Gold World News Flash |
- Coming Mega-Chaos To Dwarf The Terror Of 2008 Collapse
- All The Presidents' Bankers: The Hidden Alliances That Drive American Power
- In The News Today
- Economic Collapse 2014 -- Current Economic Collapse News Brief
- Are The U.S. & Russia Capable of Waging A Financial War?
- How Much Bad Debt Can China Absorb?
- Keiser Report: Institutionalized STEALING … & JIM RICKARDS INTERVIEW – Part 2
- Terrifying Worldwide Meltdown To Devastate The Entire Globe
- America Judgement Day Paul McGuire
- Coming Mega-Chaos To Dwarf The Terror Of 2008 Collapse
- Soaring Chinese Gold Demand And Its Geopolitical Strategy
- US Threatens Russia Over Petrodollar-Busting Deal
- Power Of Elites More Important Than China’s Gold
- Russia increasingly understands its international leverage with oil, gas, and gold
- Gold Bear Markets
- An Update on Gold
| Coming Mega-Chaos To Dwarf The Terror Of 2008 Collapse Posted: 05 Apr 2014 10:00 PM PDT from KingWorldNews:
The entire global economy now clings precariously to one crucial phenomenon — how much longer can the central banks of the developed world artificially suppress interest rates at near zero percent? The violently-negative market reaction to Janet Yellen’s comments during her first press conference was a clear indication of how vulnerable the stock market is to the eventual reality of rising interest rates. All Ms. Yellen did was remind investors that the Fed Funds Rate would have to be moved up from zero percent—probably beginning in the middle of next year. That was enough to send the major averages cascading downward faster than you could say the words "flash trading."…. |
| All The Presidents' Bankers: The Hidden Alliances That Drive American Power Posted: 05 Apr 2014 07:12 PM PDT The following is an excerpt from ALL THE PRESIDENTS' BANKERS: The Hidden Alliances that Drive American Power by Nomi Prins (on sale April 8, 2014). Reprinted with permission from Nation Books. Nomi Prins is a former managing director at Goldman Sachs.
NIXON'S BANKERS: When What Was Good for Wall Street Was Good for the President Wall Street's War While the protests against the Vietnam War intensified in the first years of the Nixon administration, the financial elite was fighting its own war—over the future of banking and against Glass-Steagall regulations. National City Bank chairman Walter Wriston was a steadfast warrior in related battles, as he fought with Chase chairman David Rockefeller for supremacy over the US banker community and for dominance over global finance. Rockefeller's sights were set on a grander prize, one with worldwide implications: ending the financial cold war. He made his mark in that regard by opening the first US bank in Moscow since the 1920s, and the first in Beijing since the 1949 revolution. Augmenting their domestic and international expansion plans, both men and their banks prospered from the emerging and extremely lucrative business of recycling petrodollars from the Middle East into third world countries. By acting as the middlemen—capturing oil revenues and transforming them into high-interest-rate loans, to Latin America in particular—bankers accentuated disparities in global wealth. They dumped loans into developing countries and made huge amounts of money in the process. By funneling profits into debts, they caused extreme pain in the debtor nations, especially when the oil-producing nations began to raise their prices. This raised the cost of energy and provoked a wave of inflation that further oppressed these third world nations, the US population, and other economies throughout the world. Bank Holding Company Battles When Eisenhower signed the 1956 Bank Holding Company Act banning interstate banking, he left a large loophole as a conciliatory gambit: a gray area as to what big banks could consider "financially-related business," which fell under their jurisdiction. In practice, that meant that they could find ways to expand their breadth of services while they figured out ways to grow their domestic grab for depositors. On May 26, 1970, the "Big Three" bankers— Wriston and Rockefeller, along with Alden "Tom" Clausen, chairman of Bank America Corporation—appeared before the Senate Banking and Currency Committee to press their case for widening the loophole. During the proceedings, Wriston led the charge on behalf of his brethren in the crusade. Tall, slim, elegantly dressed, and the most articulate of the three, he dramatically called on Congress to "throw off some of the shackles on banking which inhibit competition in the financial markets." The global financial landscape was evolving. Ever since World War II, US bankers hadn't worried too much about their supremacy being challenged by other international banks, which were still playing catch-up in terms of deposits, loans, and global customers. But by now the international banks had moved beyond postwar reconstructive pain and gained significant ground by trading with Cold War enemies of the United States. They were, in short, cutting into the global market that the US bankers had dominated by extending themselves into areas in which the US bankers were absent for US policy reasons. There was no such thing as "enough" of a market share in this game. As a result, US bankers had to take a longer, harder look at the "shackles" hampering their growth. To remain globally competitive, among other things, bankers sought to shatter post-Depression legislative barriers like Glass-Steagall. They wielded fear coated in shades of nationalism as a weapon: if US bankers became less competitive, then by extension the United States would become less powerful. The competition argument would remain dominant on Wall Street and in Washington for nearly three decades, until the separation of speculative and commercial banking that had been invoked by the Glass-Steagall Act would be no more. Wriston deftly equated the expansion of US banking with general US global progress and power. It wasn't so much that this connection hadn't occurred to presidents or bankers since World War II; indeed, that was how the political-financial alliances had been operating. But from that point on, the notion was formally and publicly verbalized, and placed on the congressional record. The idea that commercial banks served the country and perpetuated its global identity and strength, rather than the other way around, became a key argument for domestic deregulation—even if, in practice, it was the country that would serve the banks. The Penn Central Debacle There was, however, a fly in the ointment. To increase their size, bankers wanted to be able to accumulate more services or branches beneath the holding company umbrella. But a crisis in another industry would give some legislators pause. The Penn Central meltdown, the first financial crisis of Nixon's presidency, temporarily dampened the