Coming to a public financial market near you

Goldman Sachs, one of the world’s leading advisers on IPOs, will no longer take companies in the US and Europe public if they have boards made up entirely of white men.

Speaking to CNBC at the World Economic Forum at Davos on 23 January, the US investment bank’s chief executive, David Solomon, said: “I think from a governance perspective, diversity on boards is a very, very important issue. We have been very, very focused on it. So we’re trying to find ways to encourage that.”

Does this mean that Goldman Sachs will need to employ compliance advisors to check the gender of directors?  What if there is a white trans woman to man on the board?  Would that exclude the listing?

What also happens if there is a Dolezal Candidate as in a white person who identifies as not white?  What would Goldman Sachs do in situations like that.

If you are confused, just imagine being a fly on the wall of a due diligence committee reviewing the race and gender of the directors.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to Coming to a public financial market near you

  1. What if board members identify as people of colour?

  2. alans

    whats Malcolm going to do now? also son alex needs to try on black face or at least do a Bruce Pascoe

  3. Just wait until these lunatics start to adopt this sort of caper:

  4. Lutz

    So companies will simply stop listing and a new mechanism will be found.

  5. RobK

    Is it such a big deal, how many token directors are on boards now? I’m not saying it’s not stupid, especially to make it mandatory.

  6. Up The Workers!

    Ought Goldman Sachs be totally banned from operating in Australia, in much the same way as South African sporting teams were during the apartheid era, for their grossly offensive racist and sexist attitude?

    If this story is true, it is little different from vile apartheid-style discrimination on the basis of one’s skin colour and/or sex.

    Does Malcontent Turncoat support this sort of vile racist and sexist attitude from the outfit that he used to be a Director of?

  7. Young Freddy

    I used to fret about this stuff, and banks eschewing fossil fuel investments, but I now think the free market will sort it out. These woke outfits will just slowly go broke. There will be shoals and shoals of irreverent, hungry investors who will steer past the BS and plonk their $ into profit-making, rather than virtue signalling.

  8. HGS

    Good news for the competition.

  9. Steve

    Capable people will be denied opportunity because of their race and gender. That’s institutionalised bigotry.

  10. wal1957

    Great idea!

    Let’s not employ the best person for the job!
    That’ll fix everything!
    Diversity and all that!

  11. Biota

    And what was the diversity of GS boards that got them to where they are today? Do they have analysis that shows diverse boards result in higher performance?

  12. Tator

    Young Freddy,
    the only problem with that theory in Australia is that one of the largest amount of investment money floating around are the Union controlled super funds who can push for that sort of lunacy as well.

  13. Tom

    Goldmans think there is an endless queue of woke idiots lining up to go broke backing crap companies with incompetent boards. You shouldn’t have to explain this stuff to adults — and you don’t. Goldmans are pretending to be gullible children who know nothing about successful companies. The only thing they understand is how to get “likes” from the childish social media mob.

  14. candy

    Well it’s their business and all. But if Mr Solomon was so very very keen on this idea, surely as a white older man he would step down and resign, and let a younger lady of colour step up into his job.

    Now that would be admirable. To walk the walk.

  15. Gerry

    Any self respecting board should be able to work out between themselves a rotational self-identification system to cover gender and race ……maybe Prof Pascoe can be a consultant ?

  16. mem

    Seems like Goldman Sachs wants to flood the media with virtue signalling news. It could have just appointed a woman or two and got on with it like other companies. Must be feeling the heat from all its subsidy grazing from renewables and its doomsday mongering to push its carbon trading schemes. My guess is that there are already women on its various boards. Oh look. There are already four women on the Board

  17. Bronson

    Why would any body in their right mind deal Goldman Sachs?

  18. Rohan

    Imagine if you’re on the board of one of these companies going public, and look around at the pre IPO meeting with Goldman Sachs, then suggest 2 or 3 of your all white male directors take one for the team and has to wear a smart taylored business dress and matching makeup for when Goldman Sachs rock up.


  19. suggest 2 or 3 of your all white male directors take one for the team

    If you watch the video that I posted and you’re in the UK, you don’t even have to dress up, all a board member has to say is that they are female and no can argue, period. If anyone argues, all that needs to be done is make a complaint to the police and the person arguing will have a rap sheet against their name.

  20. iggie

    Wasn’t GS partly responsible for the GFC? Shouldn’t even be in business.

  21. Professor Fred Lenin

    A relaive was a director of GS in Singapore,I must ask him if they would pull this crap on there and in SEAsia ? He is retired now,I dont think he would like this nonsense,can you imagine the muslims in Malaysia and Indonesia going along with this .? or the very practical Chinese and Indians .? It would be financial suicide in that part of the world ,seems the Western world is now run by the wankerati, the rest of the world must be laughing at our foolish leadership, except for Trump they would respect and sdmire his stregnth ,and fear his reaction to foolish attacks on him .

  22. Bruce


    I heard an interesting hypothesis about why “Criminal Law” is so named:

    Conceived by Criminals
    Drafted by Criminals,
    Enacted by Criminals,
    Enforced by Criminals,
    Exclusively for the benefit of….

  23. @iggie

    Wasn’t GS partly responsible for the GFC?

    No. It was designed and executed perfectly by the US Government.

  24. CameronH

    As gender is now fluid you would just need a couple of the white men to identify as women just with respect to their role as director. Being fluid they could then just change their gender back to male when the left the meetings. Simple really.

  25. iain russell

    The due diligence committee mentioned is interesting. I understand the Pope and his bollocks being checked is a Pope Urban Myth, to coin a phrase, but could ‘testiculos habet et bene pendents’ be the death knock for some future board knobs?

  26. Sydney Boy

    As always, diversity of colour seems to be much more important to the left than diversity of thought.

  27. Tim Neilson

    Goldman Sachs, one of the world’s leading advisers on IPOs, will no longer take companies in the US and Europe public if they have boards made up entirely of white men.

    I’ve got a great new business model in mind.

    An organisation that provides docile tokens to be Directors for the year in which the IPO happens, and which also does management consulting reports straight after the IPO recommending at the end of year 1 the Board be shrunk – the docile tokens agree to be the ones not reappointed (for a suitable severance fee).
    Everyone’s a winner.

  28. Maryanne

    If having diverse members on on boards is good for business as GS claims then companies would already be doing it.

  29. Ubique

    Is Goldman Sachs guilty of assuming gender? What if board members secretly identify as women of colour, butt are fearful of coming out? How does Goldman Sachs take account of women identifying as men? How does Goldman Sachs take account of gender fluidity, where board members might choose to identify as a different gender from one day to the next? Many questions, few answers.

  30. Tim Neilson

    If having diverse members on on boards is good for business as GS claims then companies would already be doing it.

    You’re right of course. But that doesn’t matter to the wokesters.

    Wokesters assume that no-one actually involved in running a business knows as much as the wokesters about what’s good for the business.

    In any case they don’t really care what’s good for the business, only what’s good for wokeness.

    Wokesters love pressuring from the outside, so that when their wokeness causes a major train wreck the wokesters can just walk away and pretend it never happened. Exhibit A – “protecting the environment” by stymieing controlled burns in forested areas.

  31. Squirrel

    So it’s not about performance, it’s about quotas and tokenism. Much the same as the b/s about coal divestment etc.

    There must be an opportunity here for sharp disruptors to come along and say to investors – “we focus on the bottom line – that’s it”.

    Posturing trust fund idiots could still invest in virtue signalling through legacy outfits like GS, and the smart money could go after better returns.

Comments are closed.