• C++ Programming for Financial Engineering
    Highly recommended by thousands of MFE students. Covers essential C++ topics with applications to financial engineering. Learn more Join!
    Python for Finance with Intro to Data Science
    Gain practical understanding of Python to read, understand, and write professional Python code for your first day on the job. Learn more Join!
    An Intuition-Based Options Primer for FE
    Ideal for entry level positions interviews and graduate studies, specializing in options trading arbitrage and options valuation models. Learn more Join!

Why I Am Leaving Goldman Sachs

Mr. Greg Smith aint getting any more jobs, not just in the financial sector just anywhere unless he gets any of his close contacts to hire him. Bad mouthing an ex-employer in PUBLIC aint going to rock and roll. I think if i were him i would migrate to another country. I am sure he has tons of money since he worked for GS, he probably doesnt need another job again.
 
I'm trying to generate a meaningful discussion among the members here as many of us are working in the finance industry so his struggle is something many of us may have or will face at some point during our career.
If you are in his shoes, would you keep your mouth shut, your eyes closed if the business conducts conflict with your personal belief and values? Will the salary of several hundred thousand a year justify doing so?
Where is your personal break point?
 
Andy Nguyen said:
I'm trying to generate a meaningful discussion among the members here as many of us are working in the finance industry so his struggle is something many of us may have or will face at some point during our career.
If you are in his shoes, would you keep your mouth shut, your eyes closed if the business conducts conflict with your personal belief and values? Will the salary of several hundred thousand a year justify doing so?
Where is your personal break point?
Click to expand...


There is wrongdoing, maybe a lot of evil in the legal/law world more than anywhere else. There will be conflicts with your personal belief and business if you stay in a place tooo long and start climbing the ladder which is when your getting more closer to your business. It is you who has to decide how much and what you can handle, usually people getting into a job have some idea of what it is going to be like, if not they are free to leave. I am just saying badmouthing his work place isnt a good idea.

To answer the million dollar questions as to why he stayed, he probably knew the consequences of coming out like that, so he probably stashed a lot of money somewhere so life wouldn't be so hard for him going forward.
 
MRoss said:
Yes Andy but why now AFTER he made millions?
Click to expand...

He might have waited until he felt financially secure enough to do something he felt was right, but would probably end his career - it's not unreasonable. Does that make him a liar and absolve GS?

Also, if a first year analyst quits Goldman today and starts making such accusations - would you accept his opinion as more credible?
 
rsingh said:
Also, if a first year analyst quits Goldman today and starts making such accusations - would you accept his opinion as more credible?
Click to expand...

lolololol!!

So you are saying he nobly and humbly stood by earning millions so that when he was powerful enough he could expose them? That's hilarious.
 
Besides and most importantly: Everyone knew this about GS already. And he knew that everyone knew it. He just made this statement to hurt the company. Period.
 
MRoss said:
lolololol!!

So you are saying he nobly and humbly stood by earning millions so that when he was powerful enough he could expose them? That's hilarious.
Click to expand...

Er...no, I'm not. Ignorance is blissful hilarity, I guess.

I'm saying that people will make any excuse (like you did) to stay in denial about GS, and keep the focus of the mail away from the gross alleged malpractice. If it's a first year analyst, they will say "What does he know about GS?", if it's a senior employee, whose opinion about GS should be taken as credible - and alarming, they will say "He made millions while he watched this happen, why should we trust him".
 
MRoss said:
Besides and most importantly: Everyone knew this about GS already. And he knew that everyone knew it. He just made this statement to hurt the company. Period.
Click to expand...

Everyone "knowing" about it didn't really help change any practices - but thanks for admitting that you agree with his opinions! Read his last paragraph again before closing your mind on his intention.

I hope this can be a wake-up call to the board of directors. Make the client the focal point of your business again. Without clients you will not make money. In fact, you will not exist. Weed out the morally bankrupt people, no matter how much money they make for the firm. And get the culture right again, so people want to work here for the right reasons. People who care only about making money will not sustain this firm — or the trust of its clients — for very much longer.
Click to expand...