ardency of deregulation enthusiasts. The collapse of the largest, most diverse railroad holding company in America was blamed on overzealous bank lending to a plethora of non-railroad-oriented entities under one holding company umbrella. The debacle renewed debate about a stricter bank holding company bill. Under Wriston's guidance, National City had spearheaded a fifty-three-bank syndicate to lend $500 million in revolving credit to Penn Central, even when it showed obvious signs of imminent implosion. Penn Central had been one of the leading US corporations in the 1960s. President Johnson had supported the merger that spawned the conglomerate on behalf of a friend, railroad merger specialist Stuart Saunders, who became chairman. He had done this over the warnings of the Justice Department and despite allegations of antitrust violations called by its competitors. With nary a regulator paying attention, Penn Central had morphed into more than a railroad holding company, encompassing real estate, hotels, pipelines, and theme parks. Meanwhile, highways, cars, and commercial airlines had chipped away at Penn Central's dominant market position. To try to compensate, The conglomerate demonstrated that holding companies could be mere shell constructions under which other unrelated businesses could exist, much as the 1920s holding companies housed reckless financial ventures under utility firm banners. Allegations circulated that Rockefeller had launched a five-day selling strategy of Penn Central stock, culminating with the dumping of 134,400 shares on the fifth day, based on insider information he received as one of the firm's key lenders. He denied the charges. In a joint effort with the bankers to hide the Penn Central debacle behind a shield of federal bailout loans, the Pentagon stepped in, claiming that assisting Penn Central was a matter of national defense.5 Under the auspices of national security, Washington utilized the Defense Production Act of 1950, a convenient bill passed at the start of the Korean War that enabled the president to force businesses to prioritize national security–related endeavors. On June 21, 1970, Penn Central filed for bankruptcy, becoming the first major US corporation to go bust since the Depression. Its failure was not an isolated incident by any means. Instead, it was one of a number of major defaults that shook the commercial paper market to its core. ("Commercial paper" is a term for the short-term promissory notes sold by large corporations to raise quick money, backed only by their promise to pay the amount of the note at the end of its term, not by any collateral.) But the agile bankers knew how to capitalize on that turmoil. When companies stopped borrowing in the flailing commercial paper market, they had to turn to major banks like Chase for loans instead. As a result, the worldwide loans of Chase, First National City Bank, and Bank of America surged to $27.7 billion by the end of 1971, more than double the 1969 total of $13 billion. A year later, the largest US defense company, Lockheed, was facing bankruptcy, as well. Again bankers found a way to come out ahead on the people's dime. Lockheed's bankers at Bank of America and Bankers Trust led a syndicate that petitioned the Defense Department for a bailout on similar national security grounds. The CEO, Daniel Haughton, even agreed to step down if an appropriate government loan was provided. In response, the Nixon administration offered $250 million in emergency loans to Lockheed—in effect, bailing out the banks and the corporation. To explain the bailout at a time when the general economy was struggling, Nixon introduced the Lockheed Emergency Loan Act by stating, "It will have a major impact on the economy of California, and will contribute greatly to the economic strength of the country as a whole." After the bill was passed, not a single Lockheed executive stepped down. It would take several years of political-financial debate and more bailouts to sustain Penn Central. One 1975 article labeled the entire episode "The Penn-C Fairy Tale" and condemned the subsequent federal bailout: "While the country is in the worst recession since the depression and unemployment lines grow longer every day, Congress is dumping another third of a billion dollars of your tax payer dollars down the railroad rat hole." (The incident was prologue: Congress would lavish hundreds of billions of dollars to sustain the biggest banks after the 2008 financial crisis, topped up by trillions of dollars from the Fed and the Treasury Department in the form of loans, bond purchases, and other subsidies.) More Bank Holding Company Politics Despite the Penn Central crisis, the revised Bank Holding Company Act decisively passed the Senate on September 16, 1970, by a bipartisan vote of seventy-seven to one. The final version was far more lenient than the one that Texas Democrat John William Wright Patman, chair of the House Committee on Banking and Currency, or even the Nixon administration had originally envisioned. The revised act allowed big banks to retain nonbank units acquired before June 1968. It also gave the Fed greater regulatory authority over bank holding companies, including the power to determine what constituted one. Language was added to enable banks to be considered one-bank holding companies if they, or any of their subsidiaries, held any deposits or extended any commercial loans, thus broadening their scope. President Nixon signed the bill into law without fanfare on New Year's Eve 1970. In fact, his inner circle decided against making a splash about it. They didn't think the public would understand or care. Plus, they realized that there was a prevailing attitude that the Nixon administration had favored the big banks, and though it had, this was not something they wanted to draw attention to. The End of the Gold Standard The top six banks controlled 20 percent of the nation's deposits through one-bank holding companies, but second place in that group wasn't good enough for Wriston, who noted to the Nixon administration that his bank was really the "caretaker of the aspirations of millions of people" whose money it held. Wriston flooded the New York Fed with proposals for expansion. His applications "were said to represent as many as half of the total of all of the banks." The Fed was so overwhelmed, it had to enlist First National City Bank to interpret the new law on its behalf. By mid-1971, the Fed had approved thirteen and rejected seven of Wriston's applications. His biggest disappointment was the insurance underwriting rejection. The possibility of converting depositors for insurance business had been tantalizing. It would continue to be a hard-fought, ultimately successful battle. Around the same time, New York governor Nelson Rockefeller (David Rockefeller's brother) approved legislation permitting