- Joined
- 13 February 2006
- Posts
- 5,175
- Reactions
- 11,872
It is telling that the level of quarterly gold withdrawals that since 2022 have peaked at 329 tonnes per quarter in the London OTC gold market should stress this market for physical gold.This August 24, 2024 post showed that there is an estimated 9,500 tonnes to 14,300 tonnes of standing claims in the London cash (immediate ownership) OTC gold market.
A withdrawal rate estimated at 3.5% or less of standing cash gold claims per quarter appears to be stressing the London OTC cash/spot physical gold market.
The elevated implied silver lease rate shown below tells us a similar story to gold: the silver market is not adequately supplied to meet withdrawal levels at current prices:This August 24, 2024 post showed that there is an estimated 132,000 tonnes to 198,000 tonnes of standing claims in the London cash (immediate ownership) OTC silver market.
It would appear that all assets are now considered overpriced from bonds through stocks and on to commodities including precious metals.
As always when it happens it seems to have been inevitable. Selling assets such as Gold in the expectation of lower prices is not a simplistic answer. Where does one go with cash when faced with inflation? What assets will weather these times best.
View attachment 183709
I have noted in the past that London traders are quickest to sell down closely followed NY Comex on the 3 day chart above in the past. Where will markets go this week?
My own feelings are that there is no answer, nobody knows, stocks and bonds are bearish and Gold looks as if it may fall, perhaps as far as $USD2450 or further. Is this the start of of a crash? What will happen to the $USD:$AUD ? I wish I knew. I'm holding Gold still. The markets are crazy. I'm probably crazy not to go to cash.
Fear and greed.
gg
I think that 70% cash will serve you well in the next 12 or so months , Patience should pay , wait for the smell of blood and fear .Doesn't everything go down in a crash? Some less than others perhaps.
I'm still 70% cash but I'm only keeping even due to inflation v interest.
I'm taking the DeLorean for a spin to 2050 to see where we're going.
Will let you know gg.
Elevated implied market lease rates for gold since 2022 show that the physical gold lending market is stressed due to a now chronic shortage of physical metal.The large majority of the London 1,300 tonne vault float is owned by holders that do not trade gold - only a small portion of the float is available to market for settlement of these spot gold promissory notes when delivery is demanded.
Meanwhile, the draw of physical gold globally is intense with accelerating delivery demand on the Shanghai Gold Exchange (SGE) totaling 1,400 tonnes so far this year in a global 4,900 tonne annual gold market has led to high Shanghai gold premiums compared to London.Given the small apparent gold float, the London market is thus dependent on continued imports of gold should delivery demand for gold continue or increase.
The analysis of the paper shortage above is spot on.Further update:
The heart of the problem that is the London gold and silver Over-The-Counter (OTC) cash trading market is that it is based on trading of promissory notes for immediate ownership of metal with only a tiny fraction of that metal available for delivery.
This August 24, 2024 post showed that there is an estimated 9,500 tonnes to 14,300 tonnes of standing claims in the London cash (immediate ownership) OTC gold market.
And yet, London gold vaults hold a ‘float’ of only 1,300 tonnes of gold that are not held by ETFs or the Bank of England for itself and other nations.
Elevated implied market lease rates for gold since 2022 show that the physical gold lending market is stressed due to a now chronic shortage of physical metal.
Given that there may only be a few hundred tonnes (or less) of gold in London vaults available for settlement of claims vs the up to 14,300 tonnes of gold ownership claims indicated standing in the cash market, the Achilles Heel of the London market is physical delivery demand.
In Q1 and Q2 2024, there were 397 tonnes of London OTC market vault withdrawals of gold and UK import/export data show a net export (imports minus exports) of 40 tonnes of gold out of the UK through June:
Figure 1 - UK Gold Import / Export Data; source: goldchartsRus.com
Meanwhile, the draw of physical gold globally is intense with accelerating delivery demand on the Shanghai Gold Exchange (SGE) totaling 1,400 tonnes so far this year in a global 4,900 tonne annual gold market has led to high Shanghai gold premiums compared to London.
Figure 2 - Shanghai Gold Exchange (SGE) Gold Delivery Volumes 2008 to Present; source: goldchartsRus.com
In Closing
The London promissory note market for gold and silver that has existed since 1987 appears to be teetering due to the strong global demand for physical gold and silver bars while such a large cohort of London cash/spot contract metal ‘owners’ exist.
To date, the Bank of England and bullion bank operators of this market have relied on the large majority of paper metal owners being satisfied that the spot contracts that they held meant that the contract owners actually owned metal.
Given the growing global shortage of gold and silver, it appears only to be a matter of time before a counter party to a London cash/spot gold promissory note defaults on delivery starting a rush of these paper note holders to demand delivery and dropping the kimono on the London market.
Given the enormous paper-to-metal gearing in London, the rush is likely to be very short.
jog on
duc
Cast-net sized rectangle is good @Sean K ...We're working through this new box.
Would be really nice if it broke up.
Still no solid projections IMO, as just making all times highs, after all time highs, is guess work.
Unless you're into fib and gann and EW.
They only seem to work after the fact.
View attachment 183764
Quite an interesting opinion but it leaves out some important facts. The Central Banks of China has been buying more Gold this year than retail Chinese investors. Furthermore as @ducati alluded to in relation to the London market many Chinese retail investors are buying paper Gold rather than bar with the attendant risks to themselves and the market.Neils Christensen article 05/09/24:
Natixis sees gold prices holding around $2,500 this year and rising to $2,600 in 2025
(Kitco News) - Asian investors, led by Chinese consumers, drove gold prices to record highs in the first half of the year. Now, one international bank expects Western investors to pick up the baton and push gold prices further into record territory.
Last week, Bernard Dahdah, a Precious Metals Analyst at Natixis, published an updated price forecast. He sees gold averaging around $2,600 an ounce in 2025. "After a strong start to the year, the Chinese market has now cooled off. One indicator that reflects this is the Shanghai gold premiums, which have been mainly trading at a discount for most of August," he said in his report. "Meanwhile, since the nearly 9% increase in prices since July, we have seen physically-backed gold ETFs (mainly held by Western investors) finally rise again after almost a full year of outflows."
Dahdah added that his bullish outlook comes as market drivers return to traditional fundamentals, supported by a weaker U.S. dollar and falling bond yields. However, he noted that there could be a limit to how much interest rates and yields will fall, at least through the rest of 2024.
Following disappointing employment data, with the number of job openings dropping in July, market expectations for a 50 basis point cut jumped sharply. According to the CME FedWatch Tool, markets now see a 45% chance of aggressive easing later this month.
However, Natixis foresees a slower downward path for interest rates.
"Our forecast differs from the consensus in that we believe the Fed will not view the economic situation as dire enough to warrant a rapid succession of cuts and will still be concerned with lingering, above-target inflation," he said. "While the jobs market is slowing, it is normalizing to a pace consistent with target inflation, not yet descending into outright weakness. This dynamic will allow the Fed to ease policy incrementally, with a 25bp cut in September and another in December for a total of 50bps in 2024."
Dahdah added that the French bank expects interest rates to fall to 3.25% in 2025, which will keep gold prices well-supported.
"Our view is that for the remainder of the year, prices will hover close to current levels as much of this year's rate cuts have already been factored in. That said, next year, we could see prices rising more rapidly, especially during the second half of the year," he said.
Good morning Garpal Gumnut...
This is just my opinion. In relation to the Gold price what Natixis sees prices at is speculative, there are so many factors in our interconnected world that they may be correct or wildly out to the bullish or bearish side. Having said that @rcw1 one would have to be extremely brave to go short on Gold and I agree with you that it will go higher in to 2026 but much higher than Dahdah predicts.
gg
People have been focussing on gold more than usual this year, which isn't surprising given it has been hitting multiple new highs. Lately many are going into overanalysis mode, talking about paper vs physical gold, retail vs government buying, and all sorts of focus on various trivial aspects of the situation.
I'm still just looking at the big picture, where we have high inflation, huge economic uncertainty, and decreasing strength and trust in the USD, while gold is always going to be gold. Gold sat pretty flat for over 10 years and only started taking off again this year. The last time gold sat flat for about ten years (it was flat from the early 80s to the mid 00's) it then quadrupled in the following 10 years or so. We're only starting to experience the pain caused by the insane Wuhan virus policies - you don't shut down huge economies and print ridiculous amounts of new money to prop things up without causing great harm, and tremendous efforts have been made to delay the signs of the impacts (to avoid accountability, but that's another story).
People can obsess over the small details as much as they like, but while they may cause little zigs and zags along the way, the big picture issues in my opinion all say gold is set to rise strongly over the next few years.
Isn't it amazing how history repeats itself.While inflation is part of the story, it is a lesser contributor than other factors:
We have always had inflation:
View attachment 183807
We have seen the 'paper v physical' gold market before:
View attachment 183808
Full: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Gold_Pool
We also have A Great Power fading and another Great Power rising:
Excerpted from “A Century of War”, by William Engdahl
Page 3: Acting on the urgings of a powerful group of London shipping & banking interests centered around the Bank of England…UK Parliament passed a Statement of Principle in support of the concept several decades earlier advocated by the Scottish economist, Adam Smith, so-called “absolute free trade.”
