iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Goldman Sachs Values Assets Low, Sells High To Customers As Senate Panel Alleges Double Dealing

First Posted: 04/14/11 07:44 PM ET Updated: 06/14/11 06:12 AM ET

Goldman
Goldman Sachs, the fifth-biggest bank in the U.S.

As the subprime crisis was emerging on Wall Street, Goldman Sachs sold a client a slice of a complex security at a price nearly 50 percent higher than what the firm valued at for itself, according to a new Senate report on the origins of the financial crisis. Last week, another bank settled a similar case with securities regulators who accused it of "violating basic investor protection rules."

In July 2007, Goldman sold Bank Hapoalim a $9 million slice of Timberwolf, a $1 billion instrument linked to subprime mortgages, at about 78 cents on the dollar. The Israeli-based bank did not know that Goldman's internal valuations at the same time pegged the slice at just 55 cents on the dollar.

The purchase -- the Israeli lender bought it at a 42 percent premium -- is similar to one made by the Zuni Indian Tribe, which bought a comparable financial instrument from Wachovia in 2007 at 90-95 cents on the dollar even though the seller of the instrument, Wachovia, valued it on its own books before the sale at just 52.7 cents on the dollar.

In that case, Wells Fargo, which took over Wachovia, was ordered to pay an $11 million fine by the Securities and Exchange Commission. In announcing the settlement, SEC director of enforcement Robert Khuzami said the lender violated a basic rule: "Don't charge secret excessive markups, and don't use stale prices when telling buyers that assets are priced at fair market value."

In this case, the SEC declined to comment, though it's been widely reported to be investigating such cases. Goldman Sachs declined to comment. Bank Hapoalim did not return a call seeking comment.

The revelations are among a trove of findings discovered by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations after a two-year probe into Wall Street's role in causing the crisis. The panel accused Goldman of deceiving clients, betting against them and profiting off their losses.

In the case involving the Israeli lender, Goldman withheld its internal valuations showing the securities were losing value, declined to tell the bank and other customers that it was betting the security would lose value and profited at the expense of its clients, who didn't know they were buying "poor quality assets at inflated prices," according to the report.

In the SEC's case against Wells Fargo, the regulator charged that the lender sold the securities knowing the prices it charged were excessive, according to the regulatory order describing the scheme.

Whether Goldman will face sanctions for its dealings with Bank Hapoalim is another matter.

"If someone has a security on their books at 50 cents on the dollar, then is marking it up to 90 cents on the dollar, well that just sounds like they're taking advantage of the person, and it's excessive," said Allen D. Madison, a visiting professor at the University of Idaho College of Law who studies securities law.

Goldman's alleged mark-up was smaller, though.

"It's very subjective," Madison acknowledged.

Wall Street veterans, though, say Goldman's behavior is to be expected. There's no price transparency, and firms are at the mercy of the biggest banks.

"If there had been a transparent valuation paradigm ... this never would have happened," said Sylvain Raynes, a founding principal of R&R Consulting in New York and a structured finance expert. "You could never sell something worth 55 for 78 with full symmetry of information. If you could, I have a bridge for sale."

Raynes said firms like Goldman likely value securities based on the conditions in the market, "but only a few people are privy to these conditions in real time," he added.

Thus, investors and traders at smaller firms can often lose out. "This can only exist in a world like finance where reality is what a few people say it is," Raynes said.

A few weeks before the Israeli bank bought a slice of Timberwolf, Thomas Montag, a top Goldman executive, referred to the security as "one shitty deal," according to an internal email obtained by Senate investigators.

Goldman kept marketing Timberwolf to its clients after that comment.

