|
Archives
TED
BUTLER'S ARCHIVES
TED BUTLER
COMMENTARY
January 15, 2007
DANGER ZONE
(This essay was written by silver analyst Theodore
Butler, an independent consultant. Investment Rarities does not
necessarily endorse these views, which may or may now prove to be
correct.)
When anyone speaks in absolute terms, they set
themselves up to be absolutely right or absolutely wrong. Being right is
easy to handle, but being absolutely wrong, especially in full public
view, is something to be avoided. That’s why it’s good to avoid speaking
in absolute terms about markets. I’m going to disregard that normally
good advice and speak in absolute terms about the gold and silver
markets. I’ll be talking about something truly important, something that
has me very nervous.
The Problem
In simple and absolute terms, the gold and silver
markets are in the most dangerous position since I’ve followed them, or
more than 35 years. I have definitely not turned bearish on silver, nor
am I expecting lower prices in the long term. Although I expect near
term volatility to increase, I’m more bullish on silver than before, if
that’s possible. Then, what’s the danger?
The danger is to the market itself, specifically to
the COMEX, the world’s leading precious metals exchange. Trading on the
COMEX has come to dominate the world price of gold and silver to such an
extreme extent that it has become unhealthy. A large part of the danger
is the concentrated short positions. They have grown to such an alarming
size that they threaten normal operations and, perhaps, the very
existence of the Exchange. But it’s not solely the concentrated short
position, as I hope to explain.
Please keep in mind; the COMEX is part of the New
York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX), which, in turn, is the largest energy
exchange in the world. This is no minor matter. Any disruption of such
an important financial institution, now a publicly traded company, could
have serious repercussions.
I know that this is a complicated issue. I know I
have been alone in writing on this issue. I know I bring it up
repeatedly. Although I focus on the silver concentrated short position,
lately it appears that gold has caught the silver concentration
"disease." I am convinced it is the most important issue in gold and
silver.
The paper COMEX market has been allowed to become so
dominated by large traders that it is doing something that is expressly
against commodity law. Because the regulators at the CFTC and the NYMEX
have allowed them to do so, the largest traders in COMEX gold and silver
futures now set the price, rather than "discover," or follow, the price
set by the fundamentals. It is important to grasp this concept.
Commodity law and regulation are intended to prevent
the futures markets from controlling the price of world commodities. The
futures market "tail" should not wag the world market "dog." Yet that is
precisely what has occurred in silver, and now gold. Large speculators
in COMEX silver and gold, both on the short side as well as the long
side, now set the world price of each. This is contrary to commodity
law.
Over the past three weeks, the price of gold has
climbed $100 per ounce and silver has climbed more than $2 per ounce.
The large non-commercials on the COMEX accounted for roughly 95% of the
net buying in gold and silver over this period, with the "little" guys (unreporting
traders) making up a very small 5% of the total net buying.
My point is simple – large speculative buyers of
paper contracts were behind the gold and silver price moves, not
refiners or jewelry fabricators or industrial consumers. Nor were
long-term investors who pay cash on the barrel. Therefore, paper
speculators determined the price. That is against commodity law. Period.
While it is true that large paper buyers are
responsible for the recent price increases, that in no way, diminishes
the real crime and danger in the gold and silver markets, namely, the
continued expansion of the concentrated short positions. The
concentrated short sellers in COMEX gold and silver futures threaten the
very existence of the Exchange.
Since it started moving up from $4 oz several years
ago, it made no sense that silver should have the largest short position
of any commodity in history. The only reason, and it can hardly be
called legitimate, is to attempt to manipulate the price to be lower
than it would have been without the giant short position. It should be
clear today that whatever their motivation, the big shorts miscalculated
and they are on the wrong side of the trade.
The latest COT Report, for positions held as of
January 9, indicates new record extremes in all the concentrated short
categories in silver and gold futures. In both the 4 or less traders
category and the 8 or less traders’ category, the net short concentrated
positions rose to levels never witnessed. In gold, the eight largest
traders accounted for 95% of the all the COMEX commercial selling in the
past three weeks (with the 4 largest making up most of that amount).
Without this concentrated short selling, prices would have climbed much
higher. The remarkable fact is that the natural hedgers, the gold mining
companies, have been retreating from forward selling, leaving the
question open as to who the heck the sellers are and what is their
legitimacy?
At precisely the time the gold miners hold the lowest
forward sale position in many years, the four largest traders on the
COMEX hold a record net short position of 75 days of world mine
production and the 8 largest traders hold a short position of more than
104 days world production. Gold’s concentrated short position, expressed
in days of world mine production is the largest of any commodity other
than silver.
The 4 or less traders in silver are now net short
more than 282 million ounces, or more than 161 days of world mine
production, another ugly new record. The 8 largest traders are net short
almost 200 days of world mine production. Not only is this a record for
silver, it is so far beyond a record for any commodity that I can
confidently predict that no commodity will ever again have such a
preposterously large short position.
It is the combination of aggressive (and yes,
manipulative) buying by large COMEX speculators and the reckless
concentrated short position that puts the Exchange potentially in harms
way. The big shorts are so exposed that they could now be desperate. In
the last three weeks, the eight largest short traders in gold and silver
have racked up market losses (and margin calls) of more than $3 billion.
This, in addition to hundreds of millions they were out prior to that.
These new losses are far beyond any that they have ever experienced. And
because of the record large short positions they hold, their exposure to
new losses has never been greater. This should be alarming to market
observers (and regulators).
The extreme concentrated short position in gold and
silver is the prime reason to be alert to an attempt for a vicious and
engineered sell-off by the shorts. It also will be the reason for a
market melt up, if the shorts lose control. There is nothing good one
can say about the concentrated short position. It smells to high heaven
and this is why I write about it so frequently. It is obvious that
neither the regulators at the CFTC nor the Exchange have lifted a finger
to rectify this dangerous situation, in spite of repeated public
petitions.
Due to the uniqueness surrounding the silver
concentrated short position, and how much it represents in terms of real
world metal, it wouldn’t take an extreme market move to disrupt the
Exchange. A $20 up day in gold and a 50-cent up move in silver (which
has been experienced recently) generates an additional $630 million
daily loss and resultant margin call to the 8 largest shorts in gold and
silver. Two such days and you double the loss to more than $1.2 billion.
It is likely that the 8 large shorts are close to the same in each
market.
If one or more of the concentrated shorts run out of
liquidity, due to growing losses, and they are unable to fund daily
margin calls, the Exchange would be impacted. Because the shorts are
held in such concentrated hands, the losses and margin calls are
automatically concentrated. Therefore, if one or two (or more) of the
big shorts get into trouble, the Exchange and the markets get into
trouble. This is the problem.
If a big short can’t meet continued margin calls, the
burden falls, eventually, to all the other clearing (guaranteeing)
members. There is a guarantee fund maintained by the NYMEX, and a
separate default insurance policy to meet a clearing member default, but
the two combined only total about $250 million in protection.
http://www.nymex.com/ss_main.aspx?pg=3 Because the size of the
concentrated short position is so large, in a default, those funds could
be exhausted quickly. Then it comes down to demands on other clearing
members.
Thus, in a case where one of the big concentrated
shorts gets into trouble and can’t meet margin calls, other clearing
members (and, effectively, public shareholders of NYMEX stock), not
involved in gold or silver (like energy houses) will be required to pony
up massive amounts of money to clean up the mess. If that’s fair, the
explanation is lost on me.
Let me be clear, if the shorts lose control, the
price will explode. If the shorts are able to rig another sell-off and
are able to cover many of their short positions on tech fund
liquidation, it will set up a great buy point. But it will still be how
this short position plays out that is the main factor in the market
currently. From a free market perspective, that’s nuts.
The Solution
My solution involves nothing more complicated than
selectively increasing margin requirements. This is something the
Exchange does on a regular basis, and is understood by all to augment
the strength and integrity of the Exchange. But my solution involves
targeting the margin increases to where they will really do some good.
The problem in COMEX silver and gold is because of
the largest traders, not the small traders. Therefore, that’s where the
focus of the solution should be. Smaller traders haven’t had anything to
do with the manipulation or in creating the potential margin default.
So, they should not be subjected to higher margins to safeguard the
market.
I would use the Exchange’s and the CFTC’s own
definition of large and small traders to determine the margin increases.
The definition of a large reporting trader is anyone holding 150 or more
contracts of silver and 200 contracts of gold. For all traders holding
fewer contracts than those levels, no special margin increases.
For those traders holding more than the reporting
limits, and up to 1000 contracts each of silver and gold, I suggest
increasing margin requirements to one-half the full cash value of a
contract. Any such margin increase should apply to both the longs and
the shorts.
For those very few traders holding more than 1000
contracts in gold or silver, the margin should be the full value of the
contract. This would probably involve less than 25 silver traders and
100 gold traders. The only exception would be for shorts depositing
warehouse receipts to be delivered in the current delivery month.
Why am I proposing this steep increase in margins for
the very few largest traders? To protect the market from default and to
discourage unnecessary speculation or manipulation by either giant
shorts or longs. Such full contract margins would restrict the very
largest traders from trading in massive quantities of paper contracts
and nullify their heavy resultant influence on prices.
Not only does every exchange use margin increases when they deem it
appropriate, the NYMEX, in particular, has resorted to even more extreme
measures in the past. In 2000, they increased the margin in palladium to
almost double the contracts full value.
http://www.gold-eagle.com/gold_digest_00/butler081900.html When the
NYMEX instituted the extreme margin change in palladium, it was intended
to punish the longs and protect Exchange insider shorts. My proposal is
to strengthen the integrity of the market and does not discriminate
against either the longs or the shorts.
I am suggesting my margin proposal be enacted before
a default is apparent. Extreme margin increases and trading restrictions
will, by precedent, most likely be enacted by the regulators after the
problem becomes apparent. I know governments and regulators are
reactive, rather than proactive, but they need to do something now. |