terrykeenan@email.com
Showing posts with label Lloyd Blankfein. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lloyd Blankfein. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Hoffa shows Geithner how to run things
Memo to Treasury Secretary im Geithner: If you want to survive another year in Washington, start channeling your inner Jimmy Hoffa. Yes, Hoffa James P. Hoffa, that is -- the current Teamsters boss and the one man who has stared down Goldman Sachs and the big-money crowd on Wall Street and come out a winner. While our Treasury Secretary has been busy covering the friendly tracks he laid as NY Fed Chief, in recent weeks Hoffa has showed Lloyd Blankfein and Co. who's boss -- and did so without even breaking a sweat. The Hoffa v. Wall Street battle began back in December and received little notice, but taxpayers should pay attention to the kind of deal that can be cut when a tough cookie like Hoffa is driving the negotiations. The dispute centered around YRC, parent company of the Yellow and Roadway fleets, the nation's biggest trucker and employer of 30,000 of Hoffa's union brothers. Loaded with debt, and saddled with a CEO who spent more time on CNBC in recent years than Jim Cramer, YRC was headed for a year-end rendezvous with bankruptcy unless it could convince most of its bondholders to swap their debt for stock. That's a tricky proposition under any circumstances, but YRC had another obstacle to face. Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of credit-default insurance on YRC debt would pay off if the company went bust, giving bondholders an incentive to see the company go Chapter 11. Hoffa understood this and decided to play hardball -- he accused Goldman, Deutsche Bank and a handful of hedge funds of trafficking in YRC's credit default insurance and raised the prospect of his 18-wheelers parked all the way from Park Avenue to Broad Street in protest. He also turned up the political heat with union-connected lawmakers in Washington. In the end, the bullying worked like magic and by Jan. 1, fully 88 percent of bondholders agree to participate in the exchange. Bankruptcy was averted, and Goldman Sachs was eventually praised for helping YRC get "over the goal line" by buying up YRC debt in the marketplace in order to exchange the paper for stock. A triumphant Hoffa called it his "first foray into high finance." Unfortunately, Hoffa looks to have a brighter future in that area than the man who currently commands the US Treasury Department. Compare the YRC drama with the slowly evolving tale of Geithner's role in the 2008 back-door bailout of Goldman Sachs and its subsequent cover-up. You'll see why taxpayers sense something is very wrong about this story, and rightly so. As we're now learning by the day, Goldman nearly bankrupted AIG in the fall of 2008 -- much as YRC's credit default holders almost bankrupt that company last month. The key difference is that in AIG's case, the taxpayer was left holding the bag, while Goldman and AIG live to trade another day. But it gets worse. Not only did AIG pay off those contracts to Goldman and a dozen other banks to the tune of 100 cents on the dollar -- or a remarkable $62 billion -- Geithner's NY Fed insisted AIG cross out any reference to the full price of the payout. As e-mails released by Congress last week show, the idea was to keep the public in the dark. The final cost to taxpayers from the AIG rescue -- $182 billion, or about half of the entire US defense budget. Imagine the bargain Hoffa would have driven home for US taxpayers had he been representing our interests the way he did that of his union brethren. Fifty cents on the dollar? You better believe that would have been at least his starting point. And why not? Those who profited from the government bailout of AIG, led principally by Goldman Sachs, obviously think that the alphabet soup of derivatives were spun in such a fine web that no mere mortal could never grasp what was really going on. But the public is not so naive. Jimmy Hoffa, Jr. understood this and rode to the rescue of his constituents. It's too bad Geithner didn't do the same for his constituents, the US taxpayers.
terrykeenan@email.com
terrykeenan@email.com
Sunday, January 10, 2010
How many lawyers does it take to help Lloyd and his buddies cover their asses?
How Should Goldman Sachs Cover its Ass This Bonus Season?
Related Articles
More From this Author
For critics of the company and its fellow travelers, the timing could not be better.