This story was updated to reflect the following correction: Goldman sold the Timberwolf slice to Bank Hapoalim in July, not May. Montag's comments therefore came a few weeks before the sale, not after.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
As the subprime crisis was emerging on Wall Street, Goldman Sachs sold a client a slice of a complex security at a price nearly 50 percent higher than what the firm valued at for itself, according to ...
As the subprime crisis was emerging on Wall Street, Goldman Sachs sold a client a slice of a complex security at a price nearly 50 percent higher than what the firm valued at for itself, according to ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 113
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jtabs
That one man ...
07:16 AM on 04/18/2011
Damn, no wonder I can't make money, my broker kept saying buy high, sell low.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Justan Olfrend
Liberal, Progressive, Independent, American
02:02 PM on 04/17/2011
I said it before. They created the instruments, the marketed and sold the instruments, they knew the instruments best because they created them while selling the known (impending) loss that they knew was coming in a bet against their own instrument. They knew all sides and continued to sell it, and claim it was a great deal even while knowing their other bet was the winning hand. They made money off the suckers at the start and money with their pets (Paulsen) at the end. This should be criminal. What fiduciary responsibility do they have to investors that they assured that these were great deals when they were aware that most of these 2nd mortgages would be worthless at the end of their scheme? Why trust them at all today?
02:56 PM on 04/18/2011
Playing devil's advocate, they were dealing with sophisticated investors. It is possible that that Goldman wasn't directly privy or wasn't required to be privy to the base fundamentals of the underlying assets for these instruments. I do not think that the corruption was as widespread as some people think because, if it were, we'd have already heard about individuals who made money shorting these instruments. I think that alot of Wall Street just started believing its own lie.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Justan Olfrend
Liberal, Progressive, Independent, American
12:30 PM on 04/19/2011
The problem with that is they had internal emails that they called their own product a "bad" deal and they were still selling it. As the "stuff" started hitting the fan, they were still telling folks that it was just a blip and they believed in the product. People believed them. Even the best investors get cheated. Especially when the ratings agencies are paid by the same folks lying to the buyers. Great try advocating for them though. You sound just like them.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:00 PM on 04/16/2011
Oh boy. Does this mean we will get into a little bit of trouble with 'buying low and selling high' in the fair value regime?

Probably, when we're trying to be real serious about it. It's the same as being real serious about market efficiency. Ultimately, it requires us to take our hands off the financial wheel. To this date, the only person who went down the road that far was probably Alan Greenspan.
photo
Intolerantcentrist
No thanks…I brought my own air.
02:46 PM on 04/17/2011
Except that Alan Greenspan offered a mea culpa to the alleged success of his ideology.

“I have found a flaw [referring to his free-market ideology]. I don’t know how significant or permanent it is. But I have been very distressed by that fact.”

“I was shocked, because I have been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.”

---Alan Greenspan before the House Committee of Government Oversight and Reform; October 23, 2008.

The genetic fallacy of “free market efficiency” should be clear in our example of a sizable financial debacle. Markets cannot become efficient or fair when the bad actors drive good actors from the market. In this situation market do self-correct, just not in the direction, nor for a desired reason: corruption.
photo
irochfpst
no right turn
10:25 PM on 04/15/2011
they are out to defraud everyone except their best customers. i wonder who those people are?
Frankling
Fruit don't talk. Fruit just listens...and waits.
08:50 AM on 04/16/2011
Themselves. Like most corporate boards, they, themselves, are the majority shareholders, making "shareholder revolt" a forlorn possibility.
04:29 PM on 04/15/2011
Wow, do you mean to tell me that before a financial collapse someone sold something to someone else for more than it was worth?

Do you know how many securities are fairly valued by the market at any given point?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:16 PM on 04/15/2011
we are all hamsters on neocon "financially engineered" wheels...

Insider Trading Accusations Describe Network Of Corruption

Cohen, who is worth more than $6 billion..

"Such privileged information was provided to Steven as part of his relationship with Mr. Newberg and as part of an effort to "take care of one another." They sometimes referred to their group of Wharton friends as "the Wharton mafia.""

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/08/insider-trading-hedge-fund_n_820446.html

Quantifying the Role of Old-School Ties in Investing

6/9/07

"“It’s a very good paper,” said Michael S. Weisbach, a finance professor at the University of Illinois. “It suggests that there is illegal activity going on, but it doesn’t provide the S.E.C. a road map. You certainly can’t prosecute someone for having a good return on a company by somebody they went to college with.”

The authors have also been presenting it at academic seminars, as well as to the hedge fund arm of Goldman Sachs and to AQR Capital Management, another hedge fund.

Regardless of their cause, the patterns areof potential interest to other investors, who could track the investments of mutual fund managers and mimic those strategies that seemed to work especially well.

“Something about these social networks is allowing portfolio managers to better predict the future returns of companies within the network,” said Lauren Cohen of Yale, another author."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/09/business/09fund.html
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
logicanada
Blogger, radio co-host, writer, editor, voice-over
02:59 PM on 04/15/2011
. . . and their Facebook investment won't do them much good either.
04:26 PM on 04/15/2011
You're joking, right? That "investment" was sliced up and pawned off at a profit to its clients. Nice try, though.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:35 PM on 04/15/2011
we are all hamsters on neocon, SuperMob, "financially engineered" wheels

Supermob: How Sidney Korshak and His Criminal Associates Became America's Hidden Power Brokers

http://www.amazon.com/Supermob-Korshak-Criminal-Associates-Americas/dp/1582343896

Prosecute, Clawback, and Aggressively Tax banksters who caused this 2nd Great Depression!

