Tag Archives: Gold

Poster Board on Sentiment; A Contrarian Investor

I like to have a reference to refer back to a year or five years from now capturing certain points in time.   The market seems to be placing peak confidence in financial assets (stocks) vs. gold.

This post continues from a prior post: http://csinvesting.org/2016/11/17/when-no-one-wants-em-search-strategy/

The Bearish Gold Articles keep on coming:  http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-why-you-should-never-buy-and-hold-gold-2016-12

http://seekingalpha.com/article/4032167-gold-miners-perfect-bear-case

http://bloom.bg/2hWukKn Running out of metal.

Even bullish mining investors expect “waterfall declines” and gold going below $1,100. Momentum creates the news:  http://www.kitco.com/news/video/show/Gold–Silver-Outlook-2017/1456/2016-12-22/Mining-Stocks-Could-See-Waterfall-Declines—David-Erfle   To be fair, he is long-term bullish, but note the “certainty, inevitability” of gold falling in USD below $1,100 or even to $1,000.  Since he is probably considered strong hands (better capitalized with more experience in precious metals miners) his view indicates VERY bearish near-term (1 day to two/three months sentiment). As I interprete this news.

Financial risk is increasing on US company balance sheets, but then who cares while confidence is high?

As an investor, you want to monitor the amount of capital (especially in a capital intensive business!) going into and out of a business.   An industry starved of capital augurs well for future returns!

‘Anonymous Billionaire’ in the Spotlight After 1,000% Rally

  • Alaska fund is No.2 fund focused on Brazilian equities
  • Barros’s fund is now buying up Fibria, Marcopolo, Vale

Luiz Alves Paes de Barros is something of an enigma in Sao Paulo’s financial circles. At 69, he’s known around town as the “anonymous billionaire” for quietly amassing a fortune by wagering on stocks almost no one else seemed to want.

In Magazine Luiza SA, Barros may have made one of his best bets yet.

Starting in late 2015, Barros’s Alaska Investimentos Ltda. made the battered retailer one of its biggest holdings, a brazen move in a nation stuck in the middle of its worst recession in a century. It paid off. Magazine Luiza has surged more than 1,000 percent since reaching a record low about a year ago, making it the top stock in one of the world’s top-performing markets. That turned Alaska’s Black Master, which Barros co-manages with Henrique Bredda and Ney Miyamoto, into the No. 2 fund among 569 peers focused on Brazilian equities, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Barros’s latest success only adds to the intrigue surrounding one of Brazil’s most storied, but media-shy, individual investors. Early in his career, he traded commodities and was a partner of star fund manager Luis Stuhlberger at what is now Credit Suisse Hedging-Griffo. Barros then spent the next half century investing only his own cash, almost exclusively in Brazilian stocks, and regulatory filings show he personally holds 1.2 billion reais in equities.

When it comes to managing other people’s money, Barros is a rookie, having co-founded Alaska in July 2015. But his investing method remains the same. He only holds a handful of stocks, favors companies with bottom-of-the-barrel valuations and usually jumps in as everyone else is bailing.

“Perfecting patience is all I’ve done over the past 50 years,” Barros says. “I love when things get bad. When it’s bad, I buy.”

During two interviews, first in Alaska’s shoebox office in the heart of Sao Paulo’s financial district and then at his personal office on the city’s oldest business thoroughfare, the silver-haired asset manager explained what drew him to Magazine Luiza and went over the stocks he likes now: Fibria Celulose SA, Braskem SA, Marcopolo SA and Vale SA.

“The market has forgotten these stocks,” he says.

Alaska started building a stake in petrochemicals maker Braskem about four months ago (the stock has surged 48 percent since mid-August after tumbling 20 percent this year before then) and pulpmaker Fibria a few months later. Barros likes both companies because they’re fundamentally sound — and valuations are low. Braskem’s price-to-earnings ratio is 8.3, less than half the level three years ago. Fibria’s valuation is less than half the average of the past two years.Marcopolo, a maker of trucks and buses, is a play on Brazil’s rebound from recession, while miner Vale will benefit as global investors start seeking value again over safety. There’s no economic expansion in Brazil without infrastructure investments, he says.

“Vale won’t be a disaster for anyone. When iron-ore prices rise again, Vale will fly,” he said.

