Great Article - Silver Manipulation
ProofCollection
Posts: 6,246 ✭✭✭✭✭
Found this article - the first one I've seen with actual names and numbers. Enjoy.
Article
There is compelling new proof of a silver (and gold) price manipulation. The evidence connects the investment bank JP Morgan Chase, the dominant force in world commodity trading, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the primary commodity regulator, and the U.S. Treasury Department, the arranger of every conceivable bailout.
This week, I received a copy of a letter, dated October 8, sent from the CFTC to a California Congressman, Gary G. Miller. It discussed allegations of a silver market manipulation because of the data in the monthly Bank Participation Report. The data in that report for August showed that one or two U.S. banks held a massive short position in COMEX silver futures of 33,805 contracts, or more than 169 million ounces. This is equal to 25% of annual world mine production, and was up more than five-fold from the prior month’s report. After this position was established, silver prices fell more than 50%, in spite of a widespread shortage in retail forms of investment silver. Never before had there been a such a large concentrated position in any market, including every manipulation case in the CFTC’s history. Concentration and manipulation go hand in hand. You can’t have one without the other.
The letter was sent to me by a reader who had the foresight to write to his Congressman. Of course, the CFTC denied that a silver manipulation existed, as they always have. This proves that the Commission responds much quicker to a member of Congress than it does to hundreds of ordinary citizens and investors. In the future, should you decide to write to the CFTC, be sure to do so through your elected representatives.
What was remarkable (and disturbing) about the letter was that it strongly confirms an analysis I presented in an article dated September 2, titled, "Fact Versus Speculation" http://www.investmentrarities.com/09-02-08.html. In that article, I speculated that the shocking increase in the silver short position by one or two U.S. banks was related to the takeover of Bear Stearns by JP Morgan in March.
Here’s a quote from my article, dated September 2.
"I am going to speculate based upon the known facts. Maybe I will be proven correct, maybe not. However, the nature of this speculation is so disturbing, that I hope I am wrong. But I need to state it because if I am close to the mark, the implications for the silver market are profound.
I think the data in the COT and the Bank Participation Reports indicate that the U.S. Government may have bailed out the biggest COMEX silver short by arranging for a U.S. bank to take over their position. This coincides with JP Morgan’s takeover of Bear Stearns. In fact, it would not surprise me if the bailout was JP Morgan taking over Bear Stearns‘ short silver position, at the government‘s request. While this silver bailout (if it happened) was no doubt undertaken with financial system stability in mind, it has disturbing implications of legality and equity"
This is the relevant quote from the CFTC’s Oct 8 letter.
"In effect the increase [in the short position] reflected a one time acquisition of positions that were acquired through a merger in the industry, and not new trading by a bank. Thus, the assertion that there was new activity undertaken by the banks that led to a fall in silver prices is not correct since the "new" activity reflected in the CFTC’s report was in essence positions that had already existed in the market prior to July 1st."
The CFTC clearly confirms, in effect, that the big silver short position was related to JP Morgan’s takeover of Bear Stearns, since no other merger provides a plausible explanation. However, the Commission is not speaking truthfully about an increase in the concentrated short position. The CFTC’s own data, in weekly Commitment of Traders Reports (COT), show a sizable increase in concentrated short positions of some 12,000 contracts (60 million ounces) from levels before July 1st to the August Bank Participation Report.
More importantly, the real issue is not about when the one or two U.S. banks increased their short position, but how large that short position grew in the August Bank Participation Report. The CFTC is deceiving a U.S. Congressman by attempting to reduce the argument to when the short position was increased, not the obscene and manipulative size of the position. This is deception through omission and misrepresentation. What difference does it make when the manipulative position was established? The issue is how can a short position of 25% of the world production of any commodity, held by one or two U.S. banks, not be manipulative?
Bear Stearns held the largest concentrated short position in COMEX silver (and gold) futures at the time of its forced merger with JP Morgan in March. That position was not discovered until the publishing of the August Bank Participation Report followed by the October 8 letter from the CFTC to Congressman Miller. Furthermore, Bear Stearns had no legitimate backing to the short silver position, either in actual metal or cash. Otherwise it could have been delivered against or bought back, just as would have happened were it a long position.
The price of silver at the time of Bear Stearns implosion was $20 to $21 an ounce. A free market covering of a concentrated short position of this size would have driven silver prices to the $50 or $100 level and would have exposed the long-term manipulation. Rather than let the free market deal with the required short covering of such an uneconomic and unbacked short position, government authorities arranged to have the short position transferred to JP Morgan. This was undertaken by the U.S. Treasury Department, along with taxpayer guarantees against loss to Morgan worth billions of dollars. This was done, no doubt, to save the financial system from imploding. This was also patently illegal, as it aided and abetted the silver manipulation.
I’m sure the motive behind the illegal transfer of the silver short position was the mistaken assumption by Treasury that an explosion in the price of silver (and gold) would threaten overall financial stability. Well guess what - they succeeded in crushing the price of gold and silver, but to no avail, as financial stability has been shattered.
JP Morgan was not just an accommodative good corporate citizen in the illegal transfer of the manipulative silver (and gold) COMEX short position. In addition to undisclosed government guarantees against loss, JP Morgan was given free reign to liquidate the COMEX short position at their discretion, knowing full-well the regulators would look the other way, no matter what dirty tricks were necessary to cause the price to collapse. Nor was JP Morgan a neutral agent in the silver price collapse. Data from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) http://www.occ.gov/deriv/deriv.htm indicates that JP Morgan held a much larger Over The Counter (OTC) derivatives position in silver and gold than was transferred to them from Bear Stearns.
My analysis shows that Morgan has made many billions of dollars, perhaps tens of billions, from their downward engineering of silver and gold prices from their combined COMEX and OTC short positions. They have used that engineered price decline to buy back as many short positions as possible. If investors are wondering what caused the destruction of billions of dollars in gold and silver values, metal and share price alike, look no further than JP Morgan, and the government officials who enabled them.
There can be no question that the CFTC is complicit in all these illegal activities. Same with the CME Group, owner of the NYMEX/COMEX. It is not possible that they are not privy and an active party to this successful downward manipulation. To think that officials at the CFTC, from the top of the agency, to staffers and even the Inspector General, have taken oaths of office to uphold commodity law and then have allowed that law to be repeatedly violated is beyond repugnant. That they have knowingly participated in an organized cover-up of this manipulation and have taken to lying to a Congressman calls for criminal prosecution.
As bad as this is, it gets worse. The downward manipulation of the price of silver, initiated by the U.S. Treasury, undertaken by JP Morgan Chase and sanctioned and aided by the CFTC and the CME Group has proven so successful in destroying investment values that the low price of silver is now threatening to destroy tens of thousands of jobs of those who mine silver for a living, here in the US and throughout the world. Who do these people think they are that they can allow the artificial paper price to alter real supply/demand fundamentals? Those in charge of enforcing the law have enriched a few sleazy bankers who trade toxic paper derivatives at the expense of tens of thousands of innocent investors and now ordinary workers. This should make your blood boil.
While investors in silver will soon see a strong snap-back in silver prices, it is too late for those workers who have already lost their jobs due to the artificially depressed price of silver. At risk remain those jobs that will be lost if silver doesn’t rebound quickly. Silver mining is tough and dangerous for rank and file workers, much tougher than pushing paper derivatives. The fact that those who regulate our markets don’t see that distinction needs to be rectified.
One thing that I have never understood is why silver mine management has not taken a more active roll in pressing the regulators to more fully address the increasing evidence of a silver price manipulation. I suppose it has to do with fears of offending those Wall Street firms which may provide future financing and the false pride that goes with having denied in the past that a manipulation could exist. But surely those managers have now seen what a depressed price of silver has done to their stock prices and the fate of their companies. To still do and say nothing leaves their companies in grave danger.
