By Bron Suchecki, on February 10th, 2012
Below are some relevant extracts from Martin Armstrong’s The Analytical Shill. The article is generally about how research and analysts are conflicted and how analysts and investors and gurus can be blinded by their biases. The paragraphs below are straight from the article and will jump around a bit because I’ve just pasted them in order they appeared without all the extraneous stuff.
Martin Armstrong:
The metals were one favorite sector where they were constantly bullish – never bearish for 19 years. But hey, the market manipulators always needed cheer-leaders to get people to buy every high so they could sell.
On the Buffett Silver Manipulation, it was PhiBro who had a shill call the Wall Street Journal and tell them I was trying to manipulate silver down because I was short. When the WSJ & I argued and they refused to print the name Buffett they demanded I give them, that forced the CFTC to act calling me to ask where was it taking place. I told them London and they called the Bank of England. When they in turn ordered all silver brokers to show up the next morning, Buffett was forced to come out and admit he bought $1 billion worth of silver but denied he was manipulating the price.
You can ask the guys at GATA. They were well aware of the first 1993 Manipulation by PhiBro (Philips Brothers). They got in bed with Buffett when he stepped in to run Salomon Brothers after they got caught MANIPULATING the US Government bond auctions. They began buying silver and the CFTC stepped in demanding to know who their client was. Now if it had been anyone else, PhiBro’s reply was they refused to tell the name of the client. Forget the law. That does not apply to New York firms. The CFTC responded saying if they could not know who their client was, then PhilBro had to exist the trade. They did and of course made a fortune for the hawkers had all the little guys buy silver just in time for PhilBro to sell it to them.
This is WHY the manipulations began to move to London. Not only did PhiBro try to get me on board, their broker walked across the floor and SHOWED my broker Buffett’s orders at the low!
To create the fundamental, they moved inventory from New York to London. They were manipulating silver as always. Playing games with the inventories. They were moving silver from New York to London where the Buffett orders were being executed. This made the US warehouse inventories drop sharply. Go look at the analysts who talked silver up on that very fundamental. If they said there was a shortage of silver and you better buy it is going to $100, then you may be dealing with a shill or a biased analyst.
Many of the metals analysts with an agenda back then hated my guts. How dare I say there was a manipulation when it was at last silver was going up instead of down. Now I was part of some covert conspiracy hell bent on suppressing the metals because I dared to say “they are back” (manipulators) and the target was $7 by January 1998. To this crowd, a manipulation is always to the downside and never up.
Go check the recommendations of analysts back then. See where they stood. The best one I heard was silver was in demand in London because it was .9999 there instead of .999 in New York.
GATA began to see the same nonsense that I did during the early 1990s. It was just that I saw the manipulations as being UNBIASED. In other words, they did not care what they manipulated as long as there was a guaranteed profit. They manipulated even base metals such as rhodium. They manipulated platinum in league with Russian politicians who strangely recalled all platinum to take an inventory. Hell, Ford Motor Company filed suit over that manipulation.
How do you distinguish a REAL bull market from a bullshit manipulation?
Most manipulations can be seen easily when you look at a market in terms of a Basket of Currencies. Why? Because a REAL bull market must take place ONLY when it rises in terms of ALL currencies. Unless that takes place, investors in some countries will be sellers while others are buyers. Here is a classic example as to why we were bearish on gold for 19 years despite the hate mail and the best attacks of the shills. The manipulators ALWAYS need to get the metals guys worked up into a fever to sell to them to make their profits and big bonuses.
So when analysts only espouse one side, be very careful. For no matter what the market, there is always a time to rally and a time to pause. Nothing is ever straight up or straight down. Anyone who portrays that is either ignorant of the market behavior, or a shill – paid cheer-leader. Putting out bogus research has been the name of the game. Unfortunately, there are just some people who are hardcore.
Markets are the same mix as politics. There are people who simply believe in a given position and no matter what you say or what evidence you present to the contrary, they will never believe it. Thus, I have NEVER been interested in preaching to the choir. I have always preferred the independent thinker – the investor who wants to really learn about market behavior and not read someone who simply supports their never changing view of the world. Nor am I interested in exchange words with those who may not be shills, but are just part of a particular hardcore group. I am cheered only when I agree, and if I disagree, I am despised. But that is expected in the retail world – NEVER in the professional institutional world.