Anxiety levels about the financial sector are on the increase, even on Capitol Hill. The tension between high profits in banking and stress in the rest of the economy becomes increasingly a topic of discussion across the nation.
And you are hard pressed to find any government official who has not by now woken up--in private--to the dangerous hubris of big banks. To add insult to injury (and many other insults), the Bank for International Settlements is holding a meeting to discuss excessive risk-taking in the financial sector; according to CNBC Thursday morning, Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman and Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase were invited but did not show up (they really are very busy).
The smart strategy for Goldman in this context would be to pay no bonus for 2009 (in cash, stock or any other form), but this is not possible for three reasons.
(1) Goldman would need to make a credible commitment to employees to “take care of them next year.” But any legally binding commitment would be as good as a cash bonus (who knows, they could even be traded over-the-counter). And any verbal promises would be completely noncredible--among other things, Goldman cannot know for sure how the coming perfect storm will play out: the supertax on bankers in Europe, Sheila Bair’s good idea of tying deposit insurance premiums to the risk in banks’ compensation structures, Hank Paulson’s memoir on February 1, Chris Dodd’s resignation and the collapse of any meaningful Obama financial reform--allowing the Democrats to wake up to how they can run hard against Big Finance in 2010, etc. And besides, how much would you trust your boss at Goldman? The old culture there is gone.
(2) For all their communication blunders in recent months (internally they wince at “God’s work“), the responsible executives think they can hide the size of the bonuses or talk more about how stock and option grants encourage the right kind of behavior or put in some sophisticated clawback language. Some of the best lawyers in the country are working very hard on this question, but it’s all for naught. The headline bonus number will be at least $20 billion and if they try to hide this with sophisticated mumbo-jumbo, that will only bring greater attention and spread the pain over many news cycles as we run through denials, further exposures, more denials, and damning details. When you’re in a hole, stop digging--Goldman is talking with top p.r. consultants; perhaps they should bring in Tiger Woods to advise on this point.
(3) The most important reason is also Goldman’s greatest weakness: Throughout the organization, people really think they are worth the money. But remember these facts and keep track of how many times you hear them repeated: Goldman Sachs essentially failed in September 2008; it was saved by extraordinary and unprecedented government efforts at the end of September and subsequently (particularly through its conversion to a bank holding company, which gave access to the Fed’s discount window); partly this treatment was shaped by the special favor with which Hank Paulson viewed Goldman (documented in nauseating detail in Andrew Ross Sorkin’s Too Big To Fail); and the strategy of allowing Goldman to recapitalize through taking huge risk with an unconditional government guarantee in 2009 only makes sense if they use the proceeds to boost their capital--not if they pay out massive bonuses. In any reasonable economic analysis, the entire bonus pool at Goldman should be paid--with gracious thanks--to the government.
The refrain that will be repeated by Goldman executives is: We need to pay the bonuses in order to keep the best people. But think about this like a stockholder for a moment--where exactly would these people go to work if this year’s bonus is set at zero?Among the Casino Banks, Goldman is currently the best place to work and, looking forward, that’s where folks will make the most money. Hedge funds are not hiring in large numbers--most of the new financial sector jobs are at the other Too Big To Fail firms, who are now bringing people back (naturally).
Goldman’s management should come to its senses and pay no bonuses of any kind to anyone; no good people would leave. Fortunately, while the executives who run Goldman are smart, they are not that smart. The bonuses they announce on January 18 and pay in early February will become the rallying point for real reform.
[Cross-posted at The Baseline Scenario.]
Antichrist Lloyd Blankfein Up Close and Personal
He replaced Henry Paulson, who went on to assist the Bush administration in it’s demolishing of the economy.
Blankfein earned a total compensation in 2008 of $53,965,418.Base salary – $600,000
Cash Bonus – $26,985,474
Stock – $15,542,756
Options – $10,453,031
He declared in an interview that he was doing “God’s work”.
