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 : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CommanderCricket who wrote (123750)	8/28/2009 11:39:50 AM
From: Think4Yourself	1 Recommendation Respond to of 206223

re: "Can anyone make an argument for NG changing trend and heading higher?" Just about every analyst is making this argument at the moment. I just can't find any substance in their arguments. It's all fluff with no hard logic other than "prices are too low".

To: CommanderCricket who wrote (123750)	8/28/2009 11:58:08 AM
From: RWS	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206223

As far as UNG goes, I don't expect a reversal without a high volume downspike and recovery day or two. RWS

To: CommanderCricket who wrote (123750)	8/28/2009 10:40:44 PM
From: a.handbag.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206223

I still think that the cost of production will, in the long run, put a floor under the price. How can it not? Other issues are the squabbles over the regulation of fracing and the impending implosions of marginal players. On the demand side I just hope that the coal lobby can be shown to be dreaming over the idea of clean coal, which is clearly nonsense. I've given it my best shot for a price recovery but I'm not too hopeful.

To: CommanderCricket who wrote (123750)	8/28/2009 11:41:34 PM
From: Think4Yourself	Respond to of 206223

Is this a potential problem, other than a reduction in global demand? english.caijing.com.cn (Caijing.com.cn) China’s state-owned enterprises may unilaterally terminate commodities contracts as they try to cut massive losses from financial derivatives, an industry source told Caijing on August 28. According to the source, China’s State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC) has sent notice to six foreign financial institutions informing them that several state-owned enterprise will reserve the right to default on commodities contracts signed with those institutions. Keith Noyes, an official with the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, a trade organization, confirmed that he is aware of the SASAC letter, but provided no further comment. Foreign brokerages usually work through their Hong Kong operations to sign over-the-counter derivative hedging contracts, according to an investment banker whose firm is involved in the business. Hong Kong and Singapore usually serve as venues for arbitration over such transactions. Most investment banks may "just swallow" any losses arising from canceled contracts, the executive said, adding that any losses are usually made up for with compensating trades. Investment banks "just earn less" from such transactions, he said. But any such move would be a major blow to investment banks which service massive commodities hedging operations for Chinese SOEs on the international market, said the executive. Chinese SOEs have suffered massive losses from hedging contracts since the onset of the global financial crisis. SASAC and the National Auditing Office has been investigating derivatives positions trading since the beginning of the year. A source from a state-owned company told Caijing that most of China’s SOEs engaging in foreign exchange and international trade have participated in derivatives trading, involving capital topping 1 trillion yuan.