Goldman’s $550 Million SEC Settlement

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. Query says:

    I’ve read elsewhere that the $550m settlement is a “record” only if a number of qualifiers are thrown in. If the case was so “simple” to prove then why didn’t the SEC demand more, either in terms of money or stronger admissions by Goldman about the error of their ways? (Note: having read your prior post, I am convinced that you are right and SEC could have made out a case on that basis alone. So I’m wondering why SEC didn’t press matters more).

  2. Lawrence Cunningham says:

    Query:

    Thanks. My posts spoke to the simplicity of Goldman’s liability, not to the remedy. But I think that’s simple too. Investor losses are covered and a fine doubling the total imposed. That seems reasonable and simple.

    I don’t like the popular talk, making it seem complex, disputing whether $550 million is a mere slap on the wrist or an inadequate slap in the face.

    It’s a simple case on liability and remedy. Public discourse would benefit from seeing it that way.