It is obvious that the business of Wall Street has changed utterly. Goldman Sachs, which had been so clever to profit handsomely last year from the collapse in the subprime mortgage market, has yet to figure how to make money in this new era.

The firm could report a loss of as much as $2 billion, or $5 per share, when it reports fourth-quarter results next week, the Wall Street Journal reports, citing "industry insiders."

Such a loss—which would be the firm's first since it went public in 1999—would top even the most pessimistic of the analysts covering Goldman. On Monday, Susan Roth Katzke of Credit Suisse said she expected Goldman to report a loss of $4 per share for the quarter, which ended on November 28. Her report helped send shares of Goldman tumbling 17 percent on Monday.

"October was a difficult month; November—though we were hopeful—was really no better, with asset prices for equities, credit, and real estate only coming under more pressure," she wrote.

The firm's stake in Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Ltd. and some private equity investments have declined in value in recent months.

The Journal points to problems in Goldman's distressed investments—like golf courses in Japan and troubled auto loans in Thailand—that had been a big profit center.

Other analysts see a more modest loss for the quarter. Prashant Bhatia of Citigroup has forecast a loss of $1.60 per share, while Michael Mayo of Deutsche Bank estimates a loss of 65 cents per share. The consensus estimate, according to analysts surveyed by Thomson Reuters, is a loss of 62 cents per share for the quarter.

It is not as if Goldman has not been responding to the challenge of the financial crisis. The firm has converted to a bank holding company and it has bolstered its capital: selling $5 billion of preferred stock to Warren Buffett, $6 billion of stock in a public offering, and $10 billion of preferred stock to the Treasury. And it has been cutting jobs and shedding assets.

In a speech last month, Lloyd Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman, acknowledged the new challenges. "We are in the midst of a historically significant and uncertain time for business and the global economy," he said.

Yet he was confident that Goldman would survive and prosper: "I have not lost sight of the fact that many of the most important opportunities in Goldman Sachs's history came about during times of stress. Our firm has proven its ability to adapt time and again, and, more than any other factor, our culture has given us the wherewithal to embrace change."

It has usually not been a good idea to bet against Goldman. But a huge headline loss next week—especially if Morgan Stanley's results look better in comparison—might go a long way toward puncturing the last of Wall Street's myths: that Goldman is a firm of the best and brightest whose unique culture allows it to find and pursue profitable opportunities in any environment.

Perhaps Goldman is not so special after all?