????眾所皆知，高盛公司（Goldman Sachs）在金融危機遭到了創(chuàng)傷，但傷情可能比大家之前了解的要更嚴重。

????我們能從沃倫?巴菲特與高盛公司最新達成的交易中解讀出這一點。根據(jù)協(xié)議，伯克希爾?哈撒韋公司（Berkshire Hathaway）在金融危機最嚴重的時候斥資50億美元投資高盛公司時獲得的認股權(quán)證將被行權(quán)。算一算就知道當年高盛的高層們有多希望能以現(xiàn)金清償；而這或許只是“股神”巴菲特的神奇之處。或者兩種因素都存在吧。

????上周二，高盛發(fā)布公告修正之前與伯克希爾公司訂立的協(xié)議，稱將向伯克希爾公司交割市值14億美元的股權(quán)。巴菲特的公司無需支付一毛錢就可獲得這些股份。而此前高盛已經(jīng)連本帶利清償了巴菲特在金融危機時候的投資。真可謂股神的神作啊。

????巴菲特與高盛之間的這筆交易是這么來的。2008年9月下旬，巴菲特同意對高盛注資50億美元；作為回報，他獲得了高盛市值50億美元的優(yōu)先股；同時獲得了普通股認股權(quán)證，允許他以115美元/股的價格收購高盛另外價值50億美元的普通股，盡管當時該股股價為125美元/股。因此這筆交易從一開始就是賺錢的。

????對于優(yōu)先股部分，高盛公司承諾每年支付伯克希爾公司10%的分紅，但有權(quán)隨時回購本公司股票，代價是在巴菲特出價的基礎(chǔ)上再加價10%。2011年4月，高盛公司支付55億美元從伯克希爾公司手中回購了這些優(yōu)先股。路易斯安納州立大學(xué)拉菲特分校（University of Louisiana at Lafayette）金融學(xué)教授萊納斯?威爾遜曾經(jīng)分析過這筆交易，按累計13億美元的紅利計算，這筆交易的優(yōu)先股部分給伯克希爾公司帶來了總計18億美元的收益。

????現(xiàn)在再來看權(quán)證部分。根據(jù)上周二達成的協(xié)議，巴菲特的公司不必花50億美元去購買它有權(quán)購買的4,300萬股高盛普通股。（按照3月28日股價計算，這些股票市值約64億美元。）相反，高盛屆時將以股票的形式支付給他14億美元的差價。這樣巴菲特獲得的回報金額是不變的，不過最終持有的高盛公司股權(quán)要小得多。

????這就意味著巴菲特將從這筆對高盛公司歷時四年半的長線投資中輕松獲得總計達32億美元的收益，投資回報率高達64%。它看上去是一筆典型的價值投資交易。當其他投資者賣出股票的時候，以超低價大舉買入。巴菲特的傳奇就是這么書寫的。

????但這不是事實的真相。巴菲特在這筆對高盛公司的投資交易中所獲得的收益實際上全部來自這筆投資的特殊結(jié)構(gòu)：優(yōu)先股和認股權(quán)證。僅憑股票本身質(zhì)地來說，自巴菲特投資以來，高盛的股價表現(xiàn)并不特別出色。在這筆交易的投資期內(nèi)，這只股票的價格累計漲幅為17.5%。同期標準普爾500指數(shù)（S&P 500）累計上漲29%；制藥公司輝瑞制藥（Pfizer）累計漲幅為53%；蘋果公司（Apple）盡管最近股價有所回落，累計漲幅仍高達260%。

????We knew Goldman Sachs was wounded in the financial crisis. It may have been in more trouble than is understood.

????That's the sense you get from Warren Buffett's recently inked deal to turn the warrants Berkshire Hathaway received as part of its $5 billion investment in Goldman (GS) at the height of the financial crisis into stock. Do the math on the deal, and it becomes clear just how much Goldman's executives were willing to pay for cash at the time. Or maybe this is just the magic of Buffett. Or maybe it's both.

????On Tuesday, as part of an amendment to its earlier deal, Goldman said it would hand $1.4 billion worth of shares to Berkshire (BRKA). Buffet's company doesn't have to pay a penny for the shares. And this is after Goldman has already paid Buffett back for his financial crisis era investment in full, plus interest. Nice work if you can get it.

????Here's how the Buffett-Goldman deal got to this point. Buffett agreed to give Goldman $5 billion in late September 2008. In return, Goldman handed over $5 billion in preferred shares and a warrant that would allow Buffett to purchase an additional $5 billion shares at a price of $115, even though the shares were trading at $125 at the time, so in the money from the beginning.

????For the preferreds, Goldman agreed to pay Berkshire a yearly 10% dividend, with option of buying back the stock at any time for 10% more than what Berkshire had paid, which Goldman did in April 2011 for $5.5 billion. Linus Wilson, a finance professor at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, who has looked at the Goldman deal, puts the dividends at $1.3 billion. So that gives Berkshire a total return of $1.8 billion on the preferreds.

????Now come the warrants. In the deal struck on Tuesday, Buffett's firm won't have to put up the $5 billion to buy the 43.5 million shares it has a right to purchase, which would be worth roughly $6.4 billion today. Instead, Goldman is going to give Buffett the difference in stock at the time of the deal. Buffett's return is the same, but he's left with a much smaller stake in Goldman.

????Except that's not really what happened. Almost all of the gain Buffett got on his Goldman investment comes from the special structure of the investment -- the preferreds and the warrants. As a straight stock pick, Goldman hasn't been all that remarkable since Buffett put his money in. The stock is up just 17.5%. In the same time period, the S&P 500 (SPX) is up 29%. Shares of drug company Pfizer (PFE) are up 53% in the same time. Apple (AAPL), despite falling recently, is still up 260%.