After doing work on GS, it’s a company I would like to own at the right price. It’s M&A and securities underwriting businesses are market leaders and it represents a strong brand name with a strong balance sheet to go with it.I think placing a lot of time into trying to get a supremely accurate valuation of a massive financial institution is in some ways a waste of time. You’re essentially trying to value the company as a going concern until the end of time. This is often difficult for a normal EBITDA-driven business, but it’s often much worse for a financial institution. My basic strategy is to look at the business in the near-term, project the financial environment over the long-term (GDP growth in the areas of the world in which it does business, median central bank interest rate, any political factors to consider), use linear regression to project out an expected long-term ROE for the company, and use an “excess equity return” type of financial projection model to calculate a fair value for the company.Based on linear regression, I project GS’s long-term ROE to stand at 17.10% based on long-term GDP and median overnight federal funds rates. This does an approximate means of capturing the expected long-term performance of the business, which is predominantly markets based and, to some extent, lending based as well. As a median expectation, I have GS valued at $135 per share. Adjusting the long-term ROE +/- 100 basis points causes this range to come out to $125-$145. If instead sensitivity parameters are set to the cost of equity figure (given at 14.88% for this valuation), at +/- 100 basis points, the fair price range is more generally estimated at $126-$167. Based on my preferences, GS would be in play should it drop below $115 per share.