|
Related/Supporting
Commentary from the Discussion Forum
On the topic of
a physical/paper gold price disconnection...
Randy Strauss (usagold.com 27August2008; 17:43)
It doesn't require a conspiracy, only common sense
It doesn't take a loosely organized group of conspirators to
weigh depressingly upon the mechanism of price discovery coming
out of the NYMEX/COMEX futures exchange, all it takes is for
the participants who have common sense to gain the upper hand
over those who stubbornly don't have any.
Look, the futures contracts are ostensibly put forth by the Exchange
as if they were actual contracts between counterparties looking
to actually buy/sell the corresponding quantities of metal at
their contract's snapshot price.
But everyone with common sense knows that the physical element
of the contract is just a pretense, and that after paying a simple
margin to play the game for brief awhile, the vast majority of
these contracts will be settled with cash - that is, they will
be closed out with an offsetting position in yet another contract
rather than through a full-bodied payment of cash for delivery
of metal between the counterparties.
Those with common sense (and with a memory of the Hunt brothers'
experience nearly 30 years ago) know that there is no real meat
on the bones of these contracts, and they know that when "crunch
time" arrives, default is the institutionalized
and very well-worn path of least resistance.
It doesn't take conspiratorial planning for a preponderance of
participants to know enough to either steer clear of these contracts,
or to short the hell out of them at such times that may be deemed
advantageous to themselves to do so. With an eye to the big picture,
the shorts know they're simply selling a "contract"
that's inevitably to be universally recognized as all fluff
and no stuff. It's easy to sell a sure loser right down the
river.
And on the other side of the equation are the longs - the very
few who haven't yet caught on to the fact that nothing materially
is ever really going to be coming out of those contracts - except
perhaps some short-term cash if they can trade in and out nimbly
enough.
But in the longer term, everyone with common sense understands
the pretense and therefore knows that the contract is effectively
rubbish, thus ever and always giving the shorters the upper hand
when they square off at the Exchange against the addleheaded
longs who stand to gain absolutely nothing material out of their
position in the overall equation.
This whole thing reminds me of a story shared by a friend of
mine who himself is a natural-born wheeler-dealer. His young
son was being "interviewed" by an elementary school
administrator to assess whether or not the boy was developmentally
mature enough to enter kindergarten that August versus waiting
yet another year. To assess basic coping skills, the child was
asked, "What would you do if you went into the bathroom
and discovered that the toilet was broken?"
The boy's response: "I'd sell it."
A chip off the old block, if ever there was one. If the kid could
wrap his mind around the structure of a gold futures contract,
I'm sure he'd know exactly what to do with those, too.
For those who insist on the conspiracy story, I guess my point
is that you can sleep extra soundly knowing that there is a wider
population of potential co-conspirators that you can add to your
list.
Bottom line: Take advantage of the physical market for as long
as the scarce metal is still available at the deeply discounted
prices of its exchange-traded papery derivatives.
R.
Randy Strauss (usagold.com 10September2008; 17:40)
Comments inspired by the recent Don Coxe quote:
"This has done more
damage to my personal wealth than anything in the last 20 years,"
he said in an interview yesterday. But he has too much respect
for how the U.S. authorities engineered the collapse in commodities
-- a move he said was necessary to shore up the global financial
system -- to be bitter. "My attitude is, 'Goddamn it, they're
good -- it was brilliant.'"
Firstly, a sincere tip o' the
hat to the deep reservoir of wisdom and maturity that is demonstrated
in that soundbite.
All evidence of sentiment coming from inside the banking sector
that I've been getting is that the financial system seizure is
on par with that of the Great Depression, and therefore we should
not dismiss lightly the current efforts being put forth by monetary
officials (both great and small) to keep the wheels from falling
off. To acknowledge, even in the face of personal losses, that
the global financial system needed shoring up is as accurate
an admission as it is mature of Coxe to say so.
It nearly conjures up memories of Spock's famous line, "The
needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
Unfortunately, the story can't so easily or happily end with
a seemingly isolated sacrifice of commodity holders here and
there for the benefit of price-conscious shoppers everywhere
- even if it is faced bravely and maturely by the aforementioned
few.
A basic review of economics and market principles reminds us
that free price movements are the necessary swing point upon
which physical supply and demand can be balanced. And the ugly
truth of the matter at hand is that a mere discounting of the
price/value of commodity derivatives amounts to little more than
a cheap parlor trick - a trick which, although creating a nice
illusion of cheap prices, completely disregards the physical
supply/demand pricing balance and thus sets the stage for shortages
and other dire dislocations of the physical supply/demand dynamic.
And to be sure, it is the reliable and steady flow of actual
commodities that forms the basis of a well-fed, well-clothed,
well-housed, well-fueled well-content population of earth's inhabitants.
