytes of assembly code that I sold you.

jamiequint 17y ago
That analogy doesn't work. They were selling bonds to financial professionals, who had to have complicated ISDA agreements to even enter into these purchases. Part of their job is to analyze the assets they are buying. Its reasonable to expect them to do so.

btilly 17y ago

Read the complaint again. Goldman Sachs failed to disclose Paulson & Co's role, and then actively lied to investors about Paulson & Co's net position in the deal. This is material information that was not available to investors in the CDO. Hence the complaint. Edit Got the players wrong. Fixed.

jamiequint 17y ago

@btilly (won't let me reply directly to your comment) I realize what you're saying is true, but most of the arguments being made are about being made about whether the trade itself (under normal circumstances) were unethical, I'm trying to counter those.

jacquesm 17y ago
You keep doing that @ thing, there is a reason why you can't respond directly to the comments that you want to reply to, HN is set up to discourage flame wars by only showing the reply link when a comment is a little older. So be patient and then when the thread has cooled down a bit you can reply directly. If you really must reply there is always the 'link' link to the comment, the page that leads to does have the reply box. But beware of fanning the flames.
- jamiequint 17y ago
  I don't need you to teach me about HN man, I've been here for over 3 years. Your suggestion that I stop replying though is well taken, the misinformation/misinterpretation in this thread is rampant and off-putting.