Tag Archives: Bitcoin

Anti-Gold Puppet Now Hints Gold Will Soar

Several representatives of the elitists have been warning about a major global financial crisis.  Recently the former Head of the Monetary and Economics Department at the Bank of International Settlements, the Central Bank of Central Banks, warned that there are “more dangers now than in 2007.”

Goldman Sachs commodities analyst, Jeff Currie, who is infamous for incorrectly predicting gold would drop to $800 about three years ago, recently advised anyone listening to own physical gold:  “don’t buy futures or ETFs…buy the real thing. . .the lesson learned was that if gold liquidity dries up along with the broader market, so does your hedge, unless it’s physical gold in a vault, the true hedge of last resort.”

Jeffrey Christian has spent most of his career operating as a shill for the western Central Banks and bullion banks who lead the effort to manipulate gold using fraudulent paper gold derivatives.  He scoffs at the idea that gold is manipulated.   It was curious, then, when he was interviewed by Kitco and was recommending that investors should hold at least 20% of their assets in gold.  He also forecast a $1700 price target.

SGT Report invited me to discuss the significance Christian’s comments, which of course included a denial of gold manipulation:

If you are interested in learning more about either the Mining Stock Journal or Short Seller’s Journal, please follow these links:

Mining Stock Journal info                                –                            Short Seller’s Journal info

The Bitcoin And Cryptocurrency Bubble

I actively traded the internet stocks during the late stages of the internet/tech stock bubble in 1999 – from the short side. I will admit that I did take a few long-side day trade rides on a few internet stocks. I remember one Chinese internet stock that I bought in the morning at $10 after its IPO free’d up to trade and sold it about 2 hours later at $45.  To this day I have no idea what the company’s concept was all about  – I think it was one of those incubators. I doubt that company was in existence after 2001.  As such, the crypto-currency craze reminds me of the internet stock bubble.

The cryptos certainly are a heated debate. The volume from the Bitcoin defenders is deafening, the degree to which I’ve only seen near the peak of bubbles. I had a subscriber cancel his Mining Stock Journal subcription after sending me an email explaining that he canceled because he was pissed off that I was not a Bitcoin proponent.  He accused me of discouraging people from buying Bitcoins. His loss, he’s missed on out some high rate of return trade ideas in a short period of time like Banro and Tahoe Resources.  I’m not trying to discourage anyone from buying anything. I’m simply laying out the “caveat emptor” case.

Having said that, there’s truth to the proposition that the inability to short Bitcoin contributes to its soaring valuation.  I’d like to have an opportunity to see what would happen to the value of gold if the ability to short gold via the paper gold mechanism was removed from the equation.

Is it “Bitcoin” or “Bitcon?” The cost to produce, or “mine,” a Bitcoin does not imbue it with inherent value, as some have argued. It cost money to produce Pet Rocks in the 1970’s and they took off like a Roman Candle in popularity purchase price. Now if you own a Pet Rock, it’s nearly worthless. It costs money to produce and defend dollars. We know the dollar is headed for the dust-bin of history.

I’m not saying you can’t make money on cryptos. A lot of people made a small fortune on internet company stocks in 1999. But I’d bet that 98% of the internet stocks IPO’d during the tech bubble no longer exist. Currently cryptos are fueled by the “greater fool” model of making money. Most buyers of the cryptos are buying them on the assumption they’ll be able to sell them at a later time to another buyer at a higher price.

Cryptos are de facto fiat currencies. Perhaps there’s a limit to the supply of each one individually. But that proposition has not been vetted by the test of time. I do not believe that anything in cyberspace is 100% immune from hacking. Just because there have not been reports of the Bitcoin block-chain being hacked yet does not mean it can’t be hacked. It’s also possible that, for now, any breach has been covered up. Again, the test of time will resolve that. However, as we’ve seen already, the quantity of cryptocurrencies can multiply quickly in a short period of time. Thus, in that regard cryptos are no different than any fiat currency.

Finally, all it takes is the flip of a switch and your Bitcoin is unusable. But all these flaws are, for now, covered up by the euphoria of the mania. This is no different from every flawed “investment” mania in history. The current wave of crypto buyers are buying them with the hope of selling them at higher price later. “Hope” is not a valid investment strategy. “Hope” is the heart-beat of a speculative market bubble.

Perhaps one of the most definitive signals that the top in Bitcoin is imminent is this snapshot taken by the publisher of the Shenandoah blog at johngaltfla.com:

This picture was snapped in Florida. The sign says “got bitcoin? Passive income and no recruiting. Earn up to 1% on your money Monday – Friday.”