As this seemingly innocent maneuver of derivative-based pricing
(esp. the pro-cyclical discounting of this derivatives amid this
financial crisis) is being used ostensibly to "shore up
the global financial system", the unintended consequences
is that the necessary value and the workings of the REAL (physical)
economy is being sacrificed for the mere shaping of temporary
perceptions and mathematical adjustments within a PAPER (mental)
economy.
Simply put, derivative-based pricing of tangibles is very much
akin to a child playing with fire and gunpowder. It's a recipe
that doesn't end well. I would rather have high-priced food on
my plate and expensive gasoline in my car's fueltank and valuable
pile of gold coins in my vault all appropriately priced (physically)
at their inflation-ridden prices than to live in a world where
they are all derivatively-priced at attractively lower levels
and yet are physically unavailable.
Before a derivative selloff can cut too deeply into reality,
there will have to come a point of price separation by the physical
markets from their paper posers, or else we will be in for a
REAL crisis, not merely a paper/digital one. In other words,
knocking us all the way back into the Stone Age of barter would
certainly NOT by any measure be considered an appropriate policy
response. The needs of the many would also have been crushed
after having crushed the needs of the few. And in the end, after
putting on a brave face to no avail, there's no amount of wisdom
or maturity that can tolerate such a disastrous outcome from
such small-minded bureaucratic meddling as the very structure
of the current game implies.
*sigh*
R.
Randy Strauss (usagold.com 17October2008; 17:35)
on contracts and prices
Just a block away from the sandwich shop where I had lunch I
crossed paths with an old Uruguayan friend of mind who happens
to have a keener interest than average folks in the metals markets.
He was puffing on a monstrously large cigar (he's nearly a living
caricature of himself) and stopped me in my tracks to pick my
brain for a bit about prices in the gold market.
Ultimately the conversation covered the difference between the
market in COMEX contracts versus the market in physical metal.
Over the many years people have now gotten themselves firmly
into a bad habit of thinking of the COMEX futures prices (duly
adjusted for time/contango) as though they were the actual prices
for actual metal. To further demonstrate this point, consider
this: Whenever a person DOES actually make a purchase of real
metal, as the metal always costs more than the (contango-adjusted)
COMEX furures price, as a result of their bad habit they always
refer to the higher metal price as the "premium"
over the gold price.
This is a habit of shoddy thinking that needs to die right here
and now.
I discussed with my friend the universal tightness and scarcity
in the physical gold outlets around the world, and tried to help
him clearly understand how supply shortages in the face of overwhelming
demand simply does not square with the soft prices you're seeing
on the futures/derivatives markets - doesn't square, that is,
UNLESS you rid yourself of the old habit and begin to think things
through more clearly.
To demonstrate, I said, "Frank, as we stand here right now,
what would you pay me for this actual $10 bill?" [said
while pulling one from my wallet] "You'd probably give
me two $5's for it, or ten $1's, or maybe even 40 quarters..."
He said, "Sure."
I said, "Right. Exactly. Because there's nothing ambiguous
about that exchange happening in the here and now. But now consider
this. Instead of offering an actual $10 bill right now, let's
say that I were to take a piece of paper and write on it the
words, 'Frank, any time after December, when you see me, hand
me this note and I'll give you a $10 bill.' What would you pay
me for it right now?"
You could see the wheels were really turning as he took a few
puffs on his cigar, so I helped him along.
I said, "OK, I know you'd like to think my IOU's are good,
but you can't know whether or not I'm going to be hit by a bus
sometime between now and then. So instead of paying $10 today
for a December IOU, you'd want to discount that
note by some amount that adequately reflects the risk of being
stuck with a bad note. In other words, you'll say, 'OK, Randy,
I won't pay you $10 for it, but I'll buy that note from you for
$8, and it'll likely work out to be the easiest 25% I'll ever
make.' And of course, if you had less faith in collecting on
my note, you'd discount it by an even greater amount, or perhaps
not want to buy it at any price."
That's the way it works in the money markets where the future-promised
cashflow of commercial paper and bonds are discounted against
their present face value, and it's probably the healthiest way
to consider the cheap prices you see for the COMEX gold contracts
- they are being deeply discounted for their emptiness
of substance. And furthermore, the higher prices being quoted
in the marketplace to obtain real metal doesn't represent a premium
over the contracts, but rather represents the real cost of real
metal to be procured and safely delivered from amidst a vast
derivative wasteland.
So here it is in a nutshell:
The gold community has been in an old bad habit of thinking
along terms of contract gold prices in conjunction
with metal premiums.
Instead, the gold community needs to form the more proper perspective
and think along the intellectually healthier terms of discounted
contracts as compared with actual (full bodied) metal
prices.
R.
 
October 3, 2008
VideoBrief
featuring Pete Grant
& Jonathan Kosares
|