I think it is time for the employees themselves, and the unions that represent them, to take some initiative to help themselves. Losing jobs due to crooked behavior by big banks and their regulators should be a lightening-rod issue for employees, unions and Congressional leadership in the districts affected. I’m certain that legal action against the parties responsible for the price manipulation would result in substantial financial damages awarded to rank and file workers hurt by the manipulation. To that end, I offer, as much as is reasonably possible time-wise and free of charge, any consultative advice to any union or Congressional representative interested in bringing action against those responsible for the manipulation.
For investors, conditions never looked better for the long-term merits of silver, precisely because of the recent crooked take down of the price. You should do two things. Buy as much silver as you can and write your elected officials to end the silver manipulation scam.
Article
There is compelling new proof of a silver (and gold) price manipulation. The evidence connects the investment bank JP Morgan Chase, the dominant force in world commodity trading, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the primary commodity regulator, and the U.S. Treasury Department, the arranger of every conceivable bailout.
This week, I received a copy of a letter, dated October 8, sent from the CFTC to a California Congressman, Gary G. Miller. It discussed allegations of a silver market manipulation because of the data in the monthly Bank Participation Report. The data in that report for August showed that one or two U.S. banks held a massive short position in COMEX silver futures of 33,805 contracts, or more than 169 million ounces. This is equal to 25% of annual world mine production, and was up more than five-fold from the prior month’s report. After this position was established, silver prices fell more than 50%, in spite of a widespread shortage in retail forms of investment silver. Never before had there been a such a large concentrated position in any market, including every manipulation case in the CFTC’s history. Concentration and manipulation go hand in hand. You can’t have one without the other.
The letter was sent to me by a reader who had the foresight to write to his Congressman. Of course, the CFTC denied that a silver manipulation existed, as they always have. This proves that the Commission responds much quicker to a member of Congress than it does to hundreds of ordinary citizens and investors. In the future, should you decide to write to the CFTC, be sure to do so through your elected representatives.
What was remarkable (and disturbing) about the letter was that it strongly confirms an analysis I presented in an article dated September 2, titled, "Fact Versus Speculation" http://www.investmentrarities.com/09-02-08.html. In that article, I speculated that the shocking increase in the silver short position by one or two U.S. banks was related to the takeover of Bear Stearns by JP Morgan in March.
Here’s a quote from my article, dated September 2.
"I am going to speculate based upon the known facts. Maybe I will be proven correct, maybe not. However, the nature of this speculation is so disturbing, that I hope I am wrong. But I need to state it because if I am close to the mark, the implications for the silver market are profound.
I think the data in the COT and the Bank Participation Reports indicate that the U.S. Government may have bailed out the biggest COMEX silver short by arranging for a U.S. bank to take over their position. This coincides with JP Morgan’s takeover of Bear Stearns. In fact, it would not surprise me if the bailout was JP Morgan taking over Bear Stearns‘ short silver position, at the government‘s request. While this silver bailout (if it happened) was no doubt undertaken with financial system stability in mind, it has disturbing implications of legality and equity"
This is the relevant quote from the CFTC’s Oct 8 letter.
"In effect the increase [in the short position] reflected a one time acquisition of positions that were acquired through a merger in the industry, and not new trading by a bank. Thus, the assertion that there was new activity undertaken by the banks that led to a fall in silver prices is not correct since the "new" activity reflected in the CFTC’s report was in essence positions that had already existed in the market prior to July 1st."
The CFTC clearly confirms, in effect, that the big silver short position was related to JP Morgan’s takeover of Bear Stearns, since no other merger provides a plausible explanation. However, the Commission is not speaking truthfully about an increase in the concentrated short position. The CFTC’s own data, in weekly Commitment of Traders Reports (COT), show a sizable increase in concentrated short positions of some 12,000 contracts (60 million ounces) from levels before July 1st to the August Bank Participation Report.
