prévisions des cours de l'argent : Hommel réfute celles de Cabalasmédias l
C'est remarquable de lucidité et de pertinence, à lire, relire, diffuser et poster partout pour éclairer vos contemporains...Jason invite ses lecteurs à coller cet article sur leur profil face book et à le spammer... c'est en effet, une excellente suggestion que je soutiens... et je m'en vais de ce pas le pourceauposter...
- Citation :
- je vous l'ai stocké et protégé de toutes disparition fortuite et inopportune
enregistrez ce lien car l'article mérite vraiment d'être lu et
décortiqué, Jason est fidèle à lui même et son contre-poison vient à
point nommé pour remettre les FAITS en perspective
... Wall Street Journal Aids Silver Price Suppression(Through misinformation, lies and omission! Plus, the year in review, and
price predictions for 2011)Silver Stock Reportby Jason Hommel, December 29th, 2010
I'm called upon by my regular readers to refute, rebut, and rebuke this
bad article on silver from the Wall Street Journal. Price
of Silver Soaring
Investor-Fueled 74% Gains Dwarf Gold; Race to Open
By CAROLYN CUI And ROBERT GUY MATTHEWS
Regarding (RE) the WSJ comment: "unexpected surge in investor
Really? Unexpected, you say? But precious metals bulls have been predicting
explosions in the price for ten years based on irrefutable fundamentals and
unsustainable market manipulation!
How can investor demand be unexpected
when the price of precious metals has been going up continuously for ten years
now since the year 2000? Don't investors like to buy things that are rising in
price? Don't investors also try to predict things that will rise in price, and
buy them before they really rise? Does the WSJ know anything at all about
Unexpected? Really? When the numbers of silver Eagle 1 oz. coins produced by
the US Mint has been increasing steadily for the past 3-4 years, up from 10
million oz. to nearly 40 million oz. this year? How can a single
year's investor demand be unexpected, when its increase is already a steady
Regarding the WSJ comment: "Prices are rising despite oversupply."
What oversupply? What do you even mean by oversupply?
Here is the dictionary definition of oversupply:http://www.thefreedictionary.com/oversupply
supply in excess of what is appropriate or required."
Ah, the WSJ is no longer reporting fact, but throwing out opinion now.
There is no oversupply, and can never be any oversupply of things such as
gold and silver, since they have the least diminishing marginal utility of all
things on earth, since they are money. Nobody ever complained that they had too
But what does the WSJ mean by oversupply?
& demand numbers produced by such surveys as http://www.silverinstitute.org/
who the WSJ quotes as a source, have "sum up" categories called "Implied Net
Disinvestment" and "Implied Net Investment". http://www.silverinstitute.org/supply_demand.php
When investors are buying, this is often called a surplus, or as the WSJ
says, an "oversupply", and when investors are selling, that is called a
So, apparently, the WSJ is saying that when investors are buying silver
that's "oversupply". And thus, when they describe that action as an
"oversupply", they are really saying that silver purchases by investors are
"inappropriate". Thus, they reveal their bias, with one word.
RE: "Many analysts expected those factors would keep a lid on prices in
But most silver analysts are employed by LBMA bullion banks who have a vested
interest in manipulating silver prices downward, since silver is the Achilles
heel, or arch enemy, of the banking system. Thus, "mainstream" silver analysts
have never gotten a single year's prediction correct in the last ten years of
the bull market in silver and gold. They always "predict" prices for next year
that are within about 5% of current prices, and never any higher. Meanwhile,
silver prices have risen from $4.15/oz. in 2003 to $30.60 now in 2010, which is
a cumulative return of 637%, which, over 7 years, is an average annual gain of
33%. They never come close to predicting such gains.
Check my math, here:http://www.smartmoney.com/compoundcalc/
Have any of the mainstream analysts predicted a silver price gain of 33%, for
the following year, or even close, in the last 7 years? Never. Thus, they are
worse than useless, they are purposefully deceiving, or willfully ignorant, as
is this WSJ article. That should be no surprise, and neither should silver's
RE: "What they didn't expect was an overwhelming flow of money into the
market from investors eager to ride a commodities rally."
