What is a "bullion bank"? Can you provide a list of these "banks"?
Do you have any evidence that bullion banks are actually short (for themselves) and losing money? I haven't been able to find anything to support your claim.
Ask this question to perplexity.ai. It gives a remarkably precise answer. With respect to the actual examples, they list BNP Paribas, Citibank, Goldman, HSBC, and JP Morgan Chase.
As a follow up question, you can ask, for example, “do these banks depress the price of gold”. Perplexity also responds with remarkable accuracy, which I reproduce in part below:
“Bullion banks do not necessarily depress the price of gold. In fact, their activities can have both positive and negative effects on gold prices, depending on various factors and market conditions.”
(After giving further details they conclude:)
“It's important to note that the gold market is complex, influenced by multiple factors including economic conditions, geopolitical events, and currency fluctuations. While bullion banks play a significant role in the gold market, they are just one of many factors affecting gold prices.”
As a final question to perplexity I asked: on a chat group, some participants say that the bullion banks have been depressing the price of gold for years. Why is that?
(Yet another amazing answer)
Perplexity, by the way, in contrast to some other AI tools, lists the references it uses to come up with answers. So, it is easier to verify the accuracy and adjust if necessary.
So, what did perplexity have to say about "a some of these chat group participants who say that the bullion banks have been depressing the price of gold for years?" Which chat groups were referenced?
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
@jmski52: here is perplexity's response to my question about chat group views:
Some people believe that bullion banks actively suppress the price of gold for several reasons:
Protection of fiat currencies: The primary motivation attributed to this alleged manipulation is to protect the value of fiat currencies like the U.S. dollar, euro, and yen7. If gold prices were to rise significantly, it could undermine confidence in these currencies, as gold is often seen as a hedge against currency devaluation.
Central bank cooperation: Some argue that central banks work with bullion banks to influence asset prices, including gold, as part of international central bank cooperation. This is believed to be done to maintain the dominance of fiat currencies in the global financial system.
Market rigging: There have been cases of large financial institutions being accused of manipulating the London Gold Fix, a process that determines gold's global price. In 2014, several banks were implicated in collaborating to influence prices during the fixing process.
Short selling and derivatives: Some believe that coordinated short selling in the gold futures market and the use of derivative contracts by bullion banks can artificially suppress gold prices.
Historical precedent: The gold market has a history of manipulation, including periods when the price was fixed by governments or suppressed under the London Gold Pool. This history contributes to ongoing suspicions of market interference.
Regulatory actions: Recent crackdowns on gold and silver market manipulation, including convictions of traders for fabricating orders, have fueled beliefs that such practices are widespread.
While these theories are popular among some investors, it's important to note that not all experts agree on the extent or existence of systematic gold price suppression. Some argue that observed price patterns could be explained by legitimate market forces rather than manipulation.
After this, I asked if perplexity believed there is strong evidence of gold price suppression. Here is the answer:
While there are claims of gold price suppression, the evidence for systematic, long-term manipulation is mixed and controversial. Here's an overview of the situation:
Evidence Supporting Manipulation Claims
Historical precedent: There have been documented cases of gold price manipulation in the past, such as the London Gold Pool5.
Legal actions: Several high-profile cases have resulted in fines and settlements for banks accused of manipulating precious metals markets. For example, in 2020, JPMorgan Chase agreed to pay $920 million to settle charges of manipulating precious metals markets1.
Academic research: A study by Rosa Abrantes-Metz and Albert Metz found unusual trading patterns around the London gold fix, suggesting possible collusive behavior24.
Market structure: The concentrated nature of the gold market, with a few large players dominating trading, creates potential for manipulation3.
Counterarguments and Limitations
Lack of conclusive evidence: Despite suspicions, there is no clear, irrefutable proof of ongoing, systematic gold price suppression7.
Market forces: The significant price increases in gold over the past two decades suggest that if manipulation exists, it has not been consistently effective5.
Regulatory scrutiny: Increased oversight and regulatory actions have made large-scale manipulation more difficult in recent years.
Global demand: Strong buying pressure from countries like China, Russia, and India has potentially overwhelmed any attempts to suppress prices5.
