Despite tough operating conditions and slowing demand, Goldman Sachs has plenty of bullish analysts by its side, correct?

A Forbes columnist notes that of the 32 sell-side analysts who follow the stock, only one recommends selling the stock. Seventeen still rate it as a buy, while 14 others are playing it safe by pegging the stock a "hold."  

But "let's face it," he writes. "Goldman Sachs still carries a big stick--with its huge resources and pieces of rich businesses that it could still spread around."

Does this thesis hold water?

It may be true of all sell-side analysts. No one wants to anger the executives of the companies they cover unless it is truly warranted. You end up creating lots of problems, and unless you are willing to go public the way Mike Mayo has with Citigroup and Bank of America, for example, it's better to play it safe and avoid conflicts.

The columnist did find some bearish analysts from the independent ranks. A Zacks analyst has put out research noting that the legal liability that is mounting quickly is one of several reasons warranting a sell recommendation (Zacks' analysts aren't allowed to talk to the media, and their names are kept off research reports). Other independents willing to provide more negative views include Standard & Poor's and ValueLine.

I'm not sure the lack of sells is a huge problem. People are increasingly willing to interpret a "hold" or "avoid" from a sell-side analyst as code for sell. So when an analysts does come out with a sell recommendation, it is noteworthy, though in the case of Goldman Sachs it is like to be a tepid call, perhaps one based on valuation.

For more:
- here's the column

Related articles:
Goldman Sachs loss ignites shares rally   
Goldman Sachs' shocking price-to-book value plunge