More importantly, the real issue is not about when the one or two U.S. banks increased their short position, but how large that short position grew in the August Bank Participation Report. The CFTC is deceiving a U.S. Congressman by attempting to reduce the argument to when the short position was increased, not the obscene and manipulative size of the position. This is deception through omission and misrepresentation. What difference does it make when the manipulative position was established? The issue is how can a short position of 25% of the world production of any commodity, held by one or two U.S. banks, not be manipulative?
Bear Stearns held the largest concentrated short position in COMEX silver (and gold) futures at the time of its forced merger with JP Morgan in March. That position was not discovered until the publishing of the August Bank Participation Report followed by the October 8 letter from the CFTC to Congressman Miller. Furthermore, Bear Stearns had no legitimate backing to the short silver position, either in actual metal or cash. Otherwise it could have been delivered against or bought back, just as would have happened were it a long position.
The price of silver at the time of Bear Stearns implosion was $20 to $21 an ounce. A free market covering of a concentrated short position of this size would have driven silver prices to the $50 or $100 level and would have exposed the long-term manipulation. Rather than let the free market deal with the required short covering of such an uneconomic and unbacked short position, government authorities arranged to have the short position transferred to JP Morgan. This was undertaken by the U.S. Treasury Department, along with taxpayer guarantees against loss to Morgan worth billions of dollars. This was done, no doubt, to save the financial system from imploding. This was also patently illegal, as it aided and abetted the silver manipulation.
I’m sure the motive behind the illegal transfer of the silver short position was the mistaken assumption by Treasury that an explosion in the price of silver (and gold) would threaten overall financial stability. Well guess what - they succeeded in crushing the price of gold and silver, but to no avail, as financial stability has been shattered.
JP Morgan was not just an accommodative good corporate citizen in the illegal transfer of the manipulative silver (and gold) COMEX short position. In addition to undisclosed government guarantees against loss, JP Morgan was given free reign to liquidate the COMEX short position at their discretion, knowing full-well the regulators would look the other way, no matter what dirty tricks were necessary to cause the price to collapse. Nor was JP Morgan a neutral agent in the silver price collapse. Data from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) http://www.occ.gov/deriv/deriv.htm indicates that JP Morgan held a much larger Over The Counter (OTC) derivatives position in silver and gold than was transferred to them from Bear Stearns.
My analysis shows that Morgan has made many billions of dollars, perhaps tens of billions, from their downward engineering of silver and gold prices from their combined COMEX and OTC short positions. They have used that engineered price decline to buy back as many short positions as possible. If investors are wondering what caused the destruction of billions of dollars in gold and silver values, metal and share price alike, look no further than JP Morgan, and the government officials who enabled them.
There can be no question that the CFTC is complicit in all these illegal activities. Same with the CME Group, owner of the NYMEX/COMEX. It is not possible that they are not privy and an active party to this successful downward manipulation. To think that officials at the CFTC, from the top of the agency, to staffers and even the Inspector General, have taken oaths of office to uphold commodity law and then have allowed that law to be repeatedly violated is beyond repugnant. That they have knowingly participated in an organized cover-up of this manipulation and have taken to lying to a Congressman calls for criminal prosecution.
As bad as this is, it gets worse. The downward manipulation of the price of silver, initiated by the U.S. Treasury, undertaken by JP Morgan Chase and sanctioned and aided by the CFTC and the CME Group has proven so successful in destroying investment values that the low price of silver is now threatening to destroy tens of thousands of jobs of those who mine silver for a living, here in the US and throughout the world. Who do these people think they are that they can allow the artificial paper price to alter real supply/demand fundamentals? Those in charge of enforcing the law have enriched a few sleazy bankers who trade toxic paper derivatives at the expense of tens of thousands of innocent investors and now ordinary workers. This should make your blood boil.