I recall reading about the process by which Bitcoins are “mined.” Anyone can get started but it involves an upfront investment plus the ongoing expense of the considerable amount of energy used to power the computer system required to engage in the mining process.

Let me guess, the creators of Bitcoin will be happy to assist you with buying the equipment and software necessary to get started?  How is this any different from a high-tech-equivalent of a multi-level marketing scheme?  As johngaltfla asserts: “When someone implies that it is ‘easy money’ it isn’t, it is a bubble.”

I’m not here to criticize anyone attempting to profit from trading Bitcoin. I am suggesting that it is not a good idea to get married to the trade. I regret not loading up on Bitcoins in 2012.

Without a doubt I believe there is legitimacy to the cryptocurrency concept. However,  I can envision a Central Banking-led attempt to implement the crptocurrency model as means of centralizing the process of removing cash currency from the system. But that also means the eventuality that Governments collude to remove competing cryptos from the internet. This is just surmisal on my part.  Again, the test of time will determine the ultimate fate of cryptos.

Speaking of time-tested money, it’s worth noting that China is going to roll out a gold-backed yuan oil futures contract – not a cryptocurrency-backed yuan contract. Perhaps one of the major Central Banks will eventually roll out a gold-backed cryptocurrency. That’s where I believe this could be headed.

Should You Use Leverage With Precious Metals And Mining Stocks?

While I will maintain, until proven wrong by the test of time, that Bitcoin and Cryptocurrencies are nothing more than a temporary fad, investing with a long term outlook (20-30 years) gives the investor the best probability of generating life-style changing wealth.

William Powers, of MiningStockEducation.com, invited onto his podcast to discuss using leverage in precious metals and mining stock investing.  We discuss greed/fear, using margin with mining stocks, volatility, options, futures and the leveraged ETFs.

The problem for most investors, and the reason many have not made a lot of money – or might have lost money – in the precious metals sector is the inability to invest with a long term perspective.  Since 2001, gold has outperformed every asset class.  The mining stocks, in general as measured using the HUI index, have outperformed the Dow/Naz since 2001.

If your reason to be invested in a sector is still valid, there’s no reason to sell investments in that sector.  Have the reasons for investing precious metals as a hedge against a collapsing U.S. economic and political system, and thereby a collapse in the U.S. dollar, changed? Have the problems taking the U.S. down been fixed?  The answer is pretty obvious, which means you should be holding your precious metals investments, even if you bought them in early 2011.   In fact, if you bought then, you should be buying more now.  I know I have been adding to my holdings gradually since early 2016.

The next issue of the Mining Stock Journal will be published this Thursday.  I’ll be reviewing a junior stock that  has gone parabolic and a mid-cap producer that has been hammered hard but is poised to bounce back just as sharply.  You can learn more about the MSJ here – new subscribers get all of the back-issues:  Mining Stock Journal information.

Gold, A Banking Collapse And Cryptocurrencies

“We believe the effect of the troubles in the subprime sector on the broader housing market will be limited and we do not expect significant spillovers from the subprime market to the rest of the economy or to the financial system,” – Fed Chairman, Ben Beranke – May 17, 2007.

“You know probably that would be going too far but I do think we’re much safer and I hope that it will not be in our lifetimes and I don’t believe it will be.” – Fed “Chairman,” Janet Yellen – June 27, 2017

Hmmm…

Oil, Gold and Bitcoin

The falling price of oil did not garner any mainstream financial media attention until today, when U.S. market participants woke up to see oil (both WTI and Brent) down nearly $2.  WTI briefly dropped below $43.   The falling price of oil reflects both supply and demand dynamics.  Demand at the margin is declining, reflecting a contraction in global economic activity which, I believe the data shows, is accelerating.   Supply, on the other hand, is rising quickly as U.S. oil producers – specifically distressed shale oil companies – crank out supply in order to generate the cash flow required to service the massive energy sector debt load.

I am quite surprised by the rapid fall of oil (WTI basis) from the $50 level, because I concluded earlier this year that the Fed was attempting to “pin” the price of oil to $50:

The graph above is a 5-yr weekly of the WTI continuous futures contract.  Oil bottomed out in early 2016 and had been trending laterally between the mid-$40’s and $55.  I read an analysis in early 2016 that concluded that junk-rated shale oil companies would implode if oil remained in the low $40’s or lower for an extended period of time.  Note that some of the TBTF banks who underwrote shale junk debt were stuck with unsyndicated senior bank debt (i.e. they were unable to find enough investors to relieve the banks of this financial nuclear waste).  Thus, the Fed has been working to keep the price of oil levitating in the high $40’s/low $50’s, in part, to prevent financial damage to the big banks who have big exposure to shale oil debt.

