Michael Lewis is having way too much fun with the SEC's Goldman Sachs case. This case has all the makings of a good Hollywood movie.You just can't create some of the characters involved -- "Fabulous Fab", the Frenchman and "Frankenstein Derivatives" that turn on themselves! "Wall Street"'s Gordon Gekko is almost boring in comparison.

You have to have experienced a trading room floor to fully appreciate the humor!

Michael Lewis Says the Bond Market Will Never Be the Same

By Michael Lewis

Posted Thursday, April 22, 2010 - 10:04am

If you happen to be sitting on the Goldman Sachs (GS) bond-trading floor, life must feel horribly unfair.

You did nothing worse than live by the ethical assumptions of your market—any money-making event short of obviously illegal is admirable—and now your own grandfather thinks you’re some kind of monster. Your world feels upside down: What was right is now wrong; what was good is now bad; what once felt like winning now feels like losing.

You are probably wondering: What next? What will the angry rabble—all those ordinary people who can never really understand your business—now demand that you explain to them, so they can disapprove of you all over again?

A few possibilities:

No. 1: Full knowledge of the inner workings of your proprietary trading desk.

In particular: The moment-to-moment dealings of your correlations traders from late 2004 (when they first exploited American International Group’s (AIG) idiotic willingness to sell cheap insurance on pools of subprime mortgage loans) until the end of 2007, when they would have taken most of their profits from the total collapse of the subprime bond markets.

Your bosses claim to have lost almost $100 million on the Abacus trade for which your firm is being sued. This seems, to put it mildly, disingenuous. In March 2007, the time of this particular Abacus trade, your prop traders were already short the subprime market. Would they really have taken a naked long position in a deal you helped to construct precisely so that it would fail without offsetting in some other way on their books?

Ritual Sacrifice

Sadly, it will not suffice to offer up Fabrice Tourre as a ritual sacrifice. No one is going to accept a then-27-year-old Frenchman, whose job was apparently to keep sweet the patsies on the other end of your trades, as the world’s authority on your trading positions.

His name isn’t even on the top of the list of Goldman traders listed on the $2 billion Abacus deal for which you are being sued. The name on top of that document is Jonathan Egol. Egol appears to have been the bond trader at the center of your Abacus program. The same Jonathan Egol who told fellow traders in 2006—a year before this transaction—that the subprime market was doomed.

The public eventually will ask: Who is Jonathan Egol, and what exactly was his game?

No. 2: A far better understanding of your relations with the inaptly named “CDO manager.”

Read more: http://www.thebigmoney.com/articles/judgments/2010/04/22/michael-lewis-says-bond-market-will-never-be-same?page=full

Since his case is pending litigation I will just present the facts without much commentary.

SEC Charges Goldman Sachs With Fraud in Structuring and Marketing of CDO Tied to Subprime Mortgages

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2010-59

Washington, D.C., April 16, 2010 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged Goldman, Sachs & Co. and one of its vice presidents for defrauding investors by misstating and omitting key facts about a financial product tied to subprime mortgages as the U.S. housing market was beginning to falter.

---

Additional Materials

• Litigation Release No. 21489
• SEC Complaint

---

The SEC alleges that Goldman Sachs structured and marketed a synthetic collateralized debt obligation (CDO) that hinged on the performance of subprime residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS). Goldman Sachs failed to disclose to investors vital information about the CDO, in particular the role that a major hedge fund played in the portfolio selection process and the fact that the hedge fund had taken a short position against the CDO.

"The product was new and complex but the deception and conflicts are old and simple," said Robert Khuzami, Director of the Division of Enforcement. "Goldman wrongly permitted a client that was betting against the mortgage market to heavily influence which mortgage securities to include in an investment portfolio, while telling other investors that the securities were selected by an independent, objective third party."

Kenneth Lench, Chief of the SEC's Structured and New Products Unit, added, "The SEC continues to investigate the practices of investment banks and others involved in the securitization of complex financial products tied to the U.S. housing market as it was beginning to show signs of distress."

The SEC alleges that one of the world's largest hedge funds, Paulson & Co., paid Goldman Sachs to structure a transaction in which Paulson & Co. could take short positions against mortgage securities chosen by Paulson & Co. based on a belief that the securities would experience credit events.

According to the SEC's complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the marketing materials for the CDO known as ABACUS 2007-AC1 (ABACUS) all represented that the RMBS portfolio underlying the CDO was selected by ACA Management LLC (ACA), a third party with expertise in analyzing credit risk in RMBS. The SEC alleges that undisclosed in the marketing materials and unbeknownst to investors, the Paulson & Co. hedge fund, which was poised to benefit if the RMBS defaulted, played a significant role in selecting which RMBS should make up the portfolio.

Read more:  http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2010/2010-59.htm