He suggested that Goldman would have been fine without financial assistance from the feds.
Goldman recieved $10 billion in direct aid from the US government.
The Financial Times chose Lloyd C. Blankfein as its person of the year.
He suggested that Goldman’s employees make more than everyone else because they’re better than everyone else. This resulted in massive bonuses.
Goldman Sachs gave out $4.82 billion in bonuses in 2008, despite earnings of only $2.32 billion that year.
Goldman’s revenue in 2008 was 22.2 billion and net earnings were 2.3 billion.
Blankfein is the poster boy for Wall Street’s incredible craving for massive profits.
After helping impact the global financial crisis to the tune of several trillion dollars he said that Goldman regretted any damage they may have committed and apologized.
The public was outraged, but unfortunately most were represented in Congress by a bunch of spineless, worthless cowards.
Today Goldman is a money machine, massive profits, massive bonuses, massive arrogance and a distinct lack of any perceivable code of ethics.
And in gratitude to the public that kept it afloat, kept the limos and private jets running, kept the pay scale far above what any single person is worth, kept it’s customers in a suicidal state and flipped the bird at regulatory agencies everywhere, it’s response is a heart felt “fuck you very much”.
Suckers
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Last year was a good one for financial titan Goldman Sachs (GS). Despite the downtrodden economy, Goldman managed to log a stellar performance, which will yield a record bonus payout of $23 billion to its workers. We certainly helped CEO Lloyd Blankfein and his minions with $52 billion in low-cost government financing.
Sharp Decline In Most Businesses
And let's not forget that Goldman was a huge beneficiary of ailing insurer American International Group's (AIG) bailout. When the Federal Reserve agreed to pay AIG's counterparties in full, Goldman pocketed a $12.9 billion check -- 100 cents on the dollar -- for its credit default swaps. But a perusal of Goldman's financial statements also reveals that it made big bucks in 2009 by trading commodities, currencies, bonds and stocks.
Without its trading business, Goldman would have had a miserable 2009. According to its November 2009 quarterly statement filed with the SEC, Goldman suffered a sharp decline in most parts of its business during the first three quarters of last year. Specifically, its investment banking revenues fell 22% to $3.2 billion and its asset management business declined 22% to $2.9 billion.
Other factors contributed to Goldman's record 2009. Its so-called trading and principal investments unit, which trades stocks, bonds, commodities, and derivatives for clients and its own account, spiked 89% to $23.8 billion and the money it made on lending rose 65% to $5.6 billion.
And the rise in Goldman's trading revenues translated into an even higher 112% boost in its pretax income. This despite a 29% increase in its operating expenses to $23.1 billion. Most of that increase in expenses was a result of a 47% increase in Goldman's compensation expense to $16.7 billion.
Trading Revenue Spike Mystery
Just how did Goldman make all that money trading? The short answer is, it's a mystery. What Goldman says in its quarterly report fails to provide insight: For example, in the first nine months of 2009 Goldman says it had "particularly strong performances in credit products, mortgages and interest rate products."
But Goldman fails to disclose specific reasons why it was able to generate this strong performance. All it discloses is that the improvement was due to "strong client-driven activity, particularly in more liquid products. In addition, during our second and third quarters of 2009, asset values generally improved and corporate credit spreads tightened." And Goldman boasts of "strong net revenues in derivatives."
This "disclosure" leaves investors scratching their heads trying to understand what Goldman actually did to nearly double its trading revenues. Perhaps it would help if it could provide a few examples of particularly profitable trades from "liquid products" -- whatever that means. Investors could also benefit from specifics on how improvements in asset values and tighter credit spreads boosted its trading revenue.
All in all, Goldman still operates its business with enormous risks -- including $46.3 billion that it has to repay in 2010 and 2011 to lenders and bondholders and a total of $277.8 billion it owes over the next several years -- that dwarf its $53 billion tangible equity base. Among these big risks are $66.2 billion in so-called Level 3 assets -- which have no observable market value and $130 billion in derivative contracts.