If those stocks return just a fraction of what Magazine Luiza did, they’d count as stellar investments. In all, Alaska acquired almost 40 percent of Magazine Luiza’s free-floating shares, regulatory filings show. In 2016’s third quarter, Alaska unloaded half its stake. What’s left of Alaska’s holdings in Magazine Luiza is now worth about 111 million reais ($33 million).

Asked how he knew Magazine Luiza would do as well as it did, he says he didn’t. “I just knew it was cheap.” The fact that the retailer of appliances and electronics had a market value of 180 million reais even though a bank had offered to pay 300 million reais for the right to offer extended guarantees on Magazine Luiza products made that clear.

“Either the bank was crazy or there was value there,” Barros says.

Alaska’s Black Master fund has returned 143 percent in 2016, compared with a 33 percent gain for Brazil’s benchmark Ibovespa stock index. The gains were also driven by a stake in Cia. de Saneamento do Parana, the water utility known as Sanepar that’s almost tripled this year.

Alaska is still a relatively small player in Brazil’s 2.38 trillion-real stock market. The asset manager employs 11 people (“That includes the lady who serves the coffee,” Barros says). While Alaska oversees about 1.6 billion reais, three-quarters of that is Barros’s own cash. But the fund is actively seeking new clients.

Why now, after 50 years of going it alone?

“Because I’m positive that the market is going to rise,” he says.

Gold

3-performance-comparison-chart-768x340

1-incrementum-inflation-signal-768x429

50-slides-for-the-gold-bulls-incrementum-chartbook

goldminersratiozig

lundeen100216-6barrons-gold-mining-1920

compare-bgmi-and-dow

lundeen100216-7

gold-vs-currencies

gold-vs-bonds

gold-vs-stocks

gold-vs-metals

I post these charts for a historical reference point. I do not use them to predict where prices will go.  Note though that rising CinC (currency in circulation) doesn’t always correlate to rising asset prices.

Update: Oct 6th: A contrarian: http://energyandgold.com/2016/10/04/bob-moriarty-i-am-ready-to-buy-silver-at-16/

Using Technical Analysis Fundamentally; Mea Culpa

au-commod

au-stocksUsing Technical Analysis for a Fundamental View:  https://nftrh.com/2016/09/03/gold-the-good-and-the-not-yet-good/

gold_usbusd_090916

gold_yen_090916

The Trend is not your friend

There’s an old saying in the financial markets that the trend is your friend, meaning that you will do well as long as you position your trades in line with the current price trend. This sounds good. The only problem is that you can never know what the current trend is; you can only know what the trend was during some prior period. How is it possible for something you can never know to be your friend?

Market ‘technicians’ often make comments such as “the trend for Market X is up” and “Market Y is in a downward trend” as if they were stating facts. They are not stating facts, they are stating assumptions that have as much chance of being wrong as being right.

A statement such as “Market X’s trend is up” would more correctly be worded as “I’m going to assume that Market X’s trend is up unless proven otherwise”. The proving otherwise will generally involve the price moving above or below a certain level, but the selection of this level is yet another assumption and the price moving above/below any particular level will provide no factual information about the current trend.

More http://tsi-blog.com/2016/09/sorry-the-trend-is-not-your-friend/

Mea Culpa: sequoia-may-2016-transcript  Not much to glean.

However, a question for you:  Is it better to buy franchises or net/nets?

If you could choose between a fair coin that was gold or a rusty tin coin that each paid off 4 to 1 on choosing heads or tails, which one would you prefer?

In October those near Philly Microcap Conference  http://microcapconf.com/conferences/philadelphia-2016/

HAVE A GOOD WEEKEND!

 

Analyst Quiz Part II

fed-blog-federal-reserve-chairman-janet-yellen-testifies-on-capitol-hill

Part I: http://csinvesting.org/2016/02/05/analyst-quiz-is-gold-overvalued-based-on-cpi-go-short/ I will discuss in another post and send a gift to all who provided comments.

Mr. Ackman calls you into his office and tells you that he shorted gold three days ago, because he wants to make money to support his positions in VRX, etc. Goldman Sachs promised sub-$1,000 gold in 2015.  He ignored whatever you said because you are a “junior” analyst.   But today gold is up $50 +.   Pershing Square recently installed two hotlines: 1. for investor suicide prevention and 2. for death threats.   Phones are ringin’ off the hook.

