I believe you are missing the point. It is not about who provides a better service, or fraud. It is about long-term stability.
Goldman has made extraordinary profits. And done well for their customers. But it is becoming increasingly clear that the outlook is becoming more and more myopic. Profit ≠ Profit, if one is short-term and one is long-term. They are different beasts. Goldman used to be the king of kings with respect to earning long-term profit. Mr. Smith points out that long-term profit has been sidelined for short-term profit. Both are still profit - but one has a sustainable culture, one does not. This is a more nuanced issue than 'good company', 'bad company' - the qualification, 'in the moral way' becomes necessary.
Goldman has made extraordinary profits. And done well for their customers. But it is becoming increasingly clear that the outlook is becoming more and more myopic. Profit ≠ Profit, if one is short-term and one is long-term. They are different beasts. Goldman used to be the king of kings with respect to earning long-term profit. Mr. Smith points out that long-term profit has been sidelined for short-term profit. Both are still profit - but one has a sustainable culture, one does not. This is a more nuanced issue than 'good company', 'bad company' - the qualification, 'in the moral way' becomes necessary.