Forum: Edelmetalen » Goud en zilver Rockin & Rollin

[verwijderd] 18 maart 2005 10:24

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

Daily US Metals Commentary

March 17, 2005

METALS: OVERNIGHT CHANGE to 3:45 AM:London Gold Fix $442.65 +$1.45 LME COPPER STOCKS 49,100 metric tons -350 tons COMEX Gold stocks 5.915 ml oz -1,247 oz COMEX SILVER stocks 101.6 ml Unchanged

OVERNIGHT ACTION: Minor weakness despite slightly higher Chinese gold price action.

GOLD: While the US current account deficit reading yesterday provided gold support, we still think that the concern for the economy, off slackening US numbers and soaring energy prices, has robbed gold and silver of recent upside potential. In fact, given the slate of information yesterday, we have to suggest that gold really underperformed. Furthermore, with the US Dollar higher today, that has partially tempered the favorable overnight Chinese gold price action. With the June gold apparently restrained by the recent consolidation highs of $447.6, we have to think that the market will now present a range trade, with support coming in down at $443.5. However, the US economic report slate today is rather full and that could result in greater volatility in the Dollar and in turn in the gold market. In our opinion, the metals have recently been held back by concerns of slower growth and therefore, the initial claims report might shed some light on the US jobs situation. In our opinion, to view the soaring energy price situation as inflationary, which in turn could stimulate even bigger gains in the metals, the pace of the economy has to quicken. In conclusion, we can t rule out choppy to weak near term action in gold, with near term support potentially being tested down at $443.5 and possibly even $442.5.

SILVER: In our opinion, the silver market has been undermined by the slackening outlook for the US economy. In fact, we suspect that silver is even more vulnerable to the slack economic track than the gold market, and for that reason we think silver has slid 26 cents back off the March high. While May silver has near term pivot point support on the charts at $7.375, there really isn t solid chart support until prices have fallen under the $7.25 consolidation lows. Trend line support in May silver comes in at $7.366 and the top of the up trend channel comes in at $7.495. In order to respect channel support and turn higher, silver needs stronger numbers and consistently positive leadership from gold.

METALS TECHNICAL OUTLOOK 3/17/2005

SILVER (MAY) 03/17/2005: Stochastics trending lower at midrange will tend to reinforce a move lower especially if support levels are taken out. The cross over and close above the 18-day moving average is an indication the longer-term trend has turned positive. It is a mildly bullish indicator that the market closed over the pivot swing number. The next downside objective is now at 735.0. The next area of resistance is around 750.0 and 754.0, while 1st support hits today at 740.5 and below there at 735.0.

GOLD (APR) 03/17/2005: Momentum studies are trending lower from high levels which should accelerate a move lower on a break below the 1st swing support. The cross over and close above the 18-day moving average indicates the longer-term trend has turned up. The market setup is supportive for early gains with the close over the 1st swing resistance. The next downside objective is 441.5. The next area of resistance is around 445.4 and 446.2, while 1st support hits today at 443.0 and below there at 441.5.

www.kitco.com/reports/

[verwijderd] 19 maart 2005 17:17

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_05/homm...

Today, we don't make men gods. Instead society has made our financial system into a false god.
On March 15th, 2005, (the ides of March) we may have just witnessed the beginning of the death of our financial system as General Motors stock took a nosedive from $34/share down to $30.

It does not seem like much (GM down just over 10% in one day), but as of March 17th, the stock is down to $28.35, and the market cap is down to $16 billion. (GM is down nearly 18% for the week.) It's the type of volatility that we usually only see in silver stocks!

What does this mean?
GM's stock price decline is like a dagger right into the heart of the U.S. financial system, and the dollar itself!

Why did it happen?
Apparently, someone in power did the equivalent of shouting "the emperor has no clothes" and people woke up, and are beginning to see more clearly! The media decided it was time to expose the truth that GM is nearly insolvent, and will expect to lose $1.50/share in the first quarter alone!

But the story is worse than that! GM has $300 billion in debt finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=GM
...and has a market cap, now, of $16 billion. See the problem there? The bondholders could buy the company nearly 20 times over if they used their money to buy stock instead of loan it to the company. The implication is clear--that GM is headed towards bankruptcy, and will default on the bondholders, who will then own a company worth less than $16 billion dollars!

For every one point that interest rates rise, refinancing GM's debt will cost an additional $3 billion in annual interest payments -- money that they clearly do not have! Where is GM going to get another $3 to $6 to $9 billion as interest rates rise by 1%, 2%, and 3% more? Selling cars? Nope. Selling stock? Unlikely in this market! Borrowing more? From whom? The U.S. government itself is propping up this bond market, and there are no buyers even for U.S. bonds, and there haven't been for months now!

So, therefore, GM will soon be a $300 billion dollar blow-up!

How big is that? It's bigger than Enron, Global Crossing, LTCM, K-Mart, and the IRAQ war all put together!

$300 billion going belly up is a big enough event to topple the U.S. government! How so? It will shake the confidence in the entire financial system. Companies as big as GM are not supposed to go bankrupt in our "normal" world. They are "supposed" to be "too big to fail".

The value of the "official" U.S. gold hoard of 261 million oz., at $440/oz. is only a mere $115 billion.

See what this $300 billion blow-up will mean? Imagine the financial chaos as a pile of wealth almost three times larger than the current value of the U.S. "official" gold hoard evaporates!

The annual deficit is around $700 billion. How will the U.S. government sell bonds to finance the deficit if bondholders are getting wiped out?

If the government can't sell bonds while running a deficit, then the government must simply be printing money to fund the deficit--and they are, as can be seen in the rate of growth of the money supply, M3! Therefore, inflation is raging, and interest rates must keep pace, which is why GM is doomed!

Interest rates must head up, as confidence in the U.S. dollar bond market will be shaken like a tree in a hurricane!

Foreign nations are all sounding the alarm already that they will be selling U.S. bonds to diversify the holdings of their central banks: Russia, India, China, South Korea, Japan... what major foreign nation is left to buy them?

A Tsunami of dollar selling is about to begin, and will make the recent dollar decline seem like a small bump in the road.

It may take a few months for this to play out. You may have time to buy silver at under $10/oz. for a few more weeks or months. But after GM declares bankruptcy, which may take between 3 months to a year, get ready for the dollar to crash by more than 90% in the following 6-12 months.

Germany's hyperinflation in the 1930's took about a year and a half. Recently, Argentina's took place nearly overnight. Who knows which way the dollar will die, whether a quick death, or a more slow and painful one?

Either way, the dollar is dead. Long live gold and silver!
March 18th, 2005

[verwijderd] 20 maart 2005 09:19

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

Breaking! "A MONTHLY REVIEW OF GOLD FROM FRANK VENEROSO"
Summary:
• Gold and Gold Equities: The near term is uncertain. The near-term path of the dollar is unclear. The world is probably decelerating towards disinflation. This could be a negative.

• The ability of the gold futures market to absorb large spec liquidation on a small price break is long term bullish. Perhaps, the official sector is conducting an orderly retreat.