Also, this morning Janet Yellen had a nervous breakdown during her testimony to Congress.  She told Congress that, “We have no clue what is going on.”  Then she asked Congressional leaders to join her in prayer, “God, Help us!”

Her testimony: Negative Rates a failed strategy so do it

http://seekingalpha.com/article/3889006-gold-outlook-improves

You recently read:

  1. Misconceptions about gold
  2. What Determines the Price of Gold and What determines the price of gold_Blumen
  3. Murphy’s Law of Gold Analysis
  4. Gold and 1937 Depression
  5. Money Gold and Chaos
  6. Losing Control

The above readings you may or may not agree with but you press on to learn more. And you see this:

bank shit

What do you advise Mr. Ackman to do now?

God, Help us!

Follow the Capital Cycle as a Contrarian

Stanley

Ed Chancellor on the capital cycle…

From his introduction to Capital Returns: Investing Through the Capital Cycle: A Money Manager’s Reports 2002-15, which was released in hardcover today (Dec. 2015):
Typically, capital is attracted into high-return businesses and leaves when returns fall below the cost of capital. This process is not static, but cyclical – there is constant flux. The inflow of capital leads to new investment, which over time increases capacity in the sector and eventually pushes down returns. Conversely, when returns are low, capital exits and capacity is reduced; over time, then, profitability recovers. From the perspective of the wider economy, this cycle resembles Schumpeter’s process of “creative destruction” – as the function of the bust, which follows the boom, is to clear away the misallocation of capital that has occurred during the upswing.

The key to the “capital cycle” approach – the term Marathon uses to describe its investment analysis – is to understand how changes in the amount of capital employed within an industry are likely to impact upon future returns. Or put another way, capital cycle analysis looks at how the competitive position of a company is affected by changes in the industry’s supply side. In his book, Competitive Advantage, Professor Michael Porter of the Harvard Business School writes that the “essence of formulating competitive strategy is relating a company to its environment.” Porter famously described the “five forces” which impact on a firm’s competitive advantage: the bargaining power of suppliers and of buyers, the threat of substitution, the degree of rivalry among existing firms and the threat of new entrants. Capital cycle analysis is really about how competitive advantage changes over time, viewed from an investor’s perspective.

  1. Follow the capital cycle as a contrarian (well worth STUDYING!)
  2. Gold miners in the capital cycle (part 2)

http://www.marathon.co.uk/global-investment-review.aspx (Read several articles on the capital cycle in investing).

Watch for errors  (Interview of the gentleman pictured above)

Monetary History: Should Legal Tender Laws Be Abolished?

pirates

The Supreme Court’s ruling

Hepburn v. Griswold reached the U.S. Supreme Court in 1869, five years after the war had ended. The Court ruled in favor of Griswold, holding in a 4-3 decision that legal-tender laws violated the U.S. Constitution.

The majority opinion distinguished between money and notes to pay money:

There is a well-known law of currency, that notes or promises to pay, unless made conveniently and promptly convertible into coin at the will of the holder, can never, except under unusual and abnormal conditions, be at par in circulation with coin. It is an equally well-known law, that depreciation of notes must increase with the increase of the quantity put in circulation and the diminution of confidence in the ability or disposition to redeem. Their appreciation follows the reversal of these conditions. No act making them a legal tender can change materially the operation of these laws.

The Court also explained that the power to coin money, which the Constitution delegates to Congress, did not constitute a power to convert promissory notes into money:

It is not doubted that the power to establish a standard of value by which all other values may be measured, or, in other words, to determine what shall be lawful money and a legal tender, is in its nature, and of necessity, a governmental power. It is in all countries exercised by the government. In the United States, so far as it relates to the precious metals, it is vested in Congress by the grant of the power to coin money. But can a power to impart these qualities to notes, or promises to pay money, when offered in discharge of pre-existing debts, be derived from the coinage power, or from any other power expressly given?

It is certainly not the same power as the power to coin money.

With the holding in Griswold, the federal government was left with the power to borrow to finance its operations but without the authority to force people to accept its notes at face value for the payment of debts. Thus, the American people could still protect themselves from a profligate government by expressly providing that notes and contracts could be repaid only in money (i.e., gold coin), not in federal promises to repay money.

