by thrive » Mon Apr 19, 2010 11:59 am
Once again, John, I thank you for writing a few understandable sentences to concisely state the situation as you see it -- specifically, Goldman Sachs. On Friday, as I listened to CNBC, it seemed like there was an unwillingness to believe that GS was at fault -- maybe they were going with "innocent until proven guilty" -- but either way, it was hard to filter through the commentary. I thought to myself, "'John will put the facts out on the table in his blog tomorrow." And you did. Thank you. Your knowledge -- and ability to impart knowledge -- is greatly appreciated.
Once again, John, I thank you for writing a few understandable sentences to concisely state the situation as you see it -- specifically, Goldman Sachs. On Friday, as I listened to CNBC, it seemed like there was an unwillingness to believe that GS was at fault -- maybe they were going with "innocent until proven guilty" -- but either way, it was hard to filter through the commentary. I thought to myself, "'John will put the facts out on the table in his blog tomorrow." And you did. Thank you. Your knowledge -- and ability to impart knowledge -- is greatly appreciated.