PDA

View Full Version : Goldman sachs sold 44% of its B.P. Stock 3 weeks before the spill



Large Sarge
3rd June 2010, 04:58 AM
http://moneycentral.msn.com/ownership?Holding=Institutional+Ownership&Symbol=BP

Large Sarge
3rd June 2010, 05:01 AM
stories like this make John Kaminski sound pretty rational to me

they planned it, they knew it was coming, they are destroying humanity (millions if not billions of people)

what do you do with these people?

SHTF2010
3rd June 2010, 05:40 AM
maybe GS got a hot tip from Miss Cleo

nothing will happen to GS

UNTIL people realize this " selling " was more than just a lucky coincidence

EE_
3rd June 2010, 05:52 AM
stories like this make John Kaminski sound pretty rational to me

they planned it, they knew it was coming, they are destroying humanity (millions if not billions of people)

what do you do with these people?




http://www.dvorak.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/f-16_07.jpg

undgrd
3rd June 2010, 06:01 AM
I've checked 2 other sites in addition to the link you've provided and have 3 different sets of top 10 Institutional Holders??? According to the OP link, GS was number 10 as of 03/31/2110. Yahoo and Fidelity don't seem to agree....strange.


From Yahoo (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=BP+Major+Holders)

From Fidelity (http://eresearch.fidelity.com/eresearch/goto/evaluate/fundamentals/ownership.jhtml?stockspage=ownership&destination=%2Feresearch%2Fgoto%2Fevaluate%2Ffunda mentals%2Fownership.jhtml%3Fstockspage%3Downership&symbols=BP)

Glass
3rd June 2010, 04:42 PM
Can we find out if they shorted BP as well? That would be both barrels of the smoking gun IMO.

Large Sarge
3rd June 2010, 04:55 PM
they unloaded BP

and shorted transocean

http://pesn.com/2010/05/05/9501645_No_joke--Goldman_Sachs_shorted_TransOcean/



A. True Ott, Ph.D., wrote the following to me last night:

I have confirmed that there were indeed numerous "shorts" placed on TransOcean stock just days before the "problem". Was it Goldman Sachs? That is yet to be conclusively determined (there is indeed a SEC investigation ongoing) -- but labeling something as "satire" is a lawyer's shrewd trick to keep from being sued for slander -- even if it is all true. Moreover, there were massive shorts placed literally seconds after the news hit the airwaves.

Who would dare to quote the actual e-mails from "Fabulous Fab", unless the writer would post them as a "satire" - especially after what happened to the Wall Street Journal writers who dared expose the 9-11 short sales involving Goldman Sachs. (They were assigned to Afghanistan, and had fatal "accidents" there.)

Dr. Ott has subsequently confirmed from two sources that Goldman Sachs was indeed in on the shorts being placed on TransOcean stock. (See Email from Don Nicoloff documenting Goldman Sachs short puts on TransOcean stock.) And he has confirmed that the comedian was aware of that as well.

Dr. Ott had me and Paul Noel on his two-hour radio show yesterday talking about the viral article we posted, "Mother of All Gushers Could Kill Earth's Oceans".

In response to the alleged Goldman Sach's shorting story, Paul, who is an expert on the Gulf Oil subject, provided the following intelligence:

There is a reason they could have known the rig was going to fail up to two weeks ahead of its failure. The nature of these wells is that they leave the drill mud in the well and compress using very heavy drill mud to keep the well from blowing up unlimited. The well would begin to bump (similar to boiling a big bubble) and the acoustic signals would tell the rig was in trouble that far ahead. Goldman Sacks could just have had inside info. They also know the scale of things. This is the best explanation. It could be otherwise.

If you were going to sabotage a drilling team, all you would have to do is load a lighter mud in the mix as they pulled a drill pipe. .... There are lots of ways to have this happen either accidentally or deliberately. Goldman teams are great on statistical stuff sort of like the odds of rolling dice. They might just have figured stats for probability of a failure.??? Of course we could surmise other reasons are possible.

Horn
3rd June 2010, 11:06 PM
Hey, I seem to remember you posting something on this only a week, or so after the disaster.

Nobody could believe it.