• As opposed to our very positive supply/demand framework, the “official” gold supply/demand framework is not especially constructive. It now diverges so much from historical trends and abundant anecdotal information, that it has become discredited.

First, The Big Picture...
We stated in our fourth quarter letter to certificate holders of the ABN Amro gold certificate:

“Recent developments now make us even more bullish on gold longer term. We also believe that, owing to the recent correction, the shorter-term risks have abated. (See below.)

“Yet, on balance we fear the shorter-term downturn in the gold price since late last year may remain in force. In addition, we are concerned that, late last year, the global economy outside the U.S. (Japan, Europe, even China) began to slow, and that this may be the beginning of a major cyclical shift from global reflation to disinflation.

“The global bond market seems to sense this. But other markets have not. Such a shift could prove costly to reflation plays. Gold and gold equities would probably not go unscathed. Lastly, owing to a severe fall off in interest in the junior golds, this sub sector faces special risks should the overall gold sector fall further.”

That said, let us go on to the longer-term bullish case. The Intermediate- To Longer-Term Looks More Bullish From our quarterly letter:

“We regard the recent reduction in the net spec long position on Comex to below prior reaction lows (38,000 versus 50,000) on a fairly modest (10%) break in the gold price as very bullish”

Why? At this point it is appropriate to bring up our basic supply/demand framework for the gold market, which was laid out in our 1998 Gold Book and in several papers that we have written in the intervening years. We believe that fabricated demand and bar hoarding in the gold market has exceeded mine and scrap supply by a much larger margin than is reflected in the Gold Fields Mineral Services official supply/demand balances.

Second, the size of the net spec long positions in the futures and forwards markets in recent years has been larger than at any point in the past — including the 1970s. Remember, trading volumes in the OTC gold market are more than 10 times what we see on Comex, and total derivative positions may be comparably larger than Comex positions. (See our Gold Book).

Speculative purchases of this magnitude have no obvious offset. In the past, producers offset such purchases with forward sales; but in recent years, they have become buyers through reductions in their forward sales positions. There is only one possible explanation for why purchases of thousands of tonnes of gold in the futures and forwards markets does not blow the price of gold sky high: The official sector must step in on gold price rallies as an offsetting forward seller.

It is for these above reasons that we have long contended that the gold market is a managed market. GATA attributes this management to a combination of bullion dealers and official entities. We believe it is only the latter. If anything, investment bank prop desks have been long gold in recent years, in keeping with their overall bearish stance on the dollar. As we have written in the past, we do not understand the motivations behind such official intervention, but simple inference and abundant collateral evidence makes us convinced — gold is a managed market.

The official sector hoard of gold is very large, but it is not infinite. It is obvious that someday it will be depleted and the gold price will trade higher once official supplies no longer flow. We also know that the central banks will not sell and lend all their gold.

Therefore, the end of official supplies will come long before the official hoard is depleted. Because we have long contended that the gold market is in a larger deficit (between fabricated demand and bar hoarding, on the one hand, and mine and scrap supply, on the other) we have argued that this end of official supplies will come sooner than the consensus believes. When these supplies dry up, even if there is no Western investment demand, the price of gold will trade at its commodity equilibrium, which we believe exceeds $600 an ounce. If there is Western investment demand — and there will be in the future — the gold price will trade far higher.

With this framework in mind, we can explain why we view the recent sharp reduction in the Comex net spec long position on only a 10%, or $50 decline in the price of gold as bullish.

Remember, we said the gold market is a managed market. Official supplies of size are needed to meet the deficit of physical demands over mine and scrap supply. Secondly, the official sector must be a forward seller to contain the price of gold in the face of massive speculator forward buying. If the official sector did not cover its forward sales on price declines and did not let up on its flow of physical supplies, the gold price would collapse once the herd of trend following speculators dumped their derivative longs. On the two price peaks in gold in 2004, with record spec long positions, we feared this might happen. But it hasn’t. Somehow the gold price has been well contained on breaks in the face of such long liquidation. This signifies to us that the official sector is now reigning in its forward and physical supplies rather quickly on price breaks.

At a recent gold conference in Vancouver GATA made the following assessment: The official sector is engaged in an orderly retreat. We cannot be sure about this, but the ability of the gold market to hold up so well in the face of massive spec liquidation suggests that GATA may be correct. Remember, the official sector hoard is limited, and the central banks will not sell all their gold. One sign that the end of official management may be approaching might be the recent constructive gold price action in the face of severe long liquidation by “weak handed” specs.

The Less-Bullish “Official”
Supply/Demand Framework Is Discredited
The above analysis is based on our supply/demand framework. People ask us, how can you be sure your supply/demand framework is correct. The official statisticians have so much more information to base their very different, much less positive, statistical framework upon. Our answer is simple: Their gold supply/demand data contradicts so much available information on the gold market it has lost all credibility.

As I explained in the Gold Book, gold demand had been understated for years by GFMS, the “official” keeper of the global gold statistics, as has been the flow of official sector gold. Official stocks were falling faster than the GFMS data would suggest. I presented abundant statistical information to make that case. We believe that the trend in the official data since then simply flies in the face of obvious facts and this discredits it further.

People ask us where we think supply and demand are now. Our standard response is that we don’t know, because the data availabl

[verwijderd] 20 maart 2005 09:23

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

Breaking! "A MONTHLY REVIEW OF GOLD FROM FRANK VENEROSO" part 2

People ask us where we think supply and demand are now. Our standard response is that we don’t know, because the data available to us has become ever less reliable. In the old days, the World Gold Council produced a data series on gold demand for most (but not all) of the world. It was based on extensive survey data and it had no reason to be biased. It clearly showed a stronger trend in the growth of gold demand (excluding Western investment) than did the GFMS supply/demand statistics. For us it was an anchor that allowed us to see a growing error in the GFMS data (see the Gold Book).

In the 1990s GFMS was faced with a problem. From the late-1980s to the late-1990s, there was a growing flow of borrowed gold associated with speculative short sales, the hedging of central bank options and commercial inventory hedging, in addition to the well recognized producer forward selling. There were also some official sector liquidations that were not reported. These totaled to extremely large official supplies. For some strange reason GFMS refused to acknowledge most of these official supplies, particularly those associated with speculator short sales. This resulted in a gross understatement of annual supplies.

Unlike the World Gold Council, which tried to only come up with an estimate of demand, GFMS estimated both supply and demand. In the end GFMS had to make their estimates of demand and supply balance. Because they were underestimating supplies to an increasing degree, they had to underestimate demand to an increasing degree to make these accounts balance. That is why the World Gold Council survey showed a stronger gold demand trend in the 1990s than the GFMS statistics.

Several years ago the World Gold Council decided to merge its statistical efforts with GFMS leaving us, in effect, with only the GFMS supply/demand estimates. It has been my opinion that the GFMS balances became so flawed by the end of the 1990s that they had become virtually worthless. Therefore, I’ve regarded the new World Gold Council/GFMS statistics in recent years as basically useless. We no longer have any anchor for estimating gold demand and supply.

