![]() |
||||
Now open for business 6am to 6pm coast to coast! |
||||
| (Home Page) | (How to Buy Gold) | (Gold Coin Images) | (Daily Market Report) | (Live Gold Price) |
| (First-time Buyers) | (Gold Discussion) | (ABCs of Gold Book) | (Gold IRA) | (Gold Coin Shop) |
| (European Clientele) |
|
(About Us) | ||

| (Post a New Message) |
|
|
Page IV Index
Aristotle (10/17/2002) "Let's step through the looking glass now, shall we?"
miner49er (05/06/03) "The fate of overseas dollars -- will they or won't they 'come home to roost'?"
Black Blade (9/23/03) "World Gold Council sponsored ETF (Securitized gold shares?)"
BACKGROUND: (necessary context for the "looking glass" post that follows)
WGC Press release Page Oct 16
STANDARD BANK OFFERS GOLD PLAN
Standard Bank Offshore has introduced a capital-guaranteed product
linked
to the price of gold with a 12-month lock-in period. The Gold-Linked
Deposit
Account is a fixed-term deposit offering a minimum return of two
percent.
Investors can earn a 10 per cent return if the price of gold reaches
or
exceeds $400 per ounce on the London 3pm fixing of the world bullion
market on any business day during the period of the deposit. Interest
will
be paid when the product matures.
The deposit has a minimum investment
of £10,000 and is available to
sterling investors only. The offer is available to investors for
a limited period
on a first come first served basis.
Aristotle (10/16/02; 13:11:46MT - usagold.com msg#: 87548)
Standard Bank offer...
It's just pile of paper Gold manifested in one of its many possible
forms. Not only does the investor receive no Gold to show for
his £10,000 minimum investment, his cash returns are laughable.
He's effectively feeding cash into the bank as fuel for its derivative
machinations.
Just look at what's being promised!
As stated, its a *product* that is *linked* to the "price
of Gold" which is locked in for 12 months.
HA ha! Where's the Gold? And what's the liquidity on that *product*
thing, mate?
Are we to be drawn in by a 2% "minimum return" on the
deposit (paid at maturity) as our compensation for letting the
bank use our cash while we walk about empty handed? I'd rather
use the cash and eat sandwiches all year. With dijon.
Here's the biggest farce of all -- it says investors can earn
a 10 percent return on this *product* if the price of Gold reaches
$400 per ounce or higher.
Oh really? Well, isn't that generous of the bank!!!
Simple math shows us that if bought plain vanilla physical Gold,
bought it outright today (say, at $315) when Gold hit $400 we
would be sitting on capital gains of $85 on a 315 investment.
Our plain vanilla Gold purchase would give us a 27% pecent return
-- almost TRIPLE what the bank is promising with its razzle-dazzle
paper and promises. And what if Gold continues higher than $400?
Sheeeeeeeesh!!
At this juncture in the currency wars, only a fool would be SO
EASILY suckered into this paper distraction.
Gold. It's what the smart money is getting. Believe it. --- Aristotle
Aristotle
(10/17/02;
02:29:28MT - usagold.com msg#: 87615)
Stepping through the
looking glass...
...I'm a proponent of many real things (Gold, sandwiches and patio
furniture to name a few) and I heartily endorse entrepreneurial
efforts and any other eyes-wide-open stock or bond investments.
My lasting frustration, however, is with the widespread failure
of the many promoters and participants in the wide Gold market
to reach FULL DISCLOSURE on what's actually "good as Gold"
(uhhhh... that would be GOLD, sir, and NOTHING else) and what's
merely "Goldish... sorta... and only during good times."
But hey, let's drive my point home to bed. I've got no problem
if Standard Bank wants to offer, and you or anyone else wants
to invest in, a £10,000 financial product that pays 2% per
annum with a 10% kicker if the price of tea in Shanghai (or pint
of ale in London) goes up by 27%. I see nothing terribly objectionable
with that.
= = = = Moving right along to the main point = = = =
Let's step through the looking glass now, shall we?
Hold on to your hats and maybe take a Valium or two. If you're
willing to follow along this is gonna be a helluva thing.....
You know..... it occurs to me, seeing how EASILY some Gold-minded
investors may be drawn in by leverage and by less than the Real
Thing, I, too, stand ready to accept £10,000 ($15,500) investments
for over-the-counter 12-month maturity structured financial products
offering a Goldish hue. Let's call them Ari-Instruments.