banks to set up subsidiaries in each of the state's nine banking districts. This was a gift for Wriston and David Rockefeller, because it meant their banks could expand within the state. Each subsidiary could open branches through June 1976, when the districts would be eliminated and banks could merge and branch freely. Several months later, First National City Bank was paying generous prices to purchase the tiniest upstate banks, from which it began extending loans to the riskiest companies and getting hosed in the process; a minor David vs. Goliath revenge of local banks against Wall Street muscle. By that time, the stock market had turned bearish, and foreign countries were increasingly demanding their paper dollars be converted into gold as they shifted funds out of dollar reserves. Bankers, meanwhile, postured for a dollar devaluation, which would make their cost of funds cheaper and enable them to expand their lending businesses. They knew that the fastest way to further devalue the dollar was to sever it from gold, and they made their opinions clear to Nixon, taking care to blame the devaluation on external foreign speculation, not their own movement of capital and lending abroad. The strategy worked. On August 15, 1971, Nixon bashed the "international money speculators" in a televised speech, stating, "Because they thrive on crises they help to create them."16 He noted that "in recent weeks the speculators have been waging an all-out war on the American dollar." His words were true in essence, yet they were chosen to exclude the actions of the major US banks, which were also selling the dollar. Foreign central banks had access to US gold through the Bretton Woods rules, and they exercised this access. Exchanging dollars for gold had the effect of decreasing the value of the US dollar relative to that gold. Between January and August 1971, European banks (aided by US banks with European branches) catalyzed a $20 billion gold outflow. As John Butler wrote in The Golden Revolution, "By July 1971, the US gold reserves had fallen sharply, to under $10 billion, and at the rate things were going, would be exhausted in weeks. [Treasury Secretary John] Connally was tasked with organizing an emergency weekend meeting of Nixon's various economic and domestic policy advisers. At 2:30 p.m. on August 13, they gathered, in secret, at Camp David to decide how to respond to the incipient run on the dollar." Nixon's solution, pressed by the banking community, was to abandon the gold standard. In his speech the president informed Americans that he had directed Connally to "suspend temporarily the convertibility of the dollar into gold or other reserve assets." He promised this would "defend the dollar against the speculators." Because Bretton Woods didn't allow for dollar devaluation, Nixon effectively ended the accord that had set international currency parameters since World War II, signaling the beginning of the end of the gold standard. Once the dollar was no longer backed by gold, questions surfaced as to what truly backed it (besides the US military). According to Butler, "The Bretton Woods regime was doomed to fail as it was not compatible with domestic US economic policy objectives which, from the mid-1960s onwards, were increasingly inflationary." It wasn't simply policy that was inflationary. The expansion of debt via the joint efforts of the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve was greatly augmented by the bankers' drive to loan more funds against their capital base. That established a debt inflation policy, which took off after the dissolution of Bretton Woods. Without the constraint of keeping gold in reserve to back the dollar, bankers could increase their leverage and speculate more freely, while getting money more easily from the Federal Reserve's discount window. Abandoning the gold standard and "floating" the dollar was like navigating the waters of global finance without an anchor to slow down the dispersion of money and loans. For the bankers, this made expansion much easier. Indeed, on September 24, 1971, Chase board director and former Treasury Secretary C. Douglas Dillon (chairman of the Brookings Institution and, from 1972 to 1975, the Rockefeller Foundation) told Connally that "under no circumstances should we ever go back to assuming limited convertibility into gold." Chase Board chairman David Rockefeller wrote National Security Adviser (and later Secretary of State) Henry Kissinger to recommend "a reevaluation of foreign currencies, a devaluation of the dollar, removal of the U.S. import surcharge and 'buy America' credits, and a new international monetary system with greater flexibility . . . and less reliance on gold." With the dollar devalued, investors poured money into stocks, fueling a rally from November 1971 led by the "Nifty Fifty," a group of "respectable" big-cap growth stocks. These were being bought "like greyhounds chasing a mechanical rabbit" by pension funds, insurance companies, and trust funds. The Chicago Board of Trade began trading options on individual stocks in 1973 to increase the avenues for betting; speculators could soon thereafter trade futures on currencies and bonds. The National Association of Securities Dealers rendered all this trading easier on February 8, 1971, when it launched the NASDAQ. The first computerized quote system enabled market makers to post and transact over-the-counter prices quickly. With the stock market booming again, NASDAQ became a more convenient avenue for Wall Street firms to raise money. Many abandoned their former partnership models whereby the firm's partners risked their own capital for the firm, in favor of raising capital by selling the public shares. That way, the upside—and the growing risk—would also be diffused and transferred to shareholders. Merrill Lynch was one of the first major investment bank partnerships to go "public" in 1971. Other classic industry leaders quickly followed suit. Meanwhile, corporations were finding prevailing lower interest rates more attractive. Instead of getting loans from banks, they could fund themselves more cheaply by issuing bonds in the capital markets. This took business away from commercial banks, which were restricted by domestic regulation from acting as issuing agents. But bankers had positioned themselves on both sides of the Atlantic to get around this problem, so they were covered by the shift in their major customers' financing preferences. While their ability to service corporate demand was dampened at home, overseas it roared. Currency market turmoil also led many countries to the Eurodollar market for credit, where US banks were waiting. Thus, the credit extended through international branches of major US banks tripled to $4.5 billion from 1969 to 1972. The market rally, cheered on by the media, was enough to bolster Nixon's fortunes. In the fall of 1972, Nixon was reelected in a landslide on promises to end the Vietnam War with "peace and honor." Wall Street reaped the benefits of a bull market, and more citizens and companies were sucked into new debt products. The Dow hit a 1970s peak of 1,052 points in January 1973, as Nixon began his second term. |