Conclusion
While there have been instances of market manipulation in the gold market, the evidence for persistent, large-scale price suppression is not conclusive. The gold market is complex, influenced by numerous factors including geopolitics, monetary policy, and global economic conditions. While vigilance against market abuse is important, attributing price movements solely to manipulation oversimplifies the dynamics of the gold market.
Finally, because perplexity mentioned the JP Morgan case (as many do here), I asked perplexity to comment on the difference between manipulation and suppression. Here is the response:
Yes, it is important to distinguish between manipulation and suppression in the context of gold prices. Here's why:
Manipulation vs. Suppression
Manipulation refers to actions that distort market prices for short-term profit or advantage. For example, JPMorgan's case involved spoofing, where traders placed large, fake orders to create false impressions of supply or demand, influencing prices temporarily before canceling those orders. This practice aimed to deceive other market participants and generate profits for the manipulators but did not necessarily target long-term price trends137.
Suppression, on the other hand, implies a deliberate and sustained effort to keep gold prices artificially low over a longer period. It is often associated with broader motives, such as protecting fiat currencies or maintaining financial system stability. Unlike manipulation, suppression would require coordinated and systemic actions by multiple powerful entities, such as central banks or bullion banks.
JPMorgan Case Context
The JPMorgan case involved manipulation through spoofing rather than long-term suppression. The bank's traders were found guilty of creating artificial short-term price movements in precious metals markets to profit from these distortions17. However, this does not constitute evidence of a coordinated effort to suppress gold prices over time.
Why the Distinction Matters
Manipulation cases like JPMorgan's are specific and well-documented by regulators (e.g., CFTC, SEC) and courts7. They focus on illegal trading practices that violate market integrity.
Suppression theories often lack concrete evidence and rely on speculation about motives such as protecting fiat currencies or geopolitical goals. While some investors and analysts believe in suppression schemes, they are harder to prove conclusively26.
In summary, manipulation involves short-term price distortions for profit, as seen in JPMorgan's spoofing case, while suppression implies a broader and more sustained effort to control gold prices. The two concepts are distinct in intent, scope, and evidence.
"Market makers include UBS, Societe General, ICBC Standard Bank, HSBC, JP Morgan Chase Bank, Goldman Sachs International, Citibank, Bank of Nova Scotia SociaMocatta, BNP Paribas, Merril Lynch International, Morgan Stanley & Co International, Standard Chartered Bank and Toronto-Dominion Bank."
Note the term "Market Maker" for these bullion branches of these major banks. Lest we forget that Market Makers "make" the market price. If they want the price of their market product to go up or to go down, they have the muscle to make it happen.
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
"Market makers include UBS, Societe General, ICBC Standard Bank, HSBC, JP Morgan Chase Bank, Goldman Sachs International, Citibank, Bank of Nova Scotia SociaMocatta, BNP Paribas, Merril Lynch International, Morgan Stanley & Co International, Standard Chartered Bank and Toronto-Dominion Bank."
Note the term "Market Maker" for these bullion branches of these major banks. Lest we forget that Market Makers "make" the market price. If they want the price of their market product to go up or to go down, they have the muscle to make it happen.
What is the evidence of short-selling and supposed "losses"?
BTW--market makers provide for a liquid market, to be a buyer or seller when no other is present. They are not to "muscle". I know this doesn't convince you, but I was hoping your lack of evidence of "short-selling losses" would pause others in their beliefs of your opinions.
"Market makers include UBS, Societe General, ICBC Standard Bank, HSBC, JP Morgan Chase Bank, Goldman Sachs International, Citibank, Bank of Nova Scotia SociaMocatta, BNP Paribas, Merril Lynch International, Morgan Stanley & Co International, Standard Chartered Bank and Toronto-Dominion Bank."
Note the term "Market Maker" for these bullion branches of these major banks. Lest we forget that Market Makers "make" the market price. If they want the price of their market product to go up or to go down, they have the muscle to make it happen.
What is the evidence of short-selling and supposed "losses"?
