The Financial Times reports that "In a survey of 17,000 Americans, Brand Asset Consulting found that Goldman's stature -- as measured by several gauges of brand strength -- had suffered in 2008 and 2009."
Brand Asset Consulting surveys 17,000 consumers at least four times per year, and the news of hard times for Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) is no surprise given all the negative publicity the company has garnered of late.
But for Goldman, it doesn't really matter.
Companies like General Motors, Citigroup (NYSE: C), and Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) are also dealing with huge image and reputation problems -- and that will hurt them because they depend on the patronage of the masses. Goldman doesn't -- it operates as a glorified hedge fund and gets by on its wits and reputation among a relatively small cadre of industry insiders. The gas pumper's opinion of GM can hurt that company's profitability, but Goldman doesn't have any real reason to care what he thinks of its operations.
So the media circus surrounding Goldman's sliminess makes for a pleasant diversion, but it won't have any measurable effect on the way the company behaves.
Cramer on BloggingStocks: The Fed's push for TARP payback 
Hewlett-Packard reports growth in profit and operating margin in Q4
Before the bell: Stocks futures steady ahead of GDP, housing data
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
8-04-2009 @ 1:13PM
Iridium said...
Of course Goldman doesn't care what the general public thinks of them. They aren't in the business of dealing with the general public nor do they need them to succeed.
That is exactly the problem. Goldman executives can drop babies off the 32nd floor and laugh while they splatter on the sidewalk and still not have to worry about making billions of dollars.
There is no oversight of their business and they have the federal government in their pocket. Those points aren't even debatable.
It also isn't debatable that Goldman has caused oil to rise to $70 a barrel.
8-05-2009 @ 3:25AM
tpcc55 said...
The fact is, there is not a single line of business that GS does other top investment banks or commercial banks don't do. GS is simply quicker, more aggressive, and better at risk managing than anyone else. They have over 30,000 employees, hundreds of MDs and hundreds more partners. There are thousands of GS alumni working in other financial firms, and there are thousands of GS employees who came from competitors. Trust me, there's no secret society or hidden conspiracy. I am not passing any judgment on whether their activities are honorable. All I'm saying is, if GS is losing money just like all of its competitors, you won't even see their name in the headlines.