Goldman Sachs was charged by the SEC with fraud because of allegedly misstating and omitting key information about a collateralised debt obligation (CDO) that it marketed. We have held that Goldman's reputation in the eyes of the public has little impact on the company, as people on Main Street are not Goldman's customers. Main Street's effect on Goldman is more indirect, and comes through its influence over government policy and regulation.
However, the reputational harm that this SEC fraud charge could cause is a different animal. Goldman's institutional and corporate clients may envy or sympathise with Goldman's public relations plight over excess profits and compensation, but no client is likely comfortable with the idea that it could be the next sucker on the other side of a Goldman trade or product. Harm could come to Goldman via an SEC fine or the attrition of customers. That said, an SEC fine could well be relatively immaterial to the company's overall operations, based on similar actions against other financial institutions in the past. Additionally, institutional clients tend to be fully aware that “buyer beware” is an appropriate stance in dealing with any investment bank. Therefore, we don't believe mass client flight is a meaningful probability unless much more extensive evidence of fraud is unearthed. Also, if more fraud is found, client lawsuits could be more burdensome than the SEC.
Michael Wong, CPA is a Morningstar equity analyst.