| Posted: 05 Apr 2014 06:43 PM PDT Moscow, Beijing taking on the dollar 26 July 2013, 14:11 Russia and China have united their efforts in the fight against the dollar as the main reserve currency, an influential American trader, Russ Winter, said. The expert says that Moscow and Beijing have been putting into practice, for a long time now, the first part... Read more » The post In The News Today appeared first on Jim Sinclair's Mineset. |
| Economic Collapse 2014 -- Current Economic Collapse News Brief Posted: 05 Apr 2014 06:15 PM PDT In this news brief we will discuss the latest news on the economic collapse. We look to see if things are really that different. The central bank will not stop at just confiscating your wealth they will want your life. They want to enslave the people. [[ This is a content summary only. Visit http://www.GoldSilverNewsBlog.com or http://www.newsbooze.com or http://www.figanews.com for full links, other content, and more! ]]  |
| Are The U.S. & Russia Capable of Waging A Financial War? Posted: 05 Apr 2014 05:30 PM PDT from Silver Phoenix 500:
|
| How Much Bad Debt Can China Absorb? Posted: 05 Apr 2014 05:22 PM PDT Submitted by Sara Hsu via The Diplomat, China is coming under close scrutiny these days, as the leadership scurries to find new sources of economic growth and control its debt. Some analysts have reassured China watchers that the Chinese government can simply write off its bad debt, at least within the major banks, and pass it on to the asset management companies that handle that resale of distressed debt (or have it later purchased by the Ministry of Finance). Others have warned that some of the debt is serious, such as that incurred by local government financing vehicles, and are dubious about the sustainability of these entities. [ZH: As we have noted before, the dats is ugly... From November 2012, The Chinese Credit Bubble - Full Frontal:
And from November 2013, "How China's Stunning $15 Trillion In New Liquidity Blew Bernanke's QE Out Of The Water"
It seems people are starting to listen, and not a moment too soon: as of December 31, China's corporate debt just hit a record $12 trillion. From Reuters:
And then there was the worst capital misallocation in history:
Of course, there is also this:
To worry or unwind? How much debt can China really absorb? The first step in answering this would be to examine what types of debt has gone bad in China and what is likely to continue to sour, as well as how these products have been dealt with. There are three general categories of bad debt that have been bailed out in recent years (there is other bad debt that has not been bailed out): bank loans, trust loans, and loans from smaller sectors such as informal finance and credit guarantee companies. Problems with trust loans and loans from smaller sectors have generally been handled by local governments, while bank loans have been bailed out via asset management companies funded through the Ministry of Finance. Trust loans bailed out by local governments have involved sums in the low billions of RMB, while non-performing bank loans amounted to about 1.5 trillion RMB between 2011 and 2013. The second step is to consider how well the central and local governments can cope with a potential increase in bad debt. While local governments are overly indebted, as revealed by a recent report by the National Audit Office, and have experienced fiscal shortfalls for some time, the central government has maintained relatively low deficits, even coming in under the projected deficit in 2013. The way in which the central government deals with non-performing loans is easy on the fiscal budget as long as the debt can be recovered; the worst impact of this process is that it may very lightly constrain lending, as non-performing loans are taken off books and bonds are issued and purchased by banks, changing the nature of capital held on the books. In reality, however, much of the distressed debt is not recovered, and in the past has been purchased by the Ministry of Finance. Both central and local governments, then, face issues with bailing out bad loans either directly or indirectly. The third question we ask is whether the scale of bad debt will grow sufficiently to threaten the financial health of the central and local governments. For local governments, the question is moot. Their health is already threatened by a serious lack of revenue. This can only be addressed by increasing revenue, perhaps land revenue or an increase in revenue redistribution from the central government. As it stands, it seems that the fallout from trust bailouts has been relatively low and may turn out to be less onerous on local governments than it has been on the psyche of financial analysts, but if the trust debt increases and bailouts do rise, local governments will suffer, as they have little capacity to withstand a further accumulation of debt. The central government can bear a small increase in bad debt, but as long as the deficit is kept in check, bailouts will replace policies that spur much-needed growth, trading future prosperity for past profligacy. The recent 3-year non-performing loan amount of just less than 1.5 trillion RMB (about 500 billion per year and growing) seems like a tidy sum compared to fiscal expenditures of 7 trillion RMB (in 2013). With mounting non-performing loans and declining revenue in the short run, the gap between these numbers will only narrow. Although the government can pay down the debt later, postponing the bailout, many new nonperforming loans would present a challenge to officials as to how to classify, recover, and ultimately relieve the financial system of this burden. These numbers tell us that it does not appear that China can bear a very large increase in debt, and that the idea that the government can simply “bail out the financial sector” is erroneous, or at least, a stretch. China does not have the luxury of the United States, which can spend excessively because foreign countries continue to buy U.S. government debt (as the dollar is the world reserve currency). If the leadership attempts to spend down its large cache of dollar reserves, it will lose control of its currency, as a larger supply of U.S. dollars relative to the Chinese RMB would depreciate the currency unless sterilized. The only remaining option is the least savory: the Chinese government must control its debt, and this includes reducing overindulgence within the real economy. It seems that the punch bowl is empty already and the party is winding down. Now the question is, who will clean up the mess? |
