By Jeff Clark, Casey Research

Some investors are frustrated and a few are worried that gold seems stuck in a rut. This stall in price has happened before, of course, but since 2001 it’s always eventually powered to a new high. Unless one thinks the gold bull market is over, it’s natural to wonder how long might we have to wait before seeing another new high.

Absent some sort of global shock that sparks another rush into gold (easily possible in today’s climate), I think the answer may lie in examining the size and length of past corrections and how long it took gold to reach new highs afterward.

It makes sense that big corrections would take longer to reach new highs than small ones, but I wanted to confirm that assumption with the data. I also wanted to determine if there were any patterns in past recoveries that would give us some clues that we can apply to today.

Gold set a record on September 5 at $1,895 an ounce (London PM Fix) and to date has fallen as low as $1,531 (December 29), a decline of 19.2%. In order to determine how long it might take to breach $1,895 again, I measured how long it took new highs to be mounted after big corrections in the past.

The following chart details three large corrections since 2001, and calculates how many weeks it took the gold price to a) breach the old high, and b) stay above that level.

>

As you can see, it took a significant amount of time for gold to forge new highs after big selloffs. And yes, the bigger the correction, the longer it took.

In 2006, after a total fall of 22.6%, it took a year and four months for gold to surpass its old high. After the 2008 meltdown, it was a year and six months later before gold hit a new record.

Our recent correction more closely resembles the one in 2003. After a 16.2% drop, gold matched the old high seven months later. It took another two months to stay above it.

So when do we reach a new high in the gold price?

Let’s apply the same ratio from the 2003 correction and recovery: If it took 29 weeks and four days to reach a new high after a 16.2% correction, a 19.2% pullback would take 35 weeks and 0 days. That works out to Monday, May 7, 2012.

An exact date is pure conjecture, of course. On one hand, gold could drop below the $1,531 low if the need for cash and liquidity forces large investors to resume selling. On the other hand, Europe and/or the US could resume money printing on a large scale and send gold soaring overnight. The point of the data is that it signals we shouldn’t be too surprised if we don’t hit $1,900 for another four months yet. And if it takes another two months or so to stay above it.

Think that’s too long? There are some important reasons to not let it discourage you…

Once gold breaches its old high, you’ll probably never be able to buy it at current prices again.

That’s a rather obvious statement, but let it sink in. Buying now at $1,600 and then watching the price fall to, say, $1,500, wouldn’t be fun – but it’ll probably hit $2,000 or higher before the year’s over, never to visit the $1,600s again this cycle. If that turns out to be correct, the next four months will be the very last time you can buy at these levels. You’ll have to pay a higher price from then on.

Look at it this way: If the “rebound ratio” is similar to the one in 2003, you have four months and counting to buy whatever gold you want before it’s no longer on sale. It’s entirely possible that by this time next year you will never again be able to buy gold for less than $2,000 an ounce – unless maybe it’s in “new dollars” or some other currency that circulates with fewer zeros on the notes.

The data can also help you ignore the noise about gold’s bull market being over and other nonsense spewed from mainstream media types. If gold doesn’t hit $1,900 until May, you’ll know this is simply normal price behavior and that they’re overlooking basic patterns in the data. And when September rolls around – seasonally the strongest month of the year for gold – and the price is climbing relentlessly and they’re caught off guard by it, you’ll already be positioned.

Regardless of the date, we’re confident that a new high in the gold price will come at some point, because many major currencies are unsound and overburdened with debt – and they’re all fiat and subject to government tinkering and mismanagement. Indeed, the ultimate high could be frighteningly higher than current levels. As such, we suggest taking advantage of prices that won’t be available indefinitely.

After all, you don’t want to be left without enough of nature’s cure for man’s monetary ills.

[Traditional savings accounts simply do not cut it in today's economic environment – government-promoted robbery means they often lose money overall. Learn how you can protect your assets –and even get ahead.]

By Jeff Clark, Casey Research

2011 was remarkable in many ways for the precious metals markets. Gold soared to new highs in early September, hitting at an intraday record of $1,920/ounce on the fifth. Silver screamed to within a hair of $50 on April 28. Corrections ensued, and the metals ended the year on a disappointing note for silver and an underwhelming note for gold. Equities for the sector were down, to way down for junior ventures, logging their worst annual return since 2008.

Here’s a table of 2011 returns from most major asset classes:

(Click on image to enlarge)

Gold registered its eleventh consecutive annual gain, extending the bull market that began in 2001. The yellow metal gained 10.1% – a solid return, though moderate when compared to previous years.

Silver lost almost 10% year over year, due primarily to its dual nature. Currency concerns lit a match under the price early in the year, while global economic concerns forced it to give it all back later.

Gold mining stocks couldn’t shake the need for antidepressants most of the year, and another correction in gold in December dragged them further down.

Meanwhile, those who sat in US government debt in 2011 were handsomely rewarded, with Treasury bonds recording one of their biggest annual gains. In spite of the unparalleled downgrade of the country’s AAA credit rating, Treasuries were one of the best-performing asset classes of the year. The driving forces there are expanding fear about the sovereign debt crisis in Europe, combined with the Fed’s promise to keep interest rates low through 2013.

But perhaps it would be more accurate to look at 2011 in a larger context. How did these investments perform over the past three years?

(Click on image to enlarge)

There’s a lot to be said about the chart above, but we’ll cut to the chase: Despite the higher volatility, we’d much rather be investing in the assets on the left side of the chart than those on the right.

But 2011 is now part of the history books. The important question before us is: Is gold still one of the best places for money going forward? Let’s take a look at what we might expect in 2012 based on what we just left behind…

The Fundamental Case for Gold Remains Rock Solid

Gold demand from investment and central banks grew tremendously last year. Further, the geography of gold buying was widespread, with big purchases coming from Europe during the initial bouts of their crisis and Japan after the Fukushima accident. Small investors and monetary authorities alike purchased gold due to economic, financial, monetary, and political concerns. Quite frankly, we see none of these factors changing anytime soon.

Further, many countries continue to debase their currencies at phenomenal rates (see Bud Conrad’s related article below). While US Treasuries may be a good temporary parking spot for cash, don’t kid yourself about what’s behind it all: nothing. The dollar is a fiat currency, no more. A true safe haven is something that cannot be debased, devalued, or destroyed by any government. After accounting for inflation, your dollars are worth less every year.

The reasons for gold’s bull market aren’t going away anytime soon. Make sure you have enough exposure to make a material difference to your portfolio.