Ok - I'm done arguing about this. The article reminded me of an info session held in my college (I'm a stats grad student at an Ivy) last year - where Tim, the founder of Jane Street capital emphasized that Wall Street desperately needs more ethical people. Inspirational speaker, don't miss him if you get a chance to listen!
 
Andy Nguyen said:
If you are in his shoes, would you keep your mouth shut, your eyes closed if the business conducts conflict with your personal belief and values? Will the salary of several hundred thousand a year justify doing so?
Click to expand...

If one has a strong sense of integrity, one should avoid finance altogether. If one expects finance to be clean and expect that it does not have a negative impact on people all over the world, one must be naive. Maybe some quants are -- they don't see further than equations and lines of code in the same sense that weapons designers don't see further than technical problems of metallurgy, chemistry, and manufacture.

If Mr. Smith had been taking in $5m a year, would he still have accused GS? I wonder. And why bother doing so when he must have known nothing would come of it? In the USA, it's mostly whistle-blowers who get prosecuted (Manning, Assange, ...), not the accused. I'm not saying GS isn't guiltier'n'hell, I'm just curious about the motives -- for he has certainly slammed the door behind him.
 
rsingh said:
Everyone "knowing" about it didn't really help change any practices - but thanks for admitting that you agree with his opinions! Read his last paragraph again before closing your mind on his intention.
Click to expand...

I think every major bank is the same way. Board of Director meetings behind closed doors I'll bet are not "how can we follow our mission statement better?". They are probably more like "how can we close with an all time high".

You see, Mr. Smith is flat out wrong. "People who care only about making money will not sustain this firm — or the trust of its clients — for very much longer." WRONG. There is an old saying: "Only those who love money will become rich". They will make things work out for a majority of their clients because ultimately that will earn them more money.
 
MRoss said:
You see, Mr. Smith is flat out wrong. "People who care only about making money will not sustain this firm — or the trust of its clients — for very much longer." WRONG. There is an old saying: "Only those who love money will become rich". They will make things work out for a majority of their clients because ultimately that will earn them more money.
Click to expand...
You missed the point. Most likely, our sense of ethics evolved from the need to balance short term greed with long term greed. His point is basically that Goldman is being too short term greedy at the expense of its clients, and therefore its own long term welfare.

That you think he's wrong is really just a result of his faulty use of language or incomplete analysis. In the end, you and Mr Smith don't disagree about how to make money long term.
 
I would think that in the beginning he wanted to work for a great company and make money. He may have put up with the bad things for awhile just because he needed to make money. Maybe even as a junior person he was unaware of what the firm did to make money. Junior people at ibanks aren't sales people. Then he moved into upper management and did sales and saw what they did for a living. He became uncomfortable with doing what he did. Some people can do bad things to screw over people , but this guy couldn't. So he got tired of it and quit and wrote this letter thinking he could change things.
Anyway his letter won't change anything. People know what Goldman did in 2009 during the crisis, and they got fined for it. Banks will always behave in this manner. Most likely no wall street firm will hire him again. Yes, I think he did do the right thing, but by doing the right thing or trying to blow the whistle, nothing will change. Besides that everyone knows his name now and he has harmed himself by being a whistle blower. Banks or companies don't care about these letters as long as the bottom line is in tact. They don't care about any fines they have to pay as long as they have the money to pay them. It's like a traffic ticket to them and the cost of doing business.
 
Eh what, Junior Sales and Trading guys on the Sales side are sales people, but that's not really the point.
 
Lolol. He should have stayed at GS. Doesn't he know that authors make no money ?;)
 
MRoss said:
Lolol. He should have stayed at GS. Doesn't he know that authors make no money ?;)
Click to expand...

GS rewired him,"to stand on his head and bet his ass" why not give it a go!!! by the way he already made millions on the book deal. Go Figure ;)
 
Back
Top