I believe the most recent GFMS statistics are now distorted to the point of the ridiculous. Let me illustrate.

Below are the GFMS supply/demand data for 1995 and 1996 (published at a time when the gold price averaged approximately $390.00 an ounce) and the more recent data for 2003 and 2004 (when the dollar gold price has been somewhat higher). In the interim, there has been some global inflation and some dollar depreciation. Therefore, in real inflation adjusted terms in a relevant global basket of currencies, the gold price over the last two years is probably a little below the level that prevailed in 1995 and 1996.

We know that, in over 200 years of history, private demand for gold (excluding gold as a monetary metal in the hands of the public) has been positively correlated with income and negatively correlated with the real gold price. In the Gold Book, I showed that, for a constant real gold price, gold demand has tended to rise in line with global income. In the economic jargon, we say that gold has had an income elasticity slightly greater than unity. Many studies have shown that such demands for gold are also reasonably price elastic. That is, when the real price of gold falls, for the same amount of global income, demand tends to rise. (See the Gold Book for the supporting data and analysis.)

Let us apply these simple concepts to the last eight years. From 1995-1996 to 2003-2004, global real income has risen by a little more than 3% a year, or roughly 30%. Given gold demand’s past unitary price elasticity, this would suggest perhaps a 30% rise in gold demand. As I have said above, the real price of gold in a basket of currencies probably fell over this period. Given gold’s significant price elasticity, this would suggest that global gold demand rose by an even greater amount than 30%.

Has anything like this happened? If one listens to dealers and refiners, yes, something like this has happened. We hear reports of ever-rising gold demand in India and in the Middle East. And the big refineries in Switzerland are apparently running flat out, producing more gold for the market than they ever have.

John Brimelow has provided us with the following data on gold imports into Turkey. They averaged 100,000 tonnes a year in 1995-1996. They are running at a 300,000-tonne rate so far this year. Sure, Turkey — as a center for distribution into the Middle East — no doubt reflects a demand trend way above the global average. But how likely is it that gold demand in the rest of the world fell even more than GFMS reports in order for their global estimates to square with the huge demand growth in the Turkish regional market?

Click on Chart for Larger Version

But what does GFMS tell us about gold demand? They tell us that, despite a rise in global incomes of almost a third and a likely small real price decline in the relevant basket of currencies, global gold demand, excluding Western investment demand, has actually fallen. Their estimate of gold demand for the year 2003 is particularly suspect. In that year, the real price of gold in the relevant basket of currencies was surely much below the comparable price of gold in 1995-1996. And yet, GFMS tells us that gold demand fell by almost 10% from the mid-1990s to 2003, amidst a large rise in real global income.

Why is GFMS giving us demand estimates that are so out of keeping with all historical demand trends, as well as the anecdotal evidence we get from refiners and from consuming regions like the Middle East and India? The answer once again lies in GFMS’s completely erroneous estimates of supply and their felt need to pull down their demand estimates so that it squares with these erroneous supply estimates.

In the 1990s, GFMS correctly recognized that producer hedging took physical gold out of central bank vaults by way of the lending process, and made it available for fabrication. Their basic error was that they did not admit the same for other types of gold borrowings. But now they have a very serious problem. Producers are now reducing their gold borrowings. As I have explained in many papers and the Gold Book, it is not possible for the gold that has been lent and then fabricated into jewelry to be returned to the central banks without blowing the lid off the gold market. We assume that, as with the covering of the large outstanding volumes of speculator shorts in 1998 and 1999, producer forward short positions have simply been transferred to the books of the official “manager” of the gold market.

But GFMS is assuming that repayments of producer gold loans does take physical gold out of the market, that it results in a negative supply flow. This greatly reduces their estimate of aggregate physical supply. They are trying to make up for this by now reporting record high official sector sales. They are also estimating record flows of gold scrap.

The latter makes no sense. They are now carrying scrap flows that are 40% higher than 1995-1996. At the same time, their estimate of fabrication demand is down. Yet, most scrap has been recycled jewelry and has tended to move with the trend in jewelry fabrication demand. In fact, scrap flows of all kinds have tended to move in ta

[verwijderd] 21 maart 2005 19:05

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

Goud hard onderuit:

www.kitco.com/market/euro_charts.html

[verwijderd] 22 maart 2005 00:20

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

heb je de datum al dat goud gaat zakken?
verklaar je nader

[verwijderd] 23 maart 2005 19:04

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

Nothing to Worry About Author: Jim Sinclair
Wednesday, March 23, 2005, 11:34:00 AM EST

Dear CIGA:

With gold off today as a result of the expected Discount Rate rise and recognition of what everyone knew - inflation is rising - I offer the following review:

Interest Rates and Gold:

Rather than reacting like Pavlov's dog and selling gold each time the Discount Rate is increased by the Federal Reserve simply to do catch up to the market rates, please stop and think a little.

1. The proposition that the US dollar will rise significantly on official increases in interest rates totally discounts the implication of the dollar's drivers namely the US Federal budget, Trade and Current Account deficits.
2. 46% of all mortgages in the US today are ARMS, floating interest rates keyed to market rates. This higher interest rate cost will impact household consumers and others with less credit worthiness.
3. Increased interest rates that trail inflationary expectations one year forward, act as a simple increase in costs and therefore cause increased inflation.
4.Falling home re-sales will impact the value and pace of new home sales whilst killing the driver of new home sales which are largely based on zero down payment schemes.
5. Any drop in business activity. which is by definition a significant drop in earnings, equals a shortfall in tax revenue and a larger US Federal Budget deficit.
6. An increase in the US Federal Budget deficit will work against the impetus for .8000 on the USDX to have held. You will recall that the Fed Chairman, whose market track record by his own admission is equal to "tossing a coin," announced a bottom in the US dollar at .8050. Then the Administration proposed a fiscal 2005 budget at a significantly reduced level. However, this prognostication calculated the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars at zero dollars and tax income rising sharply.

So any assertion that increases in the discount rate will under present circumstance act as a long term positive dollar influence is simply not true. Gold and the US dollar are linked at the hip and that relationship will not change. Therefore any assertion that the increase in the Discount Rate under present circumstances is negative to gold in any significant form over any significant period of time is simply incorrect, IMO, based on my experience of 46 years.

This morning's events:

1. Merrill acted to protect its directors against bankruptcy. Now ask yourself why a corporation would take such an action. The answer, I believe, is because the directors demand it. That invites the possibility that the Directors fear such a situation.

2. Third BOOM in Beirut, Lebanon since the move to democratization began. As major powers around the world lent support to the Lebanon versus Syria situation, given Lebanon's history what do you expect. Beirut is going up in smoke one more time

3. Home resale figure falls 0.4% and the news says this is a bullish number higher than expected. Damn good spin if I say so myself. I have reviewed this development above in the interest rate versus gold analysis.