Goldman's Risky Balance Sheet
But the biggest risk on Goldman's balance sheet could come from the alphabet soup of off-balance sheet entities -- the kind that wiped out Enron -- which Goldman calls strange names like securitization entities (SEs) and variable interest entities (VIEs). These creatures are made up of slices of commercial and residential mortgages and total $82 billion for the SEs and $68 billion for the VIEs. It is a mystery how much losses from these entities will cost Goldman.
Does this mean that investors should expect Goldman to have a worse 2010? There is no way to know since its trading business is a black box. But one thing we can be sure of is that the U.S. will not let Goldman fail.
And thanks to all the taxpayer funded bailouts Goldman will soon pay its people an average of $782,313 -- about 13 times 2009's roughly $60,000 median U.S. family income.
Peter Cohan owns AIG shares.
Sharp Decline In Most Businesses
Without its trading business, Goldman would have had a miserable 2009. According to its November 2009 quarterly statement filed with the SEC, Goldman suffered a sharp decline in most parts of its business during the first three quarters of last year. Specifically, its investment banking revenues fell 22% to $3.2 billion and its asset management business declined 22% to $2.9 billion.
Other factors contributed to Goldman's record 2009. Its so-called trading and principal investments unit, which trades stocks, bonds, commodities, and derivatives for clients and its own account, spiked 89% to $23.8 billion and the money it made on lending rose 65% to $5.6 billion.
And the rise in Goldman's trading revenues translated into an even higher 112% boost in its pretax income. This despite a 29% increase in its operating expenses to $23.1 billion. Most of that increase in expenses was a result of a 47% increase in Goldman's compensation expense to $16.7 billion.
Trading Revenue Spike Mystery
Just how did Goldman make all that money trading? The short answer is, it's a mystery. What Goldman says in its quarterly report fails to provide insight: For example, in the first nine months of 2009 Goldman says it had "particularly strong performances in credit products, mortgages and interest rate products."
But Goldman fails to disclose specific reasons why it was able to generate this strong performance. All it discloses is that the improvement was due to "strong client-driven activity, particularly in more liquid products. In addition, during our second and third quarters of 2009, asset values generally improved and corporate credit spreads tightened." And Goldman boasts of "strong net revenues in derivatives."
This "disclosure" leaves investors scratching their heads trying to understand what Goldman actually did to nearly double its trading revenues. Perhaps it would help if it could provide a few examples of particularly profitable trades from "liquid products" -- whatever that means. Investors could also benefit from specifics on how improvements in asset values and tighter credit spreads boosted its trading revenue.
All in all, Goldman still operates its business with enormous risks -- including $46.3 billion that it has to repay in 2010 and 2011 to lenders and bondholders and a total of $277.8 billion it owes over the next several years -- that dwarf its $53 billion tangible equity base. Among these big risks are $66.2 billion in so-called Level 3 assets -- which have no observable market value and $130 billion in derivative contracts.
Goldman's Risky Balance Sheet
But the biggest risk on Goldman's balance sheet could come from the alphabet soup of off-balance sheet entities -- the kind that wiped out Enron -- which Goldman calls strange names like securitization entities (SEs) and variable interest entities (VIEs). These creatures are made up of slices of commercial and residential mortgages and total $82 billion for the SEs and $68 billion for the VIEs. It is a mystery how much losses from these entities will cost Goldman.
Does this mean that investors should expect Goldman to have a worse 2010? There is no way to know since its trading business is a black box. But one thing we can be sure of is that the U.S. will not let Goldman fail.
And thanks to all the taxpayer funded bailouts Goldman will soon pay its people an average of $782,313 -- about 13 times 2009's roughly $60,000 median U.S. family income.