Wisconsin is a pawn being manipulated by the wealthy neocon elite who were bailed out as wall street barons/oligarchs several times over via the fed's many "quantitative easings," led by the ny fed geithner syndicate.

geithner's NY fed caused our current 2nd Great Depression via "financially engineered toxic assets." banksters light their cigars with TRILLIONS in cash they are sitting on and investing in China and other countries.

2 years ago NY Times Gretchen Morgenson detailed timmy geithner's ny fed incestuous cabal where ny fed board members steered Trillions in bailout dollars and other fed "special" "monetary easing" programs to their corporations. the "players" include blankfein, fuld, rubin, summers, bernanke, greenspam, dimon, speyer, stephen friedman, prince, weill, immelt, chais, merkin, adelson, picower..

their unmitigated GREED destroyed middle class mortgages, 401Ks, health care, schools, and the middle class.

This was the greatest REDISTRIBUTION of wealth in history; UPWARD to the wealthiest few.

4/26/09

NY Times "Geithner, Member and Overseer of Finance Club" By JO BECKER and GRETCHEN MORGENSON and the accompanying graphic "Mr. Geithner’s World." research how they control the fed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/27/business/27geithner.html?_r=1

two years old and it's gotten worse!
photo
Jamf
Friends Don't Let Friends Watch Fox News
02:25 PM on 04/15/2011
That's most definitely one of their games, alright. GS is a large-scale criminal enterprise. Lloyd Blankfein (etal) should be in prison.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
cats530
16 Trillion To Banksters Per GAO Audit
12:59 PM on 04/15/2011
"Too bad there is no acknowledgment that it is people like Angelides who through their corrupt behavior over the years allowed Wall Street to singlehandedly usurp the democratic process and replace it with that of a fascist corporatocracy. But that's irrelevant: at some point, sooner or later, the American peasantry will snap. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not the day after the Apple borg hypnosis ends, and the fascination with American Idol expires, but at some point thereafter, absolutely. And the primary reason will be the glaring trampling of the tenets contained in both the Declaration of Independence and Constitution, by the kleptocratic "superclass."

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/phil-angelides-discusses-americas-dual-justice-system-one-wall-street-and-one-everyone-else
01:11 PM on 04/15/2011
I totally agree. I'm just wondering how bad it's going to have to get. Of course when we can't get foreign loans anymore because of wall streets reputation maybe our government will finally stop the borrowing and spending-the ever growing credit card for government. I hope Spitzer continues to bash them on wall street-we might actually see someone go to jail.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fineartgalaxy
Speaking from the heart, always.
12:00 PM on 04/15/2011
And that is why the insider traders and investors always come out with a profit regardless of how the market does. In most situations. That is why our retirements take a hit and the big investors always make it big.
11:48 AM on 04/15/2011
Don't worry another slap on the risk on the "Too big to fail". You lose your home because you missed a payment, sorry buddy hit the road. Destitute.
11:46 AM on 04/15/2011
Just keep this in mind.  These "pillars of the community" which in many cases some of these people are because of carefully crafted benevolence, are the very ones that will finance the next billion dollar presidential election.  Without their millions influencing elections,  a presidential election might instead attract more of a diverse candidate selection and we might actually be able to debate issues more honestly instead of listening to pure rhetoric that is malice in intent. 

Keep in mind that spending is gold for these banks.  They make money not giving out investment advice, or bringing start-up companies to the IPO status as they once did, but by putting together bond offerings that increase spending.  What I am saying is that a government reining in costs, is the last thing the GS boys want to see happen.  They may pay lip service to the high rising debt in our country, but cutting the spending is cutting their bonus money and they won't have that.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blackranger
10:13 AM on 04/15/2011
And this is not considered insider trading? Some bought the financial instruments (so many names now for products that are paper and have no real value at all, just gambling bets. I thought if a person (or a bank) made profits from information not available to all buyers, that was insider trading, at the very least they were lying and that got Martha Stewart put in jail.
02:18 PM on 04/15/2011
No this is not insider trading. Its just reality in finance that a company like Goldman Sachs has many more resources than smaller firms and access to better or in this case faster information. Insider trading would be if a Goldman had advanced knowledge that say the company that backs the security was making a public announcement the next day that they lost a lot of money. This would casue the price to drop and they would make money on it. In this situation Goldman values the bond differently then the client. 2007 - 2008 was crazy time to value these types of bonds.