While investors in silver will soon see a strong snap-back in silver prices, it is too late for those workers who have already lost their jobs due to the artificially depressed price of silver. At risk remain those jobs that will be lost if silver doesn’t rebound quickly. Silver mining is tough and dangerous for rank and file workers, much tougher than pushing paper derivatives. The fact that those who regulate our markets don’t see that distinction needs to be rectified.
One thing that I have never understood is why silver mine management has not taken a more active roll in pressing the regulators to more fully address the increasing evidence of a silver price manipulation. I suppose it has to do with fears of offending those Wall Street firms which may provide future financing and the false pride that goes with having denied in the past that a manipulation could exist. But surely those managers have now seen what a depressed price of silver has done to their stock prices and the fate of their companies. To still do and say nothing leaves their companies in grave danger.
I think it is time for the employees themselves, and the unions that represent them, to take some initiative to help themselves. Losing jobs due to crooked behavior by big banks and their regulators should be a lightening-rod issue for employees, unions and Congressional leadership in the districts affected. I’m certain that legal action against the parties responsible for the price manipulation would result in substantial financial damages awarded to rank and file workers hurt by the manipulation. To that end, I offer, as much as is reasonably possible time-wise and free of charge, any consultative advice to any union or Congressional representative interested in bringing action against those responsible for the manipulation.
For investors, conditions never looked better for the long-term merits of silver, precisely because of the recent crooked take down of the price. You should do two things. Buy as much silver as you can and write your elected officials to end the silver manipulation scam.
0
Comments
on the internet without anyone doing any checking of the facts. Of course if you do not
think it is swill... at least read the chunk of text below and consider the points.
"The issue is how can a short position of 25% of the world production of any commodity, held by one or two U.S. banks, not be manipulative?"
When the banks in question do not hold those positions as their own. They have customers.
"Trader Concentration
An area that has drawn significant attention from silver commentators is the level of concentration among short traders in the silver futures market, as reported in the CFTC's weekly Commitments of Traders (COT) reports.
Silver commentators have argued that the four-trader net short position reported in the COT reports is unusually high and imply that it is indicative of an effort by a specific group of four or fewer traders to maintain low prices indefinitely. The commentators also imply that the futures positions held by these traders are “naked” in that they are not legitimate hedge positions or otherwise entered into to offset positions in the physical silver market. To evaluate this claim, staff examined the specific traders comprising the top four shorts and their overall futures positions, their motives for holding these positions, how the levels of concentration in the silver futures market compare to those in similar futures markets (i.e., gold, platinum, palladium, and copper), and the relationship between open interest concentration and the level of open interest held by these futures traders to changes in silver futures prices.
The analysis of open interest, collected daily from June 6, 2005 through January 16, 2008—a total of 659 days in the sample—indicates that the composition of market participants among the top four net traders is not static, though certain traders do appear in the top four significantly more often than others. For the period as a whole, there were a total of 10 different traders who at some point were counted among the top four in terms of their net short futures position. Of those 10, three were present in the top four more than 50 percent of the time. The trader most often in the top four was usually ranked number two in terms of net position size among traders, when present.
The trader present second most often was typically ranked fourth among the top four traders, and was never ranked first. Finally, the trader showing up third most often was usually the number one ranked trader, holding that position on 356 days of the 475 days in which they were present in the top four. Thus, the Commission's large trader data shows that, as opposed to the allegation that four traders dominate the market by consistently holding a large concentrated short position, the top four traders at any point in time may involve any of 10 different market participants.
Notably, these large traders are not always net short; of these 10 traders, four at times were among the top four net long silver futures traders. These data show that any scheme to manipulate the silver futures market would require involvement of up to 10 traders as opposed to the four that silver commentators suggest. This renders the allegation more implausible, as such a large diverse group would increase the difficulty and complexity of effecting concerted actions while ensuring discipline within the group.