BTW--market makers provide for a liquid market, to be a buyer or seller when no other is present. They are not to "muscle". I know this doesn't convince you, but I was hoping your lack of evidence of "short-selling losses" would pause others in their beliefs of your opinions.
Evidence? I simply provided you a list of bullion banks, and told you they HAVE muscle as do makers of any market. LOL
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
Suppression theories often lack concrete evidence and rely on speculation about motives such as protecting fiat currencies or geopolitical goals. While some investors and analysts believe in suppression schemes, they are harder to prove conclusively.
In summary, manipulation involves short-term price distortions for profit, as seen in JPMorgan's spoofing case, while suppression implies a broader and more sustained effort to control gold prices. The two concepts are distinct in intent, scope, and evidence.
The two concepts are distinct in intent. Indeed, being distinct in intent doesn't mean that either one isn't valid.
Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally
"Market makers include UBS, Societe General, ICBC Standard Bank, HSBC, JP Morgan Chase Bank, Goldman Sachs International, Citibank, Bank of Nova Scotia SociaMocatta, BNP Paribas, Merril Lynch International, Morgan Stanley & Co International, Standard Chartered Bank and Toronto-Dominion Bank."
Note the term "Market Maker" for these bullion branches of these major banks. Lest we forget that Market Makers "make" the market price. If they want the price of their market product to go up or to go down, they have the muscle to make it happen.
What is the evidence of short-selling and supposed "losses"?
BTW--market makers provide for a liquid market, to be a buyer or seller when no other is present. They are not to "muscle". I know this doesn't convince you, but I was hoping your lack of evidence of "short-selling losses" would pause others in their beliefs of your opinions.
Evidence? I simply provided you a list of bullion banks, and told you they HAVE muscle as do makers of any market. LOL
I'm holding my opinion until we see what the AI bot has to say regarding this manner. RGDS!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
"Market makers include UBS, Societe General, ICBC Standard Bank, HSBC, JP Morgan Chase Bank, Goldman Sachs International, Citibank, Bank of Nova Scotia SociaMocatta, BNP Paribas, Merril Lynch International, Morgan Stanley & Co International, Standard Chartered Bank and Toronto-Dominion Bank."
Note the term "Market Maker" for these bullion branches of these major banks. Lest we forget that Market Makers "make" the market price. If they want the price of their market product to go up or to go down, they have the muscle to make it happen.
What is the evidence of short-selling and supposed "losses"?
BTW--market makers provide for a liquid market, to be a buyer or seller when no other is present. They are not to "muscle". I know this doesn't convince you, but I was hoping your lack of evidence of "short-selling losses" would pause others in their beliefs of your opinions.
Evidence? I simply provided you a list of bullion banks, and told you they HAVE muscle as do makers of any market. LOL
Read again. Evidence of short-selling and losses they are taking.
You sasid..._"Bullion banks are chasing gold higher to cover their shorts. the higher it goes the more their shorts make them suffer.
serves them right after all these years of using shorts to suppress gold's price. Payback time?"_
If, in 2003 (or 2004 or 2005, lest not be accused of cherrypicking as they had 1000 days to make these hypothetical investments), derryb invested $10,000 in gold and goldfinger invested $10,000 in the sp-500 who would have a higher balance today?
serves them right after all these years of using shorts to suppress gold's price. Payback time?"_
Yes, evidence. Please show us.
If years of posting Department of Justice charges against bullion bankers here has not convinced you, nothing will. Open minded are we?
Where is the evidence of short selling and subsequent losses?
Open minded folk want to see your evidence. If you have nothing, then just say it. You'll gain the support and respect of the open minded on this forum. If you have something then you'll gain the support and respect of the open minded.
serves them right after all these years of using shorts to suppress gold's price. Payback time?"_
Yes, evidence. Please show us.
If years of posting Department of Justice charges against bullion bankers here has not convinced you, nothing will. Open minded are we?
Where is the evidence of short selling and subsequent losses?
Open minded folk want to see your evidence. If you have nothing, then just say it. You'll gain the support and respect of the open minded on this forum. If you have something then you'll gain the support and respect of the open minded.
I don't feed on support and respect. I'm here to share information. I leave my ego at home. You should do the same.