Overwhelming flow of money into silver? Really? Let's see, there is $14,000
billion to $18,000 billion of paper dollars in the US banking system, which does
not count dollars in overseas banks, and the rest of the world is printing up
paper money like crazy for competitive devaluations. Meanwhile, the US
government has an annual deficit of $1500 billion or more, depending on how you
count, if you count off budget items, it could be as high as $3000 billion
depending on who you read. Meanwhile, a tiny $3 billion pours into silver,
which is a paltry 2% of 1% of the money in the US banking system, and a mere 10%
of 1% (or 1/1000th) of new US money creation.
I wouldn't call that an overwhelming flow of money into silver. I'd say
that's only a tiny trickle, wouldn't you say?
RE: "This is a story almost entirely about investment," says Stephen Briggs,
senior metals strategist at BNP Paribas.
Well, the silver story, in the future, will be almost entirely about
investment, but today, investors are still buying only a tiny fraction of new
silver mine supply, with the rest being consumed by industrial applications of
all sorts, from fabrication, to photography, to jewelry, silverware, and coins
From the silverinstitute.org:
2009 mine production: 709.6 million oz.
2009 Implied Net Investment: 136.9
million oz. (oversupply, or investor buying)
But let's pause here, and examine the numbers more closely.
Sprott wrote an excellent silver report that reveals that ETF silver demand
is not counted in the "demand" numbers for silver!!! http://www.industrymailout.com/Industry/View.aspx?id=245442&q=264546678qz=3f9465
Fraudulent supply/demand numbers, omitting investor demand, or calling it a
"surplus", is part of the manipulation of silver prices.
But this implies a few other things, too.
Either the exchange traded funds are not actually going out into the market
to buy silver which means they are mostly all fraudulent, or, their net
purchases are more than offset by investors or refiners dumping 1000 oz. silver
bars (the only acceptable form of ETF silver) to dealers who sell it directly to
LBMA banks. We've never had to dump any silver bars in the last 2 years of our
precious metals business.
RE: Investors from the U.S. to China turned to "hard" assets such as copper
and other commodities in part as a hedge against inflation worries.
No, copper has never been a key inflation hedge. Gold and silver are. In
fact, recent reports show that JP Morgan has been buying all the world's
warehouse copper, up to 90% of it. So, JP Morgan owns the copper, not
investors, so this statement is just a bald faced lie.
RE: Exchange-traded funds backed with silver have enabled investors to
invest in a market that traditionally was harder to participate in.
I don't know what's so hard about buying $15,000 worth of silver at $30/oz.
It's only 500 troy ounces, which only weighs 35 pounds, and comes in a box the
size of 9 inches by 9 inches by 3 inches high. Even 60 year old ladies carry
such boxes out of our store all the time. That's one of the world's easiest
commodities to buy. Contrast with WSJ's beloved copper, at $4.40/pound, which
means $15,000 of it would weigh a staggering 3409 pounds! That's why copper is
not remotely a viable inflation hedge, and has never been used as commodity
money, but only as token money. Even 1 troy oz. of copper, at $4.40/oz. divided
by 14.8 troy oz/pound is only worth 29 cents per troy oz., but would cost you
about $4 each for minting costs and distribution, and perhaps $5-10 each for
widespread marketing via MLM plans.
RE: In recent months, concerns about inflation, the European debt crisis and
the U.S. Federal Reserve's recent moves to boost the economy have driven
investors to hard assets, also benefiting silver prices.
Really? I agree. But then, why was silver's move so "unexpected" as the WSJ
first wrote, to most analysts? Shouldn't this have been easily foreseen?
RE: The craze has reached the coin market.
Craze? Craze you say? What do you mean, craze?http://www.thefreedictionary.com/craze
A short-lived popular fashion; a fad.
2. A fine crack in a surface or
Ah, only two definitions for the noun form. Clearly, they don't mean the
second. Ah, they imply silver demand by investors is not only inappropriate,
but will be short lived, and that it's now popular.
