It is sort of like the career arc of William Shatner. You know, when he had to do the voice for the animated Star Trek series? There was the first film and then (gulp) TJ Hooker? That was bad. Really bad. But, in a way, what better way to put him out to pasture but as a white cop in “LA” with an expanding waistline? (And there was Heather Locklear to look at, after all). But if you counted the Shat out, you were mistaken. A long series of films followed along with Priceline, of course, followed by The Practice and Boston Legal, putting the big WS back in the captain’s chair until he becomes so corpulent and decrepit that there simply is no where the man has not gone that he may now boldly go. (Of course, the rest of the crew aged less well. Though, James Doohan cost us a deadpool win four years in a row. That guy just wouldn’t give up the ghost).
And so it was with Goldman. Expanded waistline wracked by sudden, illness related weight-loss. On government life support. Sucking saline (and presumably morphine) from the wide open IV. Converting to a bank holding company. Things looked grim, yes. Not so fast, Barney.

Goldman Sachs’ first-quarter results announcement displayed a characteristic mixture of operational prowess and political savvy.
Kicking off the US banks’ reporting season, Goldman handily beat analysts’ forecasts. It also confirmed plans to raise capital and free itself from the shackles placed on its compensation practices by the $10bn of government aid it received last year.
The understated tone of Lloyd Blankfein, Goldman’s chief executive, who said in a statement he was “pleased with this quarter’s performance” could hardly mask the fact the Wall Street bank has set a bar that many rivals will find hard to clear.

It’s Goldman II: Wrath of Blankfein time. Suck it, Montalbán (Waters).
Goldman’s results set a high bar for rivals [The Financial Times]

Comments (14)

  1. Posted by guest | April 14, 2009 at 9:15 AM

    Let’s not get ahead of ourselves here. 2/3rds of their business is still performing terribly. Is there real persistence in their earnings? I can’t wait to see the 2nd quarter results….

  2. Posted by Anal_yst | April 14, 2009 at 9:18 AM

    I just picture Bwarney Fwank playing with his little Lloyd, Jamie, Vicky, Kenny dolls like Lord Helmet in “SpaceBalls.”
    Oh, how sad he’s going to be when Lloyd isn’t around to play anymore…

  3. Posted by Equity Private | April 14, 2009 at 9:18 AM

    You are just jealous.

  4. Posted by guest | April 14, 2009 at 9:22 AM

    GS–1; congressional morons–0.

  5. Posted by guest | April 14, 2009 at 9:23 AM

    GS lost 2.15/shr, read the fine print.

  6. Posted by american bandersnatch | April 14, 2009 at 9:25 AM

    EP – I thought you would be more of an Adrian Zmed kinda gal rather than a Heather Locklear gazer. Interesting.

  7. Posted by guest | April 14, 2009 at 9:25 AM

    I’d accuse @1 of being a BOA exec, but the post lacks the necessary farming metaphors to validate my suspicion.

  8. Posted by guest | April 14, 2009 at 9:41 AM

    no way this is the start of something special. Wait until the PPIP gets off and running and all of these banks start selling their crap to each other with leverage and the backing of the FDIC.
    Housing doesnt stabilize get made whole by the FDIC.
    Profit.
    Repeat.

  9. Posted by guest | April 14, 2009 at 9:45 AM

    @7, you are a tool. BOFA will be GS and then some 5-10 years from now. Moron

  10. Posted by guest | April 14, 2009 at 9:45 AM

    Its Jefferies Time, bitches!

  11. Posted by guest | April 14, 2009 at 9:47 AM

    Jim Cramer is my uncle.

  12. Posted by guest | April 14, 2009 at 9:58 AM

    @9 you forgot the: http://www.instantrimshot.com/

  13. Posted by guest | April 14, 2009 at 10:38 AM

    #5, last year was a freakish record year for wall street and for gs, not typical and certainly not expected to repeat with or without the meltdown. look at overall performance and their performance. and they reported an increase of profit compared to first quarter of last year. you read the fine print.

  14. Posted by guest | April 14, 2009 at 12:42 PM

    @ 12
    I was initially scared to click your link, I read it as “instant-trim-shot”…

Leave a comment

You can log in with your account or comment as a guest below.