By 1846, this declaration of principle had become formalized in a parliamentary repeal of domestic English agriculture protection, the famous Corn Laws. The Corn Laws repeal was based on the calculation of powerful financial and trade interests of the City of London, that their world dominance gave them a decisive advantage, which they should push to the hilt. If they dominated world trade, “free trade” could only insure their dominance grew at the expense of other less developed trading nations.
The British Tory Party…pushed through the fateful Corn Law Repeal in May 1846, a turning point not only in British but in world history... Repeal opened the door for a flood of cheap products in agriculture, which created ruin among not only English but also other nations’ farmers. The merchants’ simple dictum “Buy cheap…sell dear,” was raised to the level of national economic strategy. Consumption was deemed the sole purpose of production.
Britain’s domestic agriculture & farmers were ruined by the loss of the Corn Laws protectionism. Irish farmers were immiserated, as their largest export market suddenly lowered food prices dramatically, as of Corn Law repeal. The mass starvation and outmigration of Irish peasants and their families in the late 1840s – the tragic Irish Potato Famine of 1845-46 and its aftermath – was a direct consequence of this “free trade” policy of Britain.
After 1846, Hindu peasants from Britain’s Indian colony competed, with their dirt-poor wage cost, against British and Irish farmers, for the market of the British “consumer.” Wage levels inside Britain began falling with the price of bread. The English Poor Laws granted compensation for workers earning below human subsistence wage, with income supplement payment pegged to the (falling) price of a loaf of bread.
In effect, repeal of Corn Laws protectionism opened the floodgates throughout the British Empire to a “cheap labor policy.” The only ones to benefit, following an initial surge of cheap food prices in England, were the international trading houses
and merchant banks which financed them. The class separations of British society were aggravated by a growing separation of a tiny number of very wealthy from the growing masses of very poor, as a lawful consequence of “free trade.”
The name given the political doctrine which rationalized the brutal economic policy was English Liberalism. In essence, English Liberalism, as it was defined towards the end of the 19th century, justified development of an ever more powerful imperial elite class, ruling on behalf of the “vulgar ignorant masses”, who could not be entrusted to rule on their own behalf.
Unlike the empires of France or other nations, Britain modelled its post-Waterloo empire on an extremely sophisticated marriage between top bankers and financiers in the City of London, Government cabinet ministers, heads of key industrial companies deemed strategic to the national interest, and the heads of espionage services….The covert marriage of private commercial power with government in the “free trade” era after 1846 was the secret of British hegemony.
However, as a direct consequence of this British free trade transformation, a deep economic depression began by the early 1870s in England following a financial panic. The Free Trade doctrine had been premised on the assumption that British influence could ensure that same dogma became economic policy in all the world’s major trading nations. That homogeneity was not to be won…
Following a severe London banking panic in 1857, the City of London banking establishment including the directors of the Bank of England resolved on a novel device intended to prevent future outflows of gold from London Banks. The Panic of 1857 resulted from a foreign run on the international gold reserves held by the Bank of England. The run collapsed bank credit in the City and across the country. In response to the crisis, the English authorities devised a policy which resulted in a simple if dangerous evolution of central bank practice.
The Bank of England, a private holding controlled not by the Government at the time but rather by the financial interests of the City, realized if it merely raised its central bank discount or interest rate to a sufficiently high level relative to rates in competing trading countries which at any time might be draining Britain’s gold reserves, then the drain would cease and eventually, if rates were driven sufficiently high, gold would again flow back into the banks of the City of London from Berlin, or New York or Paris or Moscow.
This interest rate policy was a powerful weapon in central banking which gave the Bank of England a decisive advantage over rivals. No matter that the usurious high interest rates created devastating depression in British manufacture or agriculture; the dominant faction in British economic policy increasingly after the 1846 Corn Laws repeal, was not industry or agriculture, but finance and international trade. In order to ensure the supremacy of British international banking, those bankers were willing to sacrifice domestic industry and investment.
But the consequences for British industry of this new Bank of England interest rate policy came home with a vengeance with the Great Depression which hit Britain in 1873 and lasted until 1896…
The lack of capital investment into British manufactures was evident already at the International Exhibition of 1867, where products from entirely new manufactures of machinery, even textiles from Germany and elsewhere, clearly overshadowed the stagnant technological levels of British manufacture, only two decades before the world leader. Export of British iron and steel, coal and other products declined in this period. The period of Britain’s easy leadership among the world’s industrial nations, by the 1890’s was clearly over…
After 1873’s economic downturn, British efforts to spread “free trade” became markedly less successful as nations of Continental Europe led by Germany initiated a series of economic protectionist measures which allowed them to unleash the most dramatic rates of industrial growth seen in the past 200 years.
Towards the final decade of the 19th century, British banking and political elites had begun to express the first signs of alarm over two specific aspects of the impressive industrial development of Germany. The first was emergence of an independent, modern German merchant and military naval fleet. Since 1815 and the Vienna Congress, the English Navy had been unchallenged lord of the seas.
The second strategic alarm was sounded over an ambitious German project to construct a railway linking Berlin with, ultimately, Baghdad, then part of the Ottoman Empire…
By the 1890s, British industry had been surpassed in both rates and quality of technological development by an astonishing emergence of industrial and agricultural development within Germany. With the US concentrated on its own internal expansion after its Civil War, the industrial emergence of Germany was seen increasingly as the largest “threat” to Britain’s global hegemony during the last decade of the century.
Until approximately the 1850’s, imitation of the apparently successful British economic model was the dominant policy followed in Germany, and the free trade economics of such British economists as Adam Smith or David Ricardo were regarded as holy gospel in German universities. But increasingly, after England went into prolonged depression in the 1870s, which hit Germany and Austria as well, Germany began to realize the serious flaws in continuing faithfully to follow the “British model.” As Germany turned increasingly to a form of national economic strategy, and away from British “free trade” adherence, in building a national industry and agriculture production, the results were remarkable.
As one indication of this shift away from the English model, from 1850 to the eve of the First World War in 1913, German total domestic output increased 5x. Per capita output increased in the same period by 250%. The population began to experience a steady increase in its living standard, as real industrial wages doubled between 1871 and 1913.
As late as 1870, British large industrial companies dwarfed their young German rivals. But that was to change dramatically over the next 3 to 4 decades. Steel was at the center of Germany’s growth, with rapidly emerging electrical power and chemicals industries close behind…German steel output increased 1,000% in the 20 years from 1880 to 1900, leaving British steel output far behind.
The rail infrastructure to transport this rapidly expanding flow of industrial goods, was the initial “locomotive” for Germany’s first “wirtschaftswunder”…state backed rail infrastructure fully doubled the kilometers of track from 1870 to 1913.
Thus, while England’s national industrial and finance policy (especially after 1873) fostered industrial retardation of technological progress, that of Germany fostered quite the opposite. By 1900 the trends of divergence between the two countries were evident to all.
But a growing friction between Germany and England in the years before 1914 was centered on two special aspects of Germany’s impressive overall economic development. First and foremost was the dramatic emergence of Germany as a pre-eminent modern shipping nation, ultimately threatening the decades-long English dominance of the seas.
So long as Germany did not control her own modern merchant fleet and have a navy to defend it, Germany could never determine her own economic affairs. England was still sovereign on the world’s oceans and intended so to remain. This was the heart of British geopolitical strategy. Under such conditions, argued an increasing majority in Germany, the nation’s economic life would be ever subject to the manipulations of a foreign shipping power for the essential terms of its vital international trade.
[The second aspect driving economic friction between England and Germany] was the construction of a modern railway linking Continental Europe with Baghdad….by 1896 a rail line was open which could go from Berlin to Konia deep in the Turkish interior of the Anatolian highlands, a stretch of some 1,000 km of new rail in a space of less than 8 years in an
economically desolate area. It was a true engineering and construction accomplishment. The ancient rich valley of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers was coming into sight of modern transportation infrastructure.
…it would be a mistake to view the construction of the Berlin-Baghdad railway project as a unilateral German move against England. Germany repeatedly sought English co-operation in the project. Countless times since the 1890’s, when agreement with the Turkish government to complete a final 2,500 km stretch of rail which would complete the line to what is today Kuwait, Deutsche Bank and the Berlin government made attempts to secure English participation and co-financing of the enormous project.
The railway gave Constantinople and the Ottoman Empire vital modern economic linkage for the first time with its entire Asiatic interior. The rail link, once extended to Baghdad and a short distance further to Kuwait, would provide the cheapest and fastest link between Europe and the entire Indian subcontinent, a world rail link of the first order.
From the English side, this was exactly the point. “If ‘Berlin-Baghdad’ were achieved, a huge block of territory producing every kind of economic wealth, and unassailable by sea power would be united under German authority,” warned R.G.D Laffan, at that time a senior British military adviser attached to the Serbian Army.