Wait, when only 1/1000th of new money is moving into silver, why and how is
that popular? When only 2% of 1% of actual money in the banks, or, less than $2
out of every $10,000 sitting in banks is being invested into silver, how can
that be accurately described as popular? No, silver is very unpopular now,
Let's be honest. If even 1% of paper money in US only banks, were to be
invested into silver, it would be 50 times greater than the investment demand
today, which would be as much as $180 billion dollars, moving into the silver
market that only produces 700 million new oz. by the mines each year. $180
billion divided by 700 million implies no silver buying from anywhere else in
the entire world, and no silver buying from any kind of industrial application,
which implies a lowest possible price of $257/oz., at this "1% demand" level,
which would still be, long, long before silver ever gets to be "popular".
That's a shamefully inaccurate description, calling silver coin buying a
"craze", which also implies things such as:
verb: 1. To cause to become mentally deranged or obsessed; make
verb, intr. 1. To become mentally deranged or obsessed; go
The reason why that word "craze" is particularly objectionable to me is that
silver buyers are returning to rational thought. People who think used, dirty,
printed paper is valuable are the ones who have lost their minds.
RE: "Silver's reliance on investors to prop up the price could cause it to
"Silver's reliance on investors"? No, Investors rely on
But seriously, I agree, silver's price is increasingly reliant upon investors
who sell paper money for silver, and at some point that will ultimately halt
completely. For example, after silver hits $1 million per ounce, the price
could suddenly tumble to either $900,000 per oz., or it could simply stop
trading in terms of paper money altogether, as paper money might just not buy
anything at all at some point. It is far more true to say that paper money's
value relies more on confidence than silver.
But really, the main point with silver is that today's value is certainly not
dependent on investors, but rather, industrial demand, which is far larger, and
more stable. As China alone continues to develop and surpass the
total consumption level of Western nations, their population will consume silver
as does the western world. That would be 6 tenths of an oz. of silver, per
year, per person, because silver is an essential part of switches in electronic
devices. If China consumed that much silver, times 1.3 billion people, that's
780 million ounces, which is more silver than is currently produced annually by
all silver mines in the world. If the world is going to ever run out of things
like cheap oil, or copper, it will certainly run out of cheap silver, first.
RE: "He forecasts an average price of $30.10 per troy ounce next year "
Yes, the analysts never predict a price 33% greater, which, as I calculated
above, is the average annual gain in silver so far in this bull market. Next
year's "average" is always today's price, and always paired with a warning about
silver moving down. In less than two days, next year's average price was
exceeded this year!
RE: "But he cautions, "The number is only going to be achievable as long as
fresh money keeps moving in."
And why wouldn't it? We know that the USA alone will print from $3000
billion to $4000 billion next year. So why wouldn't at least $4.5 billion move
into silver next year? Perhaps it's more likely that $400 billion will move
into silver next year, and silver's price will be $1000/oz.? Well, maybe not,
but a more conservative estimate might be about $10-20 billion, which could
drive silver to $50-100/oz., as that's how this trend is developing.
RE: "Silver's all-time high was set in January 1980 at $48.70 an ounce, or
$129.32 when adjusted for inflation."
Perhaps the worst lies of all. What do they mean by "inflation"? The CPI
index that does not count food, fuel, housing, tuition, or medical expenses?
What does CPI count these days? What's left? Imported clothing, goods made in
China, and computers?
Instead, if we count inflation as the monetary base, as M3, which is no
longer published, we might observe that M3 was $1.8 trillion in 1980, and nearly
$18 trillion today, an increase of ten times as much, thus, the true inflation
adjusted high is not $129.32/oz., but rather $500/oz.!!!
See, another part of the lie is the false specificity of that .32 at the end
of their $129.32, to make it sound so official and supremely accurate, but it's
not remotely accurate.
And neither is my estimate of $500/oz. That's a low ball figure. Is money
M3? What is M3? M3 included short term bonds. Well most of the bond market is
now all "short term" bonds, given that they stopped selling the 30 year bond,
and given that interest rates are all so low, all bonds are priced at the near
equivalent of actual dollars. And the bond market is far larger than the $18
trillion estimate of M3. The bond market could be $25 trillion to $35 trillion,
who knows? Data on that is hard to find.