The problem for the Fed is that it can’t control the global supply of oil.  There’s too many players.  With oil pinned in that trading range, U.S. oil companies have been pumping out oil as quickly as possible.  The oil drilling rig count has risen for 22 weeks – Oilpro.com – the longest consecutive streak since 1987.  Rising production from the U.S. and elsewhere is keeping global stockpiles high, especially relative to demand.  As a result, you get chart of the price of oil that looks like the one above.  Oil is now well below both the 50/200 dma plus the RSI and MACD are pointing  straight south, indicating a high probability of lower prices for awhile.  Also, note the rising volume in conjunction with the falling price.  This is indicates that market participants have been and continues to be better sellers.

The Fed is thus unable to pin the price of oil to $50 on a sustainable basis.  Why? Because it has no control over the global supply and demand, which prevents control the price of oil for any meaningful period of time (just ask OPEC about that).  Similar to the Fed’s price-management of oil, the Fed has been keeping gold pinned under $1300 since early November in an effort to prevent a rising price of gold from undermining the dollar’s reserves status and signalling the escalating economic and financial distress in the U.S. This is despite rising demand for physical gold coming from numerous eastern hemisphere countries.  As long as the Fed (and western Central Banks) can continue delivering physical gold into the massive demand vortex in the eastern hemisphere, it can somewhat successfully manage the price.

Also similar to oil, the Fed has no control over the supply and demand of gold, except to the extent that the Fed/western Central Banks are still holding gold that can be leased out or custodial gold that can be hypothecated for the purpose of enabling a continuous flow of physically deliverable to gold the east.   But the difference between oil and gold is that the supply of mined gold is relatively fixed (and has been over a long period of time).  At some point the western Central Banks will run out of access to enough gold that can be delivered to buyers who paid to settle their purchases upfront.  At that point, the chart of the price of gold will look like the recent graph of Bitcoin, Ethereum, etc.

This brings up a quick point about the cryptocurrencies.   When the U.S. blocked Iran’s access to the SWIFT trade settlement system, India began to pay for the oil it imports from Iran with gold.  These were very large-dollar transactions. We have yet to hear any reports of sovereign nations using Bitcoin or other cryptos for payment to settle trade agreements. For me, this highlights yet another difference between the use of gold as a currency vs the cryptos.  I want to make it clear that I’m not in the anti-cryptocurrency camp, but I do believe that, ultimately, precious metals (gold and silver) are much more functional as a form of money than the cryptos.   Bitcoin debuted for peer-to-peer transactions in 2009. Gold has functioned for this purpose for over 5,000 years.  My preference in this situation is to bet big on the form of money that has pedigree.

Portrait Of A Stock Bubble

Just like the Dutch Tulip Bulb bubble, internet stock bubble, and the  mid-2000’s financial asset bubble, the current stock market is no longer  a price-discovery mechanism.   It has deteriorated into a venue in which Central Bank-manufctured liquidity – in the form of printed currency and credit creation – has flooded into the system, enabling investors to chase the few stocks rising in price at the highest velocity (click to enlarge, graph on the left sourced from Jesse’s Cafe Americain).

The drivers of this modern day Dutch Tulip phenomenon are the so-called “Five Horsemen” stocks – AAPL, AMZN, FB, GOOG,MSFT. To that grouping I toss in TSLA.  Among all of those bubble stocks, TSLA has become, by far, the most disconnected from any remote intrinsic, fundamental value.  AAPL alone is responsible for 25% of the YTD gain in the Dow and 13% of the YTD gain in the S&P 500. AAPL’s revenues and operating income have declined over the last three years (2014 to 2016).  More often than not, even on days when the S&P/Dow are red, most if not all of the Five Horsemen + TSLA  seem to close green.

Eventually, the music will stop and this “no-price-discovery-possible” market will become a “can’t find a seat” market.  The abruptness and rate of decline will be breathtaking. Perhaps only matched by the outflow of capital from the cryptos by “investors” who leveraged up their cryptocurrency holdings to throw more “money” at TSLA.