Peter Cohan owns AIG shares.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
ATTN: Employees of Goldman Sachs
We did it. Bottom of the ninth, down by three, bases loaded, and we cranked another grand slam to the moon. They may have shot Lennon, but nothing can kill the Beatles.
I admit things looked bleak for a minute there. We had to convert to a bank holding company and were forced to accept a taxpayer bailout. It felt un-American. Terribly unbanksmanly. But we accepted the money, knowing that we could magically weave it into a much larger mountain of money.
We had a few hard months there, didn’t we? They regulated our corporate jet so that we could no longer use it to fly from hole to hole on the green. Dave had to drain his money pool to half capacity. I stopped injecting gold into my blood. They don’t call it a recession for nothing. One day, we’ll look back on the year we received only five-figure bonuses and laugh.
Wanting to celebrate our renewed success is natural, but it’s important that we don’t go crazy here. Remember, ten per cent of the non-bank country is unemployed, and even those who are working have “real” jobs, where payment is proportional to the creation of a “product” or a “service.” Those poor bastards. So I ask that, in celebrating our raping of the stock market, we show restraint in the following ways:
* Please limit high-fives and chest bumps to a dozen a day.
* Don’t wear your crowns, except around the office.
* Stop paying for things in Monopoly money—I understand it is the same as real money to us, but there have been some complaints.
* For now, let’s take down the giant scoreboard that reads “Main Street: zero. Wall Street: a billion gazillion bajillion.”
Furthermore, to avoid drawing criticism from the press, this year the bonuses, expected to be comically large, will be distributed in blood diamonds, which can be easily concealed in a briefcase so it looks like we’re working.
I’d like to thank everyone who made this possible—for a second time. Respect to President Obama for keeping us in the green. Thanks to the big guy upstairs (me). And let’s not forget all the ordinary Americans, who, for some unfathomable reason, have refused to put us behind bars. We are literally taking money out of their wallets. Seriously, with these returns we are making Madoff look like a little kid with his hand caught in the cookie jar. Amateur!
Yours in money,
Lloyd Blankfein, C.E.O., Goldman Sachs
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sSDCk4bwheqF-S4VOBVV5DbuN8qjaKP5DhJaEXkI6-MDpJsVXeuv0aSu3Y7Kf8UK0GQBerQD7GN1OOJak0wH5GPvTSkcQ9FQeGlgVmOwPzYFwJ5q0ZjbuZu7iowHi2LHa8cAe-kNWTTP2WIB9XK00=s0-d)
We did it. Bottom of the ninth, down by three, bases loaded, and we cranked another grand slam to the moon. They may have shot Lennon, but nothing can kill the Beatles.
I admit things looked bleak for a minute there. We had to convert to a bank holding company and were forced to accept a taxpayer bailout. It felt un-American. Terribly unbanksmanly. But we accepted the money, knowing that we could magically weave it into a much larger mountain of money.
We had a few hard months there, didn’t we? They regulated our corporate jet so that we could no longer use it to fly from hole to hole on the green. Dave had to drain his money pool to half capacity. I stopped injecting gold into my blood. They don’t call it a recession for nothing. One day, we’ll look back on the year we received only five-figure bonuses and laugh.
Wanting to celebrate our renewed success is natural, but it’s important that we don’t go crazy here. Remember, ten per cent of the non-bank country is unemployed, and even those who are working have “real” jobs, where payment is proportional to the creation of a “product” or a “service.” Those poor bastards. So I ask that, in celebrating our raping of the stock market, we show restraint in the following ways:
* Please limit high-fives and chest bumps to a dozen a day.
* Don’t wear your crowns, except around the office.
* Stop paying for things in Monopoly money—I understand it is the same as real money to us, but there have been some complaints.
* For now, let’s take down the giant scoreboard that reads “Main Street: zero. Wall Street: a billion gazillion bajillion.”
Furthermore, to avoid drawing criticism from the press, this year the bonuses, expected to be comically large, will be distributed in blood diamonds, which can be easily concealed in a briefcase so it looks like we’re working.
