I'm starting to get slightly concerned with how many reporters will happily label something as a scam with little or no evidence to suggest it was. If you read

I'm starting to get slightly concerned with how many reporters will happily label something as a scam with little or no evidence to suggest it was. If you read through this you see: Goldman published that they thought Apple would do well; Goldman sells a derivative linked to Apples stock price and collects a sales fee; people bought into that derivative; Apple released their earnings; the value of the derivative went down; Goldman published a revised estimate on Apple. Where's the scam? It looks to me like people bought something that went down in value, and suddenly it's the sellers fault! Is this just the good old put Goldman in the title and people will read it?