The good news is that a lot of money can be made shorting stocks.  Since April, stocks like IBM, GS, SHLD, BZH and GE presented in the Short Seller’s Journal as shorts have outperformed the SPX/Dow.  SHLD is down 47% in 7 weeks – a home run.  BZH is down 18% in three weeks.  In the next issue, a “funky” financial stock will be featured that has the potential to drop at least 50% over the next 12 months if not sooner.

No one knows what event will trigger the stock bubble collapse.  One possibility is the ongoing financial implosion of the State of Illinois.  In stock bubble periods, all news is imbued with “the glass is half full.”  As an example, Illinois’ credit rating was reduced recently to BB+/Baa3.  That is a junk rating. But the media characterizes it as a “the lowest investment grade” rating – i.e. the “glass is half full.”

Both rating agencies never downgraded Enron to junk until it was weeks from Chapter 7 bankruptcy.  Illinois is on the brink of financial disaster.   See this article as an example:  Illinois Owes Billions.  This problem is absolutely dwarfed by Illinios’ public pension problem, which Illinois underfunded by a couple hundred billion (officially about $130 billion but that’s not on a true mark-to-market basis).

When the music finally stops, the perma-bubble bulls will be looking for that proverbial “seat” in all the wrong places.  But the next stampede of capital will be out of stocks, bonds, cryptos and “investment” homes and into physical gold, silver and mining stocks.

Is Bitcoin Standing In For Gold?

Paul Craig Roberts and Dave Kranzler

In a series of articles posted on www.paulcraigroberts.org, we have proven to our satisfaction that the prices of gold and silver are manipulated by the bullion banks acting as agents for the Federal Reserve.

The bullion prices are manipulated down in order to protect the value of the US dollar from the extraordinary increase in supply resulting from the Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing (QE) and low interest rate policies.

The Federal Reserve is able to protect the dollar’s exchange value vis-a-via the other reserve currencies—yen, euro, and UK pound—by having those central banks also create money in profusion with QE policies of their own.

The impact of fiat money creation on bullion, however, must be controlled by price suppression. It is possible to suppress the prices of gold and silver, because bullion prices are established not in physical markets but in futures markets in which short-selling does not have to be covered and in which contracts are settled in cash, not in bullion.

Since gold and silver shorts can be naked, future contracts in gold and silver can be printed in profusion, just as the Federal Reserve prints fiat currency in profusion, and dumped into the futures market. In other words, as the bullion futures market is a paper market, it is possible to create enormous quantities of paper gold that can suddenly be dumped in order to drive down prices. Everytime gold starts to move up, enormous quantities of future contracts are suddenly dumped, and the gold price is driven down. The same for silver.

Rigging the bullion price prevents gold and silver from transmitting to the currency market the devaluation of the dollar that the Federal Reserve’s money creation is causing. It is the ability to rig the bullion price that protects the dollar’s value from being destroyed by the Federal Reserve’s printing press.

Recently, the price of a Bitcoin has skyrocketed, rising in a few weeks from $1,000 to $2,200. Two explanations suggest themselves. One is that the Federal Reserve has decided to rid itself of a competing currency and is driving up the price with purchases while accumulating a large position, which then will be suddenly dumped in order to crash the market and scare away potential users from Bitcoins. Remember, the Fed can create all the money it wishes and, thereby, doesn’t have to worry about losses.

Another explanation is that people concerned about the fiat currencies but frustrated in their attempts to take refuge in bullion have recognized that the supply of Bitcoin is fixed and Bitcoin futures must be covered. It is strictly impossible for any central bank to increase the supply of Bitcoins. Thus Bitcoin is standing in for the suppressed function of gold and silver.

The problem with cryptocurrencies is that whereas Bitcoin cannot increase in supply, other cryptocurrencies can be created. In order to be trusted, each cryptocurrency would have to have a limited supply. However, an endless number of cryptocurrencies could be created that would greatly increase the supply of cryptocurrencies. If entrepreneurs don’t bring about this result, the Federal Reserve itself could organize it.

Therefore, cryptocurrency might be only a temporary refuge from fiat money creation. This would leave gold and silver, whose supply can only gradually be increased via mining, as the only refuge from wealth-destroying fiat money creation.

