Måndagen bjöd på en del intressanta händelser för guld- och silverinvesterare. CFTC har under en tid samlat in kommentarer till deras planerade ‘position limits’, som är extra intressanta för silverinvesterare, och när vi närmade oss deadline så kunde vi igår läsa följande:
• BARCLAYS SAYS CFTC SHOULD DEFER DECISIONS ABOUT NATURE AND EXTENT OF POTENTIAL LIMITS UNTIL AFTER IT COLLECTS NEW DATA ABOUT OTC MARKETS
Inte för att det kommer som någon direkt överraskning. Det är mycket som står på spel och även om bankerna kommer att hitta kryphål även i ett nytt regelverk, så kommer de göra allt för att behålla status-quo.
Här är en kommentar från ZeroHedge:
Well, we know at least one bank has some sizable, non-grandfatherable commodity block positions. Why Barclays thinks CFTC does not have data on OTC markets is beyond us. So while we await the CFTC to issue its decision on position limits, any minute now, we wonder just how many other banks (wink wink Blythe) will follow up with comparable objections demanding an “indefinite” delay to what may soon unleash true price discovery, particularly in the PM market. And incidentally, whatever happened to the Fed’s mandated disclosure of the confidential bank rescue information. At what point will Ben Bernanke be held in contempt to court for not following the decision of the Superior Court?
Vad som skapade en hel del diskussion inom bloggosfären igår kväll var följande info från CFTC (via ZeroHedge), vilket många tolkade som om något mycket stort är på gång:
The U.S. futures regulator said on Monday it has canceled its latest rule-making meeting scheduled on March 30.
The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission did not give a reason for the cancellation. The agency had planned to introduce at its 13th rule-making session a measure for data recordkeeping and reporting requirements for swaps prior to implementation of the rule, as well as transition swaps.
The CFTC is writing dozens of regulations to implement the Dodd-Frank law, which was enacted last July and gives the agency oversight of the $600 trillion global swaps market.
The agency also has scheduled a meeting on April 7 to introduce another batch of proposals. Measures including capital and margin requirements for non-bank companies, and a definition for the types of swaps that will be required to clear and trade have yet to be introduced.
Här är en kommentar från Harvey Organ:
As many of you know, our CFTC commissioners are meeting and assessing what all of us complained to them. I did not realize that the meeting was set for March 30.2011. Now this meeting has been cancelled. I am very angry at this. I will report when I get more information.
ZeroHedge publicerade även igår ett intressant inlägg där man lyfte fram en del intressanta kommentarer som inkommit till CFTC, bl a från Goldman Sachs och Morgan Stanley. Inget från JP Morgan, men väl intressanta kommentarer från World Gold Council, som uppger sig stödja guldbranschen, men i själva verket går kartellens ärenden.
Här är en kommentar från GATAs Chris Powell:
The council’s objection to position limits involves to a great extent their potential to interfere with the derivative instruments that have diverted monetary demand for gold away from real metal and into paper promises of metal that suppress gold’s price but can’t be fulfilled, and the potential for position limits to interfere with hedging by gold miners, another price-suppressive practice.
In essence, the council’s statement is a defense of an unlimited supply of paper gold issued by the several big international banks that control the gold and silver markets, paper gold being the enemy of real metal priced in a free market as well as the enemy of accountability for government currencies.
The World Gold Council’s letter to the CFTC has been posted at GATA’s Internet site but apparently not at the council’s own Internet site. One has to wonder here whether the council is representing mining companies or their bankers instead.
Och här är en kommentar från ZeroHedge:
The public comment period for the CFTC’s proposed position limit rule has come and gone. It should come as no surprise to anyone (and particularly those transfixed by the massive surges in various commodities, among them most certainly gold and silver) that what is at stake here is not some actual position limit definition and subsequent regulation and enforcement (although that most certainly is), but yet another challenge to the klepocratic status quo which naturally prefers the status quo to remain as is, and public interests, which seeing 100% moves in the price of grain, cotton, corn, and other commodities, would obviously prefer to reign in speculative fervor. At the end of the day, Wall Street will find loopholes in whatever the end rule is as it always does, but the polemic on the way there is quite interesting. Which is why having combed through some of the last minute public comment submissions (of which there were 5,561 in total at last check), we present some of the most indicative ones: one the one hand that of Carl “Shitty Deal” Levin, Chair of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, who obviously is for the most prompt implementation of position limits as envisioned in Dodd Frank, and on the other hand institutional money managers and traders such as PIMCO, Morgan Stanley, the World Gold Council, and, naturally, Goldman Sachs (oddly, we have yet to track down the response by one JP Morgan).
Här är ett intressant utdrag från Reuters:
Most are reframing familiar complaints: Banks, traders and exchanges say the rules would make it harder to hedge risk, and that it would reduce liquidity and increase consumer costs.
If the proposed rules are adopted with no change, “there is a substantial risk that they would undermine the efficiency of the markets for hedgers, by reducing liquidity and disrupting markets which currently function well”, Linda Cutler, a Cargill vice president, said in a letter to the agency.
Och en passande kommentar från ZeroHedge:
Ah yes, the same “we provide liquidity” straw man excuse that the HFT scalp brigade uses every time someone threatens to take away their market frontrunning power.
Och slutligen, här är en passande kommentar från Jim Sinclair som påminner oss om betydelsen av den fysiska marknaden för guld och silver:
My Dear Friends,
The paper gold market is not the gold market. As in the 1970s, cash will rule the ultimate price. Gold’s involvement in a new virtual world currency will sustain 80% of that high price.
In the 1970s paper gold was a short term game and influence on price. Today paper gold has been just that.
Pay no attention to the games the gold banks are playing. That is for their short term benefit.
Gold will trade at $1650 before it goes much higher.