iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Goldman Sachs Emails: Firm Traded Against Clients, Profited Off Their Losses, And Spread 'Poison Throughout System'

Blankfein

First Posted: 06/26/10 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 05:15 PM ET

This story was updated at 7:10 p.m. ET with comment from Goldman Sachs.

Goldman Sachs put its own interests ahead of its clients in trying to profit off the souring housing market of 2007, documents released Monday show.

The firm, which had profited handsomely off packaging and selling securitized subprime home mortgages to investors during the housing boom, switched directions in early 2007, furiously shedding its home mortgage-linked risk and buying as much insurance as it could, effectively shorting the market throughout the year -- a move that netted the firm "billions and billions" at the expense of its clients, according to the documents released by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.

"Goldman Sachs made billions of dollars from betting against the housing market, and it placed those bets in some cases at the same time it was selling mortgage-related securities to its clients," said the committee's chairman, Carl Levin (D-Mich.). "They have a lot to answer for."

Goldman says it always puts its clients' interest first. It's a position the firm has stuck by as Levin's investigation has produced emails and internal documents apparently showing otherwise.

"Our clients' interests always come first," Goldman says on its website.

But by late 2006, company officials, presciently realizing that losses from subprime mortgage-related products would soon begin to mount, began to aggressively reduce the firm's risk. It did so by reducing its inventory of positions, and by betting against subprime-related securities, the documents show.

"A very profitable year was underway," Levin said.

"In 2007, when Goldman Sachs took steps to reduce its inventory of mortgage-related investments, the Goldman Sachs sales force was instructed to sell those investments, including high-risk...securities that Goldman Sachs wanted to get of its books, creating a conflict between the firm's proprietary interests and the interests of its clients," the panel said in a statement.

The firm was "spreading the poison throughout the system," Levin charged, adding that investors had a "reasonable assumption [the securities] were designed to succeed."

One particular security, named Timberwolf I, a collateralized debt obligation of other collateralized debt obligations that were based not on actual home mortgage bonds but instead on those bonds' movements, lost 80 percent of its value within five months of issuance. A senior executive, Tom Montag, remarked in a June 22, 2007, email, "Boy, that timberwo[l]f was one shi**y deal."

That security was rated less than three months prior to Montag's email. He has since left the firm.

Goldman "cannot portray itself as working on behalf of clients," Levin said. It sold securities "that it clearly didn't believe in."

"[D]uring the early summer of 2006 it was clear that the market fundamentals in subprime and the highly levered nature of CDOs was going to have a very unhappy ending," one top executive, Michael Swenson, wrote in September 2007 in his annual self-evaluation.

In a March 2007 memo, the firm noted that it was "Game Over" for subprime as there was an "accelerating meltdown for subprime lenders such as Fremont and New Century."

An email the same month remarked that "overall as a business, we are selling our longs and covering our shorts."

Part of the problem, Levin said, was that Goldman didn't tell its clients it was shorting the market throughout the year -- it waited until the end of the year.

At times, Goldman had a net short position as large as $13.9 billion, according to a memo prepared by Levin's investigators.

In shorting the very securities it was peddling to investors, Goldman told its customers that there were a variety of other investors shorting those securities, investigators said. In at least a few of those instances, though, Goldman was the only party shorting the securities, investigators said, raising questions about possible violations of securities law.

The firm states in its most recent annual report that it "did not generate enormous net revenues by betting against residential related products."

In a statement to the Huffington Post, the firm's top spokesman, Lucas Van Praag, said:

"We respectfully disagree with Chairman Levin's statement. We did not have a big bet against the housing market, as our performance in residential mortgages demonstrates, and we believe we at all times worked appropriately with our clients. We did try to manage our risk, as our shareholders and regulators would expect. There are many lessons from the financial crisis, and we are intent on learning from them. To that end, we support strong regulatory reform to safeguard markets for the future."

Levin says the firm made as much as $3.7 billion shorting the market -- proprietary trades that only benefited the firm, and not its clients. Evidence that the firm was heavily shorting the market -- rather than just hedging its risks -- is overwhelming, investigators said.

"Company documents show the firm taking every opportunity during early 2007 to take short positions against mortgages," the panel said in a statement. "And in reducing its risk, the firm aggressively sold its mortgage holdings to clients.

"Documents show the firm's sales force raising questions about the quality of securities Goldman was trying to unload, and complaints from clients who posted big losses on products Goldman had sold them."

The panel's nearly 18-month-long investigation has yielded about 2 million documents, investigators said. Its hearing examining Goldman Sachs, featuring both current and former executives, begins 10 a.m. ET Tuesday.

