Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: About silver and gold price manipulation

  1. #1

    About silver and gold price manipulation

    Dear Sir or Madame,

    I live in Germany and apologize for my english.
    I'm trying since months now to get an answer from the CFTC to some questions, but I got none till now.

    I wrote to the following recipients:
    Silverinquiry@cftc.gov, Wlukken@cftc.gov, Mdunn@cftc.gov, BChilton@CFTC.gov, Jsommers@cftc.gov, Alavik@cftc.gov, Sobie@cftc.gov, Jamie.dimon@jpmchase.com, Dean.payton@cmegroup.com, hotline@oig.treas.gov.

    Each question can be answered with a simple number.
    I don't ask for an answer from a commissioner. It'd be enough from a member of their staff.

    Mr. Chris Powell of GATA informed me, that the CFTC has answered many questions about this issue posed by US citizens.
    Maybe the CFTC think that the manipulation of the silver prise is an US issue.
    I think, not only US citizens have a right to know what is going on at the Comex.

    That is the reason why I'm begging someone of you to pose these questions to the CFTC, and then, in the case of an answer, to be informed about it.

    I thank you in advance for your help.
    Best regards
    Marco

    Following my mail to the CFTC:

    Dear Sir or Madame,

    As of August 5, 2008, one or two U.S. banks were short 33,805 contracts.
    33,805 contracts are the equivalent of 20-25% of the annual world mine production.
    According to the February Bank Participation report, two or three U.S. banks held a record net short position equal to 15% of total world annual production of gold, a staggering and unprecedented number, exceeded only by the absurd percentage in silver (currently 20%).
    a) How much gold or silver should one bank sell short (maybe naked short), for you to think about a manipulation of the market and begin spontaneously an investigation?

    On December 2, as silver closed at $9.57, exactly 2 U.S. banks held a net short positioning of 24,555 contracts. The CFTC reports that as of the same date all traders classed as commercial held a net short positioning of 24,894 contracts. So, the 2 U.S. banks, with one particular Fed member bank probably holding almost all of it, held a sickening 98.64% of all the collective commercial net short positioning on the COMEX silver futures market.
    According to the monthly CFTC Bank Participation in Futures and Options Market report released Friday, February 6, two large reporting U.S. banks held zero long and 27,189 short futures positions in COMEX silver futures as of February 3. All commercial traders as a group held a net short silver position of 33,173 contracts that same day; so just two banks held 81.96% of all the COMEX commercial net short positioning for silver.
    b) Is this not a infringement against the CFTC’s anti-concentration rules?

    As of the close of business Jan 20, a new multi-year record was set in the percentage of the silver futures market held by the 4 largest short traders, at 48%. And when all spreads are removed from both the non-commercial and commercial categories, as is proper, the true net short position of the 4 largest traders runs over 66% of the entire COMEX futures market, the largest silver market in the world. In other words, 4 traders hold two-thirds of all the true short positions on the COMEX.
    c) How big should be the concentration on the short side of the Comex, for you to stop inquiring and intervene?

    According to the monthly CFTC Bank Participation in Futures and Options Market report released Friday, February 6, just three U.S. banks held a collective net short position in the COMEX gold market of 111,190 contracts while all commercial traders as a group reported a net short positioning of 177,589 contracts. So, three U.S. banks represent a shockingly large 60.57% of all the commercial net short positioning on the COMEX for gold.
    As the February BP report indicates, one or two U.S. banks held a 29% share of the COMEX silver market and two or three U.S banks held a 32.1% share of COMEX gold futures.
    As large as the current gold and silver percentages of the market held by one, two or three U.S. banks may be, those percentages are grossly understated because spread positions are included in open interest totals. Remove all spread positions (non-commercial and commercial) and the share of the market held by one or two U.S. banks in silver rises to 41.5%, and not 29%. In gold, the share of the market held by two or three US banks is really 45%, not 32.1%.
    d) How big should be the concentration in the net share of the short side of the Comex for you to suspect a manipulation and begin spontaneously, that means without the pressure of investors or of the Congress, an investigation?

    Between January 6 and February 3, the COT indicates that the total commercial short position increased by 2253 contracts, with the big 4 category increasing by 2256 contracts, once again accounting for more than the entire increase in the commercial category. The Bank Participation Reports corresponding to January 6 and February 3 indicate that the two U.S. banks increased their net short position by 2500 contracts in that same time period. This proves, at least during this specific period of time, that one or two U.S. banks accounted for more than 100% of all the commercial short selling and all the selling in the big 4 category.
    e) Why the fact that one or two banks accounting for more than 100% of all commercial short selling for at least a month, is not manipulation?

