|
Daniel Sparks, a former head of Goldman's mortgages department, wrote to other executives in March 2007, "We are trying to close everything down, but stay on the short side." Sparks also is scheduled to testify at Tuesday's hearing. The issue of how much Goldman executives pushed such policies and were aware of the mortgage trading department's practices is a key one emerging before the Senate hearing. The 140-year-old investment house's trading strategy in recent years enabled it to weather the financial crisis better than most other big banks. It earned a blowout $3.3 billion in the first quarter of this year. Even before the SEC filed its fraud charges, Goldman denied that it bet against clients by selling them mortgage-backed securities while reducing its own exposure to them by taking short positions. By the Senate subcommittee's reckoning, Goldman made about $3.7 billion from its short positions in several complex mortgage securities called collateralized debt obligations in 2006-2007. The short positions made up about 56 percent of its total risk during the period, the investigators found. But the company says it lost $1.2 billion when it sold home mortgage securities in 2007 and 2008. According to a November 2007 internal Goldman e-mail: "Of course we didn't dodge the mortgage mess. We lost money, then made more than we lost because of shorts." In addition to the $2 billion collateralized debt obligation that's the focus of the SEC's charges against Goldman, the subcommittee analyzed five other such transactions, totaling around $4.5 billion. All told, they formed a "Goldman Sachs conveyor belt," the Senate panel said, that dumped toxic mortgage securities into the bloodstream of the financial system. The firm's correspondence to the SEC dated Oct. 4, 2007, includes this: "During most of 2007, we maintained a net short subprime (mortgage) position and therefore stood to benefit from declining prices in the mortgage market." In his prepared remarks, Blankfein acknowledges, "We have to do a better job of striking the balance between what an informed client believes is important to his or her investing goals and what the public believes is overly complex and risky." He adds, "If our clients believe that we don't deserve their trust, we cannot survive."
[Associated
Press;
Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This
material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or
redistributed.
News | Sports | Business | Rural Review | Teaching & Learning | Home and Family | Tourism | Obituaries
Community |
Perspectives
|
Law & Courts |
Leisure Time
|
Spiritual Life |
Health & Fitness |
Teen Scene
Calendar
|
Letters to the Editor