Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : CPN: Calpine Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (266)	2/1/2002 4:23:30 PM
From: Clement	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 555

Hi Ray, Incidentally that statement was in reference to Calpine as opposed to the debate of conflicts of interest. Yes you're absolutely correct in that conflicts of interest exist - but on a practical basis, the influences on research tend to be far more subtle than you suggest. While I'm not going to be an apologist for the industry, to discount research as merely "ad copy" is a great disservice to yourself. Goldman raises good points, Eavis also has raised good points. But what I'm suggesting is that those points be examined and refuted as opposed to simply attacking the source. I'm a bit of an odd bird when it comes to investing -- and point of fact, anyone who is reading these boards is probably a bit of an odd bird. We read the comments and opinions of people we have never met and sometimes we even allow those inferences to influence our investment judgements. So why is it so difficult to at least examine arguments from what is, for whatever its flaws, an established investment bank. Point of fact - Goldman depends on its distribution channels for its survival - read: its clients on the buy side must come first and foremost. Certainly it must also appease its corporate clients but it is through GS that corporate clients can access funds. Research from GS is largely done for institutional clients anyway. So to burn its institutionals goes far beyond unwise -- there are balancing measures in place. In either event, I think investors need to share a large part of the blame for the crash of tech stocks and must place more responsibility on themselves. Regardless of the bias, I have a great deal of difficulty trusting anyone completely at face value or their conclusions without doing my own homework -- and examining their arguments at face value. Clement