We the people

Overturning Griswold

One year later, however, the legal situation changed dramatically. President Ulysses S. Grant, who had commanded Union forces during the war, appointed two new justices to the Supreme Court who promptly joined the minority in Griswold. In Knox v. Lee, decided in 1879, the Supreme Court voted to overturn the decision in Griswold and to uphold the constitutionality of Lincoln’s legal-tender law.

The new majority reasoned that the power to enact a legal-tender law was an implied power that fell under the president’s war powers and the power over monetary affairs that the Constitution had granted to Congress.

But as the dissent pointed out, the implied-powers doctrine cannot be used to create new powers. The war power, for example, entails the power to pay for war expenditures but the means by which to pay for such expenditures were limited to those enumerated in the Constitution, i.e., through taxes and borrowing.

As the dissent also emphasized, the congressional power over monetary affairs was specifically limited to the coinage of money and did not extend to the enactment of laws requiring people to accept federal promissory notes in lieu of such money.

In a separate dissenting opinion, Justice Stephen J. Field pointed out the obvious:

The power “to coin money” is, in my judgment, inconsistent with and repugnant to the existence of a power to make anything but coin a legal tender. To coin money is to mould metallic substances having intrinsic value into certain forms convenient for commerce, and to impress them with the stamp of the government indicating their value. Coins are pieces of metal, of definite weight and value, thus stamped by national authority. Such is the natural import of the terms “to coin money” and “coin;” . . ..

… The power to coin money is, therefore, a power to fabricate coins out of metal as money, and thus make them a legal tender for their declared values as indicated by their stamp. If this be the true import and meaning of the language used, it is difficult to see how Congress can make the paper of the government a legal tender.

Field placed the constitutional issue in a historical context:

The statesmen who framed the Constitution understood this principle as well as it is understood in our day. They had seen in the experience of the Revolutionary period the demoralizing tendency, the cruel injustice, and the intolerable oppression of a paper currency not convertible on demand into money, and forced into circulation by legal tender provisions and penal enactments.

Field also pointed out that the Constitution had not delegated to Congress the power to impair private contracts.

With Knox v. Lee the seeds were sown for a monetary revolution in American life — a revolution that would bring the inflationary plunder and moral debauchery that have characterized nations throughout history. The revolution began with Lincoln. But it would culminate in one of most massive assaults on private property in U.S. history — President Franklin Roosevelt’s nullification of gold clauses in contracts and his confiscation of gold from the American people.

It is impossible to overstate the significance of the Franklin Roosevelt administration’s confiscation of gold and its nullification of gold clauses in contracts. It is one of the most sordid episodes in American history. To get an accurate sense of Roosevelt’s actions, it would not be inappropriate to compare what he did with the domestic economic policies of a later 20th-century ruler, Cuba’s socialist president, Fidel Castro.

On April 5, 1933, newly inaugurated President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 6102, which prohibited the “hoarding” of gold by U.S. citizens. Americans were required to turn their gold holdings over to the federal government at the prevailing price of $20.67 per ounce.

Pursuant to Roosevelt’s executive order, anyone caught violating the law was subject to a federal felony conviction, 10 years’ confinement in a federal penitentiary, and a $10,000 fine. Soon after the confiscation, U.S. officials announced that the government would sell its gold in international markets for $35 an ounce, thereby devaluing the dollar by almost 70 percent and immediately “earning” a potential profit of almost $15 an ounce on the gold it had confiscated.

Two months later, Congress enacted legislation nullifying gold clauses in both government and private contracts, thereby requiring creditors in such contracts to accept devalued paper money in payment of such contractual obligations, even though the contract itself stipulated payment tied to gold.

Reflect for a moment on the significance of what Roosevelt did. Gold coins and gold bullion were private property, just like a person’s automobile, clothing, home, and food. On the mere command of the president of the United States, federal authorities simply confiscated gold holdings that were the private property of the American people and made it a grave federal offense to own such property in the future.

Read The Federal War on Gold

Your thoughts on a better monetary system. Why not let the market choose money and set the price?

 

Gold Stocks: No One Left to Kill?