It was becoming clear to some in England by about 1910 that dramatic remedies would be required to deal with the awesome German economic emergence...
Laffan hinted at the British strategy to sabotage the Berlin-Baghdad link. A glance at the map of the world will show how the chain of States stretched from Berlin to Baghdad. The German Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Bulgaria, Turkey. One little strip of territory alone blocked the way and prevented the two ends of the chain from being linked together. That little strip was Serbia.
Serbia stood small but defiant between Germany and the great ports of Constantinople and Salonika, holding the Gate of the East. “Serbia was really the first line of defense of our eastern possessions. If she were crushed or enticed into the ‘Berlin-Baghdad’ system, then our vast but slightly-defended empire would soon have felt the shock of Germany’s eastward thrust.” (R.G.D. Laffan)
Thus it is not surprising to find enormous unrest and wars throughout the Balkans in the decade before 1914, including the Turkish War, the Bulgarian War and continuous unrest in the region. Conveniently enough, the conflict and wars helped weaken the Berlin-Constantinople alliance, and especially the completion of the Baghdad-Berlin rail link.
By most accounts, the trigger detonating the Great War was pulled by…a Serbian assassin on June 28, 1914, at the Bosnian capital Sarajevo, when he murdered Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne. The next month, Austria (backed by Germany) declared war on the tiny state of Serbia [who was backed by Russia.]
Excerpts from “A Century of War – Anglo-American Oil Politics and The New World Order”, various pages between pages 3 and 43. F. William Engdahl, 2011
jog on
duc
What Lips finds and states in his book is that J.Aron employees were advising banks on selling and leasing gold with a view to suppressing the price of gold. Lips also mentions J.P.Morgan Bank, Chase Bank, Swiss bank UBS, and others as being involved in this gold leasing operation to silently oversupply the world’s markets.“Was it the Central Banks?
On February 6, 1996, I visited J. Aron & Co., a well-established bullion firm in London. It is a subsidiary of the prestigious Wall Street firm Goldman, Sachs and Company. Robert Rubin, its former CEO, was serving as U.S. Secretary of the Treasury at the time. Rubin has since resigned from his post. A Johannesburg stockbroker, Merton Black of Ivor Roy Jones, now owned by Deutsche Bank group, introduced me to J.Aron & Co. I had a meeting that day with Neil R. Newitt, Managing Director, and Philip Culliford, Executive Director.
Although I had never met these gentlemen before, they knew my name and were very open with me. Culliford saw a strong demand for bullion on the part of US funds, but little demand from the Middle East. Newitt was outright bearish on gold and said that the central banks would stop any increase in the price of gold. (emphasis added - ed.) Having been active in the gold market since 1968, he was in regular contact with central banks and seemed to know what he was talking about. However, he thought that of the 35,000 tonnes of central bank gold holdings only a small portion, approximately 3,500 tonnes, could be loaned out or sold. The conclusion drawn from the discussion was that there could be no doubt that the central banks were controlling the price.
I left quite puzzled and still wondering why central banks would have an interest in keeping down the price of their only asset of value? Afterwards, I visited Deutsche Morgan Grenfell, where Robert Weinberg told me that the firm of J.Aron was very active in the gold lending business. For this reason they were very interested in forward sales by gold mining companies. Weinberg also mention that Newitt was known for being notoriously bearish about the price of gold. This was understandable since he knew what was happening.
After leaving the Goldman Sachs subsidiary, it was still not clear to me why the central banks should want to keep the price of gold low. As sellers, it would appear to be normal to try to sell at the highest possible price. In the business world, it is the buyer who is interested in a low price for goods he wants to acquire.
Because central banks are responsible for managing assets belonging to the people of their respective countries, such irresponsible behavior is hard to understand. One result of my visit, however, was, that I realized that the gentlemen at J. Aron, who were acting for central banks, undoubtedly had better information and advanced knowledge that easily could be exploited. What I did not yet realize was that these were the people who actually advised the central banks. (emphasis added - ed.)
It is Not Only the Central Banks!
And so I found out, unfortunately belatedly, who had the biggest interest in keeping the gold price down, or at least unchanged. It was not the central banks - it was the bullion banks. ”
Most commodities other than gold are still well down from their all time highs and based on various metrics do not appear historically expensive. Can you elaborate why you think commodities (other than gold) are overpriced?It would appear that all assets are now considered overpriced from bonds through stocks and on to commodities including precious metals.
I’d agree with you that many commodities are not overpriced.Most commodities other than gold are still well down from their all time highs and based on various metrics do not appear historically expensive. Can you elaborate why you think commodities (other than gold) are overpriced?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?