On those Ari-Instruments I'll pay 2% per annum for use of the
money, and throwing caution to the wind (but mostly to make my
point) just like Standard Bank I'll promise a (maximum measly)
10% interest payment kicker to the bearer upon the event of Gold's
price increasing by at least 27% to $400.
Primarily to ensure the ever skeptical R Powell that everything
is right in the world, I imagine I'll hedge my cash exposure to
that price-rise event in the following manner: For every FIVE
Ari-Instruments I've sold (for which I'll have received $77,500)
I'll take up a SINGLE long position through the COMEX Gold futures
market.
Are you following me so far? That means I'll deposit $1,350 in
margin and if Gold's price increases by $85 during the year I'll
cash it out for the leveraged payoff at 100-to-1 ($8,500) from
which I can easily pay off the 10 percent interest "Gold-price
kicker" on the five Ari-Instruments -- that is, $1,550 each
totaling just $7,750 for all five.
In the meanwhile, God only knows what StanBank [Standard Bank] in my place would do with the balance of the
$77,500 (minus the $1,350 margin deposit) received for the five
Ari-Instruments for the course of the year, but they sure wouldn't have to do anything
else with it even remotely connected with Gold.
But this is what "I'd" do with the cash.
Come follow along. It might prove to be an eye-opener on the nature
of the world, especially for folks like Kasperjack who've said
I'm full of hot air without any relevance to the real world.
Following that single long, I'd take out TWO additional gold futures
positions through COMEX, but unlike the first one, these would
both be SHORT. The margin would be $2,700. Then, I'd use about
$65,000 of the remaining cash to buy 200 ounces of Gold for delivery
to my doorstep.
Are you still with me? As more and more chumps (I mean investors)
sign up for my Ari-Instruments and flood me with their cash, I'll
always be taking TWO SHORT positions on COMEX for every ONE LONG
(plus 200 ounces of Gold delivered to my door) all financed with
their money. I assure you, all of my sharpest friends will join
in this routine, and thus the price discovery mechanism provided
by COMEX will be more inclined to fall than to rise.
As this continues for year after year, I never have to pay the
10% kicker to my investors, needing instead only to pay the paltry
2% which is peanuts when drawn from the broader spectrum of my
other banking, finance, and derivative operations. Or how about
this? I'll make interest payements with the leftover Ari-Instrument
cash that didn't get used for purchases of the fixed ratio of
three contract margins (one long, two short) and the 200 ounces
of Gold per each five Ari-Instruments which were sold to these
poor chumps.
Now get this... here's a beautiful thing. With the downward price
pressure, as my long futures contracts suffer losses, it's easy
to close them out painlessly using (only) half of my outstanding
short contracts as offsets!
Furthermore, as opportunities in the falling market might allow,
some of the remaining short positions can be further liquidated
(cashed out) through COMEX as a form of compensation -- thus effectively
ensuring that the net out-of-pocket expense for the physical Gold
I bought and held is always cheaper than the market rate I paid
at the time of the order. Think hard on that one and join me in
a well-earned smile!
And you wanna know what the REALLY beautiful thing is? For this
I want everyone to wake up who's been for years predicating their
own leveraged paper Gold longs on predictions about **eventually**
there being a massive squeeze on the shorts like me. It ain't
gonna happen dudes! If you've been carefully keeping score, you'd
see that through this process I've got a physical position that
is ounce-for-ounce at least double my net short position.
IF (and that's a big if) there's an unlikely event in which me
and my bullion banking buddies can't contain the COMEX price with
our two-for-one selling, then we simply announce delivery intentions
for a token amount -- that's just a *TOKEN AMOUNT* mind you --
of our physical Gold through the exchange to stand against our
short positions.
Wanna know what happens next?
You guessed it! We just sit back laughing at the poor stoppers
as these same over-leveraged longs fall all over themselves in
their scramble to resell it -- right back to us!! Here's the thing...
the thing being that their contracts represented more Gold than
they ever had any rightful business or financial ability trying
to "control" (and I'm NOT sorry if I'm so bold as to
use the one key word always present in the honey-dripping sales
pitches of their own commodities brokers.)
These poor clowns are knocked off their feet by their own successful
leverage. As we say, the
victory was theirs, but their hands were too small to hold it. Quickly they find it's one thing to pay a $1,350 margin to hold a "right"
to buy 100 ounces, and it's quite another thing to pony up the full purchase price ($32,000+)
for each contract when the chips are down and the grown men at
the table aren't blinking. So you see, as fast as they're selling
what they can't afford, we're one step behind them with very strong
hands. Once again our token bit of Gold brought about the desired
turnaround and business continues as before. Again, if you wish
to a Gold accumulator at the best prices, think about this process
and join me in a well-earned smile.