READ Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein's prepared remarks before the panel below:


Lloyd Blankfein testimony before PSI

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
This story was updated at 7:10 p.m. ET with comment from Goldman Sachs. Goldman Sachs put its own interests ahead of its clients in trying to profit off the souring housing market of 2007, documents ...
This story was updated at 7:10 p.m. ET with comment from Goldman Sachs. Goldman Sachs put its own interests ahead of its clients in trying to profit off the souring housing market of 2007, documents ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 399
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (12 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:08 AM on 04/28/2010
These folks live in a different world.
Express moral outrage at what they're doing and they won't know what you're talking about.
12:47 AM on 04/28/2010
To appreciate the depths of Goldman’s duplicity, just take a look at its 2009 annual report. In the opening salvo of the report, Goldman is downright indignant and asserts that its only role in the financial markets has been positive.

To deflect attention away from Wall Street matters, Goldman went to great lengths to say that it spent the year acting in the interests of its clients and that these actions were the driving force behind its business.

That fails to address the huge sums of money that Goldman made in proprietary trading that did nothing to benefit clients, but enriched Goldman's shareholders and employees. The investment bank pressed the case that it paid workers only for their performances and nothing more.

On page 39 of the 2009 report, you find Goldman’s broad-brush disclosure in all its vague and generalized glory. Specific references to the Wells Notice, open investigations, lawsuits, administrative actions? Move along. Nothing to see here.

This was also the subject of an article “Goldman Sachs' Annual Report: It's All Smoke and Mirrors” on the International Business Law Advisor Blog www.IntlBusinessLaw.com on April 20, 2010. http://bit.ly/cML7Po
photo
panamarine
My opinion is only an opinion
01:56 PM on 04/27/2010
The PERCEPTION of the Goldman Sachs name is now in the mud. The "street" will equate that name with the "bilkers" of the unsuspecting investor. The damage is done. The top guys testifying before congress today are also "done". They will go away with their golden parachutes and write books to absolve themselves. Trading with Goldman will have an SEC warning label: Trade at risk, beware of "fixed" packages, etc. But then again it will be soon "XYZ Company, LLC, formerly known as Goldman Sachs". Betcha'
11:09 AM on 04/27/2010
Yep. And they grew wealthy and got away with it. Now they all own castles in Europe. Such a happy ending for all.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Elias Maxwell
One of the 99% that is PISSED
09:56 AM on 04/27/2010
The only fiduciary responsibility GS recognizes is GREED!
01:29 PM on 04/27/2010
So what should their mantra be? Charity?

Some people never left Avatar...
09:23 AM on 04/27/2010
Shorting the mortgage market is not illegal or unethical. Goldman packaged and sold mortgage securities. They didnt rate the securities and didnt originate the loans. If the people paying those mortgages kept paying, then this is all a moot point. Goldman lost money on the Abacus deal (the focus of the SEC suit). Goldman surely had long and short positions against the mortgage market, leaning more towards short. This is a scandal? And nearly everyone was long the mortgage market back then. To be short, was to be thought of as crazy. And we're not talking about "main street" investors. Goldman's clients are big, sophisticated clients that perform due diligence before investing their money. Endowments, pensions, etc., etc., work with consultants and/or have investment committees. These people are not rubes. Now you could take serious issue with the ratings agencies (Moody's et. al.) They rated these securities AAA.

I never thought it would come to this: I'll quote Paul Krugman to support my argument.

"In the past few days scandalous Wall Street e-mail messages released by the subcommittee have made headlines. That’s the good news. The bad news is that most of the headlines were about the wrong e-mails. When Goldman Sachs employees bragged about the money they had made by shorting the housing market, it was ugly, but that didn’t amount to wrongdoing."