I’d like to thank everyone who made this possible—for a second time. Respect to President Obama for keeping us in the green. Thanks to the big guy upstairs (me). And let’s not forget all the ordinary Americans, who, for some unfathomable reason, have refused to put us behind bars. We are literally taking money out of their wallets. Seriously, with these returns we are making Madoff look like a little kid with his hand caught in the cookie jar. Amateur!
Yours in money,
Lloyd Blankfein, C.E.O., Goldman Sachs
Thursday, October 15, 2009
GOLDMAN SACHS
Federal taxpayer bailout funds received: $63.6 billion
Profits for the years 1998-2008: $46.8 billion
Profits for the first half of 2009: $5.2 billion
2007 Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein pay: $70.3 million
2008 bonus pool: $4.8 billion
First half 2009 bonus and compensation pool: $11.4 billion
Bonuses (top 5 execs) last 10 years: $543.4 million
Effective tax rate in 2008: 0.6%
Offshore subsidiaries in tax havens: 29
Lobbying fees in first 9 months after bailout: $1.8 million.
Campaign contributions in 2008 federal elections: $7.1 million
Role in subprime crisis:
• Goldman Sachs had a hand in the worst of the subprime lending excesses, providing financing to three of the five largest subprime lenders: #3 New Century Financial Corp., #4 First Franklin, and #5 Long Beach Mortgage Co. This financing provided the companies with the capital they needed to originate subprime mortgages. Together, these firms issued more than $200 billion in subprime loans from 2005-2007.
• Goldman Sachs played a major role in underwriting and selling the exotic financial instruments like credit default obligations or CDOs that fueled the subprime machine through mortgage backed securities. Just before the housing bust, Goldman was ranked third by Bloomberg in the underwriting and sale of CDOs, earning $239 million. The CDO market was further fueled by other exotic financial instruments called credit default swaps, a form of insurance against possible mortgage defaults. Here again Goldman was a major player, getting bailed out on its bad bets when the government saved AIG from tanking.
• When the housing bubble burst, Goldman was hit with a series of lawsuits, including one by New York state regulators; after being subject to another investigation in Massachusetts for misrepresenting the quality of their mortgage backed securities, Goldman eventually agreed to pay a $60 million settlement.
Profiteering off the bailout and gambling with taxpayers’ money:
• Goldman Sachs put taxpayers on the hook for up to $63.6 billion in bailout funds and programs plus an unknown amount from the Federal Reserve’s $8 trillion in emergency programs. While Goldman has since repaid its $10 billion in TARP money, allowing it to avoid government oversight on executive compensation, it doesn’t have to repay the $12.9 billion received through the AIG bailout, which is even larger than the $10 billion it repaid.
• In order to access these billions of taxpayer bailout money, in September 2008, Goldman Sachs sought and received approval to become a bank holding company. As a bank holding company, Goldman should be subject to much stricter regulations and oversight. However, Goldman sought and obtained a Federal Reserve waiver from Market Risk rules required of commercial banks.
• Instead of using the bailout funds to shore up its capital base or expand lending, Goldman has issued its highest dividends to shareholders since 2003, shopped for acquisitions internationally, lavished bonuses on the same financial personnel who contributed to the crisis, and increased the amount of capital it’s put at risk. According to the company’s CFO, Goldman’s “model really never changed.” In fact, 78% of the company’s most recently reported revenues came from high-risk trading and investments, and potential trading losses on any given day were at an all time high of $245 million, up (75%) from the $139 million held at risk before becoming a holding company. In response, ten legislators sent a letter to the Federal Reserve accusing Goldman of “officially gambling with government money,” and requesting justification for their exemption. Two and a half weeks later, the Fed authorized Goldman to morph into a Financial Holding Company, which basically allows it to continue these high risk practices at taxpayer expense.