Don’t Be Deceived by Promises of Economic Growth

The US economy ended the year on a high note – the job market is improving, gas is cheaper, consumer confidence grew, real estate showed signs of recovery, and the holiday shopping season turned out better than most economists expected. So, can the US grow its way out of the debt burden? Can we forget about further money printing schemes that are bullish for gold?

We think there’s little chance that growth will be sustainable in 2012. First, the biggest chunk of GDP growth in 2011 came from personal consumption – savings cuts and income growth in particular.

(Click on image to enlarge)

Strong GDP growth comes from production, not consumption. As Doug Casey has stated many times, it’s also the secret to personal wealth: “Produce more than you consume and save and invest the difference.”

Second, according to a recent Time article, “The government says that once you adjust for inflation, weekly earnings dropped 1.8% from November 2010 to last month” [November 2011]. As a result, “Consumers have used savings or credit cards to finance their purchases.” This is hardly a sign of a strong economy.

Combining these facts with surging government debt and ongoing deficit spending means the “growth” in GDP is largely supported by… debt. US debt surpassed GDP last year for the first time since 1947, and if the Keynesians get their way, the cure for our massive debt overhang will be… more debt. Any such scheme, regardless of its name, is very bullish for gold.

Preserve your wealth with gold, not fiat currency.

The Gold Price Will Continue To Be Volatile

The average annual gold price in 2011 was $1,571.50/ounce, which was 28% higher than the prior year’s average. As we outlined in a recent article about gold corrections, the average retreat in gold since 2001 (of those greater than 5%) is 12.5%. Declines of this degree are normal. They will happen again. Thus, expected price behavior leads us to get excited when gold and related stocks go on sale, not depressed about the dips.

If you buy gold during corrections, your gain by the end of the year will be higher than the annual advance.

Gold Equities Are (Still) Dirt Cheap

Yes, precious metals stocks have lagged the underlying commodity price throughout the year. Yes, they were a disappointment in 2011 – but 2011 is only one chapter in this gold bull-market story. For most miners, margins are high, dividends are increasing, and valuations are extremely low, despite the recent fall in metal prices. We can’t tell you exactly when the turnaround will begin, but we’re confident that the time is coming when gold stocks will once again bring us leveraged performance, particularly when the greater investment community recognizes their value and clamors for increased exposure to the gold market.

The old adage to buy low and sell high still applies. When it comes to gold stocks, we’re at the “buy low” part of the formula right now.

So, if you’re feeling like 2011 was a dud for your gold portfolio, we suggest you shake off the funk. It is precisely when such feelings abound that contrarian buying opportunities are at their best. The way to buy low is to buy when others are selling. Using the current weakness in prices to get positioned for the next liftoff is the way to play this. Remember that volatility cuts both ways: just like dips, a springboard to the upside will come – of that we’re certain. And given the tenuous state of global finances and the temptation to print, one of these liftoffs is going to be life-changing.

[2012 could be one for the record books for gold and gold stocks, based on the simple fact that big climbs follow big falls – and Casey Research expects many more big climbs in this bull market. Learn how Jeff Clark boosted his mother's IRA over 90%... something you can do, too.]

By Jeff Clark, Casey Research

After all, in spite of some short-term fixes, there remains no real resolution to the sovereign debt issues in many European countries. We’re certainly not spending less money in the US, and now we’re bailing out Europe via currency swaps with the European Central Bank. Shouldn’t gold be rising?

Yes, but nothing happens in a vacuum. There are some simple explanations as to why gold remains in a funk.

1. The MF Global bankruptcy, the seventh-largest in US history, forced a high degree of liquidation of commodities futures contracts, including gold. Many institutional investors had to sell whether they wanted to or not. This is similar to why big declines in the stock market can force funds and other large investors to sell some gold to raise cash for margin calls or meet redemption requests.
2. The dollar has been rising. Money fleeing the Eurozone has to go somewhere, and some of it is heading into US bonds, which means first converting the foreign currency into dollars.
3. It’s tax-loss selling season, something that’s also impacting gold stocks. Funds and individual investors are selling underwater positions for tax purposes. Funds also sell their big winners to lock in gains for the year and dress up quarterly reports.

These forces have all acted to depress the gold price.

Notice I didn’t say that gold has suddenly become viewed as a poor safe haven. Nor that many of the world’s major currencies are no longer being debased… nor that global sovereign debt issues are resolved… nor that interest rates are positive. No, the fundamental reasons for owning gold are still intact. So don’t let the selling depress you.

Let’s put gold’s recent price action into perspective. It peaked on September 5 at $1,895 (London PM Fix) and has thus been in decline for about three months. Yet look at the bull market’s biggest three-month correction in relationship to the ultimate trend.

Gold fell 20% from August 1 to October 31, 2008, the biggest rolling three-month decline in our current bull market. And yet, it eventually powered much higher, in spite of many investors and industry experts thinking it had peaked at the time. The final quarter of 2011 ended down 5.5% over the previous quarter.

The point? Don’t confuse short-term volatility with long-term forces. The investor who looks only at today’s headlines is prone to making ill-timed decisions.

I realize that prices could trade lower – but this is why we keep a high level of cash. By the time this bull market is over, our current pullback will probably look something like the small red box in the chart above, with far higher prices in the intervening months and years.

Which makes current prices a buying opportunity. I don’t know if we’re at the bottom of our recent decline or not – but I do know where gold and silver are ultimately headed Casey Research’s Chief Economist and Editor of The Casey Report, Bud Conrad, is convinced gold will hit $2,000 in the first half of this year. If he is right, the opportunity to buy at today’s levels will be fleeting.

In the meantime, stay the course with your precious metals investments, no matter how the short-term picture looks. Gold stocks remain undervalued, and these are turbulent times. They appear to be far from over. Gold remains the #1 asset protector.

[Don't let your savings continue to be robbed by government policies. Start protecting your wealth today.]

By Jeff Clark, Casey Research

It wasn’t a fun week for gold. By the close on Friday, the metal was down 6.7% (based on London PM fix prices), the biggest weekly decline since September. It got downright irritating when the mainstream media seemingly rejoiced at gold’s decline. Economist Nouriel Roubini poked fun at gold bugs in a Tweet. Über investor Dennis Gartman said he sold his holdings. CNBC ran an article proclaiming gold was no longer a safe-haven asset (talk about an overreaction).

