After reporting on his April 2007 presentation to World Bank people (see yesterday's post, "Gold bubble"), I emailed Frank Veneroso, and have received a reply from him today. I wanted to follow up on his essay of May 2001. Here's what I asked:
In 2001, you wrote a very intriguing article, posted on GATA, theorising that central banks actually hold much less physical gold than they pretend, because of loan-outs and possibly surreptitious selling. If I may, I should like to ask a few questions:
1. Are you still of that opinion?
2. What do you think is the present situation regarding gold holdings by central banks?
3. What evidence do we now have?
1. Are you still of that opinion?
2. What do you think is the present situation regarding gold holdings by central banks?
3. What evidence do we now have?
Here is his reply:
That was my opinion. It still is. However I gave ranges regarding that amount. I now believe that central bank loan outs and undisclosed sales were at the low end of my expectations. Why? I have no direct evidence. My evidence is the following.
I believe that we are near the end of a commodity bubble that is the largest in all history. The greatest extreme is in metals. Hedge funds have accumulated futures, forwards and physical on a scale that simply has no precedent. The greatest excesses are in base metals but these same funds all hold large gold positions. I believe that individual funds may hold positions in copper or gold that are as large in value as the ETF. I know that sounds unbelievable. But I have a great deal of evidence.
If this is so, the price of gold should be much higher. My only explanation for why it is not is that central bank holdings must be very large for this to happen.
I should add, I believe there will be a coming crash in the metals sector that will surface. There will be an unprecedented investor revulsion toward this sector.
Gold’s fundamentals are totally different from those of base metals and silver. However, because the same funds also hold gold, I cannot see how gold can escape forced liquidations from these portfolios.
I believe that we are near the end of a commodity bubble that is the largest in all history. The greatest extreme is in metals. Hedge funds have accumulated futures, forwards and physical on a scale that simply has no precedent. The greatest excesses are in base metals but these same funds all hold large gold positions. I believe that individual funds may hold positions in copper or gold that are as large in value as the ETF. I know that sounds unbelievable. But I have a great deal of evidence.
If this is so, the price of gold should be much higher. My only explanation for why it is not is that central bank holdings must be very large for this to happen.
I should add, I believe there will be a coming crash in the metals sector that will surface. There will be an unprecedented investor revulsion toward this sector.
Gold’s fundamentals are totally different from those of base metals and silver. However, because the same funds also hold gold, I cannot see how gold can escape forced liquidations from these portfolios.
Mr Veneroso has kindly given his permission to publish the above comments.
From the prospectus for a conference in New Orleans in 2006:
Frank Veneroso — Perhaps the most highly regarded market economist of our time, Frank Veneroso has advised countless governments, as well as the World Bank, on economic policy, served as a senior partner in one of the world's largest hedge funds, and is a confidant and private advisor to many of today's most influential investors and economic leaders.
He was among only a handful of analysts who clearly predicted the Tech Wreck, and followed it up with a deadly-accurate forecast of today's gold bull market.
Now, Mr. Veneroso is stunning the world with predictions of a major train wreck in no less than two high-flying sectors of the global economy. Virtually no one is expecting these dramatic events...
1 comment:
1700 a oz......
Post a Comment