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
serves them right after all these years of using shorts to suppress gold's price. Payback time?"_
Yes, evidence. Please show us.
If years of posting Department of Justice charges against bullion bankers here has not convinced you, nothing will. Open minded are we?
Where is the evidence of short selling and subsequent losses?
Open minded folk want to see your evidence. If you have nothing, then just say it. You'll gain the support and respect of the open minded on this forum. If you have something then you'll gain the support and respect of the open minded.
I don't feed on support and respect. I'm here to share information. I leave my ego at home. You should do the same.
I'm asking you to share information. Why won't you? Talk about a big ego. Wt£ man!!!
It was a simple request. You have no evidence. I called you out on it. So now you return to personal attacks.
Let's make this a better forum by sharing factual information instead of misinformed opinion.
Let's make this a better forum by sharing factual information instead of misinformed opinion.
If you agree then it's factual information.
If you disagree then it's misinformed opinion.
I present opinions via links of recognized opinion makers in the world of precious metals.
If you don't agree with them then make your case; they made their case with what they wrote.
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
@pmbug said:
Are you sure about that? In the 50s, the average American nuclear family did very well on a single wage earner's >income. Today, both parents need to work to enjoy roughly the same standard of living.
There's an element of truth in what you say but no....when you adjust for quality and improved services (i.e., medical) we are doing much much better.
The charts you show are for a weekly manufacturing worker or similar laborer. It doesn't take into account soaring non-wage benefits like pensions and healthcare. It also doesn't show gravitating towards other jobs over time.
It's very easy to pin-point the change around the late-1960's and early-1970's. That's when the rest of the world (ROTW) started to recover from WW II. Communist countries were non-entities up to that point and so were the UK, West Germany, France, and Japan.
We had the United Auto Workers with 800,000 members. Today it is about 150,000.
There's no "WTF Happened ?" mystery to clear up. We know EXACTLY what happened...globalization...free trade....the U.S. dominant in services and technology and finance and medical.....and low-skilled menial labor done overseas.
@pmbug said:
Are you sure about that? In the 50s, the average American nuclear family did very well on a single wage earner's >income. Today, both parents need to work to enjoy roughly the same standard of living.
There's an element of truth in what you say but no....when you adjust for quality and improved services (i.e., medical) we are doing much much better.
The charts you show are for a weekly manufacturing worker or similar laborer. It doesn't take into account soaring non-wage benefits like pensions and healthcare. It also doesn't show gravitating towards other jobs over time.
It's very easy to pin-point the change around the late-1960's and early-1970's. That's when the rest of the world (ROTW) started to recover from WW II. Communist countries were non-entities up to that point and so were the UK, West Germany, France, and Japan.
We had the United Auto Workers with 800,000 members. Today it is about 150,000.
There's no "WTF Happened ?" mystery to clear up. We know EXACTLY what happened...globalization...free trade....the U.S. dominant in services and technology and finance and medical.....and low-skilled menial labor done overseas.
It's not rocket science !
.
Globalization has been a major economic force. But it is definitely faltering at this time. "Localization" is going to be the new trend. Local self-sufficient communities is a better way to go.
Globalization did initially "off-shore" much of the low-end manufacturing labor. But now those off-shore locations have more advanced manufacturing capabilities than we do.
All this has led to (for example) Chinese companies buying up American farmland. But you don't see Americans buying up any Chinese farmland (if that is even allowed under their laws).
@pmbug said:
Are you sure about that? In the 50s, the average American nuclear family did very well on a single wage earner's >income. Today, both parents need to work to enjoy roughly the same standard of living.
There's an element of truth in what you say but no....when you adjust for quality and improved services (i.e., medical) we are doing much much better.
The charts you show are for a weekly manufacturing worker or similar laborer. It doesn't take into account soaring non-wage benefits like pensions and healthcare. It also doesn't show gravitating towards other jobs over time.
It's very easy to pin-point the change around the late-1960's and early-1970's. That's when the rest of the world (ROTW) started to recover from WW II. Communist countries were non-entities up to that point and so were the UK, West Germany, France, and Japan.
