Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
Semtex's bizarre vendetta against Matt Taibbi for hurting Wall Street's feelings(??) was one of my favorite LC thread subplots from 2011, I hope we can bait him into explaining what exactly is idiotic about the O'Neill piece. My favorite part of that piece:
Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...#ixzz1iV4twPbO
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobman0330
I'm not sure I understand the underlying theory behind the Taibbi piece. Obviously Goldman is evil and they've been running a decade-long pump-and-dumb scam in BRIC equities. Because that makes sense. Here's how it went. First, O'Neill coins the term "BRIC" excuse me, the infamous term "BRIC." Nefariously, the BRIC countries grow at 6.6% annually over the next decade. Next, it's time for GS to cash in somehow, so they write another report concluding that growth prospects are less positive. The trap is sprung!
Now what I find curious, is that, simultaneously, possibly nefariously, O'Neill writes a pro-BRIC book. If we assume that O'Neill is privy to the pump-and-dump scam, which I think we have to, how would he get wrong-footed by releasing a pro-BRIC book (sidebar: how much would you wager that Taibbi has never read this book?) at the very same time GS is revealing the anti-BRIC denouement in their sinister drama? Has there been some kind of palace coup? Or are there more layers to the onion? Is GS's apparent about face really just a brief pause in a 360 degree revolution? Or is O'Neill's dogged persistence just two-thirds of a way through a 540 degree twirl?
Or, alternatively, is every fact mustered by Taibbi in that piece totally independent except in the author's imagination? More importantly, what does any of this have to do with QE3 and the outlook for US equities?
Pretty much nailed it. What Taibbi is insinuating is utterly ridiculous, and his claim that O'Neill's BRIC predictions were actually hogwash displays some fairly high level ignorance.
Even his quotation of the guys at Zero Hedge was seriously absolutely ******ed. Those guys predicted that GS was telling clients they were bullish on European bank stocks because they were actually secretly bearish on them, something Taibbi accuses GS of over and over again. They claimed vindication when European bank stocks actually dipped in the few days (lol) after that prediction by GS. Taibbi released his article like a month later, by which time those stocks had in fact made a full recovery, ending up in a
higher spot than when Zero Hedge wrote their piece, vindicating GS's prediction, at least for the moment. He should maybe have checked out where European bank stocks actually were before he included that little tidbit. Odds Taibbi even knows what a European bank stock is?
Seriously though, I know Matt Taibbi feels Wall Street operates strictly to deceive their clients and privately profit at their expense, and that the only one who has managed to figure this out is Matt Taibbi, but you don't find it fishy that no one else has caught on to this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobman0330
The thing is, I believe in mostly efficient markets, so I think virtually every bit of analysis produced by Wall St. is extremely well-informed chicken-entrail reading, and I would expect such predictions to be wrong ~49% of the time.
Exactly. But when Wall Street makes the wrong bet its actually completely intentional according to Taibbi and they are secretly profiting off of it. Its a wonder that the banks have ever lost money. They really should be making like a trillion dollars a year, every year. Actually no they should all be out of business with zero clients left after they bankrupted all their existing ones.
Like I said, his piece was insanely idiotic, and also like I've said, Taibbi really needs to stay away from technical writing about finance and economics because he's obviously massively ignorant about such things. Your (fly's) unending defense of him even when he continues to be blatantly wrong is what I find to be one of the funnier subplots of this forum. I get that you think Wall Street needs to be taken down a peg or two. That's fine I don't entirely disagree with this sentiment just make sure your white knight isn't a shoddy shoddy journalist.
Last edited by Semtex; 01-04-2012 at 07:46 PM.
![[Phill]'s Avatar](https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/customavatars/avatar10430_44.gif){kind=avatar}