There cannot be a perpetual bull market in anything anymore than you can stand there with your arm straight up in the air. Oh shore, you can do it briefly. But then your arm will feel so heavy you can no longer keep it up. Everything takes a pause for the same reason you sleep at night. Nothing can maintain the same energy output all the time. People come up with all sorts of excuses why they are right yet the market declines. Usually it is some conspiracy of a mythical group so powerful that they just win.
Markets collapse because EVERYONE who ever thought of buying has bought. They are now counting their profits for the next eternity. Something happens and scares the herd. Suddenly, the long try to sell but there is no bid. The market collapses in the blink of an eye. Why, because the majority has already bought and there are no new buyers to keep the momentum going. It is never some mythical short player preventing the upward advance. It is just not time yet.
Philip Tetlock, a professor of organizational behavior at the Haas Business School at the University of California-Berkeley, has been following the so called experts for some 25 years studying primarily the institutional forecasting skill of political experts. He had signed up nearly 300 academics, economists, policymakers and journalists keeping track of more than 82,000 forecasts plotting them against real-world results. He analyzed not just what the experts said but how they reasoned and how quickly they changed their mind in the face of contrary evidence. He also tracked how they reacted when they were wrong, which was of course the majority of the time. Most could not even beat a random forecast generator.
Tetlock’s research did discover that there was one kind of expert turns out consistently more accurate forecasts than others. The most important factor he discovered was not how much education or experience the experts had but how they actually thought. The best forecasters were those who were self-critical, eclectic thinkers who were constantly updating their beliefs when faced with contrary evidence instead of clinging to dogma. He found the best were suspicious of grand schemes and conspiracies and were more practical about their predictive ability. The less successful forecasters clung to the same ideas never wavering pushing the same idea to the breaking point of absurdity. These types of people were more often embraced by the media because they loved to articulate and persuade as to why their idea explained absolutely everything.
Tetlock uncovered widespread forecasting failures. Of course, there is the herd of followers who for some reason want a GURU and unrealistically expect infallibility. This may reinforce the pundits that like to put on a show and claim why they are personally better than everyone else and only their ideas are correct and when wrong, it is the result of some giant conspiracy, not their lack of ability to forecast.
The key to the future lies in the UNBIASED view of whatever it is. You cannot be married to a single position EVER! Tetlock points out that a successful analyst always qualifies their arguments with “however” and “perhaps,” while the dangerous analysts build up momentum with “moreover” and “all the more so” as they try to be more entertaining. The dangerous analyst wants to keep the clients happy and to a large extent preaches to the choir telling them what they want to hear.
The one thing about markets is that the MAJORITY just have to be wrong! Why? They are the fuel that drives the market up and down. Trap the majority either long or short and you create the fuel for the next move in the opposite direction.
So for now, it is far better to let the markets speak. As I stated at just about every conference I have ever given, there is ONLY one analyst that is never wrong – that is the market itself. The key to successful trading & forecasting is to learn how to let the market speak to you and go with the flow. It does so in both TIME as well as PRICE. Turning points are NEVER specific events, but inflection points where highs and lows take place. It would have been nice to have a low first and a more orderly advance afterwards. But markets like to create the worst of all worlds.
So for anyone who thinks he can beat the game as an analyst or trader, must remember one thing. The market is always right. To survive, we have to align ourselves with the market and listen when it speaks. This is not a game for arrogance and prognostications fixed in stone steeped in bias and dogma. History repeats – but also with a slight twist. So how high will gold go? It is a question of CONFIDENCE.
You will ALWAYS be your greatest adversary, for to succeed you must conquer your own biases, fears, and doubts. You cannot do that as Philip Tetlock has keenly demonstrated with fixed ideas. If you are married to a philosophy and will not yield and blame everyone else for conspiring against you and that is the reason something has not yet unfolded, you better see a shrink.
By Bron Suchecki, on January 27th, 2012
Worth reading this response by Victor the Cleaner in FOFOA comments to this question: “At the moment, in order to influence the Gold price downwards, all that needs to be done by the authorities in LBMA and COMEX, is to raise the margin requirements.” This is complete and utter nonsense.
LBMA is a trade association and not an exchange and as such does not set any ‘margin requirement’. The LBMA member firms are typically those banks and other financial institutions that trade gold and silver OTC in London, but non-members around the world also trade OTC with these institutions.
When Newmont has some trucks on the road on the way to the refiner, they might want to sell that gold immediately to eliminate any further price volatility from their accounts, and so they might phone JPM and sell that stuff forward. None of the two counterparties is a speculator here. Newmont does have the real stuff, and JPM does have the cash. So even if they would require collateral, this would not influence the price.
Yes, there are probably some raw recruits who follow websites such as TF and who trade COMEX futures in under-capitalized accounts. Yes, CME occasionally raises the margin. Yes, they may just be checking who is the under-capitalized novice and who really has the cash in order to purchase the gold for the contracts they hold. Yes, they may just rip off the clueless novice for fun (and money). But to think this would set the spot price of gold is quite a hubris.
The OTC market is ten times bigger than COMEX, and so it pushes COMEX around in a way that most COMEX-fixated goldbugs don’t understand.
If you want to keep gold cheap in the long run, you need to create a huge volume of gold loans, expand the ‘money supply’. If you want to manage the price of gold intra-day (and yes, there is indeed statistical evidence for this), you need to sell a lot of gold at spot in a short period of time. But you can do this only if you are a credible financial institution and only as long as you can hand over the allocated whenever your counterparties request it. So you need to understand extremely well what you are doing and how much physical per paper you need to be able to show. Hiking the COMEX margin is a side show.
What I find rather disappointing is the extremely poor quality of the discussion that is presented on the typical precious metal websites. This is financial product pushing of the same quality as pre-1999 when they IPO’d the companies that sell dog-food online.
Here are FOFOA, people discuss a very good reason for owning gold. For some reason, the mainstream goldbug websites totally ignore the good reason and push gold with inconsistent nonsense instead.
Why is that? Want to scalp PSLV? Want to create a mania, sell them financial products (including GoldMoney which is no longer ‘money’ by the way) and then when the big blackout comes, grab the gold for cheap from those who sell in panic because they never understood why they owned it in the first place? Very sad. And when the Financial Times calls the goldbugs confused idiots, sadly, there is even some truth in this statement.
If Victor keeps this up I’ll be out of a blogging job.
By Bron Suchecki, on January 23rd, 2012
London Banker “has been a central banker and securities markets regulator during a varied and interesting career in global financial markets” and is a very credible commentator IMO. From his latest:
“Perhaps gold is being used as collateral for margin and cash liquidity, sold by counterparties to bring the price lower, leading to margin calls for even more. A crisis arising from a major default (Greece, Portugal, a huge bank) would force the price lower still, when the collateral would be exercised on default. Following on, the price might rocket again to enable the conspirators to seize outsize profits. Just a scenario, mind you! (Although, I note that Lehman’s counterparties reported record profits through much of 2009.)
What is left of the global markets becomes a game of engineered survivor bias. Only those operating outside the law and with unlimited regulatory forbearance can win while the rest of us lose.”
Some may remember my comments on FOFOA blog about how “Bullion banks are like spiders in the center of a web. They can feel the twitching of the flies in the web and determine the mood of the market better than anyone else and often in advance of others.”
London Banker again: “Their top down view of clients’ trading and custody portfolios and cash positions and flows puts them in a position to exercise tyranny. They can game their clients, taking advantage of superior information, credit and liquidity to ramp or crash targeted markets as needed to precipitate a crisis.”
In other words, it is not just about avoiding debt (or its variant, leverage/derivatives) but also avoiding having most of your positions and trading with one bank.
Reading this stuff makes me comfortable that the Perth Mint will be one of the few left standing after all this is over. We don’t engage in speculative trading/risk taking and the AAA rating means we don’t have to beg and put up collateral with banks to be able to do the covering trades and other transactions necessary to keep the business running.
In the coming flight from risk, it won’t just be about moving to cash (and hopefully many moving to precious metals), but it will also be about a flight to riskless/conservative counterparties. The problem for those looking to store precious metals is that at that point the Perth Mint is likely to run out of capacity – both in physical storage and also insurance (as we fully insure – few others do). All that will be left then is personal storage, which won’t be a problem for those with small holdings. But for those with multi-million dollar holdings it will be tough as there aren’t many non-bank fully insured custodians.
The lesson is to prepare now, which I’m sure all my readers have, as it is going to get nasty.   Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts
By Bron Suchecki, on January 18th, 2012
Regular readers of this blog know I watch reports from Vietnam as an indicator of how Governments deal with large flows of money out of fiat and into gold. Non-first world countries feel this more I think and thus they give us a view into the future as to how first world countries will respond when they get hit with a real loss of faith in the ability of fiat to hold value over time and/or a view that there are few productive investment opportunities in the economy.