We had the United Auto Workers with 800,000 members. Today it is about 150,000.
There's no "WTF Happened ?" mystery to clear up. We know EXACTLY what happened...globalization...free trade....the U.S. dominant in services and technology and finance and medical.....and low-skilled menial labor done overseas.
It's not rocket science !
.
Globalization has been a major economic force. But it is definitely faltering at this time. "Localization" is going to be the new trend. Local self-sufficient communities is a better way to go.
Globalization did initially "off-shore" much of the low-end manufacturing labor. But now those off-shore locations have more advanced manufacturing capabilities than we do.
All this has led to (for example) Chinese companies buying up American farmland. But you don't see Americans buying up any Chinese farmland (if that is even allowed under their laws).
What I don't think people factor in is that the globalization movement brought us artificially cheaper goods for decades. It was easy to be a CEO during that time, all you had to do was move your ops offshore and profits would grow. But eventually the profit growth and advantage of offshoring ends, and prices will equalize, but it will feel painful.
Grok:
To evaluate the statement "Basic household goods that cost X amount of hours of work in the 1950s now cost a fraction of that for better quality," we need to consider how the cost of goods in terms of labor hours has changed over time, alongside improvements in quality. This is a question about purchasing power, inflation, wages, and product advancements. Let’s break it down.
...
However, the statement’s generality invites scrutiny. Not all goods follow this exact trajectory—housing and healthcare, for instance, often require more hours of work today due to disproportionate cost increases. But "basic household goods" typically refers to consumer durables like appliances, where productivity gains and globalization have driven down relative costs while boosting quality.
...
So, is the statement true? Yes, for most basic household goods, the labor hours required have indeed fallen to a fraction of what they were in the 1950s, and quality has generally improved. Caveats exist—luxury goods, services, or outliers like housing don’t fit as neatly—but the core claim holds.
I concede your original statement is essentially true. It was however, a narrow observation that is not necessarily reflective of the overall cost of living that was implied.
I guess I'm old because the thought of buying $3K gold just doesn't register in my brain. I'd be much more inclined to buy Tesla stock versus gold or silver. Who is buying $3K gold?
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@pmh1nic said:
I guess I'm old because the thought of buying $3K gold just doesn't register in my brain. I'd be much more inclined to buy Tesla stock versus gold or silver. Who is buying $3K gold?
I bought 3 maples today from Costco. Also sold 3 at a B&M for $35 back. Gotta love cash back credit cards & executive membership
Comments
Six.months ago i vehemently disagreed with you on this, however things have changed in the last few months.
PS...our standard of.living is still much higher than 70 years ago.
Bullion banks are chasing gold higher to cover their shorts. the higher it goes the more their shorts make them suffer.
serves them right after all these years of using shorts to suppress gold's price. Payback time?
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
What is a "bullion bank"? Can you provide a list of these "banks"?
Do you have any evidence that bullion banks are actually short (for themselves) and losing money? I haven't been able to find anything to support your claim.
@RedneckHB asked “What is a bullion bank”
Ask this question to perplexity.ai. It gives a remarkably precise answer. With respect to the actual examples, they list BNP Paribas, Citibank, Goldman, HSBC, and JP Morgan Chase.
As a follow up question, you can ask, for example, “do these banks depress the price of gold”. Perplexity also responds with remarkable accuracy, which I reproduce in part below:
“Bullion banks do not necessarily depress the price of gold. In fact, their activities can have both positive and negative effects on gold prices, depending on various factors and market conditions.”
(After giving further details they conclude:)
“It's important to note that the gold market is complex, influenced by multiple factors including economic conditions, geopolitical events, and currency fluctuations. While bullion banks play a significant role in the gold market, they are just one of many factors affecting gold prices.”
As a final question to perplexity I asked: on a chat group, some participants say that the bullion banks have been depressing the price of gold for years. Why is that?
(Yet another amazing answer)
Perplexity, by the way, in contrast to some other AI tools, lists the references it uses to come up with answers. So, it is easier to verify the accuracy and adjust if necessary.
(Yet another amazing answer)
So, what did perplexity have to say about "a some of these chat group participants who say that the bullion banks have been depressing the price of gold for years?" Which chat groups were referenced?
