{"id":187411,"date":"2013-03-11T20:49:00","date_gmt":"2013-03-12T01:49:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2013\/03\/11\/seriously-why-are-we-not-jailing-these-mother-fers\/"},"modified":"2013-03-11T20:49:00","modified_gmt":"2013-03-12T01:49:00","slug":"seriously-why-are-we-not-jailing-these-mother-fers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2013\/03\/11\/seriously-why-are-we-not-jailing-these-mother-fers\/","title":{"rendered":"Seriously, Why are We Not Jailing these Mother F%$#ers"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Joe Nocera at the <i>New York Times<\/i>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2013\/03\/10\/opinion\/sunday\/nocera-rigging-the-ipo-game.html\">takes a look at at how Goldman Sachs screwed over eToys when they managed their IPO<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><span style=\"color: blue;\">ONCE upon a time, in a very different age, an Internet start-up called eToys went public. The date was May 20, 1999. The offering price had been set at $20, but investors in that frenzied era were so eager for eToys shares that the stock immediately shot up to $78. It ended its first day of trading at $77 a share.<\/span><br \/><span style=\"color: blue;\"><br \/><\/span> <span style=\"color: blue;\">The eToys initial public offering raised $164 million, a nice chunk of change for a two-year-old company. But it wasn\u2019t even close to the $600 million-plus the company could have raised if the offering price had more realistically reflected the intense demand for eToys shares. The firm that underwrote the I.P.O. \u2014 and effectively set the $20 price \u2014 was Goldman Sachs.<\/span><br \/><span style=\"color: blue;\"><br \/><\/span> <span style=\"color: blue;\">After the Internet bubble burst \u2014 and eToys, starved for cash, went out of business \u2014 lawyers representing eToys\u2019 creditors\u2019 committee sued Goldman Sachs over that I.P.O. That lawsuit, believe it or not, is still going on. Indeed, it has taken on an importance that transcends the rise and fall of one small company during the first Internet craze.<\/span><br \/><span style=\"color: blue;\"><br \/><\/span> <span style=\"color: blue;\">The plaintiffs charge that Goldman Sachs had a fiduciary duty to maximize eToys\u2019 take from the I.P.O. Instead, Goldman purposely set an artificially low price, so that its real clients, the institutional investors clamoring for the stock, could pocket that first-day run-up. According to the suit, Goldman then demanded that some of those easy profits be kicked back to the firm. Part of their evidence for the calculated underpricing of eToys, according to the plaintiffs\u2019 complaint, was that Lawton Fitt, the Goldman executive who headed the underwriting team and was thus best positioned to gauge the market demand, actually made a bet with several of her colleagues that the price would hit $80 at the opening. (Through a Goldman Sachs spokesman, Fitt declined to comment. Goldman denies that it did anything wrong, about which more shortly.)<\/span><br \/><span style=\"color: blue;\"><br \/><\/span> <span style=\"color: blue;\">\u2026\u2026\u2026<\/span><br \/><span style=\"color: blue;\"><br \/><\/span> <span style=\"color: blue;\">Earlier this week, I tracked down Toby Lenk, the founder and former chief executive of eToys. Back when the S.E.C. was investigating I.P.O. excesses, the government deposed him. During the deposition, he mostly defended Goldman Sachs, even though he had the uneasy feeling that eToys had been taken advantage of.<\/span><br \/><span style=\"color: blue;\"><br \/><\/span> <span style=\"color: blue;\">After the deposition, he recalled, the S.E.C. lawyers began to show him some Goldman Sachs documents. He saw that one big firm after another had been allocated shares \u2014 and had immediately flipped them, even though Goldman had promised that its clients would support the stock. \u201cThat\u2019s when I thought, \u2018We really got screwed,\u2019\u201d Lenk told me.<\/span><br \/><span style=\"color: blue;\"><br \/><\/span> <span style=\"color: blue;\">Although the experience still angered him, he now has 14 years\u2019 worth of perspective. \u201cLook at what has happened since then,\u201d he said. \u201cIf you think eToys got screwed, what do you think happened to the country?\u201d<\/span><br \/><span style=\"color: blue;\"><br \/><\/span> <span style=\"color: blue;\">\u201cWhat Wall Street did to us in 1999 pales in comparison to what they did to the country in 2008,\u201d he said.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The argument of the Vampire Squid<sup>*<\/sup> is that this was just business as usual.<\/p>\n<p>The court may agree with them.<\/p>\n<p>If they do, it is not a mark of Goldman&#8217;s innocence, but rather it is a mark of how thoroughly corrupt high finance in the United States actually is.<\/p>\n<p><sup>*<\/sup><span style=\"font-size: xx-small;\">Alas, I cannot claim  credit for the bon mot describing Goldman Sachs as a, &#8220;great vampire  squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its  blood funnel into anything that smells like money.&#8221; This was coined by  the great Matt Taibbi, in his article on the <strike>massive criminal conspiracy<\/strike> investment firm, <i><a href=\"http:\/\/www.rollingstone.com\/politics\/story\/28816321\/the_great_american_bubble_machine\">The Great American Bubble Machine<\/a><\/i>.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Joe Nocera at the New York Times, takes a look at at how Goldman Sachs screwed over eToys when they managed their IPO: ONCE upon a time, in a very different age, an Internet start-up called eToys went public. The date was May 20, 1999. The offering price had been set at $20, but investors &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[970,1004,1002],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-187411","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-corruption","category-finance","category-good-writing"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187411"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=187411"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187411\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=187411"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=187411"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=187411"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}