| Keiser Report: Institutionalized STEALING … & JIM RICKARDS INTERVIEW – Part 2 Posted: 05 Apr 2014 04:45 PM PDT [Ed. Note: If you missed Part 1 of the Rickards interview, click on this link: Jim Rickards Visits Keiser Report & Exposes Himself as an Establishment Shill Covering Up CIA Involvement in 9/11 Insider Trading, Calling It "IRRELEVANT."] from RT: Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert discuss high frequency fraud, picking prices and then filling in the trades to get to that price. In the second half, is PART 2 of Max’s interview with Jim Rickards about his new book, The Death of Money. In this second half, they talk more about mutually assured financial destruction, the US dollar and the danger of insolvency. |
| Terrifying Worldwide Meltdown To Devastate The Entire Globe Posted: 05 Apr 2014 02:04 PM PDT  Today a 42-year market veteran told King World News that a terrifying worldwide meltdown is going to devastate the entire globe. Below is what Egon von Greyerz, who is founder of Matterhorn Asset Management out of Switzerland, had to say in his interview in the powerful interview.This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now |
| America Judgement Day Paul McGuire Posted: 05 Apr 2014 01:30 PM PDT Earthquakes, economic collapse, thermonuclear war, America in Prophecy. Paul McGuire's message on the need for repentance and prayer in the last days [[ This is a content summary only. Visit http://www.GoldSilverNewsBlog.com or http://www.newsbooze.com or http://www.figanews.com for full links, other content, and more! ]]  |
| Coming Mega-Chaos To Dwarf The Terror Of 2008 Collapse Posted: 05 Apr 2014 12:04 PM PDT  Today the man who had his interview censored and entirely erased out of a CNBC segment warned King World News that the coming mega-chaos will dwarf the terror of the 2008 collapse. This is an incredibly powerful piece with Michael Pento, the man who someone in an ivory tower made the decision to censor.This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now |
| Soaring Chinese Gold Demand And Its Geopolitical Strategy Posted: 05 Apr 2014 11:29 AM PDT Submitted by Alasdair Macleod via GoldMoney.com, Geopolitical and market background
The impact of these revelations on estimates of total identified demand and the drain on bullion stocks from outside China is likely to be dramatic, but confirms what some of us have suspected but been unable to prove. Western analysts have always lagged in their understanding of Chinese demand and there is now evidence China is deliberately concealing the scale of it from us. Instead, China is happy to let us accept the lower estimates of western analysts, which by identifying gold demand from the retail end of the supply chain give significantly lower figures. Before 2012 the Shanghai Gold Exchange was keen to advertise its ambitions to become a major gold trading hub. This is no longer the case. The last SGE Annual Report in English was for 2010, and the last Gold Market Report was for 2011. 2013 was a watershed year. Following the Cyprus debacle, western central banks, seemingly unaware of latent Chinese demand embarked on a policy of supplying large quantities of bullion to break the bull market and suppress the price. The resulting expansion in both global and Chinese demand was so rapid that analysts in western capital markets have been caught unawares. I started following China's gold strategy over two years ago and was more or less on my own, having been tipped off by a contact that the Chinese government had already accumulated large amounts of gold before actively promoting gold ownership for private individuals. I took the view that the Chinese government acted for good reasons and that it is a mistake to ignore their actions, particularly when gold is involved. Since then, Koos Jansen of ingoldwetrust.ch has taken a specialised interest in the SGE and Hong Kong's trade statistics, and his dedication to the issue has helped spread interest and knowledge in the subject. He has been particularly successful in broadcasting market statistics published in Chinese to a western audience, overcoming the lack of information available in English. I believe that China is well on the way to having gained control of the international gold market, thanks to western central banks suppression of the gold price, which accelerated last year. The basic reasons behind China's policy are entirely logical: • China knew at the outset that gold is the west's weak spot, with actual monetary reserves massively overstated. For all I know their intelligence services may have had an accurate assessment of how much gold there is left in western vaults, and if they had not, their allies, the Russians, probably did. Representatives of the People's Bank of China will have attended meetings at the Bank for International Settlements where these issues are presumably openly discussed by central bankers. • China has significant currency surpluses under US control. By controlling the gold market China can flip value from US Treasuries into gold as and when it wishes. This gives China ultimate financial leverage over the west if required. • By encouraging its population to invest in gold China reduces the need to acquire dollars to control the renminbi/dollar rate. Put another way, gold purchases by the public have helped absorb her trade surplus. Furthermore gold ownership insulates her middle classes from external currency instability which has become an increasing concern since the Lehman crisis. For its geopolitical strategy to work China must accumulate large quantities of bullion. To this end China has encouraged mine production, making the country the largest producer in the world. It must also have control over the global market for physical gold, and by rapidly developing the SGE and its sister the Shanghai Gold Futures Exchange the groundwork has been completed. If western markets, starved of physical metal, are forced at a future date to declare force majeure when settlements fail, the SGE and SGFE will be in a position to become the world's market for gold. Interestingly, Arab holders have recently been recasting some of their old gold holdings from the LBMA's 400 ounce 995 standard into the Chinese one kilo 9999 standard, which insures them against this potential risk. China appears in a few years to have achieved dominance of the physical gold market. Since January 2008 turnover on the SGE has increased from a quarterly average of 362 tonnes per month to 1,100 tonnes, and deliveries from 44 tonnes per month to 212 tonnes. It is noticeable how activity increased rapidly from April 2013, in the wake of the dramatic fall in the gold price. From January 2008, the SGE has delivered from its vaults into public hands a total of 6,776 tonnes. This is illustrated in the chart below.
