« Ugly says I'm the last survivor, Mon., June 5, 2006, 10:42 AM | Main | The ugly issue of back-dating of employee stock options, Mon., June 5, 2006, 11:58 AM »
June 5, 2006
Something afoot in the gold market, Mon., June 5, 2006, 11:20 AM
I think that traders ought to be positioned for something big to happen in the gold market.
Earlier today I noted the elimination of limits at COMEX. I don't think that's because Gold is headed to zero! To the contrary, I think it has to do with not wanting to be caught buying as gold lifts off in London, Shanghai and other gold trading exchanges.
With a limit out at COMEX, should gold go to $1,000 say, overnight, the commercials at COMEX, who are short, would get killed because traders everywhere in the world would go to other markets and keep on buying. The next day, NYMEX would be issuing margin calls, etc, etc, etc, day after day, as limits were hit and trading stopped.
Something is happening.
I have been writing that the U.S. Money Center Banks (the ones who control the Fed) have been quite favored recently while the foreign Money Center Banks (Deutsche Bank, HSBC, UBS, etc have not been doing so well. I'm wondering why.
Today in the Sydney (Australia) Morning Herald, there is an interesting article that everybody ought to read. The bottom line (to the Morning Herald story) is that the Gnomes have been switching their positions from oil to gold.
I have a sense of these things, as you know. And my crystal ball is telling me that this is no time to be shaken out of precious metals. I expect a summer rally that will take the gold price to a new high.
Here is the 11:15am chart on spot gold.

Posted by Posted by Bill Cara on June 5, 2006 11:20:27 AM | Category: Bullion , Gold
Discourse
Bill-
Along those lines I would expect one more violent attempt to shake out weak hands before this goes higher, perhaps a move down to the 610 range or a bit lower. Gold is sitting right around its 50dma. If it breaks below then I will wait before picking up additional positions. If it breaks decisively above I will lay on new longs of GDX. The attack on gold needs a weaker oil price and a stronger day of $USD to pull it off. Not there today.
Posted by: MarkM
at
June 5, 2006 11:52 AM [link]
Bill,
If you are correct, the underlying issue is probably related to geopolitics or derivatives. If gold popped due to one of these issues, I have to think that the stock market will have some serious downside risk. This would probably be a bad way to improve my P&L, although improved it would be.
BTW, I have rethought something I mentioned before. "Something" is always behind changes at exchanges... Whether or not that "something" moves markets is only known in hindsight.
Posted by: g034
at
June 5, 2006 12:34 PM [link]
New more powerful battery uses
silver and zinc.
Posted by: DollarBill
at
June 5, 2006 12:40 PM [link]
NYMEX silver warehouse stocks
Posted by: DollarBill
at
June 5, 2006 12:47 PM [link]
Sign of the Times!
Everbank reporting today:
"The IMF's director of the Middle East and Central Asia, Moshin Kahn, has suggested that the Persian Gulf countries consider pegging their currencies to the euro, instead of the dollar. "We're advocating the Gulf states stay with the dollar for now, but think seriously about the euro" Moshin was quoted as saying... There are 6 countries currently pegging their currency to the dollar, that want to form their own single currency by 2010."
No indication they will do it now. Other countries have voiced an interest in switching out of dollars, but it's interesting an IMF Director brought up the suggestion.
Long: weakening dollar
Posted by: Seamus
at
June 5, 2006 1:58 PM [link]
This story was commented on here:
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2006/06/the_art_of_inve.html
excerpt:
I guess it is plausible but I tend to discount his commentary. It would be more plausible if the Comex just removed limits on gold.
I would surmise it is for the opposite reasons he discusses. I have no proof but the opposite argument is more logical. The Comex raised margin requirements across the board. Not just gold. That is typically to reduce speculation. I'd expect the same actions to follow in international commodities markets as Bernanke talked to both his EU and Tokyo equivalent today about this topic.
So, if you take that along with price limit removals, that implies they are making it more difficult to buy commodities and opening up volatility.
That would mean possibly wild swings in all commodities coupled with increased money to required to actually trade each contract. To me that is an attempt to shake speculators out of commodities and return the market to producers and consumers. Obviously, I have no more insight other than we've got government officials and central bankers trying to come down on the commodities parade and this action supports their efforts.
Posted by: Kai
at
June 5, 2006 4:48 PM [link]
All I wrote at 11:20am is that: "I have a sense of these things, as you know. And my crystal ball is telling me that this is no time to be shaken out of precious metals. I expect a summer rally that will take the gold price to a new high."
I felt that there would be a shake-out attempt soon, and there was -- as soon as Bernanke started to speak an hour or two later.
And I do feel there will be a significant rally this summer, which I have said for a couple weeks. That's all.
I did write earlier this morning that I was asking any pro traders who are at COMEX if they had an opinion because I don't get it. How much debate went into this change, and did NYMEX do the same or just for COMEX?
I'm trying to gather info as to reasons why the Exchange took this action at this time. What could be the reasons? I am intellectually curious, not giving opinions on something I know little about.
A separate point is that yes, I expect a rally in gold markets that could (possibly) put the price motion into a significant trajectory. I said that if that were to happen, and there were limit up barriers, then some NY traders could get buried if traders elsewhere in the world were allowed to squeeze those who were short in NYC.
Do I see the Exchange trying to stop trading because they fear that these contracts might be going to zero? No, because the commercials are short, not the public. Besides, have you even heard of anybody talking that speculators would like to drive gold to zero?
So I happen to think that the elimination of limits has more to do with protecting local traders if global (i.e., foreign) markets get carried away on the upside.
Do I think it was done to remove volatility, and rein in the speculators? I don't see how it would. Limits were put in to limit extreme trading, so removing them presumably works in reverse.
But since I don't trade futures, I simply want to ask others who do, what their take is.
Posted by: Bill Cara
at
June 5, 2006 5:30 PM [link]
Bill, check out this read:
http://www.financialsense.com/Market/wrapup.htm
Posted by: flincinc
at
June 5, 2006 6:08 PM [link]
Gaaaaaa!!!!Holy Smokes!! It can't be good for gold that the new treasury secretary's former company, which he owns 3,230,024 shares, is net short over 47,000 futures contracts. Talk about a conflict of interest. Great data in that link by the way.
I hope the global market is ready to buy up all that gold that paulson is sure to unload to manipulate the price down.
Someone else posted this scenario earlier but did not link in the data. Anyway, it is great to be able to come to this blog and have lots of good relevant information posted by Bill and many readers. Hats off to everyone.
Posted by: cb
at
June 6, 2006 3:44 AM [link]

Thanks for the article link, Bill. Another plug for gold is the fact that the crummy employment data on Friday and weaker ISM numbers this morning will probably offset the higher reported PCE number and help influence Bernanke to pause on 6/29. If he does, gold will be pushed up on a weaker dollar for most of the summer.
Posted by: smess
at
June 5, 2006 11:39 AM [link]