5-Gold-sentiment-1

An Interesting Juncture for Gold Stocks (A good read with links)

Note that CEF in the above chart trades at an 11% discount to its 60%/40% holding of gold and silver bullion after a four year down-trend–note that this is either hyper-bearishness or massive extrapolation of trend-following.   Apple’s cash hoard could buy the entire public mining sector.   Gold stocks are cheap for a reason: poor capital allocation, poor cost control, and dilution of shareholders revealed in the five-year long bust from an epic boom from 2001 to 2011 caused investors to flee.   Since then many managements have gained religion on cost control and capital discipline (Note Barrick, ABX). All cycles turn, but when? If we knew, then no opportunity.

I always hear investors or analysts ask, “So what is the catalyst?”  If the market is at all efficient–and I would say that it is except at major inflection points–then if we knew the catalyst, then the opportunity would be arbitraged away.  How about the law of low prices or the law of supply and demand.

gold_GNX_231115

Ironically, as gold has declined in US dollar terms, it has risen in real terms versus commodities showing its mettle in a credit contraction.  TSI BLOG

1-Divergences-complete-772x1024The HUI, a gold stock index, is showing relative strength versus gold.   However, certain gold stocks like Novagold (NG), Sabina Gold (SGSVF) or Agnico-Eagle (AEM) are in incipient uptrends or, at least, vastly outperforming their indexes such as GDX or GDXJ.  You must diversify amongst the highest quality producers, developers, and explorers.

This post is not a recommendation but a historical reference point for a hated asset class.  I see much less RISK in a terrible industry such as gold mining than wonderful businesses such as Amazon, CRM, or GE.

A Masters Degree in Mungerisms, Druckenmiller Buys 20% of Portfolio in GLD

Bakshi

A Masters in Munger  Take the university level course.

Charlie Munger

Mungerspeech_june_95

110302239-Munger-Talk-at-Harvard-Westlake

Berkshire Hathaway Annual Meeting Notes 2004

gold and Drucken

Druckenmiller Buys GLD 20%

spy credit spreads

credit spreads widen

What is Mr. Druckenmiller worried about?

Buy-Backs Create Stealth Leverage

wmc150817a

wmc150817b

wmc150817c

Gold “UNDERVALUED?”

letter-aug-16-gold-discount

 

Analysts’ Predictions on Gold; Readings

forecast

forecasts-forecasts-everywhere  (A good post on psychology)

So the gold price drops, so the gold forecasts drop. Some recent calls in order of bearishness:


Towards the end of 2010 I (Bron Suchecki)  started recording forecasts in a spreadsheet, as I noticed many analysts revised their forecasts frequently in response to moves in the gold price. By 2012 I had given up as it was a lot of work to make one point – that in general analysts were just following or projecting the trend.

The chart below shows the forecasts I accumulated from late 2010 to early 2012 (the clustering around July are yearly average forecasts) and I’ve added in the recent ones above.

Continued….on recent gold “smash”