    Best regards
    ...
    Last edited by goldsilber; 03-15-2009 at 12:47 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    U.S. banks dominate the COMEX

    From:
    http://www.stockhouse.com/Columnists...ot-Gold-Report


    U.S. banks dominate the COMEX

    "While those of us with a long bias can take some comfort in the larger reductions of net short positioning by the commercial traders (covered in the full Got Gold Report), we need to remember that as of right now the short side of the market is literally dominated by just two big U.S. banks. When the regulators, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), consent to allow just two traders to take overly large positioning on either side of a particular market, it leads to mistrust and angst among the public and market commentators.

    [..]

    According to the latest Bank Participation in Futures and Options Markets report, as of March 3, 2009, two U.S. banks held zero long and 30,838 contracts short with silver then at $12.83 and with 93,051 COMEX 5,000-ounce contracts open. So, just two banks held net short positions equal to 33.14% of all the open contracts on the largest futures bourse in the world.

    According to CFTC COT reports, during that 3/3 reporting week all COMEX commercial traders as a group – all of them - were collectively net short a total of 38,704 contracts, so just two very large U.S. banks held a shocking 79.68% of all the commercial net short positioning on the COMEX.

    One potential problem with allowing overly-large positioning by just a few players is the potential for those elite traders to get into the position of having to trade in a particular direction in order to protect their position. The incentive for a trader running 1,000 contracts to try to move the market with the weight of his own trading would certainly be much less than a trader (or two traders in this case) with 30,000 contracts of one-way exposure.

    [..]

    With that in mind, in an era when regulators allowed the Bernard Madoff scam to go unchecked for many years, even though they were handed the scamster on a silver platter by others in the same business eight or nine years ago, a scam ruining hundreds or thousands of innocent investors; in a period when ANY silver product being sold on the street carries with it extremely high premiums due to overwhelming public demand; in a period when investors have had their confidence severely shaken in all markets; can the COMEX continue to allow such one-sided and concentrated trading action to continue? Perhaps more to the point, shouldn’t the COMEX explain publicly why it has allowed that very concentrated short positioning by just two U.S. banks?

    Perhaps with more clarity would come more confidence."

  4. #3

    Email sent to CFTC and Congressman

    I rephrased your letter a bit to my suiting and sent it to the same people as a US Citizen. I also am sending it to Congressmen and other Government officials. Below is what I sent. Others should do exactly the same thing in their own words.

    Dear Sirs ,

    Below are a few Questions I and other concerned precious metals investors would like you to answer. .
    The question come from a fellow German investor but I share his quest for obtaining answers.
    I also am sending this to each Congressman and also sending to international government officials and everyone else I can about this very concerning matter of silver/gold manipulation

    1. How much gold or silver should one bank sell short, to prompt an investigation of market manipulation?

    On December 2, as silver closed at $9.57, exactly 2 U.S. banks held a net short positioning of 24,555 contracts. The CFTC reports that as of the same date all traders classed as commercial held a net short positioning of 24,894 contracts. So, the 2 U.S. banks, with one particular Fed member bank probably holding almost all of it, held a sickening 98.64% of all the collective commercial net short positioning on the COMEX silver futures market.
    According to the monthly CFTC Bank Participation in Futures and Options Market report released Friday, February 6, two large reporting U.S. banks held zero long and 27,189 short futures positions in COMEX silver futures as of February 3. All commercial traders as a group held a net short silver position of 33,173 contracts that same day; so just two banks held 81.96% of all the COMEX commercial net short positioning for silver.

    2. Is this not a infringement against the CFTC’s anti-concentration rules? If so what are you plans for action?

    As of the close of business Jan 20, a new multi-year record was set in the percentage of the silver futures market held by the 4 largest short traders, at 48%. And when all spreads are removed from both the non-commercial and commercial categories, as is proper, the true net short position of the 4 largest traders runs over 66% of the entire COMEX futures market, the largest silver market in the world. In other words, 4 traders hold two-thirds of all the true short positions on the COMEX.