This is only part of the story, the part that is in the public domain. In addition there is gold imported through Hong Kong and fabricated for the Chinese retail market bypassing the SGE, changes of stock levels within the SGE's network of vaults, the destination of domestic mine output and scrap, government purchases of gold in London and elsewhere, and purchases stored abroad by the wealthy. Furthermore the Chinese diaspora throughout South East Asia competes with China for global gold stocks, and its demand is in addition to that of China's Mainland and Hong Kong. The Shanghai Gold Exchange (SGE) About 75% of the SGE's gold turnover is for forward settlement and the balance is for spot delivery. Standard bars are Au99.95 3 kilos (roughly 100 ounces), Au99.99 1 kilo, Au100g and Au50g. The institutional standard has become Au99.99 1 kilo bars, most of which are sourced from Swiss refiners, with the old Au99.95 standard less than 15% of turnover today compared with 65% five years ago. The smaller 100g and 50g bars are generally for retail demand and a very small proportion of the total traded. Public demand for smaller bars is satisfied mainly through branded products provided by commercial banks and other retail entities instead of from SGE-authorised refiners. Overall volumes on the SGE are a tiny fraction of those recorded in London, and the market is relatively illiquid, so much so that opportunities for price arbitrage are often apparent rather than real. The obvious difference between the two markets is the large amounts of gold delivered to China's public. This has fuelled the rapid growth of the Chinese market leading to a parallel increase in vaulted bullion stocks, which for 2013 is likely to have been substantial. By way of contrast the LBMA is not a regulated market but is overseen by the Bank of England, while the SGE is both controlled and regulated by the People's Bank of China. The PBOC is also a member of both its own exchange and of the LBMA, and deals actively in non-monetary gold. While the LBMA is at arm's length from the BoE, the SGE is effectively a department of the PBOC. This allows the Chinese government to control the gold market for its own strategic objectives.
Quantifying demandIdentifiable demand is the sum of deliveries to the public withdrawn from SGE vaults, plus the residual gold left in Hong Kong, being the net balance between imports and exports. To this total must be added an estimate of changes in vaulted bullion stocks. SGE gold deliveries
Growth in public demand for physical gold is a reflection of the increased wealth and savings of Chinese citizens, and also reflects advertising campaigns that have encouraged ordinary people to invest in gold. Advertising the attractions of gold investment is consistent with a deliberate government policy of absorbing as much gold as possible from western vaults, including those of central banks. Hong Kong The mainstream media has reported on the large quantities of gold flowing from Switzerland to Hong Kong, but this is only part of the story. In 2013, Hong Kong imported 916 tonnes from Switzerland, 190 tonnes from the US, 176 tonnes from Australia and 150 tonnes from South Africa as well as significant tonnages from eight other countries, including the UK. She also imported 337 tonnes from Mainland China and exported 211 tonnes of it back to China as fabricated gold. Hong Kong is not the sole entry port for gold destined for the Mainland. The table below illustrates how Hong Kong's gold trade with China has grown, and its purpose is to identify gold additional to that supplied via Hong Kong to the SGE. Included in the bottom line, but not separately itemised, is fabricated gold trade with China (both ways), as well as the balance of all imports and exports accruing to Hong Kong.
The bottom line, "Additional supply from HK" should be added to SGE deliveries and changes in SGE vaulted gold to create known demand for China and Hong Kong. SGE vaulted gold The closest and most logical relationship for vaulted gold is with actual deliveries. After all, public demand is likely to be split between clients maintaining gold accounts at member banks, and clients taking physical possession. The ratios of delivered to vaulted gold were remarkably stable at 1.05, 1.03, and 0.99 for 2008, 2009 and 2010 respectively. On this basis it seems reasonable to assume that vaulted gold has continued to increase at approximately the same amount as delivered gold on a one-to-one basis. The estimated annual increase in vaulted gold is shown in the table below.