Much of the bond market is as fraudulent as the paper promises in the silver
market. A lot of people don't buy bonds anymore, they just place bets on the
direction of interest rates, by buying futures on bonds, or options on bonds,
which is an even more fixed and rigged game than the silver price.
Which brings us to derivatives, the bets on bonds, called "interest rate
derivatives", which are estimated to be as high as $400 trillion or more.
If that is money, then the inflation that has taken place since 1980 is just
off the charts, and will ultimately drive silver prices to far higher than
RE: "This year investors are expected to pile a record $4.5 billion into the
silver market, accounting for 24% of the world's total demand, says GFMS Ltd., a
metals consulting firm in London. That's the highest level, in dollar terms, in
decades. Silver's relatively small market size�$19 billion compared with $170
billion for gold�has also played a role in amplifying the impact of investors,
according to GFMS."
Silver's price is moving so fast, it was up nearly $1/oz. in the few days
since this WSJ article. Silver's market size, at 700 million oz., times
$30/oz., is already $21 billion, not $19 billion, but this is a tiny quibble of
The point is that $20 billion, or even $4.5 billion, in a world where $3000
billion of new money is being printed annually by the USA alone, and perhaps as
high as $8000 billion worldwide, is really, really, really small, even if it's a
record number. But the WSJ article never makes comparisons like this, it just
warns that $4.5 billion is a lot, "the highest level in decades", and the word
billion is a lot, in terms of real things, but it's not a lot in terms of
dollars, which are not real things.
RE: "The strength in silver prices has prompted a flurry of development
around the globe and pushed anticipated production in 2010 to 733.2 million
ounces, up 3.3% from 2009 levels, and up 14% since 2006."
Ah, did you think they said that new silver mine supply will increase 3.3%?
No, that's anticipated production. It may be less! They write as if this 3.3%
increase is a lot and will act to reduce prices. However, new paper money in the
USA alone is about 3 Trillion / 15 Trillion, or 20%! And world population
growth is about 1.1%.
RE: "The market is set to see a surplus of 64.4 million ounces in 2010, says
Barclays Capital, which could curb prices."
Wait, wait, wait. Silverinstitute.org says the 2009 "surplus" is 137 million
oz. of implied net investment, while Barclays says the 2010 surplus will be 64.4
million oz.? Ok, if investors were buying 137 million oz. in 2009, and even
more in 2010 to explain the current rise, how will 64.4 million be enough to
satisfy them, without the price moving up?
Less silver certainly won't
curb prices, unless, by using the word "curb" Barclays is implying a chart
formation that looks like a straight line up before leveling off, somewhat like
a curb on the side of a road. But Barclays is not implying that, for sure.
The article notes that a few silver mines will be increasing production. No
mention is made of any mines that will be decreasing production, or closing
altogether, which, of course, happens all the time in the mining business.
Mines are depleting assets, and run dry.
That sums up what I needed to refute in the article.
The article makes no mention of any of the following of this year's major
news items in silver:THE YEAR IN REVIEW
1. No mention of the fact that JP Morgan was sued by at least 25 firms for
manipulating the silver market. (A new lawsuit against JP Morgan on behalf of
SLV investors was just filed, two days after the WSJ article). http://news.silverseek.com/SilverSeek/1293546686.php
No mention of the BIS reports showing that world banks have a net derivatives
exposure of $137 billion of "over the counter" "other preciouse metals"
liability, which is a short position, mostly in silver. Links:http://www.bis.org/statistics/derstats.htmhttp://www.bis.org/statistics/otcder/dt21c22a.pdf
No mention that the BIS changed their own reports, reducing the number for June,
2009, from $203 billion, down $100 billion, to $93 billion, after the US Justice
department said it was investigating JP Morgan for silver manipulation.
No mention that JP Morgan admitted to being short silver, and wanted to placate
internet criticism by attempting to cover their silver.http://silverstockreport.com/2010/jp-morgan-silver-short.html
No mention that the CFTC's Bart Chilton admitted that one large trader had 40%
of the silver market at the COMEX.
6. No mention that the CFTC has been
investigating silver manipulation for over two years.