[verwijderd] 25 maart 2005 08:25

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

The Gold Standard is Alive and Well

Ever since Nixon broke the final ties between the US Dollar and Gold
in August 1971 two myths about Gold have been accepted by the
Financial Community. The first is that the Gold standard is Dead and
the second is that Gold entered a Bear Market in 1980 that lasted two
decades (or hasn't ended if you believe some Chartists). Both these
assertions are false and reveal a misunderstanding concerning the role of Money and the role of Gold as the money of choice.

In August 1971 it was accepted opinion that now that Gold was
demonitized its value would fall dramatically. Instead, as we all
know, Gold soared 2300% to a 1980 high of US $850 but then proceeded
to fall and now 25 years later is still only half its former top. Thus
myth number two that Gold is in a bear market.

My old dictionary (Webster's 1953) defines Gold Standard as follows:

A monetary standard solely in terms of gold, in which the basic
currency unit is made equal to and redeemable by a specified quantity
of Gold.

Now according to this definition, with current Legal Tender Laws and
IMF rules we definitely do not live under a Gold standard anywhere in
the world. However I want to explore the meaning of the word standard
a bit further for I believe, despite official sanction, there is a
sense in which Gold still is the Standard by which monetary affairs
are judged. And more importantly reveals that quietly behind the
scenes Gold is reasserting itself, forcing the fiat US Dollar System
to conform.

Again referring to my old dictionary I find Standard is a complex word
taking up a full column of space. In particular I note:

2) something established for use as a rule or basis of comparison in
measuring or judging capacity, quantity, content, extent, value,
quality

4) the type, model, or example commonly or generally accepted or
adhered to: criterion set for usages or practises (moral standards)

5) a level of excellence, attainment, etc. regarded as a measure of
adequacy.

What this definition reveals is that any Monetary Standard (Gold or
otherwise) must meet certain requirements, both practical and moral.
Money must act as a medium of exchange, a measure of value and most
importantly must preserve its value through time. When Nixon tried to
get rid of Gold, the market rebelled. Why? Because the monetary unit
must preserve value through time. The US Dollar clearly cannot do
that. If the Monetary system is not preserving value through time it's
because someone is stealing that value.

And so Gold soared or more precisely, since Gold is Gold is Money, the
US Dollar was demonitized and was heading for the trash can when the
Fed intervened by freeing up interest rates. It is most important to
understand what happened here. The object is to preserve value through
time. Freeing up interest rates allowed the relative values of the US
Dollar and Gold to stabilize. The market had to find a US Dollar rate
of interest so that despite Dollar inflation the Gold Dollar ratio was
constant over time. After the 1980 crisis, it stabilized at around
$450 Gold and 15-20% US interest rates.

Thus the market reasserted itself and Gold remained the Standard
forcing the Dollar to conform. Gold itself, being the standard, cannot
by definition be in a bear market. The standard is the unit of
measurement and as such does not change.

The enemies of the Gold Standard, who prosper and rule by stealing our
wealth through time, learned from the Dollar Crisis. They introduced
sophisticated financial instruments to try to control Gold, they
tricked Gold producers into selling forward their production and when
desperate they dumped their Public Gold Reserves on the market. But
Gold is a tough taskmaster. It has played these games many times before and always won. Why? Because it serves the interests of the common people.
It alone preserves their wealth through time.

And so as the months go by we see Gold at work. People flee the Dollar, the Dollar falls, forcing the Fed to raise rates, thereby hurting borrowers and more importantly leveraged borrowers, writers of interest rate related derivatives contracts and the share markets. More Gold is dumped. The Dollar recovers slightly but the US markets also need more Dollars. The Government needs more Dollars. Without Dollar liquidity the credit bubble will collapse.

What we are seeing is not a Gold bear market or a Gold bull market.
What we are seeing is the Gold Standard at work. There are three
variables at work. The ever increasing Dollar liquidity, interest
rates and Official Gold Reserves. Gold is forcing the issue. This is
not Dollar inflation or deflation but Gold forcing the markets back to the
equilibrium only it can provide: a measure of value, a medium of
exchange, a store of value and low and stable interest rates.

Greetings from Auckland
Ed Wener
ed.na@xtra.co.nz

[verwijderd] 29 maart 2005 22:42

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

Golden Escape Pods Edgar J. Steele March 25, 2005

"By this means (fractional reserve banking) government may secretly and unobserved,confiscate the wealth of the people, and not one man in a million will detect the theft." ---The Economic Consequences of the Peace, John Maynard Keynes (the father of Keynesian Economics) (1920)

What is gold really worth today? While the accurate answer simply is whatever someone will pay for it, there are historical measures which indicate that it is seriously undervalued. Could it stay that way? Only if the central bankers are correct in what they tell you about gold and also are correct that economic depression and monetary hyperinflation are things of the past. Even so, the gold market will require ongoing rigging, because there are a great many people around the world who quite simply don't believe the central bankers - and with good reason.

I'm going to go through a quick analysis of the value of gold, one of many ways in which a value can be derived, I might add. It almost certainly will require you to read through it a few times to get the drift, because it is not the point of this article to be an exhaustive treatise on gold or investing, after all. Rather, I wish only to construct an argument for gold being used as a defense against the economic war being waged against us.

By 1945, 63,570 tons of gold had been discovered and mined, worldwide. In 2003, 144,092 tons existed, a 127% increase. Very little gold actually is used industrially or otherwise (as in dental work), unlike so many other precious metals, so most of the gold ever discovered still exists and is sitting in someone's vault.

In 1945, 68% of all gold was in central bank vaults. In 2003, 12% of all gold was in Central Bank vaults.

The total outstanding value of gold outside bank vaults in 2003 was about 100 times the total outstanding value of gold outside bank vaults in 1945.

In 1945, the total money in circulation throughout the world was about $300 billion. In 2003, the total money in circulation throughout the world was about $30 trillion, a one-hundredfold increase, which itself suggests a proper price for gold in the area of $3,500 per ounce (100 x $35).

Expressed as a pro-rata portion of the total money in circulation in 1945, each ounce of gold then in existence accounted for $147.48. Expressed as a pro-rata portion of the total money in circulation in 2003, each and every ounce of gold then in existence accounted for $6,506.26.

Some would call the analysis done at this point and claim that gold is worth between $3,500 and $6,506 per ounce. I am not one of those, some of whom use alternate analyses to derive values of up to $20,000 per ounce.

By the way, some actually suggest that the correct analysis is to divide the total money supply by the number of ounces of gold in central bank vaults, since that represents the extent to which outstanding money is "backed" by gold. In that case, the per-ounce value of gold turns out to be an incredible $54,218.94. However, this neglects to calculate a similar figure for each country with money outstanding, then weight each result appropriately. Some countries, such as America, reportedly have almost no gold left in central bank vaults, though none will allow inspections.

America's Consumer Price Index (CPI) in 1945 was 18. The CPI in 2003 was 183, representing a 10X increase.

America's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) increased by 9X from 1945 to 2003, after adjustment for inflation (CPI).

The world's money supply, expressed in dollars, increased 100X from 1945 to 2003. America's broadest definition of money, M3, increased by about 36X during the same period.

Note that the money supply increased significantly faster than did either GDP or the CPI or, for that matter, America's population, which has doubled.

