Sunday pre-game, 11/10/13



Nothing has really changed from last week, but I figured I'd post updated versions of charts. Gold needs to recover quickly or it's looking to me like $1000 will be tested soon.















17 comments:

costata said...

This is getting crazy. h/t Doug Noland:

http://www.prudentbear.com/2013/11/hearing-janet-yellen.html#.UoblLtLUl8E

November 14 – Bloomberg (Katya Kazakina and Philip Boroff): “Andy Warhol led Sotheby’s biggest auction as the Pop Art icon’s silk-screen painting ‘Silver Car Crash (Double Disaster)’ sold for $105.4 million in New York. Last night’s $380.6 million contemporary-art sale was just short of the high presale estimate of $394.1 million. Auction records were established for seven artists, including Warhol, Cy Twombly, Agnes Martin and Martin Kippenberger… The jump in contemporary-art prices -- 10 artists set records at Christie’s sale Tuesday night -- is driven in part by flush new collectors and museums amassing masterpieces, as well as investors seeking diversification, dealers and longtime collectors said. ‘I am an art collector; this is not about collecting,’ said former talent agent Michael Ovitz as he exited the cavernous saleroom.”

November 13 – Bloomberg (Katya Kazakina and Philip Boroff): “A Francis Bacon triptych became the priciest artwork at auction in the biggest sale ever last night in New York. Bacon’s ‘Three Studies of Lucian Freud’ sold for $142.4 million at Christie’s to Acquavella Galleries. It bested Edvard Munch’s ‘The Scream,’ which Sotheby’s sold in May 2012, by more than $20 million. A few minutes later Jeff Koons’s sculpture ‘Balloon Dog (Orange)’ fetched $58.4 million, an auction record for a living artist. The third-priciest lot was a graphic oversized Coca-Cola bottle by Andy Warhol that went for $57.3 million.”

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

thanks costa for those infos.

so what does that leave us with?

Nobody with surplus wants those stinkin' yellow stones, but rather burns MoE on ugly dirty paper (I personally wouldnt even wanna have for free)?
Greets, AD

Warren James said...

.. or Bitcoin. Though I doubt the BTC-to-the-moon story is about anyone looking for a store of value.

costata said...

AD,

It's more complicated than that. Other hard assets are more easily expanded in price than gold. If you bid up the price of a piece of gold you bid up all of the gold stock.

If you bid up the price of a particular painting by an artist you don't automatically increase the price of every work by that artist.

FWIW I don't own gold because other shmucks like me own it. I own some because central banks own it. And those idiots are very close to desperation. There is only one choice for them.

costata said...

AD,

To be clear, this whole IMFS is based on the foundation of a risk-free asset - sovereign bonds. Obviously they aren't risk free. So the task is either to rebuild the system from the ground up or CREATE an alternative risk-free asset.

The CBs can elect gold as that risk-free asset and it's business as usual. I think they'll go with business as usual.

Cheers

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

costa,

Let's forget the price for a second. It's just like you said, about the available stuff in the sales shelf, price comes afterwards.

I understand your good point: On a picture quite easy, because there is just that single one, nothing to debate.

What does not fit into the picture is the gold sale shelf. I know, "coat check lalala...", is absolutely not consistent, and the story is always twisted in regards of price and stock back and forth, IMHO pathetic.
Greets, AD

costata said...

AD,

Forget about the "coat check" crap. If the sovereign bond fails a "forty story building" of derivatives collapses. Stick gold at much higher prices under it and the building holds up.

Cheers

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

"The CBs can elect gold as that risk-free asset"

1.) why should CB do so?
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:World_Gold_Reserves.png
looks like they have not much interest. Place that graph into this one:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/Goldfoerderung.png

2.) IMHO that choice might have been 15yrs ago, but they didnt. They choose to inject liquidity by buying bonds, why should they suddenly change their mind?
Greets, AD

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

"If the sovereign bond fails a "forty story building" of derivatives collapses."

that's why sovereign bonds of importance do not fail:
1.) "soft" default ("we just make sh!t up") and see newly introducted CAC clauses in €-bonds.
2.) Compare (ESM+ECB)&FED, I dont see any difference.
3.) compare latest liquidity swap agreement (2weeks ago?), targeted to infinity.
Greets, AD

costata said...

AD,

They are running out of choices. Choosing to "inject liquidity" was about pro-longing the status quo. The status quo must change but they will look backward for the change. An earlier "status quo".

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

costa,

sorry, I just simply dont get it. But why do you say "They are running out of choices."?
No they dont, modern computers can handle lots of digits and "The brilliant" Larry Summers said on the 8th.November that "null problemo" we will have negative interest rates. Hey Larry, but what about paper cash? "null problemo" will be prohibited, problemo solved!
Instead of laughing their butt off, TPTB joint in:
http://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachrichten.de/2013/11/19/strafe-fuer-sparer-asmussen-bringt-negative-zinsen-ins-gespraech/

You seriously think that such a club of morons will change their minds?
Greets, AD

costata said...

AD,

It won't be about changing their minds. It will be about retaining their mindset and changing the base-asset of the existing system.

costata said...

AD

I should have focused on this because very few people are:

"The brilliant" Larry Summers said on the 8th.November that "null problemo" we will have negative interest rates.."

If cash has a negative interest rate then shouod hold it for how long?


costata said...

Sorry

If cash has a negative interest rate then shouod hold it for how long?

Corrected

If cash has a negative interest rate then you should hold it for how long?


AdvocatusDiaboli said...

I hold paper cash and I dont care for how long. Although we do have inflation of ~3% in the €-zone (everybody who says something different does not live here and doesnt run a company here), I rather have a loss of 3% per year than a gain of maybe 0.5%-1% less loss (-3%=1~2,5% anyway) per year and being cypressed or IMFed at any point of time randomly (not to forget the "Eat the Rich" campaigns in Germany).

Oh, by the way: You do know, that in Italy you are not allowed to pay with more than 1000€? In France it is 3000€, next year it will be also 1000€. In Spain it is 2500€.
What does that sound like?
Greets, AD

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/17/negative-interest-rates-eliminating-cash-the-summers-solution/

good read IMHO as always, except the confiscation, because why confiscate gold, if the dumb down plebs wants bitcoins anyway?
Greets, AD

AdvocatusDiaboli said...

SCNR regarding bitcoins, wanna buy a number:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfelvI_ikf4