In addition, the top 10 traders are not monolithic and represent a wide diversity of business interests with diverse customer bases. In this regard, staff interviewed five of the largest traders that are included among the group of 10. Based on these interviews and from the Commission's records, the staff has determined that the entities in this group are involved in the silver markets as dealer/merchants, index traders, swaps/derivatives dealers, money managers, banks and silver depositories. Two of the five traders interviewed indicated the futures positions they entered into were to offset activity that they engaged in with customers situated in the physical silver markets. This activity included buying silver from producers and selling silver to consumers in various manufacturing industries.
Few of the futures positions of these two traders represented proprietary trading of the firms. The remaining three traders were less active in the physical markets, but, nonetheless, they primarily established futures positions to offset other obligations, such as over-the-counter swap trades and other financially settled contracts, that they had entered into with their customers. For each firm interviewed, their futures trading activities are driven primarily by the desires and needs of the firms' customers to either buy or sell silver or to assume or hedge financial exposure to silver prices.
The understanding that the largest net short silver futures traders have an overall neutral position in the silver market is confirmed by information collected by NYMEX relating to several of these large traders. In August 2007, NYMEX contacted several of the largest short silver futures traders requesting specific information regarding their activity in the silver cash and OTC markets. The exchange found that these firms generally held significant forward purchase and sales agreements that, overall, left the firms with a net long silver exposure.
The short futures positions on NYMEX were approximately offset by their long cash exposure. This means that, contrary to the silver commentators' allegations, the largest net short traders in the NYMEX silver futures markets are not “naked” shorts, as the firms' overall exposure in the silver markets (considering their futures, cash and OTC positions) is approximately neutral. "
<< <i>fc, thanks for posting that. I had not seen that. The article I posted isn't there to sway or convince people, it's to stir up healthy discussion. Thanks. >>
I am glad I could help you see a differing opinion to the article.
I hope you did not take offense to my use of the word, "swill" ;-)
I just see the article get trotted out as proof of manipulation too often
lately and it is important to bring up the other side of the argument.
Kind of old information, though.... is it still applicable to what has been happening since July 2008?
<< <i>"The analysis of open interest, collected daily from June 6, 2005 through January 16, 2008—a total of 659 days in the sample—......"
Kind of old information, though.... is it still applicable to what has been happening since July 2008? >>
I think so yes. The two players listed in the first article are simply aggregates for customers of all types.
Those are not proprietary plays of the banks. There is a small group of players who normally hold such
large positions and they rotate among themselves based on their business patterns at the time.
<< <i>"The analysis of open interest, collected daily from June 6, 2005 through January 16, 2008—a total of 659 days in the sample—......"
Kind of old information, though.... is it still applicable to what has been happening since July 2008? >>
Silver mostly went up, way up during that time frame. Is the writer's conclusion that there was massive manipulation to inflate the price?
Here is the chart:
<< <i>I'm glad someone does. I want to see all sides of an argument so I can make my decisions accordingly. >>
<< <i>I'm glad someone does. I want to see all sides of an argument so I can make my decisions accordingly. >>
<< <i>I'm glad someone does. I want to see all sides of an argument so I can make my decisions accordingly. >>
I've read both articles posted. I have no way to confirm either of them, I can only take them at face value. Despite the fact that I've been trading PM since 1985, I cannot draw any
conclusions from either article. There are no solid references, etc. Both sound plausible, but w/o confirmation, well......?
I believe, based on my personal experience that manipulation has been going on to varying degrees
since I've been trading it on COMEX. It's easy to point to Bunker Hunt and say 'look what he did', but times were simpler then.
These days, there are so many reasons to put on a massive trade none of which has to do w/the PM itself. Just ass covering.
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm glad someone does. I want to see all sides of an argument so I can make my decisions accordingly. >>
I've read both articles posted. I have no way to confirm either of them, I can only take them at face value. Despite the fact that I've been trading PM since 1985, I cannot draw any
conclusions from either article. There are no solid references, etc. Both sound plausible, but w/o confirmation, well......?
I believe, based on my personal experience that manipulation has been going on to varying degrees
since I've been trading it on COMEX. It's easy to point to Bunker Hunt and say 'look what he did', but times were simpler then.
These days, there are so many reasons to put on a massive trade none of which has to do w/the PM itself. Just ass covering. >>
the information i have presented comes from this source:
http://cftc.gov/stellent/groups/public/@newsroom/documents/file/silverfuturesmarketreport0508.pdf
since it is from "THE MAN" some people will heavily discount it. As for places to verify the information used
in the report it would take me time to discover where each is pulled from. But then a person who does not
wish to be convinced could question where that information came from, ad nauseam.
all i know is that over the last few years... discounting recent events.. if that was manipulation downwards
the gold bugs should be clamoring for a lot more of it ;-)
roadrunner
If you track the Treasury's machinations for more than just 24 hours, and if you "follow the money", it's no stretch to understand how the manipulation in pms is occurring. It's not the first time that JP Morgan will have been the "last man standing" in the financial arena, and in this case the precious metals markets have now been awarded to them.
The Treasury has jurisdiction over counterfeiting, but they won't prosecute the creators of the financial derivatives in the financial industry. Hundreds of $Billions keep disappearing and the Treasury is the main conduit. Does it really come as a revelation that the SEC and CFTC are running interference for the same cabal?
But - Heaven Forbid! If you point out the obvious, you are a tin foil hat conspirator. Yeah, sign me up for a subscription to the CFTC's newletter. I'll believe anything.
If they didn't cut off the escape hatch of gold and silver as a safe haven, the Treasury wouldn't be able to implement the greatest transfer of wealth in history - from US citizens, savers and stockholders - to the wealthy bank CEOs and corrupt managements who created imaginary book entries and then sold them as if they were real while leveraging these deals beyond obscene levels. And after the scheme fell apart, they continue to justify these endless bailouts using taxpayer money - the looting to end all looting. Biggest scam in history.
The pms are just a backwater event. But perception is everything, and the pms can't be allowed to function as an alternative money. Yeah, good luck with that.
I knew it would happen.
I don't believe we're going to see $650 gold in the current setting. While gold appears to be sputtering, it is fighting against severe manipulation and holding it's own. The little Dutch boy (ie JPM) only has so many fingers available.
roadrunner
If the gold and silver markets are subject to such abusive manipulation, why would anyone want to put their money in PMs?
CG
<< <i>Those here who are convinced that wide spread manipulation is going on are also the biggest proponants of investing in gold and silver.
If the gold and silver markets are subject to such abusive manipulation, why would anyone want to put their money in PMs? >>
I think the two go hand in hand. If you thought one, wouldn't you be the other?
If you believe there is manipulation (downward), then you also probably believe that the manipulation has to come to an end. With the separation of physical and paper prices, that end appears to be close at hand. If you honestly believe this to be the case, how could you not be a proponent of investing in gold and silver?
<< <i>With the separation of physical and paper prices >>
Myth. The only separation was in small denomination bullion. That spread is being closed by increased production of hte small denominaiton items to meet demand.
Again, read the financial reports of the producers. They are realizing lower prices for their gold and silver. That is the real market for physical PMs.
CG
All the markets out there (stock, bond, commodities, currency, real estate, etc) are extensively manipulated. So what are gonna do with your FRN's, stuff it under the matress like they did in 1932 waiting for a 40% devaluation in the dollar? So the real question is which market offers the most protection/safety for oneself while offering a means for appreciation in strongly inflationary and also deflationary scenarios.
Investing in the manipulated stock or bond markets can leave you totally broke....as we've just witnessed over the past 8 months. The physical gold market has approached nowhere near such a point....and likely never will. It has weathered both inflationary and deflationary environments (2001-2008) rather well, in fact better than any of the above listed "investments." Party on Garth...........
roadrunner