This Mineweb article on India raising import taxes on gold and silver has some interesting quotes in this respect:
“…this hike will discourage imports … that is what the government wants, since imports have made a huge dent in India’s growth story and growth seems to be flagging”
“The shift away from financial savings to something which will just lie in lockers around the country could be a large contributing factor to lower growth…”
“Another expert with a nationalised bank pointed out that money locked up in the yellow metal effectively disappears from the economy to become jewellery or sits idle in cupboards and bank lockers.”
“Money spent on gold is practically wasted and it is also excluded from the financial intermediation system. Imports needed to be curbed.”
“The massive jump in gold imports has also led to an increase in current account deficit.”
No surprise that most of this plays on the “gold is useless” meme. In actual fact I agree with that. One’s savings are better invested in productive businesses and entrepreneurs rather than an inert metal.
However, what the financiers, technocrats and politicians don’t get is that movements into gold are a clear signal or vote by savers that the economy is crap. The solution is not to block the signal, but to solve the underlying problem. Actually the way to solve it is to get out of the way and stop fiddling with the economy but that would put them out of a job I suppose.
What these guys are doing is taking painkillers so the pain in their chest won’t bother them. Then they’ll all be surprised when they get a heart attack. Indeed, money flowing into gold is painful. That’s the point. 
By Bron Suchecki, on January 17th, 2012
Good interview between Jeff Lewis (silver-coin-investor.com) and Grant Williams (vulpesinvest.com). Grant makes a very good point on emotions influencing how events are interpreted (my emphasis):
” It’s important to try and keep a sense of balance because the way things trade, particularly in silver, it’s easy to get fixated upon an idea and to blame every move on that particular idea. In the case of silver, the big theory about silver is the manipulation of the COMEX futures. … It’s a dangerous game to sort of ascribe every single move in an instrument to a construct that has yet to be proven beyond any doubt. While I suspect there is definitely something untoward going on the silver futures as Bart Chilton has intimated in his comments this past year. I think it’s a very dangerous game to not have a balance, to just simply look at the way markets behave, look at the extraneous events that may have an effect and cause the de-leveraging or liquidation and to try and get a more rounded picture of why something moves now.”
Later he says what the extraneous event was:
“I think a lot of that downdraft we saw in both gold and silver going into year end, was just people who are having to raise cash and selling the thing that they had a little bit of profit built into. Now, once they start going down, the shorts are going to press that; and so these falls get a lot more vicious than perhaps they would be in just an orderly market where people were looking to sell a bit of precious metals to raise some cash for year end. But as I say, you have to try and take your emotions out of this thing.”
Interesting here that Grant says that the initiator of the price drop was year end selling, which was further “pressed” by speculators. I made a similar point in this corporate post when talking about bullion banks being aware of falling Indian consumer demand. My point, and Grant’s, is that not everything is a manipulation (as in being initiated by speculators) and sometimes speculators are just riding a physical market trend. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid (or should that be “Silver-Aid”) of the pumpers which blame every price drop on manipulation but who never question any price rise.
As Ted Butler says (my emphasis) “… when silver experienced two separate 35% price declines in a matter of days. Such a decline in a world commodity for no observable supply/demand reason is unprecedented and I would say impossible in a free market.” Same applies when you have the London AM Silver Fix increasing 20.1% over 24 hours from $10.77 to $12.93 on 18 Sep 08 (note: I can’t find two 35% price declines in London Fix data, Ted must be talking intra-day).
Some who has been drinking the Silver-Aid is Tyler Durden with the silly headline Physical Silver Surges To Record 30% Premium Over Spot, In Backwardation. Regrettably, it was picked up by Money Morning Australia (from whom I’d expect better), to which I left this comment:
“What that chart tells us is that PSLV is a closed end fund with some possible tax advantages with good marketing, hence the premium. In the real physical wholesale silver market which is not constrained by a limited number of shares, Perth Mint is not having any problem acquiring, or selling, silver at spot.”
Tyler must be drinking a lot of Silver-Aid or desperate to alleviate the cognitive dissonance of a circa 25% increase in COMEX silver warehouse stocks since mid-2011 to claim that a stock exchange listed trust is as good as and representative of cold hard physical in your hand.