While the worry may have been real, let’s focus on facts. Have the reasons for gold’s bull market changed in any material way such that we should consider exiting? Instead of me providing an answer, ask yourself some basic questions: Is the current support for the US dollar an honest indication of its health? Are the sovereign debt problems in Europe solved? How will the US repay its $15 trillion debt load without some level of currency dilution? Is there likely to be more money printing in the future, or less? Are real interest rates positive yet? Has gold really lost its safe haven status as a result of one bad week?

And one more: What is the mainstream media’s record on forecasting precious metals prices?

Our take won’t surprise you: not one fact relating to the trend for gold changed last week. We remain strongly bullish.

So why did gold, silver, and related stocks fall so hard?

The reasons outlined in this month’s BIG GOLD are still in play (the MF Global fallout, a rising dollar, year-end tax-loss selling, and the need for cash and liquidity to meet margin calls or redemption requests). Last Wednesday’s 3.5% fall took on a life of its own, selling begetting selling, fear adding to fear (especially the case with gold stocks). None of these reasons, however, have anything to do with the fundamental factors that ultimately drive this market. Once those issues shift, then we’ll talk about exiting.

So, should we buy now? Is the bottom in?

Let’s take a fresh look at gold’s corrections and compare them to the recent one. I’ve updated the following chart to include the recent selloff.

[How do I calculate the data? I look for the periods in every annual gold chart that represent a distinct fall greater than 5%, then measure the highs and lows.]

(Click on image to enlarge)

Our recent drop equals 12.5%. This isn’t to suggest that the correction is over, but it does show that we’ve already matched the average decline, which is also 12.5%. This comes on the heels of the 15.6% fall in September. You’ll notice something else: We’ve now had three major corrections (greater than 5%) in one year, the first time that’s happened in this bull market.

The worst-case scenario would be a drop that matched the biggest on record, 27.7%. From $1,795 – the recent interim peak price – that would take us to $1,295. That wouldn’t be fun, but a fall to that level would not by any stretch signal the end of the bull market, nor a fall into unprofitability for our producers. And it would represent a true blood-in-the-streets buying opportunity. After all, that’s exactly what happened in 2006 and again in 2008, and in both instances gold eventually powered much higher. The bears were wrong then, and they’ll be wrong again this time, even if that extreme scenario were to come to pass.

Here’s the updated picture for silver:

(Click on image to enlarge)

Silver’s volatile nature really comes through in these data, which measure corrections of 10% or more. The recent decline tallies 18.4%. It, too, comes on the heels of a recent correction, a 35.2% tumble in September. The average of these declines is 20.3%, which would take our current correction to $28.22, close to last Thursday’s price. Like gold, we’ve now had more corrections this year (four) than we’ve ever had in this bull market.

The worst plausible scenario we see for silver in the near term would be a fall to $16.32, matching 2008′s 53.9% drop. But you’d have to be awfully bearish to think it will plummet that far.

These data should actually give you some comfort. We’ve been here before. We’ve seen worse before. And yet, in every instance, gold and silver eventually climbed higher. So, unless you really believe that Obama and Merkel have brought happy days back to the world economy, precious metals will resume their ascent, and probably sooner rather than later. And when they do, you may well never be able to buy at these prices again. Those who were too scared to buy at $560 in 2006 and $700 in 2008 missed out on what were some of the greatest buying opportunities of this bull market.

Would I buy now? Given that each metal has already met its average decline, and that both have seen more corrections this year than any other, we’re likely closer to the bottom than the top. So yes, I added an extra contribution to my favorite bullion accumulation program last week.

Either way, my advice is to spend a little more time watching the drivers for gold and a little less time worrying about the price. Until those things change, look for an entrance, not an exit.

[While no one can know just yet if gold has bottomed or not, those who understand the inevitable path of all fiat currencies know these prices represent a good buying opportunity. Learn more about how to protect yourself from being robbed by your government – and how to invest in gold for maximum profit potential.]

By Louis James, Casey Research

We have reported on changes in global gold demand, from booming investment demand in Asia to European and US debt concerns that have re-solidified gold’s long tenure as the ultimate safe-haven asset for turbulent times. In fact, with investment demand from private and institutional buyers continuing to grow and central banks increasing their gold reserves, total demand reached a record US$57.7 billion in the third quarter of 2011. Quite astounding.

But what’s happening on the supply side of the equation?

The most important source of gold supply is mine production – which is responsible for about two-thirds of the total – followed by recycled gold. While recycled gold is the reason supply is inelastic, new production has more predictive power since it can reflect shifts in industry conditions and investor sentiment.

Starting with a bird’s-eye view, take a look at global gold production since 1900.

(Click on image to enlarge)

The 1980 gold mania occurred when gold supply had the same structure as it does today: two-thirds from production and one-third from recycled product. As the chart shows, in the 1980s, production increased after the short-lived mania came to an end, while this time around, production has already gone up (more on that below). Also, as the 1980s wore on, production grew in spite of the price falling dramatically.

History doesn’t repeat exactly, but it often does rhyme, so comparing the 1970-1980 decade to the present can give us a useful context for thinking about gold today. Reviewing the data available, here are some key comparisons:

1. The previous major interim peak in mine production was recorded in 1970, followed by a 10-year decline and ultimately, the 1980 peak in gold’s price. It’s interesting to note that the mania occurred when gold supply was flat.This cycle, we have an interim peak in 2001, followed by a decline for seven years, and then a reversal of the trend in the last three years. On average, production decreased at 0.2% per year (2000-2010). But looking at the decade average ignores the trend reversal in the last three years: Gold production rose by 7.4% in 2009, 3.7% in 2010, and is up 5% in the three quarters of 2011 compared to the same period in 2010.This recent increase in production without a market mania beforehand could be seen as an argument against there being a mania this time around: There’s no supply crunch. Supply could keep up with demand and prevent the crunch from happening. We don’t see this being likely for several reasons, foremost among which is that we don’t see the increases in production being sustainable. Mines are by definition depleting assets, and it gets harder every year to permit and place new mines into production.

2. Global gold reserves in 1980 tallied 1.1 billion ounces (34,000 metric tonnes), and production at that time was sufficient to meet demand at the time for about 20 years. In 2010, reserves were 1.6 billion ounces (51,000 metric tonnes) and were also sufficient to meet demand for an identical 20 years, but production was twice as high. Much of this can be attributed to improvements in mining technology that, coupled with higher prices, allow larger, lower-grade deposits to be mined profitably. Again: no supply crunch.Not yet, anyway. In addition to the increasing regulatory burdens, the discovery process has grown more arduous. There are new technologies that have made some things much easier, but overall, most explorers have to go farther and search harder every year.