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/opinion/26krugman.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Coyote50
"Taxes are the price we pay for civilization."
11:17 AM on 04/27/2010
I think the Krugman is wrong on this one -- I'll say it again, an investment is a contract and all contracts legally include a fiduciary duty on the part of this kind of seller - which means you have to act in the best interests of the client -- and material disclosure - which means any information that would affect the client in making a decision to buy something. This was not done by GS and it is illegal. Depending on how much they knew, and they appear to have known a lot, it can be fraud.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Coyote50
"Taxes are the price we pay for civilization."
12:57 PM on 04/27/2010
Actually, I don't think Krugman is wrong about all of it -- just whether or not what they did was illegal. His main point was that the rating agencies were guilty of not doing their jobs - and he suggests some possible solutions to hold them responsible. But where I disagree with him is whether these emails indicate wrongdoing. Firms do have duties to their clients, not just their shareholders. They omitted material facts. That's pretty clear. Of course, we aren't even talking the morality or ethics of it...
12:07 AM on 04/28/2010
It doesn't matter whether it's true or false. If it brings them down it's a good thing. Goldman is way too powerful and hard to kill. Anything that brings them down to size it very good.
01:08 AM on 04/28/2010
"It doesnt matter if it's true or false ... ?" To quote Jon McEnroe: You cannot be serious. When did truth and falsehoods become obsolete? I don't necessarily disagree about cutting Goldman's risk taking ability down to size, but truth does, and should, matter. They may be not guilty of fraud in the SEC case. It's no slam dunk, in fact, it's a very shaky case.
madame48
NO..it's a gop Cookbook !Tempus edax,homo edacior
08:16 AM on 04/27/2010
I think we need to install a gollows next to that bull on Wall st...after all, the gop says the death penalty is a deterrent to crime....nice place to start..line 'em up
08:07 AM on 04/27/2010
we didn't do anything illegal, sez Blankfein, an even sicker bird. But GS sure did lots that was unethical, immororal, and downright wrong. But to focus on the lawful and unlawful, which is why the Doddering Dodd's reform bill matters. Too much in the cowardly Dodd bill reverts to regulators, and to their judgment. A better bill will say to Wall Street that what is unethical-- betting secretly against the products you are marketing to "widows and orphans, or Calpers,-- will henceforth be a violation of law and the Fabulous Fabs of the next bubble will find their asses in the slammer with the child abusers. And i'm in favor of bringing back the public stocks for the likes of God's work Blankfein, Vikram the Bandit Pandit and Diamond Jaimie. i hope our senators will recover the use of the thumbs they have been sitting on and make a crime a crime,
photo
WOODSTOCKER51
HAVE A NICE DAY!
07:29 AM on 04/27/2010
"ITS NOT EASY.............DOING GODS WORK"......
06:53 AM on 04/27/2010
This whole investigation will end up nothing more than a sham. Money is power, and these people have the money. Those with the money can, and will manipulate our so called justice system, and our less than honorable judges, and politicians. If in the end these people are not jailed, and then prevented from ever holding positions with the kind of power that Goldman had over the market, then it will be nothing, but a sham.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:53 AM on 04/28/2010
If these people are jailed, this will do nothing to change the system. These are a certain type of person that will succeed in this system (not necessarily evil) who will be replaced with the same type of person.
06:47 AM on 04/27/2010
I'm always impressed by how careful and clever companies are in their use of words in a public announcement. It's designed to make the general public believe it means one thing, when in fact it just obscures the truth..
So in this case GS states ' We did not have a big bet against the housing market, as our performance in residential mortgages demonstrates '., and so I suspect that the department dealing specifically in securitised residential mortgages will have shown losses. But their statement leaves out the rest of the equation, and the accusation that has been levelled against them, where it's proprietary trading division has taken out huge positions in derivative products and profited handsomely Likely their defense on that one will be that derivative contracts are not part of the residential mortgage market and so as far as they are concerned they have acted properly at all times especially in their dealings with their clients.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:58 AM on 04/28/2010
I think that those in the Wall Street world may be sincere in saying they acted properly. Theirs is a different world.
06:26 AM on 04/27/2010
Hello? Trading "against" clients? I'm no fan of G-S and I DO think they stepped WAAY over the line and ought to all be thrown in jail but not for taking positions on both sides of the market. That's kinda how it's done. Whew.
05:58 AM on 04/28/2010
Only if you're a Market Maker.

GS traders don't qualify.
photo
WOODSTOCKER51
HAVE A NICE DAY!
06:13 AM on 04/27/2010
...OK..WHERES ALL THAT "TEA PARTY OUTRAGE"??........MAYBE ALL THAT BIG MONEY HAS BEEN BEHIND THOSE "OLD WHITE,GUN CARRYING PUPPETS" ALL ALONG...

..BBBBBBBBBBBBBBAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.....SAID THE "HEAD SHEEP"...
06:28 AM on 04/27/2010
Dude, one word: CapsLock. It is not your friend and folks tend to think you crazy when you use it. So don't.
photo
WOODSTOCKER51
HAVE A NICE DAY!
06:51 AM on 04/27/2010
DUDE.ITS CALLED."NEARLY BLIND"..IF MY NEAR BLINDNESS IS AN ISSUE.THEN GET LOST.....AND WHO CARES WHAT THEY THINK............COVER YOUR EYES.........THEN READ OUTLOUD............PFTTTTTTTTTTTTT
06:11 AM on 04/27/2010
Most of Americans are ignorant as hell and for this our economy is collapsing as people like me and many others have been saying since 2007. Presidents are puppets they dont work for the people as presented in the mainstream media . Simple Fact
photo
Guytar
I'm sorry that I made you cry
05:43 AM on 04/27/2010
"Levin says the firm made as much as $3.7 billion shorting the market -- proprietary trades that only benefited the firm, and not its clients. Evidence that the firm was heavily shorting the market --rather than just hedging its risks -- is overwhelming, investigators said."

I think this says it all.

While I'm here, could I please ask HuffPo to restore the previous "green" format for comments.