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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Spekulatius who wrote (38273)	6/11/2010 10:52:08 PM
From: Madharry	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 79055

I dont agree. I dont think bp is such an easy target and i dont think GS is either. as I said before, A logical extension of the case against GS, is that if a dealer thinks that an investment is poor it has to warn the the prospective purchaser of its opinion or perhaps of other opinions that its familiar with. By extension I could infer that no dealers should sell US govt bonds if it believes inflation is headed up and that US credit rating will deteriorate over time unless it states that to prospective buyers up front. The whole thing is ridiculous. As far a BP goes, I think its not unlikely that the US sub of BP files for bankruptcy. What does Obama do then? He can pass all the retroactive laws he wants. On top of that who will want to drill in the gulf after that? There will be a battle royale over exactly what BP is liable for anyway My guess is that BP will still be a company after OBama finished his term as president. As you may or may not be aware of there is still extensive litigation going on over 9-11. That was almost 9 years ago. I think the litigation over this oil spill will be at least 18 years.