With Goldman charged, rivals smell blood

Within days -- perhaps even hours -- of news that Goldman Sachs was facing fraud charges from U.S. regulators, rivals seized on a chance to elbow in front of Wall Street's most profitable bank.

Investment bankers have been lobbying executives at state-owned Agricultural Bank of China and pushing officials in Beijing to drop Goldman as an underwriter for the more than $20 billion IPO the Chinese bank is preparing, according to sources familiar with the matter.

The sources said rival bankers were also asking officials at state-controlled Bank of Communications to ditch Goldman from its joint global coordinator role in the $6.1 billion rights issue that China's fifth-largest bank is planning for the Hong Kong Stock Exchange.

A lot of it probably is wishful (banker) thinking: There is no indication that either AgBank or Bocom will push Goldman aside.

In fact, everything appears hunky-dory. AgBank on Tuesday asked the firm to take the lead in its planned roadshows to sell the IPO to investors, according to one source.

The rivals are well aware that in China how an organization is perceived can mean everything, and that a tainted Goldman could be vulnerable.

In particular, the nature of the case brought by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission provides fertile ground for the bank's rivals because it alleges that Goldman failed to tell clients key information about a subprime mortgage securities product that it sold to them in 2007.

My question is will this be a step towards a one world bank?

I do not know. The Financial Regulation Bill is a step towards the government takeover of banks in the US. The bill does not mandate a takeover; rather it puts the tools in place that allow the Treasury Secretary to take over the assets of a bank, fire its management and assume all shares of stock, for banks that do not meet certain criteria.

From civil fraud in the US, we may evolve to more and almost unlimited criminal fraud unless “Too Big to Fail” evolves to “Too Big for Jail”.

However, on the world stage, “Too Big for Jail” may be considered for rejection, perhaps selectively, and focused mainly on the US, if the European courts have anything to do with it, simply because ALL of the world-central bank destructive credit derivatives of PONZI originated here. Charles Ponzi, himself, would no doubt be flabbergasted to learn of the world-wide spread of his rotten technique to every financial institution in the Western Fiat World.

The size of all things financial is in “uncharted waters”, “unprecedentally huge” as some frequently note, and now, with accountability arising as a realistic direction after-the-fact, that too may be found, humorously, “Too Big for Court”, as litigation encompassing a completely fradulent Ponzi system of nation-state modus operandi world-wide is impossible to contemplate in scope. Talk about Pandoras’ Box!! Humorously, again, are there enough lawyers? Is there enough courtroom space, jury food, etc? Has guilt already been established?

Yes, the situation is historically absurd, and proposed solutions are even worse, and will be proved so as they are designed, refined and carried out by the same people who have brought the very present situation.

A rotting fruit rots its worst and best at the end with no other alternative, and not all seeds survive.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.