Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by chillydawg | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

chillydawg

Bargain.

View on HN

The fine is roughly 10% of their Mkt cap [1]. Remember the original $500M fine in 2010? That was truly awful [2].

[1] http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=GS

[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/business/16goldman.html

Much of their market cap is dispersed in the form of compensation to employees and management, so market cap is an underestimate of the profit from activities.

What would be a fair price in your view?

If the penalty isn't higher than the derived value, it's not a penalty, but a cost of doing business.

OK, so what was the derived value?

Shareholders and directors paying that money out of personal wealth. To be honest, I don't know whether it actually was a bargain, but it probably is. Goldman seem to make vast sums of money and routinely factor in 11 digit legal bills as a matter of course. They appear to break the law knowing that their eventual bill will be considerably less than their overall profits and even better - no one has to go to jail.

The shareholders are paying out of their personal wealth. This was expected and already priced into the stock.

Well they were bailed out with $10B plus lots of other props[1]. Some significant portion [some might say all + interest] of that would seem fair.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs

When will people stop talking about the "bailout." It was a relief fund. Goldman paid the 10B back in ONE year. TARP turned a profit. When will you stop living in 2008?

3x Revenues for the years in question. The current penalty is not much more than a slap on the wrist, because even after paying the fine Goldman Sachs makes a profit from the business for the years in question. People see Billions and think the fine is significant, but unless the fine is linked to actual income, it is fairly meaningless.

We'll get an idea of how others think of the value of this settlement by how the stock price moves after this...

Felony convictions, jail time, and a life-long industry ban for the perpetrators. In addition to the fines of course.

And if there are repeated violations, dismantling of GS as a corporate entity + nationalization of its assets would be a good place to start.

GS is a corporation, an entity that exists at society's pleasure. When society grows displeased at the antics of habitual corporate offenders, society should impose a form of bankruptcy, in which the corporation ceases existence and its assets are divided among lenders and victims.

The norms of corporate governance would change, swiftly.

Jail for everyone who demonstrated a conflict of interest. Total recovery of lost funds by selling off assets of the guilty.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com