The benefits of vault storage, ranging from security from theft to the ability to use it as collateral, seem certain to encourage gold account holders to continue to accumulate vaulted metal rather than take personal possession. SupplySupply consists of scrap, domestically mined and imported gold Scrap Scrap is refined entirely by Chinese refiners, and as stated in the discussion concerning mine supply below, the absence of SGE standard kilo bars in Hong Kong is strong evidence that they are withheld from circulation. It is therefore reasonable to assume that scrap should be regarded as vaulted, probably held separately on behalf of the government or its agencies. Mine supply Typically, a mine will produce doré which has to be assessed and paid for before it is forwarded to a refinery. Only when it is refined and cast into standard bars can gold be delivered to the market. Broadly, one of the following procedures between doré and the sale of gold bars will occur: • The refiner acts on commission from the mine, and the mine sells the finished product on the market. This is inefficient management of cash-flow, though footnotes in the accounts of some mine companies suggest this happens. • The refiner buys doré from the mine, refines it and sells it through the SGE. This is inefficient for the refiner, which has to find the capital to buy the doré. • A commercial bank, being a member of the SGE, finances the mine from doré to the sale of deliverable gold, paying the mine up-front. This is the way the global mining industry often works. • The government, which ultimately directs the mines, refiners and the SGE, buys the mine output at pre-agreed prices and may or may not put the transaction through the market. I believe the government acquires all mine output, because it is consistent with the geopolitical strategy outlined at the beginning of this article. Furthermore, two of my contacts, one a Swiss refiner with facilities in Hong Kong and the other a vault operator in Hong Kong, tell me they have never seen a Chinese-refined one kilo bar. Admittedly, most one kilo bars in existence bear the stamp of Swiss and other foreign refiners, but nonetheless there must be over two million Chinese-refined kilo bars in existence. Either Chinese customs are completely successful in stopping all ex-vault Chinese-refined one kilo bars leaving the Mainland, or the government takes all domestically refined production for itself, with the exception perhaps of some 100 and 50 gram bars. Logic suggests the latter is true rather than the former. Since the SGE is effectively a department of the PBOC, it must be at the government's discretion if domestic mine production is put through the market by the PBOC. Whether or not Chinese mine supply is put through the market is impossible to establish from the available statistics, and is unimportant: no bars end up in circulation because they all remain vaulted. It is material however to the overall supply and demand picture, because global mine supply last year drops to about 2,490 tonnes assuming Chinese production is not available to the market. Geopolitics suggests that China acquires most, if not all of its own mine and scrap production, which accumulates in the vaulting system. This throws the emphasis back on the figures for vaulted gold, which I have estimated at one-for-one with delivered gold due to gold account holder demand. To this estimate we should now add both Chinese scrap and mine supply. This would explain why vaulted gold is no longer reported, and it would underwrite my estimates of vaulted gold from 2011 onwards. Further comments on vaulted gold Therefore, scrap and mined gold must be allocated into other vaults not included in the SGE network, and these vaults can only be under the control of the government. It will have been from these vaults that China's sudden increase in monetary gold of 444 tonnes in the first quarter of 2009 was drawn, which explains why the total recorded in SGE vaults was obviously unaffected. So for the purpose of determining the quantity of vaulted gold, scrap and mined gold must be added to the gold recorded in SGE vaults. Though it is beyond the scope of this analysis, the existence of government vaults not in the SGE network should be noted, and given cumulative mine production over the last thirty years, scrap supply and possibly other purchases of gold from abroad, the bullion stocks in these government vaults are likely to be very substantial. Western gold flows to ChinaWe are now in a position to estimate Chinese demand and supply factors in a global context. The result is summarised in the table below.
Chinese demand before 2013 had arrived at a plateau, admittedly higher than generally realised, before expanding dramatically following last April's price drop. Taking the WGC's figures for the Rest of the World gives us new global demand figures, which throw up a shortfall amounting to 9,461 tonnes since the Lehman crisis, satisfied from existing above-ground stocks. This figure, though shocking to those unaware of these stock flows, could well be conservative, because we have only b |
| US Threatens Russia Over Petrodollar-Busting Deal Posted: 05 Apr 2014 11:27 AM PDT On the heels of Russia's potential "holy grail" gas deal with China, the news of a Russia-Iran oil "barter" deal, it appears the US is starting to get very concerned about its almighty Petrodollar
We suspect these sanctions would have more teeth than some travel bans, but, as we noted previously, it is just as likely to be another epic geopolitical debacle resulting from what was originally intended to be a demonstration of strength and instead is rapidly turning out into a terminal confirmation of weakness. As we explained earlier in the week,
And here is Voice of Russia, "Russia prepares to attack the Petrodollar":
Finally, those curious what may happen next, only not to Iran but to Russia, are encouraged to read "From Petrodollar To Petrogold: The US Is Now Trying To Cut Off Iran's Access To Gold."