For as long as the Federal Reserve can protect the dollar by bullion price suppression and money creation by other reserve currency central banks, and as long as the Federal Reserve can keep the influx of new dollars out of the general economy, the Federal Reserve’s policy adds to the wealth of those who are already rich. This is because instead of driving up consumer prices, thus threatening the US dollar’s exchange value with a rising rate of inflation, the Fed’s largess has flowed into the prices of financial assets, such as stocks and bonds. Bond prices are high, because the Fed forced up the price by purchasing bonds. Stock prices are high, because the abundance of money bid prices higher than profits justify. As the US government measures inflation in ways designed to understate it, the consumer price index and producer price index do not send alarm systems into the markets.

Thus, we have a situation in which the Fed’s policy has done nothing for the American population, but has driven up the values of the financial portfolios of the rich. This is the explanation why the rich are becoming more rich while the rest of America becomes poorer.

The Fed has rigged the system for the rich, and the whores in the financial media and among the neoliberal economists have covered it up.

A Stock Market Crash: A Matter Of “When,” Not “If”

Given group-think and the determination of policy makers to do ‘whatever it takes’ to prevent the next market ‘crash,’ we think that the low-volatility levitation magic act of stocks and bonds will exist until the disenchanting moment when it does not. And then all hell will break loose, a lamentable scenario that will nevertheless present opportunities that are likely to be both extraordinary and ephemeral.  –  Highly regarded hedge fund manager, Paul Singer, in his latest investor newsletter

Singer has apparently has unloaded $5 billion worth of stock, which is 15% of his funds management.

Anyone happen to notice that several market commentators have argued that Bitcoin is  a bubble but the same stock “experts” look the other way as the U.S. stock market becomes more overvalued by the day vs. the deteriorating underlying fundamentals? Bitcoin going “parabolic” triggers alarm bells but it’s okay if the stock price of AMZN is hurtling toward parity with the price of one ounce of gold. Tesla burns a billion per year in cash. It sold 76,000 cars last year vs. 10 million worldwide for General Motors. Yet Tesla’s market cap is $51.7 billion vs. $48.8 billion for GM.

This insanity is the surest sign that the stock market bubble is getting ready to pop. If you read between the lines of the the comments from certain Wall Street analysts, the only justification for current valuations is “Central Bank liquidity” and “Fed support of asset values.” This is the most dangerous stage of a market top because it draws in retail “mom & pop” investors who can’t stop themselves from missing out on the next “sure thing.” There will be millions of people who are permanently damaged financially when the Fed loses control of this market. Or, as legendary “vulture” investor Asher Edelman stated on CNBC, “I don’t want to be in the market because I don’t know when the plug is going to be pulled.”

A friend/colleague of mine is a point and figure chart aficionado. He sent me an email on Thursday in which he said even with the five horsemen (FANGs + AAPL) and the SPX and Dow up today (and the SPX setting a new all-time high), the bullish percent index (BPI) of the NYSE is negative which means there are more stocks generating a point and figure sell signal than a buy signal. This has been fairly consistent over the past couple of weeks. (Note: the bullish percent index is a breadth indicator based on the number of stocks on point & figure buy signals). When the BPI is negative over an extended period of time, it reflects the fact that a lot more stocks in the NYSE are trending lower than are trending higher. When a declining number of stocks are participating in the move higher of a stock index, it is a bearish signal.

As my friend says, “in reality this will continue until it doesn’t.” He goes on to say: ” what this shows me is that at this time it’s much better to be strategically short than broadly short. This will change too at some point…”

Picking out strategic shorts has been the focus of the Short Seller’s Journal. Not all of the ideas have worked and a couple back-fired – in defiance of the company’s underlying fundamentals – but many ideas are well below the price at which they were presented either the first time or presented again thereafter. One idea that has declined 39% (declined $42) since August 2016 is Ralph Lauren, which was presented on August 14, 2016 at $108.19. It closed Friday at $66.11, down 41 cents on a day when the SPX hit another all-time high. RL has closed lower on 12 of the last 13 days.

One subscriber emailed me earlier this week to let me know he had shorted 200 shares at $108 and covered 100 of it this week. He’s hanging on to the other 100 share short. I mentioned to him that my 12-18 month target was $50 and that he should hold the other 100 short at least until August because it’s only going to get worse for the consumer and retailers.

Currently there’s a a large percentage of stocks trading below their 50 and 200 day moving averages.  Many stocks are close or at 52-week lows.  Some stocks, like Sears Holdings (SHLD) are no-brainer shorts.  Sears is going to file for bankruptcy – it’s down 32% from April 2nd, when it was presented as a short idea in the Short Seller’s Journal.  Similar to the probability of a stock market crash, it’s  a matter of “when,” not “if.”