Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PaulM who wrote (48730)	2/10/2000 12:19:00 AM
From: Enigma	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116764

Paul: "Everyone must know by now that short positions can never be liquidated via actual purchase or delivery of physical gold (witness Barrick)" Q. Barrick has reduced it's hedge position - surely it did so by buying back contracts in some manner? Where does it say this has to be done with 'physical gold' - surely they simply close out positions? If I've sold forward can't I then buy the contract back. "The purchase of gold calls is not a perfect insurance policy for the shorts, but at least this way when the paper market goes bust, they will be able to justify a suspension of contractual obligations by saying "see, it's not just our fault, we're owed gold too." Q. 1.The size of the call positions Barrick has purchased would lead one to believe that it must be certain of delivery - if it wants it - that is why I am guesing the deals are with some CB, CBs, BIS, possibly through an inermediary. Maybe not. But it seems to me that the CBs have been prepared to sell gold at any price so why not $319, and $335? especially since they have held the gold for decades, or may have it values at a much lower price.. 2. I can't see how the call positions purchased by Barrick could negate in any way its obligation to deliver gold at $360. I can't see how it could invoke force majeur as a result of a contract entered into subsequent to the forward sale contracts. BTW spot now at $312 - we're getting blase here?

To: PaulM who wrote (48730)	2/10/2000 1:09:00 AM
From: IngotWeTrust	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116764

Nice one PaulM!!! Yeah, just what the bankers want...a gold mine of their own...just like a mortgage broker wants your house back, and the plumber wants your used plumbing if you can't pay what he's owed either. This Ashanti thing is what is lighting the fire...and here we all thought it would come from producers changing their tune about trashing their own product... Or from Central banks ceasing to sell that damnspotrelic<g> But nope, Upward Pressure on the POG is instead coming from a "level-headed" Ghanian court magistrate wanting someone else to get the hole in the ground and fire the liars standing over it, especially the now infamous CFO smuck that caved into Goldman Sach's black box/Scholes leasing model, etc., etc., etc... Of course I expected the Ghanian gov't to get their licks in first, as they have been the ones to control who plays and who stays in their country anyhow... Trust me...if there is anyone on the planet that hates Goldman Sach more that I do, it is a West African politico who has been raped...again, by the white man and for the yellow stuff no less. And Minkers thought that West Malia's govt was just a tad too sensitive about Mink's leacherous employees embarrassing the Malian Govt and that nice World Bank rep personally installed by Volcker over there...Funny thing, Western World Yanks and yes, even Phillipinos aren't too highly regarded over there in West Africa...and that even includes Mink's Phillipino's a/w/a Bre-X's Indonesian employed geologists as I recall...hmmmm Has Ghana taken a page out of Suharto's play book ala ABX and Bre-X negotiations, a/w/a Goldman and going to screw the whole lot of the Western "gold f&&kers" running amuck in their sandpile??? Yep, the Ghanian govt HAD to step in, just as I opined on here in the last 72 hours or so..., and that wondrous little court ruling you post just happened TOOOOOOOOOOday, a mere 96 hours after the NY lawsuit was filled by PO'ed AMERICAN shareholders. Why shouldn't the Ghanian gov't take their 20% share, and say thank you...for we now KNOW where the hole in the ground is and how to mine it and not play paper gold games... ...and stick it to the Western World, all the while forcing up the price of the gold they are "nationalizing???" Not only has G/S got to put back Uncle Al's CB gold and that of---what is it... 21 other counterparty banks?---but they get to go try to find a new "Rapunzel" to spin paper-gold into straw" so that Rumpelstiltskin can "take it from there" Yep, that is what has gotten ole PDG and ABX's hedge book attention, Ken, et al... ...this little NY lawsuit against Ashanti!!! God help ole ABX if us Yanks want Nevada's Carlin Trend deposit back, eh? heh heh heh heh... *UP YOURS GOLDMAN!!!!!* GOOOOOO GHANA!!!! Mah mule needs new shoes...right TD? O/49r

To: PaulM who wrote (48730)	2/10/2000 6:39:00 AM
From: long-gone	Respond to of 116764

<<to wait if Ashanti has no hope of ever producing its way out this. And just imagine, Ashanti is just one of tens or hundreds of producers with a hedge book >> But wasn't the position hedged by Ashanti greater than their foreseeable reserves or production? There ae hedged positions & thend, there are hedge positions as you point out. It may prove interesting going forward, as I'm hearing rumor here in Denver of some producers considering a MASSIVE net long hedge position....