Archive for December 2010
Wall Street Journal aids silver price suppression
(Through misinformation, lies and omission!)
Plus, the year in review, and price predictions for 2011
by Jason Hommel
Posted originally December 29th, 2010 on Silver Stock Report
I’m called upon by my regular readers to refute, rebut, and rebuke this bad article on silver from the Wall Street Journal:
Price of Silver Soaring
Investor-Fueled 74% Gains Dwarf Gold; Race to Open Mines
By Carolyn Cui and Robert Guy Matthews, published Dec 26, 2010
Regarding the WSJ comment: “unexpected surge in investor demand”
Really? Unexpected, you say? But precious metals bulls have been predicting explosions in the price for ten years based on irrefutable fundamentals and unsustainable market manipulation.
How can investor demand be unexpected when the price of precious metals has been going up continuously for ten years now since the year 2000? Don’t investors like to buy things that are rising in price? Don’t investors also try to predict things that will rise in price, and buy them before they really rise? Does the WSJ know anything at all about investing?
Unexpected? Really? When the numbers of silver Eagle 1 oz. coins produced by the US Mint has been increasing steadily for the past 3-4 years, up from 10 million oz. to nearly 40 million oz. this year? How can a single year’s investor demand be unexpected, when its increase is already a steady trend?
Regarding the WSJ comment: “Prices are rising despite oversupply”
What oversupply? What do you even mean by oversupply? Here is the dictionary definition of oversupply:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/oversupply “A supply in excess of what is appropriate or required.”
Ah, the WSJ is no longer reporting fact, but throwing out opinion now. There is no oversupply, and can never be any oversupply of things such as gold and silver, since they have the least diminishing marginal utility of all things on earth, since they are money. Nobody ever complained that they had too much money.
But what does the WSJ mean by oversupply? The supply and demand numbers produced by such surveys as http://www.silverinstitute.org/ who the WSJ quotes as a source, have “sum up” categories called “Implied Net Disinvestment” and “Implied Net Investment”.
http://www.silverinstitute.org/supply_demand.php When investors are buying, this is often called a surplus, or as the WSJ says, an “oversupply”, and when investors are selling, that is called a deficit.
So, apparently, the WSJ is saying that when investors are buying silver that’s “oversupply”. And thus, when they describe that action as an “oversupply”, they are really saying that silver purchases by investors are “inappropriate”. Thus, they reveal their bias, with one word.
WSJ: “Many analysts expected those factors would keep a lid on prices in 2010”
But most silver analysts are employed by LBMA bullion banks who have a vested interest in manipulating silver prices downward, since silver is the Achilles heel, or arch enemy, of the banking system. Thus, “mainstream” silver analysts have never gotten a single year’s prediction correct in the last ten years of the bull market in silver and gold. They always “predict” prices for next year that are within about 5% of current prices, and never any higher. Meanwhile, silver prices have risen from $4.15/oz. in 2003 to $30.60 now in 2010, which is a cumulative return of 637%, which, over 7 years, is an average annual gain of 33%. They never come close to predicting such gains.
Check my math, here: http://www.smartmoney.com/compoundcalc/
Have any of the mainstream analysts predicted a silver price gain of 33%, for the following year, or even close, in the last 7 years? Never. Thus, they are worse than useless, they are purposefully deceiving, or willfully ignorant, as is this WSJ article. That should be no surprise, and neither should silver’s price rise.
WSJ: “What they didn’t expect was an overwhelming flow of money into the market from investors eager to ride a commodities rally”
Overwhelming flow of money into silver? Really? Let’s see, there is $14,000 billion to $18,000 billion of paper dollars in the US banking system, which does not count dollars in overseas banks, and the rest of the world is printing up paper money like crazy for competitive devaluations. Meanwhile, the US government has an annual deficit of $1500 billion or more, depending on how you count, if you count off budget items, it could be as high as $3000 billion depending on who you read. Meanwhile, a tiny $3 billion pours into silver, which is a paltry 2% of 1% of the money in the US banking system, and a mere 10% of 1% (or 1/1000th) of new US money creation.
I wouldn’t call that an overwhelming flow of money into silver. I’d say that’s only a tiny trickle, wouldn’t you?
WSJ: “‘This is a story almost entirely about investment,’ says Stephen Briggs, senior metals strategist at BNP Paribas”
Well, the silver story, in the future, will be almost entirely about investment, but today, investors are still buying only a tiny fraction of new silver mine supply, with the rest being consumed by industrial applications of all sorts, from fabrication, to photography, to jewelry, silverware, and coins and medals.
From the silverinstitute.org:
2009 mine production: 709.6 million oz.
2009 Implied Net Investment: 136.9 million oz. (oversupply, or investor buying)
But let’s pause here, and examine the numbers more closely. Sprott wrote an excellent silver report that reveals that ETF silver demand is not counted in the “demand” numbers for silver! http://www.industrymailout.com/Industry/View.aspx?id=245442&q=264546678qz%3D3f9465
Fraudulent supply/demand numbers, omitting investor demand, or calling it a “surplus”, is part of the manipulation of silver prices. But this implies a few other things, too.
