Restore Goldman fraud Door

On April 20, the US investment bank giant Goldman Sachs reported a lucrative first-quarter profit: $3.3 billion, a sharp rise of 91% per cent from a year earlier. But the dark clouds on Goldman's head are clearly gathering.　　The British regulator announced April 20 that it would investigate the British firm.　　Meanwhile, German financial regulators have asked for details of the SEC's prosecution of Goldman Sachs and will decide whether to take legal action after "carefully assessing the contents of the document".　　But after the SEC filed a lawsuit against Goldman Sachs for "securities fraud," Goldman reacted forcefully, thinking that the SEC's core appeal was "misleading investors", and that it was no fault for Goldman to comply with the industry rules that revealed the identities of both sides of the deal. So who was the real victim and who was the perpetrator of the Goldman Sachs "fraud" incident?　　How does this game work? Our correspondent has found a Wall Street insider who has been trading in the CDO and CDs markets for a long time.　　　　He once had the same deal with the Goldman Sachs trading rival, ACA, and was familiar with the way Goldman Sachs ' fraudulent doors ' played. The chain of the game, in the SEC indictment, Goldman Sachs, ACA, ABN Amro, the Paulson Fund, the German Industrial Bank (IKB), the Bank of Scotland, six companies, and three products – mortgage-backed securitization products (RMBS), credit default products (CDS), appeared.　　And a compound secured claim voucher (synthetic CDO).　　According to Goldman Sachs, as of May 31, 2007, ACA managed 26 CDO products and the underlying mortgage products cost as much as $17.5 billion.　　Market information shows that, in addition to the CDO product management, ACA also has a security company (ACA Financial Guarantee), also for tens of billions of of dollars of CDO products to guarantee. "ACA is not known outside the world, but in the industry, it is a well-known CDO asset management company and a seller of CDs that insure against CDOs."　　Said the Wall Street insider.　　How does this game of Goldman play?　　Goldman's response to the SEC's indictment, issued 18th this month, shows that the Paulson Fund did "assist" ACA in picking the mortgage-backed debt (RMBS), the underlying product of the CDO product. However, ACA also rejected a large number of bonds singled out by the Paulson Fund and opted for bonds that met their chosen criteria.　　According to the prevailing market data, the Abacus (Abacus) -2007-AC1 synthetic the underlying mortgage products (RMBS) selected under the CDO as many as $2 billion trillion.　　However, ACA chose only a portion of the product and sold the CDO products at close to $909 million trillion. Meanwhile, in an effort to increase its profitability, ACA has sold part of its external sales toThe AC1 product's credit-default product-simply, is to protect the value of AC1.　　It is said that ACA issued a policy to obtain the proceeds of the insurance policy. When the deal was made, ACA then sold the policy through ABN Amro to Goldman Sachs, according to people familiar with the matter.　　ABN Amro has added dozens of bps.　　Goldman then transferred the policy to the Paulson Fund.　　That is, if the price of RMBS products that ACA chooses declines, then Paulson will benefit from a fall in the price of products – the Paulson fund has not been directly shorting the market.　　In a game designed by Goldman Sachs, ACA and Paulson funds were the real rivals (counter party). ACA wants to make money from CDOs and RMBS products.　　But Mr Paulson wants to make money during the fall. Goldman then sold CDO products to other investors.　　Including the 150 million-dollar product bought by the German Industrial Bank (IKB). "But Goldman did not disclose how much of the product was packaged." So it's hard to say whether Goldman has any of these CDOs in its own hands.　　said the person. However, Goldman's response on 18th revealed some information about Goldman's loss of 90 million of dollars in the same portfolio.　　　　That part of the damage is likely to come from the CDO products that Goldman Sachs has not sold. The fate of 6 participants according to open market information, ACA filed for bankruptcy in 2007.　　The reason is that the value of the CDO products it guarantees has fallen sharply. In fact, ACA was almost the first company to fall in the US financial crisis.　　They secured nearly 100 billion of the CDO products. According to the US Securities and Futures Commission, after ACA fell, the Dutch bank, which resold the insurance of AC1 CDO products as an intermediary, was forced to bear the burden of compensation. Finally, the ABN AMRO Bank buyer, RBS, paid 841 million dollars.　　The money was transferred through Goldman to the Paulson Fund.　　To date, five participants in the transaction have suffered heavy losses: ACA went bankrupt, ABN Amro was bought, and the Bank of Scotland eventually paid a 841 million-dollar bill, while Goldman Sachs, which made 15 million dollars in the deal, lost $90 million on the same assets.　　More unpredictable, because of the SEC's lawsuit, April 16, Goldman Sachs lost a day worth as much as $12 billion trillion.　　Only the Paulson fund has tasted the sweetness. "The Paulson fund finally turned to shorting the ABX index, making a huge profit."　　"According to the reporter interviewed the person said. The Paulson fund was not charged, but was also involved in the whirlpool.　　But Mr Paulson believes he has always been "reasonable" and "well-meaning" in his dealings with Goldman. On the evening of April 20, in a letter to investors, Paulson defended himself by saying that PaulsenkiIn the process of looking at the empty mortgage stock market, Kim has been "transparent" and "open".