Hacker News Reader

Comment by veyron | Hacker News Reader

There are a multitude of cases involving technology companies and shenanigans with Goldman Sachs, including Marvell Technologies: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/04/11/marvell-co-founders-s...

View on HN

If I could use one word to make a generalization about the financial industry as a whole, including Wall Street, banking, etc., it would be this: shenanigans. You need to be very very careful when dealing with them, and I would also avoid their world as much as you reasonably can. Perhaps not a complete boycott is wise or possible, but as much as you can.

When you're dealing with top investment bankers you have to realize you're playing the lottery. Goldman will always be hedged and you will always be carrying the risk, not the least of which is that they will mislead you in some subtle way that costs you big. They have more knowledge, more experience, and better lawyers than anyone, so good luck proving any misconduct on their part.

Everyone in finance who is not a fish knows this, but they still deal with Goldman, why? Because they're making more money than anyone else, so you still have better odds with them than anyone else.

While I don't blame the founders for choosing Goldman, I do think that they should have recognized that paying a flat fee was a bad idea. Incentives matter, and it's easy to see how even the most reputable investment bank would allocate fewer resources to your deal if there is no potential upside to them.

Yeah. This is why I don't invest -- I don't really see it as investing, I see it as waiting to have your money taken away by someone who is really good at taking money from others.

You realize that historically U.S. markets have not worked that way, and putting your money under your mattress instead of investing it resulted in dramatically lower returns?

So, can we declare shenanigans on Goldman Sachs then?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com