|
| Power Of Elites More Important Than China’s Gold Posted: 05 Apr 2014 03:38 AM PDT Being successful in trading has a lot to do with finding the developing "story" behind the price structure of a market. We had good results in February because we keyed into some very important pieces of market information that would lead to a likely result for the direction of price, or what we call "the story of the market." We had less success in March because the focus was more on trying to catch up to the story, where being just a step or so behind is not as rewarding, even resulting in loss. |
| Russia increasingly understands its international leverage with oil, gas, and gold Posted: 05 Apr 2014 03:33 AM PDT Lawmakers Call on Oil and Gas Producers to Ditch 'Dirty, Bloody Dollar' From Russia Today, Moscow http://rt.com/politics/russian-dollar-abandon-parliament-085/ A group of lower house members of Parliament are urging Russian oil and gas producers and traders to stop using the US dollar. They say this means sharing profits with the United States and making Russia vulnerable to Western sanctions. "The dollar is evil. It is a dirty green paper stained with blood of hundreds of thousands of civilian citizens of Japan, Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Korea, and Vietnam," one of the authors of the motion, Mikhail Degtyaryov of the conservative nationalist party LDPR, said in an interview with Izvestia daily. Degtyaryov also said that Russia already had a bilateral agreement with China allowing payment in national currencies and this proved that such step was possible. ... Dispatch continues below ... ADVERTISEMENT Silver mining stock report for 2014 comes with 1-ounce silver round Future Money Trends is offering a special 18-page silver mining stock report about how to profit with the monetary and industrial metal in 2014, and it comes with a free 1-ounce silver round. Proceeds from the report's sales are shared with the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee to support its efforts to expose manipulation in the monetary metals markets. To learn about this report, please visit: "Our national industrial giants will not suffer any losses if they choose to make contracts in rubles or other alternative currencies," the MP said. "Russia will benefit from that. We should act paradoxically when we deal with the West. We will sell rubles to consumers of our oil and gas, and later we will exchange rubles for gold. If they don't like this, let them not do this and freeze to death. Before they adjust, and this will take them three of four years, we will collect tremendous quantities of gold. Russian companies will at last become nationally oriented and stop crediting the economy of the US that is openly hostile to Russia." Degtyaryov is known for drafting an official bill banning the US dollar in Russia. He told reporters that this document has been recalled from parliament and amended with a ban on the euro and promised to resubmit the new draft to the lower house in the near future. On Wednesday the head of leading state-owned bank VTB, Andrey Kostin, also urged Russia to start transitioning to ruble payments with all its trading partners, including China and Western Europe. Kostin also said the switch should begin as soon as possible and that exporting companies should lead the way in adopting the change. According to the banker the plan could help to lower the country's dependency on "the whims of US and EU authorities." However, industry experts have warned against hasty moves, saying that sometimes the transition to a different currency was simply impossible. The head of the Trade and Industry Chamber's committee for financial markets, Yakov Mirkin, said that at present the international practice was to calculate oil and gas prices in US dollars as the international reserve currency. "We cannot swim against the current. This is how the whole thing works. Maybe such a thing will be possible in 10 or 15 years, but not today," Mirkin noted. The head of the public relations department of the Russian state oil corporation Rosneft, Mikhail Leontyev, said that his company was bound by contract obligations and the fast switch to a different currency was simply impossible. Join GATA here: Porter Stansberry Natural Resources Conference Committee for Monetary Research and Education http://www.cmre.org/news/spring-meeting-2014/ Canadian Investor Conference 2014 http://cambridgehouse.com/event/25/canadian-investor-conference-2014-inc... * * * Support GATA by purchasing DVDs of our London conference in August 2011 or our Dawson City conference in August 2006: http://www.goldrush21.com/order.html Or by purchasing a colorful GATA T-shirt: Or a colorful poster of GATA's full-page ad in The Wall Street Journal on January 31, 2009: http://gata.org/node/wallstreetjournal Help keep GATA going GATA is a civil rights and educational organization based in the United States and tax-exempt under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Its e-mail dispatches are free, and you can subscribe at: To contribute to GATA, please visit: ADVERTISEMENT Buy metals at GoldMoney and enjoy international storage GoldMoney was established in 2001 by James and Geoff Turk and is safeguarding more than $1.7 billion in metals and currencies. Buy gold, silver, platinum, and palladium from GoldMoney over the Internet and store them in vaults in Canada, Hong Kong, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom, taking advantage of GoldMoney's low storage rates, among the most competitive in the industry. GoldMoney also offers delivery of 100-gram and 1-kilogram gold bars and 1-kilogram silver bars. To learn more, please visit: http://www.goldmoney.com/?gmrefcode=gata |
| Posted: 05 Apr 2014 02:07 AM PDT It’s been a while since we looked at Gold in a vacuum. We’ve focused on the gold stocks as they have led the sector. We covered Silver last week. Gold is more interesting because in its current state its more difficult to draw a strong conclusion. One could look at the evidence and go either way. Today Gold is back above $1300. Is this the start of a run to and past $1400? I don’t know. My gut says more range bound activity is ahead. |
| Posted: 04 Apr 2014 08:50 PM PDT The Daily Gold |
Coming Mega-Chaos To Dwarf The Terror Of 2008 Collapse
As the Ukrainian crisis unfolded threats of financial war came from Russia and to a lesser extent from the E.U. and the U.S. They were not carried out except a few sanctions targeting key personnel in Russia. These were shrugged off and the crisis appears to have dropped to a series of posturing by both sides. A sigh of relief crossed the developed world and investment life went back to normal. In the past we have had similar events that were defused in a similar way. But history teaches us that that the world can suppurate easily and quickly in tense situation like this. The First World War started because of one shot from a pistol. He Second World War were preceded by trumpeting of 'peace in our time' as mistaken politicians thought they had made peace with Germany. 
| You are subscribed to email updates from Save Your ASSets First To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
No comments:
Post a Comment