The Moonshot, the Worst-Case Scenario for my crew would be in
the end game where the currency world comes undone and the flood
of hyperinflated dollar spending washes over everything with sprees
of buying anything and everything tangible in the flight from
dollars.
In that case business as usual ceases to be, and conceivably we'd
need to deliver up to nearly HALF of our physical Gold holdings
to protect ourselves from nominal (bookkeeping) cash losses through
the Exchange on our remaining open positions of short contracts.
The prospect of that being very traumatic to us is much diminished,
however, given the nature of the product. In times of volatility
there are trading/price limits that kick in, and the COMEX Gold
exchange stands better than a good chance of its contracts being
locked in "fantasy land pricing" while the prices on
the physical market run away in round-the-world Gold rush trading.
At least a few frustrated COMEX longs will be looking to liquidate
the paper junk ASAP and take their cash where the Real action
is.
Whether the exchange in Gold derivatives survives or not, the
upside is we keep at least half the Gold to ourselves -- my partners
and me -- all of which was purchased for ourselves with other
people's money through the Goldish-colored Ari-Instruments. The
final small bite for me out of the worst-case-scenario is that
we (my crew) would have to sell a wee bit of these Gold holdings
on the soaring physical market if, in fact, our previously mentioned
long contracts fail to pay out via the Exchange (due to COMEX
lockdown) in order for us to cover our measly 10% interest rate
kicker due to the $400-Gold-price knock-in as promised in the
original terms of the Ari-Instruments. And yes, perhaps we've
gotta liquidate just a little more of our remaining Gold at these
glorious moonshot prices -- on an as needed basis -- as frustrated
owners of the Ari-Instruments reach their 12-month cycle maturity
and want to cash out their original [paper] principle (£10,000
or $15,500) on these Goldish yet quite impotent paper posers that
we designed for them.
Are you a physical Gold Advocate through and through? Then smile
with me a well-earned knowing smile as you continue to buy your
physical Gold at prices that others have worked so carefully for
so long to bring so low for massive acquisition before the Free
Gold moonshot.
If, having joined me in my office for the day, you still insist
there is metallic virility in Goldish paper investments, then
Heaven help you because my crew, my partners and me, we'll take
you up on it. We'll work you up and roll you over, maybe make
you wiser but none the richer. So please... feel free to pull
up a chair and have a cigar, your head filled with promises even
as we rape you.
"Golly, Ari, you've changed!"
No, I don't feel that I have. I'm still trying to help you, to
wake you up. (It's the falling piano thing -- "Get the hell
outta the way!") That, plus I don't want you to be a welfare
case while I'm trying to live large after the dollar goes Bolivian.
(The quickest road to revolution and communism is a penniless
population. I WANT you to have Gold so you won't take mine. There,
see? Turns out I'm not so noble after all. I'm just as selfish
as the next guy.)
I just figured where attempts at friendship and various flower-filled
analogies have continued to FAIL to impress upon some of you the
stakes of the game, I thought perhaps a little swim, up close
and personal-like, with the sharks might convince you that the
blood in the water will be your own unless you heed my words.
It's just tough love, my friend, tough love. And self interest.
Here endeth the "insider view," thus endeth the lesson.
Real Gold. Right now. (What time do you think you have???) Get
you some. --- Aristotle
miner49er
(05/06/03;
10:06:12MT - usagold.com msg#: 102429)
Homeless Dollars...
Good post, John the Jute (msg#102381)! Very nice way of explaining
the relativeness of scale.
Regarding your musings re: dollar repatriation, it can be a tough
one to answer. The obvious take is of course as you express, that
without use for dollars, they would simply find their way back
to US shores, and help drive (hyper-)inflationary pressure. Yet,
if you will permit me also to think out loud for a moment ;->,
perhaps we can take a look at this currency as the derivative
instrument it effectively is, and then try to figure out its ultimate
fate. Let's view it specifically as a kind of call option; one
that commands a premium as a price paid for its exercise-ability
at any time for any of the goods or investment media that exchange
in the currency's universe (or the settlement of debts). This
amounts effectively to a liquidity premium.
This premium gives it a trade value in its own right, and as such,
as long as there is a market that believes in the currency's stability,
the currency itself trades on its own merits. Not unlike futures
and options. And just as many of these contract instruments get
exercised for whatever underlying asset they represent, most are
simply exchanged among speculators and hedgers trying to benefit
from movements in the contract price, never actually intending
to exercise or take delivery. The paper remains viable so long
as the holder is confident that the next guy believes the contract
is generally good.
While many holders of a currency intend to "exercise"
the currency for real things, especially those in the currency's
principal use domain, most of these currency units are likewise
exchanged among speculators and hedgers (including all those private
individuals, who own dollar denominated savings and investment
accounts overseas), who are only trying to profit (speculate)
from the currency's movement, or preserve (hedge) their own currency's
seemingly endless trek of depreciation vis-a-vis this US dollar.
Most of these have no intention whatsoever of "taking delivery"
of things with these currency instruments.
So, what happens to the dollars they sell? For these average citizen
types, the banks that held their accounts buy them. They then
either sell them to another institution or may enter the foreign
exchange markets themselves (depending on how they are regulated).
They also may hold some back, depending on how they wish to balance
their own portfolio. So, now these dollars that have not ended
up remaining in reserves at these banks have entered the foreign
exchange markets putting upward pressure on the currency of the
seller, and downward pressure on the dollar.
Historically, the paradigm was to do as little of this as was
necessary in order to keep the seller's currency "competitively"
weak (among other reasons). As the influence of export to the
US wanes (tapped out US consumer + growing size and sophistication
of other markets), the need to keep one's currency weak vs. the
USD, so as to compete for this market also wanes. Instead the
stabilizing and strengthening of one's currency becomes more important
(thereby encouraging borrowing in the local capital markets),
and allowing local workers to enjoy a bit more the fruit of their
labors, instead of always helplessly watching the value of their
labors get sucked into the vortex of a dollar-dominant currency
paradigm.
So, do these orphaned dollars eventually come home to roost in
the US domestic markets? We will be told that. The media will
wring their hands over anecdotal wake-up stories like Arabs buying
up vast tracts of property, and how "they" will soon
"own" the country... (This has been going on for ages
in the U.K., as you're aware... every other lovely English manor
is seemingly owned by some Saudi mogul...) We experienced the
same with the Japanese in the 80's (Rockefeller Center...). Hence
part of the political response will be to enact capital flow restrictions.
But anecdote amounts to chump change, in a purely financial evaluation.
The really big holders of dollars are the central banks. What
they do with their reserves will make or break. Their influence
over other banks and financial institutions will also largely
dictate the destiny of these dollars. In the gold standard, the
currency acted as something of a title deed for a specific good
at a specific price. Central Banks could and did take these "receipts"
and claim gold from each other. In this day, there is nothing
for CBs to "claim," as these dollars are no longer "title
deeds." Rather, they are like non-expiring calls for things
on demand, at the variable and going price. CBs are likely to
neither a) dump them on the forex markets, as this would simply
devastate the currency, and risk dreaded instability globally
-- something banks are NOT prone to do; or b) race to our markets
to try and buy things (like gold), as this would also be fruitless,
since a market revaluation for this action would instantly make
gold unpriceable, and it would not even be offered. Again, why
engender the instability?
Without a certain weapon in the arsenal of the euro's design,
the foreign CBs would indeed be over a barrel. Previously they
were forced to evermore be on a dollar standard, since they would
realistically only opt for this as the lesser of two evils. The
alternative of saying no to the dollar at that time, would only
have meant a return to a gold standard, and the politically unacceptable
bone-crushing depression that would follow (as well as instability).
In 1979, the European CBs began marking their gold reserves to
market. This one act demonstrated immense foresight, and would
provide the escape valve from the rock-and-hard-place no-win choices
between eternal dollar support, or global depression.
Quietly, the euro-system banks have been divesting themselves
of dollars. Collectively they retain something like 211 bn. currently.
(This is not a large amount relatively speaking, but consider
fractional reserve lending, and quickly we perceive the immesity
of euro-dollar infestation.) This decline in dollar holdings is
desired to take place concurrently with a rise in the price of
gold to offset this. Spoonfeeding dollars into the system won't
crash it, as well a slow commensurate rise in gold. The discipline
that they have thus far maintained is indicative of the tectonic
movement of the geopolitical strata. Ideally there will be no
rash or even discernible activity. The perfect result is to simply
keep shifting these plates until we wake up one day and the world
has been remapped. Reality of course is that there are points
of friction that cause tremors of unpredictable frequency and
proportion all along the way. At some point critical mass will
be reached, and the dollar contract markets for gold will no longer
be able to contain its price as market perception on a large enough
scale discounts paper parity with the real metal accordingly.