Further proof that Tyler is suffering is his conclusion that the backwardation discussed in Keith Weiner’s appended article “means, although for those who like the punchline here it is, as above: shortage” when, if you read Keith’s good article, he says at the bottom that (my emphasis) “In a normal commodity, backwardation means shortage. … But in gold and silver it means something else entirely. People have the metal. But for whatever reason(s), they choose not to take this free money. In the silver market right now, trust is in short supply.”
Why everyone thinks that Zero Hedge is a credible source when in this example (and I have others) he can’t even understand that Keith is saying there isn’t a shortage of metal, there is a shortage of trust. I covered this idea in the Gold Standard Institute’s 2009 Canberra seminar (I’ll post up the points from the presentation shortly for those interested).
I’ve left this comment on ZH, let’s see what comes of it:
“Perth Mint does not incur any premium when it pulls physical out of London. Whoever is feeding you that is making a fool out of you. If you really are independent and after the truth, more than happy to chat with you anytime – you have access to my email in my profile.”
There are plenty of good reasons to hold precious metals I don’t know why people resort to this shortage and premiums meme – maybe it is just a simple idea easily understood and communicated compared to some more intellectually dense analysis of the market’s supply/demand/stocks.
Anyway, to finish on a more upbeat tone, here is Grant again:
“… we are left with an awful lot of strong hands holding silver now. I’m here in Asia, the futures price is really more of an irrelevancy. Over here it’s all about physical metal both in gold and silver and so we see a lot of buying of physical metals here in Asia when the price comes down on the COMEX and we see premiums expand because it’s very tough to get delivery.”
I focus on the base trend for precious metals and see it driven by increasing numbers of strong hands. The day-to-day volatility (down AND up) is driven by leveraged money of speculators and hedge funds and bullion bank prop desks. I’d suggest ignoring that volatility, otherwise you waste too much emotional energy stressing about it. Just buy your PMs (or dollar cost average in) and forget about it and relax. That’s what insurance is for. 
By Bron Suchecki, on January 4th, 2012
Got a post up on the corporate blog on how 50% of all money spent on non-fuel mineral exploration during the last 15 years was spent on gold exploration.
And from the “who can make the most dramatic price forecast” department comes The Possibility of $1,000 Silver before Hyperinflation. Has anyone made a higher call?
To save you reading the whole article, here is the key logic behind the headline:
“…with gold at this relatively conservative top of $10,000 – if silver is at its historic 16:1 average in relation to gold – silver will be $625 per ounce. We have also explained above how it is entirely possible for silver to overshoot this 16:1 average, which is normally what happens when a trend has been misaligned for such a long period of time. If silver does reach a 10 to 1 ratio as it has done before at different times throughout history, then we would be seeing a price of $1000 per ounce…”
I suppose when you start off with the assumption that $10,000 gold is “relatively conservative” then $1000 silver is not far behind.
The key “gotcha” is in the headline: “before Hyperinflation”. That is not a situation in which you want to trade your silver for $1000 of soon to be worthless fiat. 
By Bron Suchecki, on December 28th, 2011
Mineweb (ex-Reuters) is reporting that “Gold exchanges in China outside of two in Shanghai are to be banned, authorities said in a statement released on Tuesday.”
Looks like the much hyped Pan Asia Gold Exchange is dead. Not sure where this leaves those who claimed that it “will ultimately destroy the remaining short positions in both gold and silver”.
I will come back to this story but for the moment I want to see how the pumpers and hype merchants spin it, or unspin what they said before.
I also find it interesting that this story breaks at the same time as China Daily reports that “China should further diversify its foreign-exchange portfolio and make more gold purchases when the metal’s price dips but is still at a relatively high level, a senior central bank official said on Monday.”
What is China’s game re gold? How can we weave these two stories into a coherent explanation?
By Bron Suchecki, on December 23rd, 2011
Following on from this post from 2009 where I identified five types of storage (Segregated Allocated, Unsegregated Allocated, Unsegregated Physical Backed, Unallocated Fully Hedged, Unallocated Unhedged), we now have confirmation that “Allocated” metal at a bullion bank is unsegregated from this interview with Kyle Bass (42 minute mark) where he talks about bars being all over the place when they did an audit.
The unsegregated nature of bullion bank allocated is why Bob Pisani picked up the wrong bar in his visit to the GLD vault as part of a HSBC promo.