3. Gold production has outpaced the increase in the population. In fact, gold production per capita now is even higher than in the 1970s. No crunch evident from this perspective either.

However, gold is not a consumer good – it’s not something people need to eat a certain amount of every day, so the physical quantity of gold per person in the world means less than it would for other commodities. Gold, we have long argued, is a “fear barometer” in today’s world. It’s valued, which means it has demand in inverse proportion to people’s confidence in other forms of money. So the fact that supply has kept up with population growth does not imply that supply has – or “should have” – kept up with demand… and we can see that it hasn’t in the price of gold. A major part of that is the return of investment demand, almost to levels we saw in 1980, as you can see in the chart below.

(Click on image to enlarge)

4. Today, as in 1980, mine production and scrap are the major components – almost the only components – of supply. The disappearance of net disinvestment from the supply side of things is one of the more bullish similarities we see between now and 30 years ago.

(Click on image to enlarge)

5. One major difference between the gold market today and in decades past is the geography of mine production. South Africa accounted for two-thirds of global gold production in 1970 and 55% in 1980. In 2010, not one country was responsible for more than 14% of world mining supply (with the leader being China, at 13%).A similar shift has occurred with demand. In the 1980, it was mostly Western countries soaking up the gold trade, probably because that’s where most of the wealth that wanted to avoid inflation was. By 2000, when gold was held in the same esteem as certain other four-letter words, North America and Europe had almost left the field. Today, it’s become a truly global trade again, as you can see in the chart below.

(Click on image to enlarge)

Such decentralization has benefits: It creates flexibility and stability in the gold market. The market psychology is more diverse, making it more liquid and robust.

No Crunch Today – Crunch Tomorrow?

Your Casey Research metals team believes the supply of gold is going to tighten. Most companies have been forced to look in riskier jurisdictions and remote locations with poor infrastructure. Environmental and other regulations are multiplying and becoming more costly every year, and even in places where they are not, labor strikes and increases in taxes are taking their toll. Worldwide, mining becomes more complicated and expensive every year… and in some cases, not even worth trying. At the same time, big discoveries remain few and far between – and even when a discovery is made, it often takes up to ten years to reach production.

As they say, the low-hanging fruit has been picked: We do expect a supply crunch in the years ahead.

It’s tempting to try to make an argument based on future constraints in gold supply and some of the interesting similarities between past and present conditions in that supply – they seem to point to a gold mania ahead. But it’s the demand side that dominates the price of gold. Whether a shortage of gold supply from production occurs or not, demand for gold is more flexible than supply overall.

Gold is a monetary metal. If confidence in paper money evaporates the way we think it will, the flight to the safe haven of gold could swamp any conceivable glut in supply. We’ve no crystal ball to tell us when it will start, but we definitely see a mania coming.

And another question arises: Now that gold demand and supply are dispersed across the globe, where will the mania start? US? Europe? How about China, India, or Malaysia? Things could really start cooking with no immediately evident cause in the West at all.

Regardless of when or where the mania starts, our advice is to make sure your personal gold reserves are in place.

[As profitable as owning gold looks to be, an anomaly in the markets is making gold stocks even more attractive. But not just any gold miners… certain qualities make specific stocks the best bets. Learn what they are and how to get in on the action yourself.]

By Kevin Brekke, Casey Research

A new polysyllabic term has entered the Wall Street lexicon and is sweeping through the investing world like a brush fire through a dry canyon: “hypothecation.” With its connection to the MF Global bankruptcy and aftermath, it engenders the kind of fear a homeowner might feel while monitoring the approaching flames.

The rise of hypothecation as the lead suspect in the MF Global tragedy has caused a fair bit of confusion about what, exactly, it is – and is not. Proving the idiom that nature abhors a vacuum, the blogosphere has weighed in with all manner of explanations, many of which have been less than accurate.

In an attempt to help our readers get to the heart of the matter, we will briefly review hypothecation – what it is and how it is used – and do so in plain English.

There is considerable ground to cover here, so we will get right into it, starting by defining the term, then discussing the role hypothecation played in the demise of MF Global before turning our attention to the question in the minds of many gold investors – was MF Global re-hypothecating gold bullion? Finally, we’ll have some closing thoughts on the potential implications for us as individual and institutional investors going forward.

The Two Faces of Hypothecation

At its most basic level, anyone who has traded on margin (borrowing money from a broker to purchase stock) or shorted a stock (borrowing shares through a broker that are sold today in the hope of replacing them with shares purchased at a lower price tomorrow and pocketing the difference) has participated in hypothecation.

Hypothecation is a legal term that means “to pledge something as collateral.” In the financial world of stockbroking, to hypothecate shares of stock means they are pledged against a loan from a broker for money to complete a transaction. For the investor, hypothecation necessitates a margin account.

Opening a margin account requires that a broker obtain a signed agreement from the investor. The margin agreement can be part of a standard account-opening agreement, or it might be a completely separate document. It is this agreement that opens the door for the assets in your account to be used for re-hypothecation purposes. Without such an agreement, you will not be able to open a margin account. In other words, if you have a margin account, you are in the game. If you don’t have a margin account, you are strictly an innocent bystander with no legal skin in the game.

It is important that you as an investor understand the terms of trading on margin. Once you trade on margin, any common stock, cash, or securities in your margin account can be considered as collateral for the money you borrow. And if the terms of the margin agreement allow it – almost universally the case – the broker can borrow or loan shares in the investor’s account up to the value of the amount borrowed (the margin).

Here it seems appropriate to mention that hypothecation is sanctioned by the SEC – subject to a host of rules, of course. Yet some of the recent reporting regarding hypothecation makes it sound as though brokers are taking shares from customer accounts for their own use and unbeknown to the customer. Unless the broker is engaging in deliberate fraud, that is not the case.

Most margin account agreements contain language that clearly explains that if a customer trades on margin, one understands that shares or other securities in one’s account – up to the amount of margin – can be borrowed or lent to other customers for shorting or to the broker for other uses. If a customer does not agree with this arrangement, one should not trade on margin. This is standard practice in the stockbroking industry.

Those “other uses” lead us to the second face of hypothecation.

Re-hypothecation

Re-hypothecation is when a broker reuses customer-pledged collateral to back the broker’s own trades and borrowings. It is 100% legal. However, while the practice may be legal, that does not mean it is prudent. Using the same collateral to support two separate borrowing transactions is obviously a risky tactic.