I knew it would happen.
@jmski52: here is perplexity's response to my question about chat group views:
Some people believe that bullion banks actively suppress the price of gold for several reasons:
Protection of fiat currencies: The primary motivation attributed to this alleged manipulation is to protect the value of fiat currencies like the U.S. dollar, euro, and yen7. If gold prices were to rise significantly, it could undermine confidence in these currencies, as gold is often seen as a hedge against currency devaluation.
Central bank cooperation: Some argue that central banks work with bullion banks to influence asset prices, including gold, as part of international central bank cooperation. This is believed to be done to maintain the dominance of fiat currencies in the global financial system.
Market rigging: There have been cases of large financial institutions being accused of manipulating the London Gold Fix, a process that determines gold's global price. In 2014, several banks were implicated in collaborating to influence prices during the fixing process.
Short selling and derivatives: Some believe that coordinated short selling in the gold futures market and the use of derivative contracts by bullion banks can artificially suppress gold prices.
Historical precedent: The gold market has a history of manipulation, including periods when the price was fixed by governments or suppressed under the London Gold Pool. This history contributes to ongoing suspicions of market interference.
Regulatory actions: Recent crackdowns on gold and silver market manipulation, including convictions of traders for fabricating orders, have fueled beliefs that such practices are widespread.
While these theories are popular among some investors, it's important to note that not all experts agree on the extent or existence of systematic gold price suppression. Some argue that observed price patterns could be explained by legitimate market forces rather than manipulation.
After this, I asked if perplexity believed there is strong evidence of gold price suppression. Here is the answer:
While there are claims of gold price suppression, the evidence for systematic, long-term manipulation is mixed and controversial. Here's an overview of the situation:
Evidence Supporting Manipulation Claims
Historical precedent: There have been documented cases of gold price manipulation in the past, such as the London Gold Pool5.
Legal actions: Several high-profile cases have resulted in fines and settlements for banks accused of manipulating precious metals markets. For example, in 2020, JPMorgan Chase agreed to pay $920 million to settle charges of manipulating precious metals markets1.
Academic research: A study by Rosa Abrantes-Metz and Albert Metz found unusual trading patterns around the London gold fix, suggesting possible collusive behavior24.
Market structure: The concentrated nature of the gold market, with a few large players dominating trading, creates potential for manipulation3.
Counterarguments and Limitations
Lack of conclusive evidence: Despite suspicions, there is no clear, irrefutable proof of ongoing, systematic gold price suppression7.
Market forces: The significant price increases in gold over the past two decades suggest that if manipulation exists, it has not been consistently effective5.
Regulatory scrutiny: Increased oversight and regulatory actions have made large-scale manipulation more difficult in recent years.
Global demand: Strong buying pressure from countries like China, Russia, and India has potentially overwhelmed any attempts to suppress prices5.
Conclusion
While there have been instances of market manipulation in the gold market, the evidence for persistent, large-scale price suppression is not conclusive. The gold market is complex, influenced by numerous factors including geopolitics, monetary policy, and global economic conditions. While vigilance against market abuse is important, attributing price movements solely to manipulation oversimplifies the dynamics of the gold market.
Finally, because perplexity mentioned the JP Morgan case (as many do here), I asked perplexity to comment on the difference between manipulation and suppression. Here is the response:
Yes, it is important to distinguish between manipulation and suppression in the context of gold prices. Here's why:
Manipulation vs. Suppression
Manipulation refers to actions that distort market prices for short-term profit or advantage. For example, JPMorgan's case involved spoofing, where traders placed large, fake orders to create false impressions of supply or demand, influencing prices temporarily before canceling those orders. This practice aimed to deceive other market participants and generate profits for the manipulators but did not necessarily target long-term price trends137.
Suppression, on the other hand, implies a deliberate and sustained effort to keep gold prices artificially low over a longer period. It is often associated with broader motives, such as protecting fiat currencies or maintaining financial system stability. Unlike manipulation, suppression would require coordinated and systemic actions by multiple powerful entities, such as central banks or bullion banks.