When the gold price has a big move the news agencies ring up traders for a comment. When I read these articles I’m looking for two things: why do traders think it happened and what do they think about gold going forward. Understanding these consensus narratives around gold is useful as they control large amounts of money and their views influence others.
Before I go on to discuss the comments, please note that narratives (see Ben Hunt) are not about truth, they are about what everyone thinks is the truth. For many finance professionals, the truth is less important (if at all) than being in the herd – most are not interested in the career risk of taking a position contra to the consensus view.
In terms of the why, here are some of the more sensible comments:
  • Ross Norman: They choose the optimal moment in the early morning and when Japan was closed for a holiday to get the biggest bang for the buck. It was clearly ‘short’ traders using leverage to trigger (technical) stops” he said. The price later regained some of its ground, allegedly as the profiteers cashed in jackpot gains on options that they also had. “It was a trade within a trade”. (link)
  • Marex Spectron: no coincidence that this happened in the quietest, thinnest period of the week … they deliberately want to move it in a big way (link)
  • “Traders”: Gold also fell in the Chinese derivatives market, which, traders said, added to the impression of an orchestrated attempt to push the price down, triggering others to sell their positions. (link)
  • Martin Armstrong: many rumors floating around from China off-loading because wrong storage figures were released, to a large spec investor who sold 6 tonnes and has taken a huge loss on a leveraged trade! (link)
  • “Traders and Analysts”: attributed the massive move to high-frequency trading algorithms as well as stop-loss selling. (link)
  • Societe Generale: It was just a bit of a bear raid and there was nobody on the other side to mop up the selling (link)
  • Chuck Butler: maybe the gold sale on the SGE was “margin influenced,” which would mean that large investors use gold as collateral on stock trades, and as the Chinese stock market has dropped the margin calls have come in (link)
  • “Market Participant”: The fact that it was done in Asian hours and in a loud, messy manner suggests it may be done by people not directly under European and US regulation (link)
The general view seems to be that it was a deliberate tactical move to push the price down, trigger stops, and try to get gold down to the technically important level of $1080, but with the real objective of making money on another derivative position.
On to the narratives around gold after this price smash. Here are a selection:
  • Singapore-based trader: “We do see a lot of people in China selling gold to get fast cash to go back into the equity market” (link)
  • Phillip Securities: “It looks like the end of an era for gold, China has been grappling with oversupply after importing a record volume in 2013.” (link)
  • Societe Generale: “We have breached significant support levels, we know U.S. rate hikes are coming, there is no inflation and there is no catalyst to hold gold when other markets are doing better” (link)
  • Momentum Holdings Ltd: “With low global inflation and an improving U.S. economy, I doubt we’ll see big economic shocks, which is not good for gold” (link)
  • KBC Asset Management: “Gold is a hedge against everything that can go wrong. But at the moment it appears that not a lot is going wrong. We have an Iran deal, a Greece deal and we have good news from European and U.S. economies. There is no real reason for us to invest in gold and gold companies.” (link)
  • Deutsche Bank: “the “fair value” for gold is around $750. … “All the ducks are now aligned for a gold slide: real interest rates are rising, the dollar is getting stronger and the risk premium on equities is going down” (link)
So no change in the “improving US economy” and “Fed raise rates” story, indeed I feel that market participants see this price smash as confirmation of this narrative. That is not good for gold as it will give them confidence to test gold again. I’m not as confident as they are that everything is looking rosy and all the problems have been solved so I find myself agreeing with Adrian Ash that just like in 1999, this is a case of “peak hubris of policy-makers thinking they had abolished the boom-bust cycle” and that “gold continues to do what it does, rising when you need it and slipping when the financial world thinks it’s just a useless commodity”.

Former Gold Bug Turns Bearish: Http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/35556

No Matter What Book You Read Do Not Buy Gold

Current Sentiment (note small specs INCREASING their shorts as price moves sideways this past week).

vOUmCk-300x67

COT positions

2106-300x153

gold spy

commod to stks

country hubris

Grave Dancing on Goldbugs

From Bloomberg (Bloomberg belongs to a limousine socialist, and is well-known for its pro-central banking/ pro-money printing and anti-gold editorial line. Some of the most ludicrous articles about gold ever published have appeared on Bloomberg):

Gold Slump Not Over as Speculators Go Net-Short for First Time – apparently Bloomberg’s authors have yet to hear about contrarian signals.

Gold Is Only Going to Get Worse (“Our survey shows a majority of traders and investors aren’t optimistic”) – indeed, Bloomberg seems to be blissfully unaware of contrarian sentiment analysis.

Gold Could Fall to the $1,000 Mark (video)

Good Luck Bargain Hunting for Gold Miners – naturally, gold miners are even more doomed than gold itself…

From the Wall Street Journal:

Let’s Get Real About Gold: It’s a Pet Rock – actually, as we have previously pointed out, it’s a door stop, not a pet rock. We should perhaps mention here what Jason Zweig, the author of this WSJ article, wrote in 2011 right at gold’s peak. From Mr. Zweig’s WSJ Article of September 17, 2011:

“Growing numbers of investing experts have been declaring that gold is a bubble: an insanely overvalued asset whose price is bound to burst. There is no basis for that opinion.”

With respect to gold miners (which since then are down by more than 80%) he opined:

“But there is one aspect of gold investing where it is possible to make rational estimates of value: the stocks of gold-mining companies. And, by historical standards, they seem cheap—based not on subjective forecasts of continuing fiscal apocalypse, but on objective measures of stock-market valuation.”

This is really a textbook example of how market sentiment works.