As background, under US Federal Reserve Board Regulation T and SEC Rule 15c3-3, a prime broker may re-hypothecate an amount up to 140% of the customer’s liability to the broker.

Let’s quickly do the math on that one. If a customer has purchased $1,000 of securities, of which $500 is margined (borrowed), the broker is permitted to re-hypothecate up to $700 of the collateral – $500 x 140%.

Echoing the above, the use of re-hypothecated customer collateral is a common practice among broker dealers.

However, MF Global pushed the envelope on re-hypothecation by arbitraging differences in re-hypothecation regulations between jurisdictions and using off-balance-sheet maneuvers to ratchet its leverage to very high levels – referred to as hyper-hypothecation. The many components of this elaborate scheme, when combined, may make it impossible for MF Global’s clients to recoup any of their losses.

MF Global Goes Offshore

“Give me a place to stand and a lever long enough and I will move the world.” – Archimedes, 220 BCA

Once a leverage junkie, always a leverage junkie. It will help to understand the MF Global collapse if we keep in mind that its leader, Jon Corzine, is an ex-Goldman Sachs (GS) man, and the boys at GS love their leverage. The 140% leverage allowed under the US re-hypothecation regulation just didn’t scratch Corzine’s itch.

The solution: take it offshore.

Corzine decided to extend the lever a few thousand kilometers east and stand in the UK. In the UK, it turns out, there is no limit to the amount that can be re-hypothecated. It is the responsibility of the customer to negotiate the terms of re-hypothecation. Absent that, the broker is free to re-hypothecate 100% of the securities in a customer’s margin account, not just the securities acting as collateral.

The forensic accounting and investigation into the collapse of MF Global and the disappearance of possibly $1 billion or more in client funds is under way, and I do not wish to draw any premature conclusions. But preliminary reports about the investigation suggest that MFG had churned pledged client assets – re-hypothecating collateral several times – and used it to place a massive $6.2 billion bet on European sovereign debt.

It was a bad gamble that sent MFG into history’s dustbin.

This is an arcane and complicated topic, and this article does not attempt to cover every detail. The goal is to provide enough information for a reader to have a better sense of the terms that are probably going to be in the media a lot in the days and weeks just ahead.

By Jeff Clark, Casey Research

We’ve been saying since September that gold producers are undervalued, and here are some data that show just how extreme the undervaluation is.

The following chart measures the stock prices of major and intermediate gold producers against their Net Asset Value, based on the daily price of gold. In the simplest terms, a company should be worth more as the product it sells rises in price faster than the cost of those sales. In this case, gold has doubled in price over the past three years while costs have not kept up, dramatically increasing the intrinsic value of a reasonably well-run gold producer. Yet look what the stocks have done when measured against this higher value.

In spite of a rising gold price, stock prices have steadily fallen. In fact, as the right axis shows, the industry is currently selling at a 20% discount to its Net Asset Value (as of October 21) – and historically, gold stocks trade at a premium.

Notice that gold stocks hit 1.6 times their NAVs just before the crash of 2008. Gold producers often trade at this level. If I’m right, companies will revert to historical premiums, meaning much higher stock prices than today.

These data don’t tell us when prices will rise, nor do they signal that stocks can’t trade lower. They are simply telling us that at this point in time, gold stocks represent a true bargain. Someday this won’t be the case, and the opportunity to buy at current levels will be gone.

I’m convinced that in a year or two, we’ll look back and be very happy with our positions.

[Owning gold stocks is an excellent hedge against the wealth-robbing policies the US government is pursuing… but not just any gold stock has blockbuster profit potential. Learn how to protect yourself and invest wisely.]

By Jeff Clark, Casey Research

If you’re bullish about the long term for gold and silver, it’s mouthwatering to watch them undergo a major correction after taking earlier profits that added to your deployable cash. For a little historical perspective on pullbacks, consider the following charts.

The current 15.6% gold decline, while considered a “major” correction, is not out of the ordinary, particularly following the late summer spike. And after each big selloff, there was a price consolidation phase that in every instance led to higher prices. The message: hold on, and buy the big dips.

Not surprisingly, silver’s biggest corrections are larger than gold’s. This is also true for the rebounds; they’ve been quite dramatic. If we apply the biggest three-month recovery of 44.3% to the current correction, that would take silver to $40.63… meaning we probably shouldn’t expect $60 silver by year-end.

[There's still time to capitalize on the anomaly in the metals market that will bring amazing profits to those who are positioned for it. This report will help you get started… and offers a special bonus, too. Don't delay – the tide could turn very soon.]

By Jeff Clark, BIG GOLD

This may sound sensationalistic, but I think the odds are very high that, on average, gold producers will sell in the $200 range before this bull market is over. With most of them trading between $20 and $40, the returns could be tremendous. And while the typical junior won’t reach the same price level, their percentage returns will be much greater and potentially life-changing, as you’re about to see.

The timing of this article may seem incongruous, given the recent weak performance of gold and gold stocks. But that was the identical situation in each of the past manias: both the metal and the equities didn’t excel until the frenzy kicked in. The following documentation is actually a fresh reminder of why we think you should hold on to your positions – or start accumulating them, if you haven’t already.

So, are my projections based on some fantastical gold price, or a complex formula for gold stock valuations? Nope. I base my projections simply on what gold stocks have done in the past. And to the surprise of many investors, it’s a performance they’ve logged several times, making the following prices very believable if you’re bullish on gold.

It comes with a warning, though:

Caution: the following tables may cause excitement, drooling, or the temptation to go all in. Read and invest at your own risk. 

You’ve undoubtedly read about gold’s spectacular climb in 1979-’80. And you’ve likely heard how well gold stocks performed in general. But most researchers haven’t identified exact returns from specific companies during this era.

The reason? Digging up hard data prior to the mid 1980s, especially for the junior explorers, is difficult because it hasn’t been computerized. So we sent a couple of researchers to the library to view the Wall Street Journal on microfiche. We also relied on Scott Hunter of Haywood Securities; Larry Page, president of the Manex Resource Group; and the dusty archives at the Northern Miner. (This means our tables, while accurate, are not necessarily comprehensive.)

Let’s get started…

The Quintessential Bull Market: 1979-1980

The granddaddy of gold bull markets occurred during the 1970s decade, one culminating in an unabashed mania in 1979 and 1980. Gold peaked at $850 an ounce on January 21, 1980, rising 276% from the beginning of 1979. Yes, the price of gold on the last trading day of 1978 was a mere $226 an ounce.

Here’s a sampling of gold producers from this era. What you’ll notice in addition to the mouthwatering returns is that gold stocks peaked not until nine months after gold.

Returns of Producers in 1979-1980 Mania
Company	Price on 12/29/1978	Sept. 1980 Peak	Return
Campbell Lake Mines	$28.25	$94.75	235.4%
Dome Mines	$78.25	$154.00	96.8%
Hecla Mining	$5.12	$53.00	935.2%
Homestake Mining	$30.00	$107.50	258.3%
Newmont Mining	$21.50	$60.62	182.0%
Dickinson Mines	$6.88	$27.50	299.7%
Sigma Mines	$36.00	$57.00	58.3%
Giant Yellowknife Mines	$11.13	$39.00	250.4%
AVERAGE			289.5%

You’ll see there was great variability among the returns of these companies. That’s why, even if you believe we’re destined for an “all-boats-rise” scenario, you still want to own the better companies.

Today, Barrick is selling for $47.59 (as of November 25). If our mania started now and mimicked the average 289.5% return, ABX would reach $185.36 at its peak. GDX at $54.79 today would hit $213.40.

Keep in mind, though, that our data measure the exact top of each company’s price. Most investors, of course, don’t sell at the very peak. If we were to able to grab, say, the middle 80% of the climb, that’s a return of 231.6%. Barrick would hit $157.80 and GDX $181.68 in that scenario… still tantalizing returns.

And with all due respect to Barrick management, there are gold stocks we’re convinced will far outperform the largest gold company in the world in the coming mania.

Here’s a sampling of how junior gold stocks performed in the same period, along with the month each peaked.

Returns of Juniors in 1979-1980 Mania
Company	Price on 12/29/1978	Price Peak	Date of Peak	Return
Carolin Mines	$3.10	$57.00	Oct. 80	1,738.7%
Mosquito Creek Gold	$0.70	$7.50	Oct. 80	971.4%
Northair Mines	$3.00	$10.00	Oct. 80	233.3%
Silver Standard	$0.58	$2.51	Mar. 80	332.8%
Lincoln Resources	$0.78	$20.00	Oct. 80	2,464.1%
Lornex	$15.00	$85.00	Oct. 80	466.7%
Imperial Metals	$0.36	$1.95	Mar. 80	441.7%
Anglo-Bomarc Mines	$1.80	$6.85	Oct. 80	280.6%
Avino Mines	0.33	5.5	Dec. 80	1,566.7%
Copper Lake	$0.08	$10.50	Sep. 80	13,025.0%
David Minerals	$1.15	$21.00	Oct. 80	1,726.1%
Eagle River Mines	$0.19	$6.80	Dec. 80	3,478.9%
Meston Lake Resources	$0.80	$10.50	Oct. 80	1,212.5%
Silverado Mines	$0.26	$10.63	Oct. 80	3,988.5%
Wharf Resources	$0.33	$9.50	Nov. 80	2,778.8%
AVERAGE				2,313.7%

If you bought a reasonably diversified portfolio of top-performing gold juniors prior to 1979, your initial investment could’ve grown 23 times in just two years. If you managed to grab 80% of that move, your account balance still would’ve grown 1,850%.

This means a junior priced at $0.50 today that goes on to become a Mania Phase winner could sell for $12 at the top, or $9.75 at 1,850%. If you own ten juniors, imagine just one of them matching Copper Lake’s return.

Here’s what returns of this magnitude could mean to you. Let’s say you have $10,000 to devote to a portfolio of the best-of-the-best gold juniors. If our mania someday matches the classic 1980 blow-off top, your portfolio could be worth $241,370 at its peak… or about $195,000 if you manage to grab the middle 80%.

This all assumes, of course, that you sell to realize the profit. If you don’t take the money and run at some point, you may end up with little more than tears to fill an empty beer mug. Consider this: many junior gold stocks, including some in the above list, dried up and blew away after October 1980. Investors who held to the bitter end not only saw all their gains evaporate but lost their entire investments as well. Keep that in mind, because all bull markets eventually come to an end – even golden ones.

Returns from that era have been written about before. So I can hear some investors saying, “Yeah, but that only happened once.”

Au contraire. Read on…

The Hemlo Rally of 1981-1983

Many investors don’t know that there have been several mini-manias in gold and especially gold stocks outside of the 1979-’80 period.

Ironically, gold was flat during the two years of the “Hemlo rally.” But something else ignited a bull market. Discovery. Here’s how it happened…

Up until this time, most exploration was done by teams from the major producers. But because of lagging gold prices and the resulting need to cut overhead, they began to shrink their exploration staffs, unleashing a swarm of experienced geologists armed with the knowledge of high-potential mineral targets they’d explored while working for the majors. Many formed their own companies and subsequently went after these targets.

This led to a series of spectacular discoveries, the first of which occurred in mid-1982, when Golden Sceptre and Goliath Gold discovered the Golden Giant deposit in the Hemlo area of eastern Canada. Gold prices rallied that summer, setting off a mini bull market that lasted until the following May. The public got involved, and as you can see, the results were impressive for such a short period of time.

Returns of Producers Related to Hemlo Rally of 1981-1983
Company	1981 Price	Price Peak	Date of High	Return
Agnico-Eagle	$9.50	$21.00	Aug. 83	121.1%
Sigma	$14.13	$24.50	Jan. 83	73.4%
Campbell Red Lake	$16.63	$41.25	May 83	148.0%
Sullivan	$3.85	$6.00	Mar. 84	55.8%
Teck Corp Class B	$17.00	$21.88	Jun. 81	28.7%
Noranda	$33.75	$36.38	Jun. 81	7.8%
AVERAGE				72.5%

Gold producers, on average, returned over 70% on your money during this period. While this isn’t the same spectacular gains from just a few years earlier, keep in mind this occurred in about 12 months’ time. This would be akin to a $30 gold stock soaring to $51.75 by this time next year because it’s located in a significant discovery area.

Once again, it was the juniors that brought the dazzling returns.

Returns of Juniors Related to Hemlo Rally of 1981-1983
Company	1981 Price	Price Peak	Date of High	Return
Corona Resources	$1.10	$61.00	May 83	5,445.5%
Golden Sceptre	$0.40	$31.00	May 83	7,650.0%
Goliath Gold	$0.45	$32.00	Mar 83	7,011.1%
Bel-Air Resources	$0.81	$1.60	Jan. 83	97.5%
Interlake Development	$2.10	$6.40	Mar. 83	204.8%
AVERAGE				4,081.8%

The average return for these junior gold stocks that had a direct interest in the Hemlo area exceeded a whopping 4,000%. A $0.50 junior stock today would exceed $20.

This is especially impressive when you realize it occurred without the gold stock industry as a whole participating. This tells us that a big discovery can lead to enormous gains, even if the greater industry is flat. In other words, we have historical precedence that humongous returns are possible without a mania, by owning stocks with direct exposure to a discovery area. There are numerous examples of this in the past ten years, as any long-time reader of the International Speculator can attest.

By May 1983 – roughly a year after it started – gold prices started back down again, spelling the end of the bull market. Another reminder that one must sell to realize a profit.

The Roaring ’90s

Junior exploration companies were now starting to collect on the “intellectual capital” they’d inherited from the majors. Another series of gold discoveries in the mid-1990s set off one of the most stunning bull markets in the current generation.

Companies with big discoveries included Diamet, Diamond Fields, and Arequipa. This was also the time of the famous Bre-X scandal, a company whose management was later found to have been “salting” drill intercepts.

[One of Doug Casey's biggest wins during this time was Diamond Fields. He started buying the stock around 25 cents and later sold at prices as high as $120. You can do the math. To read more about his other spectacular wins in The 1970s Interview with Doug Casey...]

By the summer of ’96, investor interest had sparked a minor mania, and companies with little more than a few drill holes were selling for $20 a share. The table below, which includes some of the better-known names of the day, is worth the proverbial thousand words. And if you’re the kind of investor with the courage to buy low and willingness to sell during a frenzy, it can be worth a million dollars.

Returns of Producers in Mid-1990s Bull Market
Company	Pre-Bull Market Price	Price Peak	Date of High	Return
Kinross Gold	$5.00	$14.62	Feb. 96	192.4%
American Barrick	$28.13	$44.25	Feb. 96	57.3%
Placer Dome	$26.50	$41.37	Feb. 96	56.1%
Newmont	$47.26	$82.46	Feb. 96	74.5%
Manhattan	$1.50	$13.00	Nov. 96	766.7%
Cambior	$10.00	$22.35	Jun. 96	123.5%
AVERAGE				211.7%

The average producer more than tripled your money during this period. Once again, these gains occurred in a relatively short period of time, in this instance inside of two years.

Here’s how winning juniors performed. Hold on to your hat.

Returns of Juniors in Mid-1990s Bull Market
Company	Pre-Bull Market Price	Price Peak	Date of High	Return
Cartaway	$0.10	$26.14	May 96	26,040.0%
Golden Star	$6.00	$27.50	Oct. 96	358.3%
Samex Mining	$1.00	$7.20	May 96	620.0%
Pacific Amber	$0.21	$9.40	Aug. 96	4,376.2%
Conquistador	$0.50	$9.87	Mar. 96	1,874.0%
Corriente	$1.00	$19.50	Mar. 97	1,850.0%
Valerie Gold	$1.50	$28.90	May 96	1,826.7%
Arequipa	$0.60	$34.75	May 96	5,691.7%
Bema Gold	$2.00	$12.75	Aug. 96	537.5%
Farallon	$0.80	$20.25	May 96	2,431.3%
Arizona Star	$0.50	$15.95	Aug. 96	3,090.0%
Cream Minerals	$0.30	$9.45	May 96	3,050.0%
Francisco Gold	$1.00	$34.50	Mar. 97	3,350.0%
Mansfield	$0.70	$10.50	Aug. 96	1,400.0%
Oliver Gold	$0.40	$6.80	Oct. 96	1,600.0%
AVERAGE				3,873.0%

Many analysts refer to the 1970s bull market as the granddaddy of them all – and to a certain extent it was – but you’ll notice that the average return here exceeds what the juniors did in the 1979-’80 market.

This is akin to that $0.50 junior stock today reaching $19.86… or $16 if you snag 80% of the move. A $10,000 portfolio could grow to over $397,000 (or over $319,000 on 80%).

Gold Stocks and the Greater Depression

Those of you in the deflation camp may dismiss all this because you’re convinced The Great Deflation is ahead. Fair enough. But you’d be wrong to assume gold stocks can’t do well in that environment.

Take a look at the returns of the two largest producers in the US and Canada, respectively, during the Great Depression.

Returns of Producers During the Great Depression
Company	1929 Price	1933 Price	Total Gain
Homestake Mining	$65	$373	474%
Dome Mines	$6	$39.50	558%

During a period of soup lines, crashing stock markets, and a fixed gold price, large gold producers handed investors five and six times their money in four years.

If deflation “wins,” we still think gold equity investors can, too.

The Catch

Before you sell your kids to buy gold stocks, be aware of the fine print: history may not repeat. There’s no law that says we have to get a mania; it’s a good bet, we’ve no doubt, but it could be different than what we saw before – maybe the mania occurs just in gold and not the stocks… or maybe it’s only in certain geographical areas… or it takes longer than what some investors have the patience for.

The point here is simple: don’t invest so much that you get wiped out if it doesn’t come to pass.

In the end, though, we think the efforts by governments around the world to reflate the economy will work. Throughout history, a fiat currency system has never lasted – not even once. Eventually, they all fade away. And whether or not gold (or silver) are somehow figured into the monetary replacement, the odds are high that we’ll see a mania of epic proportions in our industry, as the world’s current fiat currencies implode. Truly life-changing gains will be reaped by those with the foresight, courage, and cash to act before it arrives.

So, yes, someday we think your favorite gold stock will sell for $200. Or perhaps a lot more.

[If you've been thinking about joining Doug Casey and Louis James as they speculate on the best of the best precious metals juniors, now is the time to take advantage of a special discount on Casey International Speculator. If you prefer the relative stability of the profitable gold and silver producers, Jeff Clark brings you the best ideas on those every month in BIG GOLD. Now is the time to invest, before the mania kicks in, as prices on gold stocks are as attractive as they’ve ever been.]

By Bud Conrad, Casey Research

Though late to the party as usual, the proverbial man on the street – along with members of mainstream media and Wall Street heavyweights – is finally waking up to the decade-long, 700% increase in the price of gold, joining a growing buzz around the monetary metal. From questions whether gold is in a bubble to predictions that soaring prices are just around the corner, one thing is clear: a new phase of awareness for gold is upon us. How far might it move before these troubling times are over?

The Big-Picture Economic Environment

Kicking things off, I would like to explore several themes in order to put the current economic situation in context. 

For example, continuing weakness in employment and housing indicates that the big slowdown that started in 2007 persists. Actually, the economy never exited the recession but rather – thanks to massive intervention – enjoyed a temporary reprieve that I have called the “Eye of the Storm.”

We experienced the first part of the storm from 2007 to 2009, but by late 2009 and into 2010 massive bailouts, stimulus, and deficit spending produced a false-dawn recovery. This recovery was most pronounced in the financial sector where the government transferred toxic private-sector debt – including large amounts held at Fannie and Freddie – onto the government’s own balance sheet.

We now are entering the second half of the storm, as it is becoming impossible to ignore the unprecedented and intractable sovereign debt problems sweeping the globe. These problems are especially obvious in the weak countries of Europe where punitive levels of interest rates are pushing weaker members of the eurozone to the brink. As the parts begin to fail, so will the whole.

And the US is not so far behind, with its own historic levels of government debt and deficits running at levels never seen before.

As we at Casey Research have warned of ahead of time, in their attempts to avert a 1929-style depression, governments took on the bubble in toxic private debt, stupidly transferring that burden onto the government (and taxpayers), causing the problem to morph into today’s sovereign debt crisis. Simply, with the government debt too big to ever be repaid, we are now beyond the point of no return.

The private debt problem is not resolved, either. That’s because much of the bad debt on the books of corporations and financial institutions was hidden through “Extend and Pretend” practices, starting with the elimination of mark-to-market accounting requirements. Much of this debt will eventually be revealed to be in default.

Worse, because sovereignties around the world have caused their finances to deteriorate to such extreme levels, they are now ill prepared, and maybe even unable, to step in yet again to soften the blow of private-debt deleveraging and write-downs. As a consequence, the next part of the storm could be prolonged as companies and banks are dragged down.

Furthermore, due to their poor decision-making to this point in the crisis, the governments themselves are now facing a loss of confidence in their sovereign debt, evidenced by soaring interest rates and the rising cost of credit default swaps (CDS) for the PIIGS.

There is no way to recapitalize the Greek debt, and Finland is right to demand collateral, which it recently has. The contagion will extend to the other PIIGs and to the stronger European countries of Germany and France – they can’t also bail out Spain and Italy, which are too big to fail, without destroying confidence in their own economies. Yet absent such a bailout, massive restructuring of weak-country debts held on the books of the banks in the stronger countries will further exacerbate and extend the crisis.

Meanwhile, the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) is too small, and the resources to cover all the countries in trouble just aren’t there. Economists now understand that the PIIGS are well past the point of no return with 130% or so of debt to GDP. The European Central Bank (ECB) will be expanded, like other central banks, to print more euros, but still the system is going to face more debt problems.

The ratio of debt to GDP in Europe, the US, and elsewhere (which is projected to only increase from here) will lead to the sort of problems historically associated with Latin American banana republics, collapsed communist states, and certain countries in Africa. While this is not being adequately discussed in the mainstream, the debt of the supposedly advanced countries is projected to explode beyond the levels that are already tormenting the PIIGS. Put another way, in the decade just ahead, I expect the advanced countries to undergo the same pain we are already seeing in the weak countries.

Supporting that contention, a new paper by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) points out that when government debt approaches 80% to 100% of GDP, there is a weakening in the economy. Greece and the euro system aren’t just facing an economic weakening but a breakdown of the financial system.

Importantly, the debt-to-GDP ratio of the United States is now (conservatively) at 95%, and demands from a tidal wave of retiring baby boomers will make the deficits far worse. Remarkably, annual deficits of a trillion dollars or more over the coming decade are projected. The US debt-to-GDP ratio will break above 100% in two years or less, and debt could double in the next decade if interest rates rise in concert with a widespread loss of confidence in the government’s ability to manage its fiscal and monetary affairs.

The next logical step in this sovereign debt crisis is for us to see further signs of a loss of confidence in the currency. Such a currency crisis is usually measured by rising inflation that, in turn, leads to higher interest rates, which make the crisis worse. That’s because a vicious debt “death” cycle begins to form, with interest on the debt begetting ever-worsening deficits begetting ever higher interest rates that, in time, leave the country unable to even pay the interest on its debt, let alone pay down the debt itself.

Sounds dramatic, I know – but that is what is happening in Greece. The major difference from historical events of a similar nature is that this time, it is not just the smaller, less developed countries – the so-called banana republics – that are in the throes of a financial collapse but most of the world’s advanced economies. This is certain to end badly.

In the short term, the central banks will print up money for their governments and bankers, but in the long run, the loss of confidence will become so great that currencies self-destruct. As the problems extend around the globe, currencies and bond markets will be wiped out together.

In time, new currencies will have to be issued, almost certainly with some form of link to gold and other commodities. To survive what’s coming, you need to understand the process and try to gauge how fast it may unfold. To shed further light on those issues, in the following I provide data on how serious the situation is and conclude with my predictions for the price of gold.

Central Banks Can Print Paper, But They Can‘t Print Gold

Gold is the only real money. In contrast, the power of central bankers to create fiat money out of thin air has distorted our financial systems beyond anything imagined in the early days of slips of paper issued for gold held at the local goldsmith’s.

To get a sense of the distortion, we’ll start by looking at the difference between the quantity of gold held by central banks and the amount of paper money they have issued. As you can see in the chart below, the amount of gold held has been surprisingly stable. But the blue line, a close reflection of the narrow definition of money that has been created globally, shows that the quantity of all forms of financial assets has grown dramatically.

The clear point of this chart is that the nominal quantity of the paper money in circulation has been growing much faster than the gold that formerly underpinned that currency and may be called upon to do so again before this is over. Regardless, as the power of money creation greatly benefits the money printers, we expect profligate money spending and creation to continue apace.

Importantly, central banks are no longer selling off their gold but rather are increasing their holdings. You can see that shift in the small upturn in the red line at the right of the chart. Central banks halting gold sales and becoming net buyers of gold decreases supply and increases demand, leading to higher gold prices.

As a related anecdote, Venezuela’s President Chavez recently recalled gold reserves not currently held in Caracas, exciting the gold bulls with the thought that the withdrawal of some 150-200 tonnes of gold from the Bank of England and bullion banks will force a squeeze on traditional stockpiles of gold. Chavez is further proposing to nationalize Venezuela’s gold mines. His many faults aside, I think Chavez understands the situation perfectly and is using his dictatorial powers to move back towards gold faster than slower-moving nation-state competitors.