This unsegregated storage is not necessarily a problem and would not make a difference in any bankruptcy of a custodian as the key “segregation” is the specific bar numbers and weights in the client name. Whether bars belonging to two different clients sit together on the same pallet or are on separate pallets separated by air, I cannot see making a difference.
By Bron Suchecki, on December 22nd, 2011
Digital Gold Currency Magazine is reporting that GoldMoney is suspending the ability to make and receive payments in precious metals to or from other GoldMoney customers due to the “global increase of compliance requirements for payment service providers.”
This capability was the key differentiator of GoldMoney to other online precious metal storage businesses. It is an unfortunate development for gold standard advocates.
The decision was not entirely driven by increased regulations as GoldMoney also indicate that “our customers’ use of the metal payments and currency exchange services is not significant.” Looks like a case of disporportionate compliance effort for GoldMoney on something that didn’t drive business.
Interesting then that customers have voted and said they aren’t really interested in gold as money. Possibly this may change if those customers are faced with high inflation or banking system instability, but it will be hard for GoldMoney to restart the functionality and catch up with any regulatory requirements in place at the time (assuming there is any regulatory tolerance for alternative payment systems at that time).
Freegold anyone? 
By Bron Suchecki, on December 21st, 2011
A couple of weeks ago FOFOA made the following statement:
Do you remember the stories about HSBC clearing out space in their vaults, or JP Morgan building new vaults? What could be the explanation for this if the aggregate gold stock is so stable? Then it occurred to me that unallocated storage is much more space-efficient because the gold sits stacked on pallets. Allocated gold often gets put into cubby holes to assist in recordkeeping. That takes up much more space. So the process of allocation after many decades of non-allocation requires an expansion of vault space. This is how I now interpret these stories.
I left a comment suggesting other reasons for new vaults:
1. Investment’s share of demand vs jewellery/industry is much higher now compared to past, thus more going into vaults rather than around necks.
2. ETFs and others (eg Goldmoney) share of investment demand vs coin/bar is greater compared to past, thus more going into vaults rather than backyards.
3. Industry consolidation during gold bear market meant vault closures and thus increase in utilisation of remaining vaults, leaving less spare capacity to absorb above factors before new vaults were needed.
Just to clarify that last point, say there were 10 vaults with capacity of 100oz but each was only holding 60oz. Total spare capacity is 400oz. Then you have 3 vaults close during gold’s bear market and metal is moved into the remaining 7 vaults. You now have 600oz in 7 vaults, leaving only spare capacity of 100oz.
Another point is that allocated metal is not “often gets put into cubby holes”. Allocated does not rely on physical segregation by client. For example, you can have a pallet of 32 x 400oz bars with 32 owners of each specific bar number on that pallet. My guess is that except for all but the most paranoid client (mostly likely central banks), most allocated at bullion banks is held this way, rather than piles segregated by client.
I also forgot to mention that my guess is that the amount of physical supporting unallocated metal accounts with bullion banks has increased, that is the fractionalisation has declined. This puts further pressure on vault capacity.
Evidence for this is that whereas unallocated accounts were free a number of years ago, there is now a small fee on unallocated. My guess is that the physical turnover/redemptions have increased in line with a more busy gold market and thus bullion banks have needed to hold more physical to back their unallocated to deal with day to day fluctuations.
Of course it could just be the banks going for a fee grab if they felt their clients would just accept it.
And while I’m doing posts on my comments on FOFOA’s blog, here is another for those who don’t follow the FOFOA blog comments closely – and I can understand that considering some posts get 400+ comments (link here):
Re 1) [major refiners would start posting their own price for physical gold, having their own auctions, making the trading volume public], that is what the Perth Mint already does. The 5 tonne or so per week we refine is currently auctioned. Settlement can be full cash, but mostly is done in London paper gold plus a cash premium. I just watch this premium, it will tell me when paper gold has really disconnected.
BTW, miners sell their metal to us either for cash or swap for paper gold (which they then on trade).
The system will break when miners find few willing to take their paper gold or the price offered is much lower than what we will pay. And in that situation we will always be after to better the offers they get because we are getting better prices for the real physical at the other end.
Because the Perth Mint stands as intermediary between physical buyer and physical seller, the miner is always informed as to the real price of gold.
We are not reliant on the London market to tell us the price, we make a Perth price every day. However currently London is a convenient settlement mechanism for us the miners and the buyers, but it is just to help the flow. 
|
|
Most Popular Posts