JPMorgan Case Context
The JPMorgan case involved manipulation through spoofing rather than long-term suppression. The bank's traders were found guilty of creating artificial short-term price movements in precious metals markets to profit from these distortions17. However, this does not constitute evidence of a coordinated effort to suppress gold prices over time.
Why the Distinction Matters
Manipulation cases like JPMorgan's are specific and well-documented by regulators (e.g., CFTC, SEC) and courts7. They focus on illegal trading practices that violate market integrity.
Suppression theories often lack concrete evidence and rely on speculation about motives such as protecting fiat currencies or geopolitical goals. While some investors and analysts believe in suppression schemes, they are harder to prove conclusively26.
In summary, manipulation involves short-term price distortions for profit, as seen in JPMorgan's spoofing case, while suppression implies a broader and more sustained effort to control gold prices. The two concepts are distinct in intent, scope, and evidence.
JPMs run ins with the department of justice for fixing the price of gold and silver have been linked on this forum for the past 20 years.
For the Fish's question "What is a bullion bank?":
London Bullion Market Association
"Market makers include UBS, Societe General, ICBC Standard Bank, HSBC, JP Morgan Chase Bank, Goldman Sachs International, Citibank, Bank of Nova Scotia SociaMocatta, BNP Paribas, Merril Lynch International, Morgan Stanley & Co International, Standard Chartered Bank and Toronto-Dominion Bank."
Note the term "Market Maker" for these bullion branches of these major banks. Lest we forget that Market Makers "make" the market price. If they want the price of their market product to go up or to go down, they have the muscle to make it happen.
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
Who needs a PCGS message board anymore when we got perplexity.ai. and it's resident spam robot @Higashiyama ? THKS!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
Good messages from Higash
they confirmed what many here have said over the years while you kool aid gulpers were in denial.
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
LBMA does seem to be having a tough go of it lately. Failure to deliver per contract is a technical default.
I knew it would happen.
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
What is the evidence of short-selling and supposed "losses"?
BTW--market makers provide for a liquid market, to be a buyer or seller when no other is present. They are not to "muscle". I know this doesn't convince you, but I was hoping your lack of evidence of "short-selling losses" would pause others in their beliefs of your opinions.
e> @RedneckHB said:
Evidence? I simply provided you a list of bullion banks, and told you they HAVE muscle as do makers of any market. LOL
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
Suppression theories often lack concrete evidence and rely on speculation about motives such as protecting fiat currencies or geopolitical goals. While some investors and analysts believe in suppression schemes, they are harder to prove conclusively.
In summary, manipulation involves short-term price distortions for profit, as seen in JPMorgan's spoofing case, while suppression implies a broader and more sustained effort to control gold prices. The two concepts are distinct in intent, scope, and evidence.
The two concepts are distinct in intent. Indeed, being distinct in intent doesn't mean that either one isn't valid.
I knew it would happen.
I'm holding my opinion until we see what the AI bot has to say regarding this manner. RGDS!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
Read again. Evidence of short-selling and losses they are taking.
You sasid..._"Bullion banks are chasing gold higher to cover their shorts. the higher it goes the more their shorts make them suffer.
serves them right after all these years of using shorts to suppress gold's price. Payback time?"_
Yes, evidence. Please show us.
If, in 2003 (or 2004 or 2005, lest not be accused of cherrypicking as they had 1000 days to make these hypothetical investments), derryb invested $10,000 in gold and goldfinger invested $10,000 in the sp-500 who would have a higher balance today?
If years of posting Department of Justice charges against bullion bankers here has not convinced you, nothing will. Open minded are we?
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
http://ProofCollection.Net
Where is the evidence of short selling and subsequent losses?
Open minded folk want to see your evidence. If you have nothing, then just say it. You'll gain the support and respect of the open minded on this forum. If you have something then you'll gain the support and respect of the open minded.
I don't feed on support and respect. I'm here to share information. I leave my ego at home. You should do the same.
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
I'm asking you to share information. Why won't you? Talk about a big ego. Wt£ man!!!
It was a simple request. You have no evidence. I called you out on it. So now you return to personal attacks.