The Dow increased by 10X during the same period, too.

While American post-WWII productivity increased by about 3X on a per-capita basis, the money supply (M3) increased beyond productivity by a factor of ten, which squares with the CPI increase. When I was a child, those purple first-class postage stamps cost 3 cents, but today they are more than ten times that amount, an external validation of our statistical analysis. I recall today's $1 ice cream cones costing but a nickel a scoop.

In other words, our money has been robbed of 90% of its value in the last fifty years by excessive expansions of the money supply, with most of the loss taking place in just the last 30 years. Meanwhile, the per-capita supply of gold actually has declined by about 40%. What's the problem, you might ask - after all, gold went up from $35 to $330 in the same time period, approximately the amount of inflation. Here's the problem: at both points, the price of gold was being artificially constrained by the central bank, both directly and through its surrogate, the American government.

The real question is what happens to the price of gold if the bank loses control of it and, particularly, if the dollar swoons significantly, as seems to be occurring at the time of this writing.

Executive Summary
Yes, this is the way financial analysis is done. Assemble all the relevant statistics, analyze them with statistical devices like regression analysis, adjusting for extraordinary events and external manipulation. Move them around on the table before you, trying the pieces in different positions, like a jigsaw puzzle. Eventually, a picture emerges. Only then is a rationale developed to fit the result that one thereby intuits.

What I have done herein is a very clumsy approximation of that procedure, if indeed it can be dignified with so organized a word as "procedure." Nevertheless, a picture has emerged and I am pretty confident of its parameters.

Clearly, the current price of gold represents about the lowest it ever has been, when adjusted for the various factors we have considered. Therefore, it represents an eminently safe vehicle for getting through the coming economic meltdown. The wild card is its up side, which could be significant. It seems safe to say that gold will see some serious swings, but that they will be upwards and almost certainly never again below the current value.

In Roman times, an ounce of gold could buy you a good suit of clothes, it is said. The same was true in 1929. Today, a good man's suit will cost between $1,000 and $2,000. By the "suit theory" alone, gold has a long way to go.

If gold were to take over the job of money in today's economy, all other things being equal, its value most assuredly would go to somewhere between $6,000 and $10,000 per ounce. However, there are other vehicles of value that would also pick up the slack, such as silver and platinum and backhoes and seed corn and...well, you get the idea. But gold needn't step into the breach; the dollar need merely abdicate its position as the world's reserve currency, as now seems inevitable. Gold will be revalued to the levels that it would assume if it and the other precious metals were the only medium of exchange, even though some form of fiat money inevitably will be thrown into the breach.

I spent a lot of time in my earlier life analyzing stock and bond price movements, then financial statements from both a corporate treasury standpoint and that of a bookkeeper and an auditor. I learned that, like everything else, accounting and finance is an

[verwijderd] 29 maart 2005 22:44

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

Golden Escape Pods part 2

I spent a lot of time in my earlier life analyzing stock and bond price movements, then financial statements from both a corporate treasury standpoint and that of a bookkeeper and an auditor. I learned that, like everything else, accounting and finance is an art. I cannot articulate precisely how I calculate the ultimate value for gold that I have, but I feel pretty good about its validity. The danger of exact formulae is in the likelihood of error creeping in. Broad-brush analysis, such as this, keeps the entire forest firmly in view at all times. Yes, I could throw some calculations down here and derive the very numbers I am about to give you, but in honesty that would be contrived. Contrived, that is, as in precisely how financial analysts always have plied their trade.

I believe that gold will spike to as much as 3 or 4 thousand dollars per ounce in terms of today's dollar, no later than 2010 and probably much sooner, then settle in at around $1500, in terms of the dollar's 2005 purchasing power. I see $1000 as the likely bottom of gold's ultimate range, which itself provides a profit potential in excess of 100% over today's price.

Checking Our Work
A "sanity check" of my valuation can be made by updating the price of gold from some past point in time to today, using something that reflects the general decline in the purchasing power of the dollar. The problem is in getting accurate figures. Roosevelt pegged gold at $35 in the 1930s and kept it there through the end of the war. Many believed that to be a fair price at the time. If so, then simply multiplying $35 by the 36X increase in the M3 money supply yields $1,260 per ounce. Pretty close.

Another "sanity check" can be derived from the price of gold in the mid 1970s, which ranged around $150 per ounce, probably a pretty good free-market-driven price from just prior to the massive inflation of modern times. The Dow-Jones Average bottomed out in 1974 at about 575 and likewise probably was a pretty good derivation of free market forces. Today's Dow is hopelessly bloated by the monetary inflation of the past several years, so cannot be used directly. Fundamentals dictate, via traditional price-earnings ratios, a proper level today for the Dow of about 4,500. This can quickly be calculated simply by dividing the historical "square-up" corporate stock price-earnings ratio of 12 by today's average price-earnings ratio of about 28, then applying the resultant fraction to today's Dow.

Fundamentals, remember, are what square up stocks with other forms of investments. Applying our adjusted increase in the Dow of 683 percent to the 1973 gold price of $150 yields $1,025, a conservative figure in that the earlier period's bottom for the Dow is used in the calculation. Using other Dow figures from the 1970s produce today's gold value as ranging up to around $2,000 per ounce.

Since gold will, as pointed out above, likely spike well above $1,200, if one chose to bail out at, say, $3,000, then real estate likely will be the safest transition investment at that point, particularly if real estate values continue with the very recent deflation which now seems to be taking hold. If the stock market has crashed, as in 1932, then buying a bundle of penny Blue Chips could prove to be very advantageous in the long run. Staying in gold, of course, is the sure bet, just as always.

The Real Allure of Gold
Is gold safe? You bet. In fact, it looks to be one of the best investments around just now, with silver's fundamentals even better. But the central bankers don't want you to know that.

This becomes even more urgent if one takes the view, as do I, that we have seen America's "last hurrah," with other nations, particularly China, assuming the ascendancy in world financial affairs as we move into the future. Stripped of its value, the dollar likely never will recover. An emergency "escape pod" from the trap that the American economic system is becoming is a necessity today. Gold can serve as that escape pod.

(Excerpted from "Defensive Racism" (ISBN 0-9761259-0-0, ProPer Press, 2004) a book by Edgar J. Steele, who, in a former life, earned a BA in Finance, an MBA in Accounting and worked for a time as a Financial Analyst for a major firm.) Copyright ©2005, Edgar J. Steele

[verwijderd] 1 april 2005 08:57

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

Barrick, Blanchard Didn't Settle Gold Plot Suit

From Reuters Thursday, March 31,2005

www.reuters.com/financeQuoteCompanyNe...
duid=mtfh58857_2005-03-31_18-37-03_n31727076_newsml

VANCOUVER, British Columbia -- Barrick Gold Corp. and Blanchard, the
New Orleans bullion and coin dealer that accuses the miner of
manipulating the gold price, did not settle their lawsuit on
Wednesday, Blanchard said on Thursday.

"There was no formal settling yesterday," said Neal Ryan, a
spokesman for Blanchard.

