Friday, April 16, 2010

Here's Why You Don't Need to Spend Money on Rupert Murdoch's WSJ PayWall

My story posted  at 11:01: SEC Charges Against Goldman Will Have Legs

WSJ story at 11:49: Why The Goldman Story Has Legs

WSJ's story included this:
First off, Goldman has been feeling heat in recent months amid record profits and revelations of their wild success amid the credit crisis, which hit other Wall Street firms hard

I wrote this back in January (Along with a GS short recommendation):

Despite a better than anticipated fourth quarter earnings of $4.95 billion (largely because of no charges for bonuses in 4Q), the stock was rocked today by indications that Wall Street will be President Obama's whipping boy.
Hmmm, I wonder where WSJ got their thoughts about GS being under heat at earnings time? It's not that they don't list a reference. In fact, they list a bogus reference, to a WSJ story about Fed profits on the sale of Goldman stock. It's almost like they got the story from somewhere other than WSJ but didn't want to reference the source, and so they Googled "Goldman profits", got the Fed story and linked to it without reading it, since they already had the story from another source. I wonder what sources they are really using?

1 comment:

  1. Nice call and nice jop on the GS story by EPJ. Couldn't agree with you more about not needing to pay WSJ.