• Goldman literally gambled with California taxpayer money, advising its investor clients to take advantage of the state government’s financial crisis by betting against state bonds that Goldman itself had helped sell, pocketing millions in fees. The giant investment firm did not inform the office of California Treasurer Bill Lockyer that it was proposing a way for investment clients to profit from California’s deepening financial misery. In Sacramento, officials said they were concerned that Goldman’s strategy could raise the interest rate the state would have to pay to borrow money, thus harming taxpayers.
• Goldman’s bailout money has gone little to help struggling homeowners. Goldman’s loan servicing operation, Litton Loan Servicing LP, has started trial mortgage modifications for only 3% of its 103,871 borrowers who are eligible for the Obama Administration’s Making Home Affordable Program (and are at least 60 days past due).
• Moreover, Goldman is back in the mortgage securitization business, repackaging the mortgages that have been stuck on their books since the housing bubble burst and now selling them as a new product. Known as “re-remics”, they simply pull out the worst of the bonds to boost the credit rating to make the sale, kind of like what brought on the financial crisis in the first place.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vEv6LPLgom7ITpjqSMcQo5WJ6h0B1rQGlkxz8y1OhC_eSmTT8EQsYNZjXs7aGS6iLFPmX8y-ynjJnRVMdwF7-e6BAIHdsHWkku7s2CnxHR4jtucW8IO577wQ2exiKi1NV97t5mQ8W1P0qG6GunzN2h=s0-d)
Sunday, October 4, 2009
ATTN: Employees of Goldman Sachs
We did it. Bottom of the ninth, down by three, bases loaded, and we cranked another grand slam to the moon. They may have shot Lennon, but nothing can kill the Beatles.
I admit things looked bleak for a minute there. We had to convert to a bank holding company and were forced to accept a taxpayer bailout. It felt un-American. Terribly unbanksmanly. But we accepted the money, knowing that we could magically weave it into a much larger mountain of money.
We had a few hard months there, didn’t we? They regulated our corporate jet so that we could no longer use it to fly from hole to hole on the green. Dave had to drain his money pool to half capacity. I stopped injecting gold into my blood. They don’t call it a recession for nothing. One day, we’ll look back on the year we received only five-figure bonuses and laugh.
Wanting to celebrate our renewed success is natural, but it’s important that we don’t go crazy here. Remember, ten per cent of the non-bank country is unemployed, and even those who are working have “real” jobs, where payment is proportional to the creation of a “product” or a “service.” Those poor bastards. So I ask that, in celebrating our raping of the stock market, we show restraint in the following ways:
* Please limit high-fives and chest bumps to a dozen a day.
* Don’t wear your crowns, except around the office.
* Stop paying for things in Monopoly money—I understand it is the same as real money to us, but there have been some complaints.
* For now, let’s take down the giant scoreboard that reads “Main Street: zero. Wall Street: a billion gazillion bajillion.”
Furthermore, to avoid drawing criticism from the press, this year the bonuses, expected to be comically large, will be distributed in blood diamonds, which can be easily concealed in a briefcase so it looks like we’re working.
I’d like to thank everyone who made this possible—for a second time. Respect to President Obama for keeping us in the green. Thanks to the big guy upstairs (me). And let’s not forget all the ordinary Americans, who, for some unfathomable reason, have refused to put us behind bars. We are literally taking money out of their wallets. Seriously, with these returns we are making Madoff look like a little kid with his hand caught in the cookie jar. Amateur!
Yours in money,
Lloyd Blankfein, C.E.O., Goldman Sachs
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tWCkU7-BB1It2ASyecprA9BKvy6XBKh9cuItjXx6R2-GhlX4DUgKNvcad0ki_kEfcpcYtFVfX1KlAXe2r5TGiMAlf-XU669qOJdgt61XxOPRA_fZTNQhFXh7slPenJlI5DguGt7BzpMKwsOZTRnag=s0-d)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