Blanchard launched an antitrust lawsuit against Barrick in December
2002. In it, it alleges that the Canadian gold producer, in league
with U.S. financial giant J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., made $2 billion
in short-selling profits by suppressing the gold price.

Barrick, the world's third-largest gold producer, denies the charge.
Short-sellers borrow instruments such as shares or commodities and
sell them, hoping to return them later at a lower price and pocket
the difference.

As part of normal judicial process, a Louisiana district court judge
ordered the pair to try to settle their differences out of court.

Ryan declined to say if another settlement meeting had been set,
adding that the court had asked the parties not to comment. He
confirmed, however, that a trial is still scheduled to start in July.

Barrick was not immediately available for comment.

Blanchard wants the court to force Barrick and J.P. Morgan, as well
as other bullion banks, to stop borrowing gold from central banks
and selling it into the market -- a practice the dealer says
depresses the price and has hurt other investors.

[verwijderd] 4 april 2005 08:59

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

ECB's gold sales undermine euro's credibility By Michael Kosares Centennial Precious Metals, DenverUSAGold.com Sunday, April 3, 2005
www.usagold.com/amk/usagoldmarketupda...

No sooner had this Market Update featured a report on official- sector gold sales last week than the European Central Bank (ECB) announced a surprise: It had sold 47 tonnes of gold. The sales occurred between February 1 and March 11. The ECB also stated that its gold sales were now complete for the year.

In this era of supposed transparency in the official financial sector, one wonders why the primary central bank in Europe, the most powerful signatory in the European Central Bank Gold Agreement, would conduct a sale clandestinely, announcing it after the fact.

The bigger question is why the ECB felt compelled to sell gold at all.

Europe doesn't have a huge balance-of-payments problem as the UnitedStates does. It's not at war. Europe doesn't have a lack of currency reserves to tap for foreign payments. So why liquidate gold when the dollar is in severe trouble and gold is on the rise?

Forty-seven tonnes is a large amount to liquidate over so short a time (less than 45 days), and the sales no doubt damaged the gold price even though the intent of the Central Bank Gold Agreement is to prevent such stealth attacks on gold. In fact, the London Times linked the sales "to sharp drops and recoveries" in the gold price over the period.

To most observers the gold price seemed no worse for wear. Gold started February in the low $420s and reached its high for the period in the mid-$440s in March at about the time the ECB was winding up its gold sales. What might the gold price have done had the ECB kept its 47 tonnes in the vault? Would gold have gone through the important $450 figure? Or $460? Even $500 if it had gotten on a roll?

Not knowing what prompted the ECB to sell suddenly, we can only speculate as to what might have been going on behind the scenes. Was some bullion bank in trouble? Was there a severe shortage in the upper reaches of the gold market that had to be filled on a moment's notice? Just prior to the sales Germany had announced its refusal to sell more gold, Switzerland had concluded its sales, and France was supplying far less gold to the market than expected. Was the ECB moving to fill the breach?

Leaving aside the ECB's agenda, its gold sales are not without
repercussions. They send the wrong message at the wrong time.

Europe and the euro are already reeling under significant alterations to the stability pact, which restricted budget deficits and created the impression that the ECB's member states were willing to make sacrifices for the economic stability of the union. Gold originally was added as a component of ECB reserves to give credibility to the new currency and substance to the claim that the euro would become a rival to the dollar.

By selling gold reserves, the ECB calls that commitment into
question and fuels criticism that the euro and the ECB are no better
than the dollar and the Federal Reserve. The other day an editorial
in the Financial Times went so far as to say that "the euro does not
have much to recommend it, other than not being the dollar."

Mysterious, ungrounded, and seemingly inexplicable and unnecessary
gold sales are not likely to alter that assessment.

The Financial Times went on to say that problems with the dollar, yen, and euro present good reasons for selling all three currencies. The likely beneficiaries, in the newspaper's view? Gold and the Chinese renminbi.

Since we may have to wait years for China to revalue its currency,
that leaves gold as the last solid repository for savings -- nothing
new for the metal of kings and the king of metals.

[verwijderd] 5 april 2005 09:17

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

Bundesbank opposes IMF gold sales or revaluation

Mon April 4, 2005 10:48 AM GMT+02:00
FRANKFURT (Reuters) - The International Monetary Fund should not sell or revalue its gold reserves to fund debt relief for poor countries, Germany's Bundesbank said on Monday.

A Bundesbank spokesman confirmed that a document quoted in the Frankfurt Allgemeine Zeitung on Monday warning about the consequences of using gold reserves for development aid is the official position of Germany's central bank.

According to the four-page internal document, the newspaper said, the Bundesbank is opposed to any sale or revaluation of the IMF's 103.4 million ounces of gold reserves, valued on its books at around $9 billion but worth about $42.3 billion at today's prices.

"We have always indicated the IMF is not a development organisation and that its general reserves, which come from central bank stocks, should not be used for development aid," the document was quoted as saying.

Finance chiefs of the Group of Seven nations have asked IMF Managing Director Rodrigo Rato to report this month on the British proposal to use gold stocks to cancel debts of the world's poorest nations.

The United States, the biggest holder of gold bullion, is opposed to the plan. Germany's government has said it remains open to using IMF gold reserves for aid.

The Bundesbank said the high unrealised gains of the IMF's reserves were important to give extra security to IMF creditors and allowed donor countries to give additional resources.

"A continuing erosion of the unrealised gains must inevitably have negative consequences for the future financing ability of central banks," the document said.

"If this proposal goes ahead it raises fears that the whole unrealised value of the gold reserves could be used up within a few years."

The IMF has said 13 million to 16 million ounces of gold could be sold without disrupting markets.

The Bundesbank announced in December it would sell just eight tonnes of its quota of 120 tonnes of gold in the first year of the five-year accord among European central banks.

The European Central Bank sold 47 tonnes of gold last week, the first time it has sold gold reserves.

[verwijderd] 6 april 2005 13:21

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

The Gold Super-Spike by Bill Bonner

•Oil hit its highest level ever last week. And now Goldman Sachs is predicting a "super-spike" in the price – to over $100 a barrel – and gasoline prices of $4 a gallon. It is coming, dear reader. But not necessarily as Goldman imagines.

•So, too, is a super-spike in the price of gold almost a certainty. As the world supply of "funny" money increases... the value of real money must increase too. All over the globe, the supply of money and credit is increasing at two, three... four... times increases in GDP. For now, the extra liquidity is going into asset prices. Property prices are still going up in most places.

In America, for example, increases in house prices added $6 trillion to homeowners’ net worth over the last four years. Americans were so delighted with getting something for nothing that they decided to enjoy it. The personal savings rate dropped to 0.6% in February. Why bother to save something so you can have something later on... when you’ll get something anyway? Lunch is always free, isn’t it?

But it will be a cold day in Hell when the laws of nature are repealed. Self-deceit can go on for a long time, but not forever. Eventually, the U.S. dollar will begin to look more like the Zimbabwean paper currency than real money. When it does, gold will spike. If we only knew when!

