Goldman Sachs Says No Facebook Shares For US Investors 529
theodp writes "In 2009, Robert Cringely speculated that the day might be coming when Goldman Sachs decides the United States isn't worth dealing with anymore. Crazy, eh? Maybe not. Blaming 'intense media attention,' Goldman Sachs has decided to exclude US investors from a $1.5 billion Facebook offering. In a nicely-timed all-investors-are-not-created-equal MLK Day statement, the US taxpayer bailout beneficiary said, 'Goldman Sachs decided to proceed only with the offer to investors outside the US....We regret the consequences of this decision, but Goldman Sachs believes this is the most prudent path to take.'"
Your fancy US Dollars (Score:4, Interesting)
ARE WORTHLESS!
Exodus, anyone? (Score:2, Interesting)
Nuff' said.
Re:USA a minefield? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:oh really? (Score:5, Interesting)
It kind of looks like the people who could really benefit from an IPO would already have been excluded. Just like always. So, I'm less inclined to be upset about this.
Given Facebook has all the hallmarks of being the next AOL and Mark Zuckerberg the next Steve case, I have a feeling that GS is doing the US a favor.
Re:In my yard (Score:4, Interesting)
So now, after millions of dollars in bonuses for executives who bankrupted the company, and hardly any money to normalize loans so that we would not neighborhood destroyed by foreclosed home, they spend money on this but lock out the people who paid for the bailout.
It could be that Facebook is at the point of Myspace, where the company is trying to cash in while it can. Goldman Sachs is trying to create a novel structure, much like the mortgage back security, in whih the real risks of the investment are hidden from the investor. This instruments sole purpose is to hide the innards of Facebook from investors. Because the money for Facebook is from the taxpayer, Goldman Sachs has almost no risk, just potential for commisions.
Re:So what GS is saying is.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:A Way To Get Around Regulations (Score:4, Interesting)
You lack imagination. They owe more than the money they borrowed, any company that leaned on the taxpayer does. Any time a company wants to privatize profits but make losses at the risk of the public, there is a debt beyond cash.
Re:So what GS is saying is.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe this is the future growth export industry in the US: securities fraud of foreign nationals.
Re:USA a minefield? (Score:5, Interesting)
If it turns out that Facebook is a bubble[...]
If?
I have to wonder -- given their past behavior -- if GS is juggling its various independent business entities so that one entity can offer the IPO while another entity shorts the motherfucking hell out of it. The actual reality would undoubtedly be more complex than the non-gnome population could readily understand, but I wouldn't be surprised if, once all the layers of obfuscation are peeled away, that's what it boils down to.
In any case, Facebook really doesn't have a whole lot of room to grow, and it's ripe to be friendsterized by someone in the next wave of social networks. Live by the social trend, die by the social trend.
Re:Exodus, anyone? (Score:4, Interesting)
There are three primary things that facebook is useful for imho, first is the chat system which is xmpp based (open standard, gtalk etc uses it too) which everyone uses so many friends that do not use other IM system such as msn, aol etc are available to talk to.
Next is the event system complete with iCal support, friends can invite me to events and it will magically appear with details on my android.
Finally where facebook started, photo sharing and tagging, the ability to quickly share things with friends by simply uploading them.
The value comes from the ease of use of sharing information. But of course, this comes with the caveat that you should only put information on there that you _want_ to be shared.
Re:So what GS is saying is.... (Score:4, Interesting)
The SEC has all sorts of regulations meant to "protect" the public. Goldman-Sachs is just trying to obey them.
LOL... Having been suckered into too many IPOs I agree. Thanks for looking out for us Goldman!
Seriously people, why would you want to buy this? Zuckerman and friends are multi multi millionaires. They did it pretty much by starting with nothing. This is just their chance to cash out before the thing heads south. If they saw much more upside, would they be selling?
Re:A Way To Get Around Regulations (Score:5, Interesting)
Not confused at all. They owe more than MONEY. You don't get that.
The fed isn't a fucking bank, we had to bail them out because of their own actions, and actions of like banks. What they owe is to move forward in a responsible way so we don't have to bail them out again. They owe the citizens a debt of gratitude. They operate in a free country, they owe it to us to operate ethically. Money isn't the only method for measuring the "quality" of a business. It is also not the only way to measure debt.
Re:Your fancy US Dollars (Score:2, Interesting)
China owns about one trillion in US debt. If the dollar tanks that'd be a huge loss for them. However, if the Yuan becomes the new world reserve currency, and freely buying the US debt was to intentionally tank the dollar...
Re:So what GS is saying is.... (Score:5, Interesting)
What it is is a scheme to get our taxpayer money which we bailed them out with last years out of the country. They invest in a big bubble once more, this time with their bailout money, invest in it from outside the country using shills (so it can't get scrutinized by the local authorities) and then bust the bubble after transferring out all the cash.
Re:What's the bottom line? (Score:4, Interesting)
You've got to do a lot more than that. These shares are probably not going to get to the retail brokers at all. They'll get divvied up between the big banks and the investment houses to be distributed to their most favored customers.
I can pretty much guarantee that whoever you are, you are not one of their "most favored" customers.
Re:So what GS is saying is.... (Score:5, Interesting)
It wasn't the "European banks" that got hurt from the mortgage-backed bunkum. They were made whole to the tune of 100 cents on the dollar. The people who are paying for it are the same ones that are paying for it over here. You and me. Our parents. Our kids.
They are creating a "breakaway" culture, who within decades will be the only ones with access to capital, to new technologies, to advanced health care. That's the ultimate effect of the dramatic increase in wealth disparity. Fifty years of this and they'll be as far ahead of the rest of us as the American settlers were of the Native Americans. When two cultures exist side-by-side and one is so far in advance of the other, it doesn't work out well for the ones on the bottom. We are seeing evolutionary branching based on wealth alone.
Re:Good (Score:4, Interesting)
I wrote that small businesses get squashed by regulation, but big businesses can avoid it. Why would you conclude, in an article about Facebook and Goldman Sachs avoiding regulation, that I thought both of them were "small"?
Re:A Way To Get Around Regulations (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Yes GS is bad, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
Whenever I hear a libertarian bitching about "complex and outdated" regulatory regimes I do two things, reach for my gun and hold on to my wallet, because I know that I'm about to get ripped off and fucked over by a scam artist. Yeah, isn't it wonderful how we got rid of all of those "complex and outdated" regulations like Glass-Steagall and reasonable capital ratios? Why we've just benefitted so much from the trickle-down effect, oh wait, that's not trickle down, that's just some bankster pissing all over me.
Re:So what GS is saying is.... (Score:4, Interesting)
And, they probably -are- protecting the public in this case...companies should not be allowed to sell shares to the public without disclosing important information about themselves.
Maybe this is the future growth export industry in the US: securities fraud of foreign nationals.
Future growth industry? Dude, in the industry everyone knows not to touch US onshore investors. It's too messy in terms of documentation, and it gives the SEC powers to look at your investors from other countries. Everything US is done via offshore entities to prevent this. I'm surprised everyone thinks this is news.