Screwloose

$59 Billion Dubai Debt Default Could Have Much Wider Implications

That's unfair. Peter Cooper's patch is the Gulf and he was the ONLY commentator [of hundreds] that accurately called the bottom for gold at $868 in April - completely against the trend.

Maybe seeing daily a grotesque malinvestment, heading for certain trouble, frames his advice. Once again he's been proved right.


On Nov 27 11:39 AM posiedon wrote:

>Another fear mongerer...

Dubai Default Raises Contagion Concerns

"......is that gold generally falls by less in the sell off and then bounces back quicker in the aftermath of the sell off."

Spot-on - at least so far. It's back to where it was at this time yesterday - the Dow is still 3-digits down. That's serious resilience.

Thirteen dollars more for, yet another, record close - it couldn't, could it?

Options Trader Outlook: It's Fall-Down Friday, Dubai Cruel World!

"Dubai, Cruel World..."

Classic one - thanks for the much-needed uplift.

Gold May Gain on Dubai Crisis

Current GLD flows are reported as 9 ounces out for every one in. As expected; the leveraged funds and hedgies are starting their profit-taking for year-end. Looks like a lot of them got stopped-out overnight.

As they've been selling, gold has hit record after record. So it's not just the speculators that are driving this market - there is a VERY big buyer out there that may have accumulated as much as 1,000 tons on Monday alone.

Witness the little games. Not only holding the price dead-level for four solid hours on options expiry day; [$37B futures traded - work out for yourselves how big that buy order was, as they did it to London too] but deliberately forcing the price to - just - a new record close every day.

That's openly taunting the COMEX. For the first time in years, someone else is demonstrating their control of the market. The concern should be "what happens when they've acquired enough?"

Gold Is Rallying: Now Where Do We Keep It?

This has got to be silver-related. As said; all the gold was already in vaults [except maybe Cash4gold's] and it doesn't move much, its ownership just changes.

Investment silver is the new factor. Industrial silver would have been stored at metal dealers, not bullion vaults and takes up 60-odd times the space of gold.

Many reports say that the Fort Knox/West Point bullion is coin-melt and thus not pure gold - unless it's since been refined to LBMA standards. [Or swapped for plated tungsten......]

Will Gold Hit $1,200 by the End of the Year?

Initial CME figure for yesterday's gold volume: a record 322,926 contracts traded.

That's 32,292,600 ounces, or $37,620,879,000 @ $1165/oz.

$37 billion traded: somebody bought enough gold yesterday to make the $6.7B Indian buy look like pocket-change - and without moving the price too much. They stood aside at the, unimportant, Nov expiry and so lured the shorts into the trap this time - as to whether the COMEX can now actually deliver.....

Although they're backed by the Fed's printing press; there must be a finite limit to the gold suppressors' losses. If they throw in the towel and start to cover their shorts going right back to the $800 zone, there could be some jaw-dropping volatility ahead.

Time to Bail on Shale?

Alan

A year ago you said: "Hold Gold? Time to Fold" as it was only going one way - down. [From $7-800/oz]

How'd that work out for you....?

Will Gold Hit $1,200 by the End of the Year?

Somebody set out to teach the COMEX shorts a lesson today - and they succeeded magnificently.

Options expiry day for the Dec contract would normally see some savage downside action - I had a sizeable bet on that myself as the, much smaller, Nov expiry got hit very hard.

Instead, gold jumped $7 straight out of the blocks last night and, despite massive resistance, pushed up in exact $5 steps to $1165; until COMEX open when it was smartly stepped up another $5.

Holding a flat-line like that needed serious money; I don't need too many guesses as to who has a few billion dollars to divest.

The OI and COT figures will be interesting tomorrow.... JPM will not be happy bunnies.

Gold: Still Cheap Despite New Record High

Thanks Adrian

Nicely put piece of reassurance, but necessarily pitched to your clientele's comprehension level.

Isn't the journalist in you just itching to do a deeper, more technical, piece on this quite significant story? True or false; there's malevolent intent at work here - the timing of the story's leaking cannot be a coincidence?