April 6, 2005

Bill Bonner [send him mail] is the author, with Addison Wiggin, of Financial Reckoning Day: Surviving the Soft Depression of The 21st Century.

[verwijderd] 6 april 2005 23:48

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

dus als ik het goed lees....KOPEN!

[verwijderd] 7 april 2005 22:46

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

ECB president sounds skeptical of IMF gold sales

From Reuters Thursday, April 7, 2005

www.reuters.co.za/locales/c_newsArtic...
type=businessNews&localeKey=en_ZA&storyID=8116730

FRANKFURT -- The European Central Bank is cautious about a proposal
for the International Monetary Fund to sell gold reserves to fund
development aid for poor nations, ECB President Jean-Claude Trichet
said on Thursday.

Trichet said there was no agreement within the IMF on the proposal by
UK Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown to use its gold to write
off debt, and the ECB would urge caution.

"As regards our own position, we would certainly be cautious in this
respect," he told reporters at the ECB's monthly press
conference. "It is discussed in the IMF but I understand there is no
consensus. ... It is certainly the situation where we are far from an
agreement."

Trichet said development aid should be funded out of national
budgets, not asset sales, in line with criticism from Germany's
central bank earlier this week.

The United States has also said it sees no need for the IMF to sell
some of its gold stocks to fund debt relief.

"As central banks we say that development assistance should normally
be financed through budgetary resources ... rather than through the
use of monetary assets," Trichet said.

Finance chiefs from the Group of Seven nations have asked IMF
managing director Rodrigo Rato to report this month on the proposal
to sell part of the fund's 3,217 tonnes of gold, valued at about
$42.3 billion.

"The IMF has concluded that an overall sale could be accommodated
without significant difficulty. This is particularly true if it is
spread over a reasonable period of time," a UK government source told
Reuters on Thursday.

"Deeper debt relief is essential in making the necessary investment
in health and education to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.
Gold sales are firmly on the table," the source added.

Trichet said if the IMF did sell gold, the proceeds might be better
used to shore up its own finances. Any sale should also be within the
cap agreed by central banks under their latest gold accord. Central
banks agreed to limit total gold sales to 2,500 tonnes over five
years from 2004 to avoid distorting the market.

"It would be absolutely essential that it (any sale) would not hurt
the market," Trichet said. "And if there were sales on the market,
then it should not change what we have told the market with our own
gold agreement."

IMF staff have also said any sale should count towards the 2,500
tonne ceiling and UBS Investment Bank analyst John Reade said
Trichet's main concern was to avoid upsetting markets.

"The clear implication is that he doesn't seem to be in favour of a
sale and if it was to take place, it must not hurt the market," said
Reade.

The ECB announced last week it had sold 47 tonnes of gold and Trichet
confirmed that no more sales were planned until after September at
the earliest.

He said the sale was designed to reshape ECB reserves.

[verwijderd] 8 april 2005 15:58

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

Gold Review of 4/06/05 June Gold: Open= 426.7 High=429.6 Low=426.3 Close= 429.2 +2.6 Listless trading on the dollar gave much needed support in the gold pits, as prices rebounded off the 200 day moving average, and closed above the 10 day moving average for the first time since March 16. It appears those long in gold are unwilling to see prices move much lower than $426 oz. Seemingly, the cool off in energy prices has allowed other news to break through, with reports today that the US would actively block any gold sales by the IMF. This aggressive stance should help those gold bugs regain some confidence in their long positions. However, a major breakout seems unlikely until more substantial news rattles some real nerves on either side of the dollar. News to watch for this week is Thursday’s European Central Bank’s decision on rates, and the US jobless report. If selling pressure cannot successfully press below $426, the yellow metal should find more support at $430. Patience still is key to these markets right now, with direction not apparent. Look for gold prices to react inversely to the dollar, but a more receptive mood to outside influences this week could key activity. If you’re of the mind that the dollar could find support here, you might consider selling gold calls and/or buying puts. Contact us for details. Resistance can be found at $430.0 $430.8, $431.0, and $432.8. Major upside goals are $433 and $436. Support can be found at $428.0, $427.3, $426.0, and $425.2. Major downside objectives are $424 and $420.

www.kitco.com/reports/

[verwijderd] 9 april 2005 10:36

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

On silver and the warehouse stocks (this morning):

Well, Well, Well! After a 12 hour delay, the Crimex finally released the Ag warehouse stocks.

Down another 600k ounces! The Registered class is the one to watch (only these can be delivered) and they are now below the critical 40 million ounce level to 37.996 million. The Eligible class cannot be delivered because it is 100% fully paid silver owned by investors (who will not sell or deliver below $10 in my opinion (and probably not sell prior to the $50 - $100 level).

I knew something was up when the release was delayed (only Cabal members were likely to get the results on time).

Oh well, investors owned silver (Eligible class) can be removed by investors at any time without Crimex interference; not so with Registered class. Anyone taking delivery on Crimex and then wanting to remove such silver may be intimidated into leaving it there.

And Spitzer is only concerned about fines for fraudulent wrongdoers.

Wake up and buy silver off the Comex floor and take delivery guys.

[verwijderd] 11 april 2005 19:46

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

Gold: The Only Currency that Can't Be Printed
By Bill Fleckenstein MSNMoney.com Monday, April 11, 2005
moneycentral.msn.com/content/P113717.asp
The world is starting to see that it's not just the dollar that has
serious problems. Brewing financial crises and weak currencies make
gold the best choice for crisis protection.As far back as April 2003, in a speech I gave at the Las Vegas Precious-Metals Conference, I stated that gold would benefit from an inevitable economic crisis of confidence (which could be postponed but not avoided). Now, nearly two years later, it is my belief that the catalysts for this crisis are here. This week I will focus on one of them, the dollar.
Growing concerns about the dollar, in fact, prompted editorials in both The New York Times and the Financial Times (known as the FT) a week ago. The Times' April 2 editorial, "Before the Fall," takes exception to the sanguine viewpoint "that foreign central banks won't risk the losses in their dollar reserves that would occur if they started shunning dollar-based investments." In brief, the editorial warns, "the United States is betting that it's too big --in other countries' eyes -- to fail."

The Times also warns that if foreign central bankers decide to stop buying our dollars, we may need to "borrow in the face of an ever-weakening dollar -- a recipe for higher interest rates and higher prices." Further, it notes: "If the economy is in a housing bubble, as many analysts believe, higher mortgage rates would pop it, with dire results for homeowners' balance sheets and the overall health of the economy." Banks and insurers, check your credit.
I suspect that "dollar bag holders" -- that is, the foreign central banks -- won't feel comfortable reading this, and it will strengthen their resolve to lighten their dollar positions. From a perversity-of-markets standpoint, though, the fact that the editorial board of The New York Times felt so compelled to write this editorial may mean that the dollar bounce will continue.
Meanwhile, though I have been bearish on the dollar for some time -- and think it's headed lower OVER TIME -- I would not have spoken as forcefully about the immediate future as the editorial did here: "The recent rally of the United States dollar notwithstanding, the greenback has nowhere to go but down. ... The dollar's current uptick is just a breather in its overall downward trajectory. ... The dollar is heading down, no matter what." I say that because, as anyone with any experience in the financial arena knows, in the short run, markets can do ANYTHING.

