SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Maurice Winn who wrote (51772)6/27/2009 7:25:39 PM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 218124
 
whatever the next story will be, it will absolutely not be qcom, a tale of by gone years that ended so very many years ago

gold is not and had never been a story, but a systemic truth that gives quarter to none, and a truth that depends on no believers, because it just is, gold that is

twist and turn might mere humans do, and each and every sorry time, gold reign supreme, saving those who save to be saved, and offering redemption to those wanting to redeem

so fine and refined

blessed be gold

just in in-tray

player 1 the monthly dose of gloom from Georgia....as always, keep the children away from it, and thorougjly disregard what they write about gold.

player 2 I think he views gold from teh same perch as the rest of the mkt...from a socionomic perspective, and there is no doubt that from that vantage point, things look bearish for gold...BUT....gold is about wealth preservation, which means a rotation out of paper currencies

player 1 he has a theory - which i disagree with - that since gold is now 'priced' in paper currency, and not 'fixed' anymore, that it must behave like silver in a deflation. this completely overlooks that even though gold is not used as money in everyday transdactions anymore, the market continues to treat it as if it were money. therefore, in a genuine deflation, it will do what it has always done - it will become more valuable.

in fact, we already have empirical proof that even during the nowadays more common occasional 'deflation scares', gold tends to sharply rise in terms of commodities, stocks, and most currencies.

player 3
this should be an interesting exercise to watch:

Financial industry officials said Friday they believed the Treasury had come up with an appropriate procedure for determining a fair price.

"It think this is a fair and balanced process that utilizes objective measurements for determining the market value of the warrants," said Scott Talbott, a senior vice president for the Financial Services Roundtable, which represents the largest financial companies in the country.

Talbott said that for banks that have publicly traded stock, it should be a fairly straightforward process to determine values for the stock warrants.

Under the Treasury guidelines, the banks will have 15 days from when they repaid their bailout funds to submit an offer for what they would be willing to pay to buy back the stock warrants.

Treasury will then have 10 days to respond. If Treasury objects to the bank's offer, it can make a counteroffer, using a range of pricing methods.

If the two sides cannot agree on a price, appraisers for each side will be appointed. If those appraisers remain apart, then a third appraiser will be brought in, according to Treasury's guidelines.

Treasury's guidelines also leave as an option that if the two sides remain apart on a price, the government has the right to put the warrants up for sale in an auction process in which third parties would be invited to bid.

The department received $68 billion in repayments of bailout funds on June 17. The largest amounts were $25 billion from JPMorgan Chase & Co., and $10 billion each from Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley. They now have until the end of June to make an offer for the warrants.

The stock warrants allow Treasury to buy the banks' stock at a fixed price at some future date. The Government Accountability Office released a report last week calling for more transparency regarding the warrants and the repayment process.

Until the banks buy back the stock warrants that Treasury holds, they remain entangled in a program that has subjected them to limits on executive pay and other restrictions. The banks have complained that the government-imposed rules could hurt their profits and prevent them from hiring or keeping top talent.

Besides JPMorgan, Goldman and Morgan Stanley, the other seven big institutions repaying funds last week were: U.S. Bancorp, Capital One Financial Corp., American Express Co., BB&T Corp., Bank of New York Mellon Corp., Northern Trust Corp. and State Street Corp.

To begin the process of leaving the bailout program, the banks had to clear a series of hurdles designed to ensure they would remain viable despite the financial crisis and the recession.

All but Northern Trust underwent government "stress tests" to ensure they had an extra capital buffer in case the recession worsened. The 10 also were required to raise equity from investors and raise debt without a government guarantee.

Despite their relative strength, the banks still rely on government subsidies, including guarantees on debt they already issued and discounted credit lines from the Federal Reserve.

In addition to the $68 billion in bailout funds repaid by the 10 large institutions, another $2 billion has been repaid by smaller banks.

In addition to the money they are returning, the banks have paid Treasury more than $2 billion in dividends mandated under the bailout program passed by Congress last October at the height of the financial crisis. The banks were required to pay 5 percent interest on the funds they received for the first five years and then 9 percent interest for any funds they still held after that time.

player 1
my guess is that by 2010 at the latest, they will all need to be bailed out again.

i can understand that they want to shake off the governmental interference strait-jacket as quickly as possible, but there is the looming potential problem that the current downturn is very different from its post WW2 predecessors, and that its likely eventual magnitude and duration is not properly appreciated yet.

player 4 There is always someone of prominence who throws in the towel at the top of a market.

Julian Robertson giving up within 3 months of the top of the internet bubble.

Richard Russell capitulating and telling us we had a final wave to much higher highs in the summer of 2007 in the stock market after being consistently bearish for some time.

So will the time to sell gold be when someone like Prechter finally turns bullish on gold?



