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: russwinter who wrote (62513)	1/6/2001 10:53:02 AM
From: Crimson Ghost	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116753

Russ Quite obvious that the CBs (at least those following the US?British lead) are much more concerned with keeping POG down than in being adequately compensated for escalating credit risk. These absurdly low lease rates are an outright subsidy to the bullion banks.

To: russwinter who wrote (62513)	1/6/2001 11:21:40 AM
From: Bruce Robbins	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116753

I agree with what you are saying. With everything going on right now, it will be harder for the central banks to control gold while there are other fires to put out. IMO Al and his pals are trying to avoid a bank panic. A run on the banks at this point would be fatal. As for gold, the open interest for all contracts (see the-privateer.com is at an all time low, trading desks are closing- how easy is it to manipulate something that is so small <g>. There is not too much volatility in something that barely trades through a small collection of traders IMO. The lease rates reflect the fact that the central banks are all ready to lease the gold to keep the fiat currency market afloat. The problem is what is the difference between the actual paper gold floating around in contracts, derivatives etc vs the actual bullion sitting in the vaults? Is it subject to a "fractional reserve" type system where only a small portion of the gold actually has to back the contracts? What would happen if everyone wanted delivery of the physical? Perhaps the Middle East or OPEC will demand payment for oil in gold bullion or dump the US$ and debt instruments they hold for gold. That might get things moving again. Something big has to demand payment in physical. Increasing jewelry demand (which is what the World Gold Council is trying to do) will be a drop in the bucket. If only we could get a sustained run up to $350-400 to kill the gold company hedging and forward sales. That might make a difference too. Bruce

To: russwinter who wrote (62513)	5/31/2002 7:04:01 AM
From: long-gone	Respond to of 116753

Friday May 31, 4:47 am Eastern Time Reuters Business Report Bank of America Mothballs Subsidiary LONDON (Reuters) - Bank of America said on Friday it has mothballed its Bank of America Financial Products subsidiary which handles a small volume of derivatives trades for a select group of clients. The US-based subsidiary was set up in early 1996 and carried out its first trade in November of that year, a spokesman for Bank of America (NYSE:BAC - News) said. "It was set up by Nations Bank which at that time was rated around A- and so was shut out of certain complex derivatives deals," said the spokesman. "Setting up the better-rated bankruptcy-remote subsidiary enabled them to do those deals." Nations Bank later merged with Bank of America which became a much larger and more highly rated business and no longer required a specialist unit to be active in all derivatives markets, the spokesman said. But Bank of America Financial Products, which conducted 95 percent of its business in interest rate derivatives, is not being closed entirely. Rather it is being barred from taking on new business while the bank plans what to do with it in future. The subsidiary will continue to service all outstanding trades, however. biz.yahoo.com