However, I think it's worth noting that The New York Times editorial
page dislikes the present administration so much that it has a bit
of an agenda. Thus, its argument MAY be seen as more political than
heartfelt economic concern.

Now for a look at the Financial Times' April 2 editorial --"Crosscurrents Make Currencies Choppy" -- which I think will also put pressure on foreigners left holding the dollar bag. Unlike The New York Times piece, the FT gets at the trickier problem of the dollar going down AGAINST WHAT: "The euro does not have much to recommend it, other than not being the dollar."

That's emphatically what I believe. Though willing to own euros in the past, I have owned them primarily for the same damning-with-faint-praise reasons as described by the FT. As I have said many times, most currency choices are just battles of wits amongst unarmed opponents. In other words, they are only "relatively" attractive versus each other and not genuinely attractive on their own.

The FT correctly points out that, although Europe and Japan could
solve their problems without their currencies tanking, "solving the
U.S. (trade deficit) problem almost certainly requires the dollar to
weaken further on a trade-weighted basis."

Lastly, the paper comes to a conclusion that I have come to -- and
that the rest of the world (including Asia) will ultimately come to:

"In truth, there are good reasons for selling all three of the
world's main currencies. But could they all fall? Yes, against
either gold or the Chinese renminbi. In recent years, gold has been
a useful hedge against the dollar, but not against the euro or yen.
Meanwhile, the U.S., Japan, and the EU would all like to see the
renminbi revalue, but so far, the Chinese are not playing."

I think that for the FT, which has been known as a very anti-gold
publication, to come to this conclusion means that people who have
not liked gold are re-examining their viewpoint. I think this will
be a positive for gold, notwithstanding the many down days it has
endured. Often, seismic shifts in thinking unfold in slow-motion, as
I have noted with respect to many of our corporate scandals.
(Editor's note: The metal is down more than 7 percent since Dec. 1.)

The combination of problems in our country's financial system (think
Fannie Mae, MBIA, American International Group, and General Motors), our inability to do anything to strengthen the dollar, the inherent weakness of other currencies, and our inflation rate (which, while clearly not alarming, is running higher than any rational person would like to see) is exactly the recipe for a much higher gold price.

[verwijderd] 19 april 2005 18:10

[verwijderd]

Lid sinds: 01 jan 0001

Laatste bezoek: 01 jan 0001
Aanbevelingen

Ontvangen: 0

Gegeven: 0
Aantal posts: 0

U.S. Mint to make coin with higher gold content
By The Associated Press via Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Tuesday, April 19, 2005

www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories...

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Mint announced on Tuesday it will begin
producing a new 24-karat gold bullion coin early next year, hoping to
capitalize on growing international demand for purer gold coins.

The Mint already produces the 22-karat American Eagle gold bullion
coin, and Mint officials estimate the potential global market for 24-
karat gold coins at $2.4 billion annually.

This will mark the first time the U.S. Mint has produced a 24-karat
gold coin, a designation that means it contains 99.99 percent gold.
The current 22-karat gold coin, on the market since 1986, contains
91.67 percent gold with the rest of the coin made of other alloys.

Global investors in recent years have been turning increasingly to the purer gold coin, although the American Eagle is still the bestselling gold coin in North America. The Mint estimated that currently 60 percent of global gold coin sales are of 24-karat coins, with Canada's Maple Leaf a top seller.

"There is a demand, both here and abroad, for 24-karat gold coins,"
said Mint Director Henrietta Holsman Fore. "We want to meet this demand by producing the highest quality and most beautiful coins in the world."

Congress authorized the sale of the American Eagle gold coins in December 1985 after then-President Ronald Reagan banned imports of the South African gold Kruggerand. The American Eagle coins went on sale in October 1986.

Before that time, the United States had not had a gold coin in
general circulation since 1933.

The American Eagle coins have face values of $50, $25, $10 and $5 but
they sell for much more than that with the price set by the market price of gold. The $50 American Eagle was selling for around $445 on Monday.

The gold contents range from an ounce in the $50 American Eagle to
one-tenth of an ounce in the $5 coin.

Currently, American purchases of 24-karat gold coins made in other countries represent almost one-third of all gold coin sales in the
United States.

"The United States Mint plans to match and exceed world class business practices with this new 24-karat gold bullion coin," Fore said.

Forum	# Topics	# Posts
Aalberts	466	7.012
AB InBev	2	5.495
Abionyx Pharma	2	29
Ablynx	43	13.356
ABN AMRO	1.582	51.521
ABO-Group	1	22
Acacia Pharma	9	24.692
Accell Group	151	4.132
Accentis	2	264
Accsys Technologies	23	10.588
ACCSYS TECHNOLOGIES PLC	218	11.686
Ackermans & van Haaren	1	188
ADMA Biologics	1	34
Adomos	1	126
AdUX	2	457
Adyen	14	17.729
Aedifica	3	903
Aegon	3.258	322.687
AFC Ajax	538	7.087
Affimed NV	2	6.289
ageas	5.844	109.887
Agfa-Gevaert	14	2.049
Ahold	3.538	74.330
Air France - KLM	1.025	35.023
AIRBUS	1	11
Airspray	511	1.258
Akka Technologies	1	18
AkzoNobel	467	13.036
Alfen	16	24.691
Allfunds Group	4	1.469
Almunda Professionals (vh Novisource)	651	4.251
Alpha Pro Tech	1	17
Alphabet Inc.	1	405
Altice	106	51.198
Alumexx ((Voorheen Phelix (voorheen Inverko))	8.486	114.819
AM	228	684
Amarin Corporation	1	133
Amerikaanse aandelen	3.836	242.925
AMG	971	133.201
AMS	3	73
Amsterdam Commodities	305	6.687
AMT Holding	199	7.047
Anavex Life Sciences Corp	2	490
Antonov	22.632	153.605
Aperam	92	14.975
Apollo Alternative Assets	1	17
Apple	5	381
Arcadis	252	8.767
Arcelor Mittal	2.033	320.659
Archos	1	1
Arcona Property Fund	1	286
arGEN-X	17	10.294
Aroundtown SA	1	219
Arrowhead Research	5	9.730
Ascencio	1	26
ASIT biotech	2	697
ASMI	4.108	39.089
ASML	1.766	106.428
ASR Nederland	21	4.452
ATAI Life Sciences	1	7
Atenor Group	1	485
Athlon Group	121	176
Atrium European Real Estate	2	199
Auplata	1	55
Avantium	32	13.647
Axsome Therapeutics	1	177
Azelis Group	1	64
Azerion	7	3.392

Edelmetalen Terug naar discussie overzicht

Goud en zilver Rockin & Rollin

Neem deel aan de discussie

Direct naar Forum

Zoek alfabetisch op forum

Gesponsorde links

Macro & Bedrijfsagenda

14 februari