Gold Price Manipulation

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/metal_are_in_the_pits_2arTlGNbMK7mb1uJeVHb0O

There is no silver lining to the activities of JPMorgan Chase and HSBC in the precious-metals market here and in London, says a 40-year veteran of the metal pits.

The banks, which do the Federal Reserve’s bidding in the metals markets, have long been the government’s lead actors in keeping down the prices of gold and silver, according to a former Goldman Sachs trader working at the London Bullion Market Association.

Maguire was scheduled to testify last week before the Commodities Futures Trade Commission, which is looking into the activities of large banks in the metals market, but was knocked off the list at the last moment. So, he went public.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/metal_are_in_the_pits_2arTlGNbMK7mb1uJeVHb0O#ixzz0ks8lHlrA

Maguire – in an exclusive interview with The Post – explained JPMorgan’s role in the metals pits in both London and here, and how they can generate a profit either way the market moves.

“JPMorgan acts as an agent for the Federal Reserve; they act to halt the rise of gold and silver against the US dollar. JPMorgan is insulated from potential losses [on their short positions] by the Fed and/or the US taxpayer,” Maguire said.

In the gold pits, Maguire sees HSBC betting against the precious metal’s price without having any skin in the game in the form of a naked short.

“HSBC conducts an ongoing manipulative concentrated naked short position in gold. Silver is much easier to manipulate due to its much smaller [market] size,” Maguire added.

“No one at JPMorgan is familiar with Andrew Maguire,” said Brian Marchiony, a company spokesman. HSBC declined to comment.

Also during the CFTC hearing, Jeff Christian, founder of the commodities firm CPM Group, said that the LBMA, the physical delivery market for gold and silver in the UK, has been using leverage, which is another way to depress the price of gold and silver.

Christian said that the LBMA – the same market Maguire trades in – has leverage of about 100-1 on the gold bars settled on the exchange. In layman’s terms, that means if 100 clients requested their bullion bars be delivered, the exchange could only give one client the precious metal.

The remaining requests would have to be settled for cash equivalent. “That is tantamount to a default on the trade,” says Bill Murphy, chairman of the Gold Antitrust Action committee.

Maguire goes further and calls it a fraud: “If you sell something you do not own, then that is fraud.”

Back in 2007, Morgan Stanley agreed to settle a $4.4-million lawsuit brought by precious-metal clients, who alleged that Morgan offered to buy gold and silver and store it for the investors, but never purchased any metal and still charged them storage fees.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/metal_are_in_the_pits_2arTlGNbMK7mb1uJeVHb0O#ixzz0ks8eUXld

Until they can make gold (or coat tungsten bars to trick everyone), bet on gold. Just buy a little every month, or silver – this takes you out of the paper money loop and protects you. Think of it as going on strike against the banksters and public serpents.

Though apparently if you buy it on the LBMA, what you are actually buying is paper from a seller that in fact does not have the gold that they purport to be selling.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Though apparently if you buy it on the LBMA, what you are actually buying is paper from a seller that in fact does not have the gold that they purport to be selling.[/quote]

Right. Take physical delivery.

For the purposes of space, it might be better to own precious gems. Easier to hide in the lining of clothes or store up the poop chute if needed – gross, but an old tried-and-true method.

But not diamonds (IMO.)

Synthetic diamonds are now available for less than $100 per carat which absolutely have 100.00% the visual appearance of natural diamonds, and which are in fact also the same crystal structure of carbon (however with some different trace elements).

Yes, for some period of time people that can afford it will pay 100x more for natural diamonds.

But if the idea is to have a store of wealth for bad times, I really can’t see diamonds as the way to go. Who’s going to pay $10,000 a carat (or whatever) for what is the same thing except for pedigree and except for differences that can only be found with scientific tests? If it looks identical or inferior, then in bad times it’s hard to see people wanting to pay such a premium just to be able to say the stone is natural.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Though apparently if you buy it on the LBMA, what you are actually buying is paper from a seller that in fact does not have the gold that they purport to be selling.[/quote]

Right. Take physical delivery.

For the purposes of space, it might be better to own precious gems. Easier to hide in the lining of clothes or store up the poop chute if needed – gross, but an old tried-and-true method.
[/quote]

Sounds like you speak from experience. I am just kidding. I would rather swallow and crap out a day later, than SIIHP.

I thought it was Glenn Beck that was manipulating the gold market: