|
|
|
|
|
by suresk
5084 days ago
|
|
It really isn't clear what GS was providing if they didn't do the most basic due diligence. I did that kind of stuff as a lowly associate at a university-affiliate VC fund, so I don't see how a firm being paid millions of dollars can't find someone to make a few phone calls. Proceeding without the DD questions being resolved and going ahead with a last minute change to the deal doesn't seem like incredibly good judgement on the founders' part, but then again, shouldn't GS have - in their advisory role - warned them about any of this? And, while the founders being non-business type people may excuse them from some of the blame here, their CFO really doesn't have a similar excuse and probably didn't do them any favors. Where was Seagate at in all of this? Unless I missed something, they owned 25% and could have at least been useful in helping with due diligence on the supposed Asian customers. If all of this is true, GS really doesn't look good here, but a lot of people had a hand in this getting so screwed up. OT: Was anyone else surprised by how much vacation the supposed junior level associate was able to take at GS? |
|