It is at this juncture that the gold reserves of the CBs will
provide immense expansionary leeway, as they are for a season
revalued constantly upward. This bona fide liabilityless reserve
base will make the ECB member banks the premier lending institutions
to fuel the economic growth of the euro zone, and those align
themselves with it.
In this respect it is important to curry the cooperation of the
more maverick dollar holders, like China and Russia, as their
track record of unpredictablility, may lead them to use their
dollars as weapons... (And don't think that their dollar debt
is of much concern to them, as they know all too well that those
totals can be reduced in real terms to pocket change, if such
a hyper-inflation were to manifest.) Indeed as far as the books
are concerned, this one use for these dollars overseas -- the
repayment of dollar debts -- would actually provide a contractionary
effect as these receivables are cleared from the balance sheet...
One reason why Goldendome's sought after interest rate hikes can't
happen... (gotta keep expanding..., and making it more expensive
to borrow, isn't gonna help matters...) [Goldendome, there is
much to this discussion, and I would like to provide my opinion
in response to you -- as I used to think exactly the same... I
likely won't have time, but the Trail provides some excellent
discussion along these lines...]
The strategy of the level-headed is to slowly remap the globe
financially. This involves as much as possible a SLOW transformation
from one currency paradigm to Another. These dollars en masse
will not return home. They were born in exile and will die in
exile. We will hyperinflate ourselves, and won't need help from
overseas...
Take care John the Jute,
miner
Black Blade
(9/23/03;
21:55:16MT - usagold.com msg#: 109259)
World Gold Council sponsored
ETF (Securitized gold shares?)
Good or bad? It depends on what you expect from it I guess. Personally
I rather have physical gold in my possession because to me physical
gold (and silver) is insurance. We have seen how the markets can
just close up shop for several days at a pop. Remember what happened
on September 11, 2001? No one had access to their investment portfolios
as the markets closed for several days. Yet even though my stocks
were locked up and inaccessible I could grab a fist full of my
gold and silver. I think most here view physical precious metals
as portfolio insurance and having it in their possession is better
than not having it in an emergency. The "lock up" in
the markets was a wake up call much like during the Great Depression
people lost their savings when banks closed up or were inaccessible
due to a "Bank Holiday".
Now the flip side of the coin so to speak. Many large Funds are
restricted from owning anything but stocks and bonds. Therefore
they are not allowed to hold precious metals as a form of insurance
even if they wanted to. Besides, it is almost impossible to buy
such large quantities of physical gold on a timely basis as demonstrated
by Goldcorp's attempt to make a large (actually a moderate) size
purchase of physical gold even after being assured that a quantity
ten times the size that they bought could be readily acquired.
Actually it took a couple of weeks if I remember correctly. The
story is located in the "Gilded Opinion" here at USAGOLD
I believe. The point I am making is if the ETF is actually shares
based on actual physical gold located in a vault then this would
be a way for large funds to put gold in the mix of their securities.
I understand that the price will be based on the spot price of
gold and shares will be issued only on the amount of physical
gold in the vault and new shares can only be issued as more gold
is acquired and placed in the vault. The gold supposedly can't
be loaned nor can any derivative structures be made using the
gold as collateral. So in this regard it may be good as it will
create another source of demand. I am not sure if the Aussie fund
will be combined with the UK fund and the proposed US fund either.
But for the individual investor looking for portfolio insurance
and I mean true physical gold as insurance come what may that
can't be isolated away from him/her then I would stick with the
"real deal". If I want to speculate then I will buy
gold mining shares of gold producers based on the qualities that
I determine to fit my needs and what I look for in a speculative
instrument like stocks. OK, for disclosure purposes, I do own
shares in three debt free unhedged gold producers. But that is
not "portfolio insurance", that is a speculative and
hopefully profitable investment. The physical "real deal"
is insurance in my possession where I can get to it no matter
what world event takes place and no matter what may occur in the
financial markets. So is the WGC securitized gold shares good
or bad? It is a matter of perspective but they are two different
things entirely and it's comparing apples and oranges from my
point of view.
- Black Blade
© 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 All material is copyrighted property of the indicated contributor, presented at USAGOLD by permission. All rights reserved.
|
Centennial Precious Metals Gold coins & bullion since 1973 Denver, Colorado 80246-0009 We educate first-time investors! |
for quotes and purchase information.
|