Let's make this a better forum by sharing factual information instead of misinformed opinion.
If you agree then it's factual information.
If you disagree then it's misinformed opinion.
I present opinions via links of recognized opinion makers in the world of precious metals.
If you don't agree with them then make your case; they made their case with what they wrote.
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
There's an element of truth in what you say but no....when you adjust for quality and improved services (i.e., medical) we are doing much much better.
The charts you show are for a weekly manufacturing worker or similar laborer. It doesn't take into account soaring non-wage benefits like pensions and healthcare. It also doesn't show gravitating towards other jobs over time.
It's very easy to pin-point the change around the late-1960's and early-1970's. That's when the rest of the world (ROTW) started to recover from WW II. Communist countries were non-entities up to that point and so were the UK, West Germany, France, and Japan.
We had the United Auto Workers with 800,000 members. Today it is about 150,000.
There's no "WTF Happened ?" mystery to clear up. We know EXACTLY what happened...globalization...free trade....the U.S. dominant in services and technology and finance and medical.....and low-skilled menial labor done overseas.
It's not rocket science !
.
Globalization has been a major economic force. But it is definitely faltering at this time. "Localization" is going to be the new trend. Local self-sufficient communities is a better way to go.
Globalization did initially "off-shore" much of the low-end manufacturing labor. But now those off-shore locations have more advanced manufacturing capabilities than we do.
All this has led to (for example) Chinese companies buying up American farmland. But you don't see Americans buying up any Chinese farmland (if that is even allowed under their laws).
.
kitco - 2934.80 again
happy days
What I don't think people factor in is that the globalization movement brought us artificially cheaper goods for decades. It was easy to be a CEO during that time, all you had to do was move your ops offshore and profits would grow. But eventually the profit growth and advantage of offshoring ends, and prices will equalize, but it will feel painful.
http://ProofCollection.Net
cheap imports are a success for American consumers at the expense of American workers.
Freedom is like inflation: you lose 2-3% every year. Slow enough that you don't even notice.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_shock
~~~
Grok:
To evaluate the statement "Basic household goods that cost X amount of hours of work in the 1950s now cost a fraction of that for better quality," we need to consider how the cost of goods in terms of labor hours has changed over time, alongside improvements in quality. This is a question about purchasing power, inflation, wages, and product advancements. Let’s break it down.
...
However, the statement’s generality invites scrutiny. Not all goods follow this exact trajectory—housing and healthcare, for instance, often require more hours of work today due to disproportionate cost increases. But "basic household goods" typically refers to consumer durables like appliances, where productivity gains and globalization have driven down relative costs while boosting quality.
...
So, is the statement true? Yes, for most basic household goods, the labor hours required have indeed fallen to a fraction of what they were in the 1950s, and quality has generally improved. Caveats exist—luxury goods, services, or outliers like housing don’t fit as neatly—but the core claim holds.
I concede your original statement is essentially true. It was however, a narrow observation that is not necessarily reflective of the overall cost of living that was implied.
Yelling at clouds on pmbug.com
First time in my life I'm hoping for a massive correction..............so I can buy MORE!!
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
New ATH on COMEX.....$2987
And APMEX is over $3k...
http://ProofCollection.Net
And our friend silver is putting on a shine also!
$2,998 on COMEX......
$2,982.60 on KITCO.... actual spot!
Good timing as I plan to sell another 100 oz Engelhard tomorrow at my local coin shop.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
What a day for Au & Ag!
I see $3,000 gold for the weekend. Happy Saint Patrick's day!👍
OK it's official on the futures near month contract. $3000
http://ProofCollection.Net
front month futures
from today's chart up to the close of after hours trading at 5pm eastern
Gold to Platinum ratio 3:1........what????
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
I'd be interested in the price you are offered.
Might have to get ready to sell off some gutter.....if I can find any buyers. RGDS!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
I guess I'm old because the thought of buying $3K gold just doesn't register in my brain. I'd be much more inclined to buy Tesla stock versus gold or silver. Who is buying $3K gold?
I bought 3 maples today from Costco. Also sold 3 at a B&M for $35 back. Gotta love cash back credit cards & executive membership