@MrEureka said:
Leasing precious metals is not a new or unusual practice. I even did it once myself back in the 80's, with no regrets. The trick is to pick your counterparty wisely.
IN a round about way, I lease gold by selling gold futures.
I never part with the physical and I never deliver the gold. I roll the contracts. Currently, the return is approximately the 1 year t-bill rate or around 5%. Each sale reduces my long exposure, so I'm selling the futures when I wish to hold less gold.
Perhaps you can answer a question for me. Back in 1979-80 the Hunt Brothers exploded the silver market by buying up many contracts, and then demanding delivery of physical products. Do modern contracts specifically exclude this option?
As I understand it, the problem wasn’t that they took delivery, but that they bought so much - physical and contracts - that the market rose dramatically. (They were bona fide silver bulls, so their buying turned their bullish stance into a self-fulfilling prophecy.) The market only crashed when COMEX changed its rules, forcing the Hunts to unwind their position. As I see it, they were the victims, not the villains.
I wouldn't exactly call them victims. They were heavily over-leveraged and Comex changed its margin requirements. If they were victims then so is every overleveraged person/entity. Like the banks and market speculators during the Great Depression or the hedge fund Long Term Capital Management or all of the banks during the Housing Crisis or....
Leverage is dangerous but it's not criminal or evil in any way. And I wouldn't have called the Hunt brothers victims if COMEX hadn't intentionally targeted and crushed them. Was COMEX wrong to do that? That's a tough call. But whatever you think of COMEX, the Hunts were certainly their victims.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@MrEureka said:
Leasing precious metals is not a new or unusual practice. I even did it once myself back in the 80's, with no regrets. The trick is to pick your counterparty wisely.
IN a round about way, I lease gold by selling gold futures.
I never part with the physical and I never deliver the gold. I roll the contracts. Currently, the return is approximately the 1 year t-bill rate or around 5%. Each sale reduces my long exposure, so I'm selling the futures when I wish to hold less gold.
Perhaps you can answer a question for me. Back in 1979-80 the Hunt Brothers exploded the silver market by buying up many contracts, and then demanding delivery of physical products. Do modern contracts specifically exclude this option?
As I understand it, the problem wasn’t that they took delivery, but that they bought so much - physical and contracts - that the market rose dramatically. (They were bona fide silver bulls, so their buying turned their bullish stance into a self-fulfilling prophecy.) The market only crashed when COMEX changed its rules, forcing the Hunts to unwind their position. As I see it, they were the victims, not the villains.
@MrEureka said:
Leasing precious metals is not a new or unusual practice. I even did it once myself back in the 80's, with no regrets. The trick is to pick your counterparty wisely.
IN a round about way, I lease gold by selling gold futures.
I never part with the physical and I never deliver the gold. I roll the contracts. Currently, the return is approximately the 1 year t-bill rate or around 5%. Each sale reduces my long exposure, so I'm selling the futures when I wish to hold less gold.
Perhaps you can answer a question for me. Back in 1979-80 the Hunt Brothers exploded the silver market by buying up many contracts, and then demanding delivery of physical products. Do modern contracts specifically exclude this option?
You can take delivery. I almost did it during the silver peak a couple years ago because it was the only way to get silver at a low premium. In the end, I just didn't want to mess with 5000 ounces in giant bars.
@MrEureka said:
Leasing precious metals is not a new or unusual practice. I even did it once myself back in the 80's, with no regrets. The trick is to pick your counterparty wisely.
IN a round about way, I lease gold by selling gold futures.
I never part with the physical and I never deliver the gold. I roll the contracts. Currently, the return is approximately the 1 year t-bill rate or around 5%. Each sale reduces my long exposure, so I'm selling the futures when I wish to hold less gold.
Perhaps you can answer a question for me. Back in 1979-80 the Hunt Brothers exploded the silver market by buying up many contracts, and then demanding delivery of physical products. Do modern contracts specifically exclude this option?
As I understand it, the problem wasn’t that they took delivery, but that they bought so much - physical and contracts - that the market rose dramatically. (They were bona fide silver bulls, so their buying turned their bullish stance into a self-fulfilling prophecy.) The market only crashed when COMEX changed its rules, forcing the Hunts to unwind their position. As I see it, they were the victims, not the villains.
I wouldn't exactly call them victims. They were heavily over-leveraged and Comex changed its margin requirements. If they were victims then so is every overleveraged person/entity. Like the banks and market speculators during the Great Depression or the hedge fund Long Term Capital Management or all of the banks during the Housing Crisis or....
They were victims. COMEX changed the rules in the middle of the game. It's equivalent to you having a $500k mortgage that you are paying every month and then your bank decides that you need 50% equity so they want an immediate $250,000 cash payment or they will foreclose.
If I recall, in the case of the Hunts they even prevented them from unwinding the paper positions by making it illegal to open new long positions but not short positions. That meant the only legal buyers for the Hunt paper were the banks that had short contract positions. The banks were allowed to profit from a rule change that favored them by exchange regulators who were banking insiders tied to them.
Comments
Leverage is dangerous but it's not criminal or evil in any way. And I wouldn't have called the Hunt brothers victims if COMEX hadn't intentionally targeted and crushed them. Was COMEX wrong to do that? That's a tough call. But whatever you think of COMEX, the Hunts were certainly their victims.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Agree.
You can take delivery. I almost did it during the silver peak a couple years ago because it was the only way to get silver at a low premium. In the end, I just didn't want to mess with 5000 ounces in giant bars.
They were victims. COMEX changed the rules in the middle of the game. It's equivalent to you having a $500k mortgage that you are paying every month and then your bank decides that you need 50% equity so they want an immediate $250,000 cash payment or they will foreclose.
If I recall, in the case of the Hunts they even prevented them from unwinding the paper positions by making it illegal to open new long positions but not short positions. That meant the only legal buyers for the Hunt paper were the banks that had short contract positions. The banks were allowed to profit from a rule change that favored them by exchange regulators who were banking insiders tied to them.
i am dyslexia of borg futility is resistant your ass will be laminated.