7. No mention that the
CFTC just delayed imposing position limits on silver.http://silverstockreport.com/2010/cftc-delay.html
No mention of the recent rumor that JP Morgan has two of the CFTC commissioners
on their payroll. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPg4qTNTP-E&sns=fb
No mention of Andrew McGuire's CFTC testimony of a prediction in advance of a JP
Morgan silver manipulation.
10. No mention of Jeff Christion's CFTC
admission that the LBMA is leveraged 100 to one with nearly zero actual physical
metal backing up most "physical" accounts.http://www.bullionbullscanada.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=10586:jeffrey-christians-1001-blunder&catid=48:gold-commentary&Itemid=131
MY PRICE PREDICTION FOR SILVER: At least a high of $40/oz. by next year, 33%
higher than $30 this year.
If the past seven years is any guide, silver's
price should continue at pace, if not outperform, the past seven year's
average gains of 33% per year. Someday, silver could really blow up much faster
than that. Frauds do collapse suddenly. The dollar is fraud. Fractional
reserve banking is fraud. Fractional reserve banking in silver is fraud. Most
of the financial world is fraud today. Silver is not a fraud and is the
opposite of fraud. Silver is not a promise to pay, silver in your hand is
evidence that you have been paid in full.
But let's assume, for the benefit of the doubt, that Carolyn Cui is just a
very bad researcher on silver, and was not intentionally omitting all the major
news items on silver in the past year.
How honest is she? Or the WSJ for that matter?
Here's a WSJ article on silver from May, 2008.
Fundamentals Begin to Weigh On Silver
New Mines' Output, Economic Weakness
Could Crimp Prices
By CAROLYN CUI May, 2008.http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121098087701600147.html
Ah, not very accurate, and not a very good warning. The WSJ should have
warned that the dollar would fall, and that people could protect their
purchasing power by buying silver. Did they? Sadly, no. They have never
gotten it right on silver in this entire bull market, and are as woefully wrong
today, as they were two years ago.
Excerpt: Barclays analyst Suki Cooper, who targets silver's average price at
$15.20. "Silver's fundamentals look less compelling this year and are more
likely to push prices lower," she wrote in a research note.
Laughable! Exactly as I predicted, these buffoons always predict "same as
last year" prices, and are never bullish.
Excerpt: CPM Group, a New York-based commodities research firm, expects
demand for silver to hold up this year, and its price to average $18.25.
I've seen better reports on silver from CAROLYN CUI. I've even written to
her a time or two. So I can conclude that she is not ignorant, but willfully
ignorant, or being misleading on purpose. Perhaps if she does not "toe the line"
she will be out of a job, but if your job involves lying, you should probably
So, what should we conclude, and what should we do, in the order of most
1. Buy silver. Buy real silver that you have carried, lifted, and stored in
your own vault.
2. Do not trust the Wall Street Journal, or CAROLYN CUI or
ROBERT GUY MATTHEWS ever again.
3. Cancel your subscriptions to the Wall
4. Write nasty letters to the WSJ's advertisers, and boycott
them (just kidding, don't waste your time).
5. Subscribe to the free
newsletter at the Silver Stock Report.
6. Share this report in your own
blogs online, or on facebook.
7. Write your own refutations of future
mainstream hit pieces on silver, exposing their intentional lies and
misinformation, and lack of information.
8. Write to Write to Carolyn Cui
and Robert Guy
Matthews at firstname.lastname@example.org
them for their honest answers and justifications to the accurate information
presented here, just for the fun of watching them squirm.
Til next time,
Happy New Year, and we will be open again on Jan. 3rd.
strongly advise you to take possession of real gold and silver, at anywhere near
today's price, while you still can. The fundamentals indicate rising prices for
decades to come.
Our Coin Shops are open 10AM to 5PM Pacific Time, Monday
to Friday, closed weekends.WE ARE CLOSED UNTIL MONDAY,
JH MINT & Coin Shop, Grass Valley, CA --
minimum $5000 order for free shipping, USA shipping only.
also my Mom's Silver Shop in Sacramento, CAwww.momssilvershop.com
Auburn Blvd., #12
Sacramento, CA 95821
(916) 481 5656
(Mom will ship
with no minimum order size, and overseas, and take credit cards and