Either the exchange traded funds are not actually going out into the market to buy silver which means they are mostly all fraudulent, or, their net purchases are more than offset by investors or refiners dumping 1000 oz. silver bars (the only acceptable form of ETF silver) to dealers who sell it directly to LBMA banks. We’ve never had to dump any silver bars in the last 2 years of our precious metals business.
JP Morgan Silver Manipulation Explained: Part 2
Once again, two bears (inexplicably, one of them is still the Aussie koala) come to grips with the infamous J P Morgue:
Bloomberg counters Gold’s run with absurd, baseless hit-piece
by Jordan Roy-Byrne, CMT
Posted Thursday, 23 December 2010
GoldSeek.com
MONDAY MORNING I WAS GREETED via my inbox with a Bloomberg report on Gold. Bloomberg has a series called “The Dark Side of Gold.” Its important to note this isn’t the first time the news organization has attempted a hit-piece on Gold. I wrote about this exactly one year ago and identified the cases and examples of Bloomberg’s gold bashing.
The crux of the biased series (one that even makes CNBC blush) is how Gold ETF’s are responsible for Gold’s rise and contributing to a bubble. It is insinuated that because the ETF’s are easily tradeable, a torrent of sell orders would cause Gold could to fall sharply, ala 1980.
Gold’s rise actually has very little to do with the GLD ETF. It really is a non-factor when you consider any of the following reasons: Threat of sovereign debt defaults, debt monetization in Europe, Japan and US, 0%-1% interest rates, commodity bull market, and falling gold production. The GLD ETF is an effect of the bull market, not a cause. The same is true with mutual funds during the bull market in the 1980s and 1990s.
In the two minute preview video, Bloomberg’s Carol Masser makes two ridiculous claims in a span of about four seconds. She claims that prior to the Gold ETF, only “conspiracy theorists” were buying Gold and that it cost a “fortune” because of holding costs and commissions. This is nothing other than failed hyperbole, seeking to demonize Gold and gold bulls. I’m not an expert on the exact ongoings of the physical market but I’m sure that it at that time it didn’t “cost a fortune” to buy Gold. Meanwhile, any conspiracy theorists have clearly made a lot of money.
Oh, I forgot to note at the very start of the video, the woman claims that even “college coeds” are buying Gold. Really Bloomberg? Where is the evidence of that? Google that and I bet you are more likely to find soft-core pornography than any hard-hitting evidence on such a ridiculous assertion.
Speaking of “hard-hitting,” Bloomberg interviewed Mark Williams of Boston University, who on camera made the case that Gold is in a bubble by providing zero evidence. A googling of the professor reveals he was perfect for this series, as he is a notorious hard-money hater. In November he wrote an editorial about how the gold-standard should be relegated to the dustbin of history. The only thing that will be relegated to the dustbin of history is our fiat currency system. It’s happened before and will happen again.
Bernanke’s inflationary binge could spark a currency war and ruin the dollar
by Gerard Jackson
Brookesnews.com
Posted originally Dec 20th, 2010
BERNANKE’S MONETARY SHENANIGANS ARE BUILDING UP a host of problems, domestic and international. In the next 8 months or so he plans to pump nearly $900 million dollars into the US economy with the intention of lowering interest rates to the point where business borrowing and consumer spending will be sufficiently stimulated to trigger a recovery. (If only it were that simple.)
This policy amounts to criminal negligence. If Bernanke were a surgeon he would be doing jail time. To get a grip on the magnitude of Bernanke’s folly let’s go back to 2007 when the Fed’s balance sheet stood at $900 million. By 2009 it had jumped to $2.3 trillion, an increase of 136.7 per cent. The excuse was that a massive monetary injection was needed to prevent an economic collapse. I for one never believed that the US was in danger of a deflation-driven implosion. I also warned that the consequences of any rescue package would be to slow if not prevent the necessary economic adjustments from taking place.
So what did America get for Bernanke’s swift monetary rescue? Unemployment stuck at 9.6 per cent with the broader measure standing at 17 per cent. His response is not to reason why but to once again step on the monetary accelerator. Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.
Let’s see what “Helicopter” Ben’s vulgar Keynesianism might mean for Americans. Short-term debt used to be the Fed’s main monetary instrument. Thanks to Bernanke most of the Fed’s Treasurys are now long long-term with about half exceeding five years. Bernanke has to know that in the current situation holding long term securities involves great risks. At the moment the rate stands at just over 4 per cent. You don’t have to be an expert in finance to realise that a rise to 6 per cent would slash the value of these holdings, wiping out several times over the capital on the Fed’s balance sheet.
But why should this happen? Because Bernanke — the architect of this policy — has implemented a monetary strategy that must eventually drive up interest rates if not checked. And right now, there is nothing checking him. Flooding the economy with dollars is bound to arouse inflationary expectations. This will lead to rises in the yield of long-term bonds which in turn will drive down bond prices (there is a strict inverse relationship between the yield of a bond and its price) turning the Fed’s balance sheet into an ocean of red ink.