Might casting aspersions on physical's integrity be in the interest of those currently holding, impossibly short, futures/options positions...? [Although it seems to have backfired on them if that was indeed the case. I was counting on a Monday dip too...]

Whether the "deep storage" segment of Fort Knox's reserves have been cloned is probably forever unknowable; but the viewpoints of some of your, doubtless diverse, range of contacts would make an interesting piece. The guys at Baird's factory on the practicalities, for example?

Gold: Still Cheap Despite New Record High

Hi Adrian

Another valuable piece - thanks.

OK; be gentle, but what's your take on Rob Kirby's claim that plated tungsten fakes, in quantity, have penetrated the chain of accreditation?

We could really use a whole article from yourself on that - covering things like; whether it's possible; the practicalities [how would you stamp anything into tungsten?] whether, to your knowledge, there has ever been a confirmed case and what do the professional metallurgists say about possible [acoustic?] screening methods to differentiate?

A Sit Down with Treasury Officials (Part I)

Good job they didn't invite Denninger....

.

The New Gold Rush: Lots of Risk

To judge how far gold has deviated from it's long-term value; avoid pricing it in currencies that are far from constant in either quantity or value.

The change from the 1980 panic spike can be calculated at anywhere between $2200 and $7400 - depending on which measure of inflation is used.

As the measurement of CPI is so politically sensitive and open to constant manipulation; it's safer to gauge gold's current fear premium by comparing what an ounce of gold will buy.

Throughout history, it's said that one ounce of gold will buy a man a high-quality outfit [hat, tie, shirt, suit and shoes] or 400 loaves of hand-made bread. [Not the mass-produced cardboard stuff.]

Work those figures out in any currency and you have a rough idea of where gold would be in settled times. Anything above that range needs abnormal conditions to sustain it - and you should proceed accordingly.

It should also be remembered that the dollar cannot fall to nothing. It is, at least nominally, backed by 8,800 tons of gold - at some point the dollar/gold value must come into equilibrium and the dollar will be a de-facto gold-backed currency again.

Why the IMF's Indian Gold Sale Matters

"The IMF had to sell?" This is an organisation with an unlimited power to print money - and they just have; $250 billion in crisp new SDRs.

$6B from India is nice - but it's pocket-change. Earmarked for admin costs and good [read hopeless] causes.

As to the sales process: after approval, all or any of the gold was immediately available for off-market sale to the highest bidder - so far that's been India - or, if no bids, to be trickled into the market.
Where's the mystery in that?

Gold Soars to New Highs

Peter

What charts are you looking at? Does $30 intraday - $20 of that in 5 minutes - not qualify as a spike in your eyes?

You're clearly a hard man to please....


On Nov 03 11:59 PM Peter Cooper wrote:

> No sign yet of an obvious spike on the gold price chart

Incurious Gold Manipulation Theorists

On Nov 03 06:17 PM DiggerUK wrote:

> @ Screwloose,
> There is a world of difference between physical and paper gold.

There certainly is.

> Paper gold has a third party risk, physical doesn't.

Correct so far - if held in your possession.

> CB's and bullion banks are different entities anyway. They each have
> their own stack.

Indeed they do.


> They also exist for different reasons. The bullion banks to smooth
> the path of international trade mainly, the CB's to regulate the
> states currency.

I like the "mainly..."

> If a leasing arrangement is entered into by the CB it is just doing
> it's job of protecting the states currency. But it isn't selling
> the stack in the national vault, just allowing it to be used as collateral
> mainly.

I fail to see how you can use something that you don't own as collateral against default..? [Although, in theory, you could use it to nominally back futures contracts - if you could be certain that nobody would stand for delivery....]

> As you can see from this link it is leased gold that is traded most,
> not physical.

If the leased gold is traded, as most was, then it's not being used as collateral. The leased gold was sold into the physical market to depress the price - the CBs didn't want it back, although they still carry it on their books [no audits] and get the miniscule lease rates from it. Research the "Gold carry trade" from the late 90s.