From Marketwatch:

The carnage isn’t over in gold, other metals-mining stocks

Study predicts gold could plunge to $350 an ounce (i.e., here come the extreme predictions, the inverse of the vast bullish consensus and the extreme bullish predictions that were made at the peak by gold bulls)

And all of this was finally crowned with the following pronouncement in the Washington Post:

Gold is doomed

Interestingly the author of this article, Matt O’Brian, actually gets one thing right, although his conclusion remains utterly wrong – he writes:

“When you think about it, a bet on gold is really a bet that the people in charge don’t know what they’re doing.”

That’s exactly what it is Mr. O’Brian. The wrong conclusion he comes to is this one:

”But economists do, for the most part, know what they’re doing.”

Yes, in some parallel universe perhaps. That people can profess such beliefs after the twin debacles of the tech and housing bust and after yet another giant asset bubble has been blown by these “economists who know what they are doing” is truly stunning. How blind and naïve can one possibly be? This article is a good example of statist propaganda. Our wise leaders know what they are doing! How can anyone doubt it!

Meanwhile, the mirror image of bearishness, we see:

Meb Faber ‏@MebFaber  Jul 29

2015 has seen the largest amount ever raised in a biotech IPO, as well as the largest valuation for bio IPO with no drugs. via @IPOtweet.  Can anyone guess how those investments will do over the next five years?

Additional Reading

A reader contributes: http://www.buffettfaq.com/ The blog has questions and answers of Buffett and Munger categorized by different parts of investing.

Common_Stocks_and_Uucommon_profits_and_other_writings.pdf

Also, worth a look: This Blog Analyzes Money Managers

Perpetual Capitulation

macrocosm-600x294

An ode to the end of a con

How long can deception go on?

When prices are set By banks printing debt

All trust in the “markets” is gone!

There is no stand-alone Narrative regarding gold today (June 2013), as there was in 1895. Today gold is understood from a Common Knowledge perspective only as a shadow or reflection of a powerful stand-alone Narrative regarding central banks, particularly the Fed … what I will call the Narrative of Central Banker Omnipotence. Like all effective Narratives it’s simple: central bank policy WILL determine market outcomes. There is no political or fundamental economic issue impacting markets that cannot be addressed by central banks. Not only are central banks the ultimate back-stop for market stability (although that is an entirely separate Narrative), but also they are the immediate arbiters of market outcomes. Whether the market goes up or down depends on whether central bank policy is positive or negative for markets. The Narrative of Central Banker Omnipotence does NOT imply that the market will always go up or that central bank policy will always support the market. It connotes that whatever the central bank policy might be, it will drive a market outcome; whatever the market outcome, it was driven by a central bank policy.

The stronger the Narrative of Central Banker Omnipotence, the more likely it is that the price of gold goes down. The weaker the Narrative – the less established the Common Knowledge that central bank policy determines market outcomes – the more likely it is that the price of gold will go up. In other words, it’s not central bank policy per se that makes the price of gold go up or down, it’s Common Knowledge regarding the ability of central banks to control economic outcomes that makes the price of gold go up or down.

Instead, the focus of the mainstream Narrative effort moved almost entirely towards what open-ended QE signaled for the Fed’s ability and resolve to create a self-sustaining economic recovery in the US. And it won’t surprise you to learn that this Narrative effort was overwhelmingly supportive of the notion that the Fed could and would succeed in this effort, that the Fed’s policies had proven their effectiveness at lifting the stock market and would now prove their effectiveness at repairing the labor market. Huzzah for the Fed!

See 6_30_13-HOW-GOLD-LOST-ITS-LUSTER-THE-ALL-WEATHER-FUND-GOT-WET-AND-OTHER-JUST-SO-STORIES  and   A Negative Narrative on Gold

gold IR

Negative News Tends to Cluster at MAJOR bottoms:

  1. Gold Could Go To $350
  2. Gold Sends a Message
  3. Gold Could Plunge to $800

My Jaw Dropped: Long gold, short US stocks, Short US Dollar

3-Gold-Optix-1024x641
low gold

Zeal073115A

commodities and emerging market equities

Commodities

Will the US Dollar Continue its Rampage Higher? 272660136-Raoul-Pal-GMI-July2015-MonthlyRate hikes and goldRate hikes are “bad” for gold?

rising rates bad for gold
Zweig Calls HighStocktoCommodityAtAllTimeHighInvestors above flee tangible assets for financial assets. Taken to an extreme, input costs for companies will go to zero and profit margins to infinity. Reality?

Biotech Fantasy2Biotech Fantasy