    3. How big should be the concentration on the short side of the Comex, for you to intervene?

    According to the monthly CFTC Bank Participation in Futures and Options Market report released Friday, February 6, just three U.S. banks held a collective net short position in the COMEX gold market of 111,190 contracts while all commercial traders as a group reported a net short positioning of 177,589 contracts. So, three U.S. banks represent a shockingly large 60.57% of all the commercial net short positioning on the COMEX for gold.
    As the February BP report indicates, one or two U.S. banks held a 29% share of the COMEX silver market and two or three U.S banks held a 32.1% share of COMEX gold futures.
    As large as the current gold and silver percentages of the market held by one, two or three U.S. banks may be, those percentages are grossly understated because spread positions are included in open interest totals. Remove all spread positions (non-commercial and commercial) and the share of the market held by one or two U.S. banks in silver rises to 41.5%, and not 29%. In gold, the share of the market held by two or three US banks is really 45%, not 32.1%.

    4. How big should be the concentration in the net share of the short side of the Comex for you to intervene?

    Between January 6 and February 3, the COT indicates that the total commercial short position increased by 2253 contracts, with the big 4 category increasing by 2256 contracts, once again accounting for more than the entire increase in the commercial category. The Bank Participation Reports corresponding to January 6 and February 3 indicate that the two U.S. banks increased their net short position by 2500 contracts in that same time period. This proves, at least during this specific period of time, that one or two U.S. banks accounted for more than 100% of all the commercial short selling and all the selling in the big 4 category.

    5. How in a free, honest trading marketplace can one or two banks account for more than 100% of all commercial short selling for at least a month without an evil self-serving and manipulative purpose? What are your plan for actions on this?


    Regulators allowed the Bernard Madoff scam to go unchecked for many years, even though they were handed the scamster on a silver platter by others in the same business eight or nine years ago, in a period when ANY silver product being sold on the street carries with it extremely high premiums due to overwhelming public demand; in a period when investors have had their confidence severely shaken in all markets;

    How can the CFTC continue to allow such one-sided and concentrated trading action to continue?


    Warm Regards,

  5. #4

    Gold Price Manipulation More Blatant

    By Patrick A. Heller, Market Update
    March 17, 2009
    http://www.numismaster.com/ta/numis/...ArticleId=6323

    "On Friday, March 6, gold lease rates turned negative for the day. What that means is that anyone who wanted to lease gold would actually be paid a fee in addition to getting a free gold loan.

    No sane person would choose to lose money loaning physical gold, in addition to the risk of never getting the gold back from the other party. However, if someone (such as the U.S. government) wanted to suppress the price of gold, this is one tactic to try to accomplish that purpose.

    I can come to no other conclusion than that a large quantity of physical gold surreptitiously appeared on the market on March 6 with the sole purpose to drive down the price of gold. The quantities were large enough that they almost certainly could not come from private parties. With most of the world's central banks now being net buyers of gold reserves, they would not be the source of this gold. By process of elimination, the suspicion falls upon the U.S. government as the ultimate party responsible for this blatant action to manipulate the price of gold.

    Of course, the U.S. government would not want to be identified as the cause of this leasing anomaly. Instead, such manipulation was almost certainly conducted by multiple trading partners of the U.S. government.

    [...]

    The U.S. Mint is so far behind at meeting demand for bullion gold and silver American Eagle issues that it last week announced an indefinite suspension of plans to strike 2009-dated proof and uncirculated versions for collectors. Even further, the U.S. Mint also announced that it would not even accept orders from primary distributors for any gold or silver Eagles this week.

    On the wholesale market, supplies of gold and silver American Eagles quickly disappeared. The premiums of these coins shot upward. Some retailers now have to decline orders as they don't know when they might be able to fill them or what premiums they will have to pay to acquire merchandise. My earlier prediction that by the end of April it would become almost impossible to find any physical gold or silver bullion-priced items for reasonable delivery is starting to come true."

  6. #5
    When they can no longer game gold and silver it will blow. Even the Hunt Brother's could only play the game so long, and we all know how they got their a__s handed to them in the end.

    I put some more pressure on them today.

    Go ahead and keep on printing money Fed, and watch and learn. Even they, only have so much gold in Ft. Knox and that is saying if there is much of our gold left.

  7. #6
    ahhh, how'd everyone like the gold manipulation down to the 880s 2 days ago....yeah, right before the fed announcement of buying up us debt......LOL...... obvious manipulation...gold shot up to over 940 in a matter of a half hourmfrom 880s
    Mega Quakanami is coming to California, then WW3
    The US vs China and Russsia - qwakeup.org



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-20-2014, 11:15 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-25-2014, 08:23 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-13-2013, 04:38 PM
  4. PMs: Ted Butler: The End of Silver Price Manipulation [Podcast]
    By bobbyw24 in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-19-2010, 01:43 PM
  5. PMs: Silver could Rise Sharply if the Manipulation of its price stops
    By bobbyw24 in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 11-09-2010, 02:44 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •