It was big news when AIG finally released the list of CDS trade counterparties that it had paid off with taxpayer funds. At the top of the list was none other than Goldman Sachs, which received $13 billion more than any other firm. Goldman spokesman Michael DuVally told Reuters that it was hedged on its AIG positions, but because "AIG was not allowed to fail...Goldman did not get money from hedges that would have paid out if the insurer had collapsed."

He also said that under the terms of its contracts, Goldman was "entitled to collateral." While some are raising the issue of Goldman's Washington alum network, the more pressing issue is why AIG decided to satisfy obligations in full. Why did they pay off in whole when the times required their counterparties to swallow at least partial losses? This is very curious.  

For more:
- here's the article

Related Articles:
Will AIG execs do the right thing?
What will Edward Liddy say on Wednesday?
Goldman Sachs news from FierceFinance
Is the CDS market the next black hole?