Chinese take-Out of the U.S. Economy, debt crisis triggering Reserves conversion into gold and silver
by Jim Willie CB
Originally posted Dec 15, 2010
Here, at the end of 2010, Jim Willie produces a masterwork of perception and analysis. This is an important article, and in my view clearly describes the major forthcoming power balance that will affect the entire world. –Aurick
THE CHINESE MUST REALLY THINK THE AMERICAN STRATEGY AND BEHAVIOR TO BE BRAINDEAD AND SELF-DESTRUCTIVE. The US helped them assemble a manufacturing industry, replaced US income with debt, and finally faces the Grim Reaper in a national episode of systemic failure. The US leadership is as stupid and mindless as the population is driven by compulsive consumption over the cliff, as the nation faces ruin. The Jackass warning has been for five years that the Chinese experiment would end in tragedy, and that when a preponderance of USTreasury debt is owned by foreigners, especially a single foreign nation, the Untied States will lose its sovereignty.
It is worse. It lost its vitality entirely. With its financial engineering backfire, the nation is broken from a sequence of repeated asset bubbles & busts. With its wartime economy, the nation seeks new enemies and prefers exports of weapons to productive goods. The nation is like a Sherman Tank sinking in a sea of quicksand with credit cards as banners flown, all overdrawn and canceled. The globe has come full circle from a century ago. The export of opium by Britain to China back then, the US monopoly on narcotics nowadays. Uncle Sam prefers selling contraband to legitimate industry.
A spectacular sequence of events has taken place with respect to China and the United States in the past decade. The disastrous outcome was extremely visible long ago to the competent economists. This article cannot fully discuss and analyze the entire sequence, which in my view took the USEconomy from imbalanced, debilitated, and on the verge of ruin in ten years to chronic insolvency, accelerated breakdown, and systemic failure today. The official policy toward China by the USGovt on bilateral trade highlights the incredibly stupid and irresponsible nature of American leadership, especially in economic and financial matters.
Let this piece serve as an outline of ruinous self-destructive policy, resulting in a climax failure in the Untied States. At the doorstep to a much darker poorer place, with countless traits associated with the Third World, the US as a nation with its USGovt and Wall Street compromised leadership refuse to admit grotesque errors. They do what they usually do, create more money to toss at half-baked solutions, and create a new enemy to lay blame on foreigners. This time though, the Chinese object of criticism, rebuke, hostility, and retaliation is the largest USTreasury creditor.
The counter-attack from Beijing after an amateurish display of ignorance and tantrums seems directed at purchases of Gold & Silver, along with developing a stranglehold on the commodity supply chain. The financial managers in China have found inventive ways to discharge vast amounts of USTreasury Bonds. Their challenge includes finding secure worthwhile investment locations for the over $20 billion in bilateral trade surplus they build each month with the US, a formidable challenge indeed.
MOST FAVORED NATION TICKET
The rationale for the Clinton Admin to grant a Most Favored Nation status to China in its closing months in 1999 was a mystery to me. To be sure, the gesture went a long way toward developing detente with the slumbering giant. But it awakened the Middle Kingdom after two centuries of quiet, marred by a half century of harsh communism. Without question, some big promises were made in bilateral agreements. My suspicion is that the USGovt sought a lock on a new large scale creditor to purchase USTreasury debt securities, regardless of the consequences. Perhaps the USGovt sought a bagholder both either USTBonds or USAgency Mortgage Bonds, or both. With Japan and South Korea as neighbors, China would surely not resort to purchasing US weaponry.
Given the coincident timing with the handover of Hong Kong from the British at the end of its 99-year lease, one must suspect that China might have promised not to transform HK into an economic prison camp shrouded in communist rules that would render it a wasteland, if the US and UK would only promise to assist the Asian giant with technology transfer, industrial support, and massive business investment. China probably promised some big bait of cheap imports to the USEconomy, the grand US achilles heel. The US was well along its pattern of consuming itself to death. Witness the retail emphasis within its economy, its crippling reliance upon debt, its junk food preferences, and its obesity. The China might have laid a great trap, and the US took it. Maybe the entire deal was well planned, a leftover of Mao Tse Tung days when he was a member of the Skull & Bones group.
The Most Favored Nation status was the ticket that opened the door, a New Open Door policy, for investment, lower cost in production, and the general awakening of the sleeping giant. What followed was a natural course of events to unseat the Untied States, converting it into a hopeless debtor with neither the prospect nor the means to repay its debt. Enter the new age of China, all perhaps the plan, the ever patient giant. The parallel to the destruction was a course taken by former USFed Chairman Greenspan. He guided the nation through the avenue to financial engineering and consequent implosion brilliantly, offering ideological justification, legislative obfuscation, and near the end, a nearly total abdication. He was a tremendous mesmerizing high priest. Greenspan’s second paycheck from his Swiss masters is consistent with working an agenda toward the demise of the American Empire.