... and so, maurice, even you should be able to discern that i am hilariously euphoric that you continue to chant the qcom voodoo chant, now so many years in a roll Message 25743799 , going from 30 to 46, for an outfit that must run to stay in place, while fending off bullets from the back and veering away from traps in front, on the left and right, and have no gold

i must count my blessings, and count them again for at least another 8 years, delicious year after lucious year



To: Maurice Winn who wrote (51772)6/27/2009 7:42:37 PM
From: TobagoJack1 Recommendation  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 218124
 
in case i forgot to mention redemption in the last 5 posts to you, just in in-tray per privateer gold :0)

What An Unlovely Monetary Mess With the exception of a short-lived aberration a couple of weeks ago in the lead up to the G-8 Finance Ministers' meeting and when the US Treasury was selling off a weekly record $US 130 Billion in new debt paper, the world has been getting more and more publicly "dissatisfied" with the status of the US Dollar ever since the start of this year. And a growing number of nations, the most vocal of which have been Russia and China, are not holding back about it.

Last week we had the "SCO" (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) meeting immediately followed by the "BRIC" (Brasil, Russia, India, China) summit in Russia. Russia and China are members of both organisations. India is, of course, part of BRIC and is moving slowly but surely towards upping their present SCO status from "observer" to full member. The BRIC countries alone have 15 percent of the world economy and 40 percent of the world's currency reserves, not to mention about half of the world's population. They are, to put it mildly, fed up with exchanging actual and valuable economic goods in return for US Treasury and Fed emitted IOUs - otherwise known as US Treasury debt paper and US Dollars.

Once again this week, the Chinese have called for a "multi-polar" world reserve currency "delinked from sovereign nations". The BRIC nations (notably China and Brazil) have already set up large barter trades between each other where goods are exchanged without the use of money at all. China has already set up "swap" deals all over the world where trade is carried out, especially in raw resources, without the use of US Dollars. Russia has proposed selling Treasuries and buying the "sovereign debt" of the other BRIC nations - if they will reciprocate in kind.

And, of course, Gold keeps raising its pesky head on the periphery of all these discussions. Yet again this week, a "senior researcher" in the Chinese Communist Party piped up: "Should we buy Gold or US Treasuries? The US is printing dollars on a massive scale and in view of that trend, according to the laws of economics, there is no doubt that the dollar will fall. So Gold should be the better choice." There is an old saying in the debate about "ideologies" - "Just because Stalin says the sun rises in the east doesn't mean it isn't true." Piquant, though, is it not, that this statement comes from the last "Communist Party" with any influence left on earth today.

Nor is the debate being confined to the last holdouts of "Communism" and to countries which were up until very recently known as "developing nations" or, in less polite circles, as economic and financial "basket cases". The Canadian magazing Macleans recently published an article titled: "Can They Pay It Back?". Of course there was no need to identify the "they" in the title, anyone reading it constantly (and correctly) assumed that the entity in question was the US. While no definitive answer to the question was reached inside the body of the article, there was a lot of evidence presented all leading to only one possible conclusion. NO - "THEY" CAN'T!

Unless, of course, they "pay it back" with MASSIVELY devalued Dollars, which is how all but a handful of nations have repaid massive debts throughout history. Not that the US Dollar hasn't been massively devalued already. Forty years ago, there were certain financial entities (foreign governments and central banks) which could still exchange $US 35 for one troy ounce of Gold. Today, anyone can "buy" Gold. The problem is that it takes $US 940 to buy that same troy ounce. It takes almost 27 times as many US Dollars to buy an ounce of Gold today as it did in 1971. And 1971 isn't very long ago.

Turn the situation "inside out" and look at the US Treasury's "funded debt" and you will instantly perceive a very good reason for this massive US Dollar devaluation. In 1971, the Treasury's "funded debt" was $US 400 Billion. Today it is $US 11,400 Billion. That's a blow-out of 28.5 times in the funded debt over the same period, a fairly close match to the 27-fold rise in the US Dollar Gold "price". Just as an aside, a 28.5-fold rise of the US Gold price - to match the US Treasury funded debt blow-out - would give a Gold "price" of $US 997.50. The $US Gold price has actually reached at or about that level four times in not much more than the past year - in March 2008, July 2008, February 2009 and May 2009. [edit by tj: do not fight the fed]

And remember, we are not counting here the Treasury's "unfunded debts" - political promises which it has made but has NOT funded. A recent estimate put these at $US 99,000 Billion. [edit by tj: at the event horizon of galactic recognition of unavoidable fate, gold can do 10k in a heart beat, until the heart beats no more]

In May 2006, Gold reached $US 720 per ounce, almost the same price it had reached in September 1980 in its "backside" rally after falling from $US 850 to about $US 480 between January and March 1980. That $US 720 level reached in May 2006 led to the first major correction in the current Gold bull market. It took Gold until Septmeber 2007 - that's 16 months - to regain the $US 720 level. Six months later in March 2008 Gold hit the $US 1000 level for the first time ever.

And that led to the second major Gold correction in US Dollar terms. The difference with the current correction is that Gold has repeatedly advanced back to (or very near) its previous highs - it did not do that during the 2006-07 correction. Last month, Gold actually regained the US 1000 level - for one day. Now - fifteen months after first hitting $US 1000 in March 2008 - Gold stands just above the $US 940 level. The first major Gold correction took 16 months to resolve. This one has taken 15 months - and counting.

There is, of course, one other major difference. In the 2006-07 Gold correction, paper assets of all descriptions were still booming. This time, and despite the stock market recovery since March this year, the opposite is the case. The "monetary mess" has not changed but the reaction to it on the paper markets certainly has. The reaction of governments and central bankers has not changed, it has merely intensified, to a level which was not seen as imaginable up until less than a year ago.