|
Archives
WEEKLY COMMENTARY
August 27, 2002
Also see new article at:
Best of Lance Lewis
Best of Mogambo Guru
Best of Bill Buckler
Best of Steve Puetz
Best of John Mauldin
Speculative Position Limits
By Theodore Butler
This is a follow-up to the recent letters and e-mail exchanges with
the CFTC and the COMEX regarding my allegations of manipulation in the
silver market. It seems that, no matter how hard I try to solicit response
to my very specific allegations, the CFTC and COMEX dance around the
issue. Since I consider this the most important matter currently impacting
the price of silver, I thought I might expand on this issue of speculative
position limits. What are they, why do they exist, and what do I think is
wrong with COMEX silver speculative position limits.
As the term clearly states, the purpose of this body of commodity law is
to limit the size of the positions that speculators may hold in any
regulated futures market. (Silver is such a regulated futures market).
This is not meant as discrimination against speculators, but to ensure
that the key reason that futures markets exist, is not compromised.
Although some may think that the futures industry is just a form of
legalized gambling, serious students of the market know that the real
economic purpose for futures markets is to allow hedging - the transfer of
price risk away from real producers and users to those who willingly
accept that risk, speculators. It is this principal of risk transfer that
stands behind the futures markets, much like the principals of
risk-sharing that legitimatize the insurance industry. It takes two to
tango, and without speculators, the futures market could not exist.
Without speculators, the real producers and users would have no one to
transfer their price risk to.
Yet, even allowing for the necessity of speculators as a prime ingredient
in the market equation, a strong component of commodity law has evolved
over the past 100 years, that seeks to control the influence that
speculators can exert on prices. That component is speculative position
limits. Here's the reasoning why this has evolved - real producers and
users must invest much capital and time and effort to develop and run real
businesses. In our free market economy, it is the law of supply and demand
that must determine prices, and our entire economic body of law seeks to
make illegal anything that would constrain trade and hinder or
artificially influence prices. No one would argue with the principals of
this economic legal process.
In commodity futures trading, because of the leverage created by the
requirement of only a small down-payment, or margin, it is easy for a
speculator with a large pool of capital to deal in quantities that would
dwarf the quantities that real producers and users dealt in. This was true
a hundred years ago, and is more true today. Common sense should tell you
that whoever dealt in bigger quantities, would have a bigger influence on
prices. That's just the law of the world. Therefore, a mechanism had to be
created in order to insure that speculators didn't deal in larger
quantities than did the real producers and users. The framers of commodity
law came up with the no-nonsense solution of speculative position limits -
set a definitive and logical actual limit on how many contracts any one
speculator could control at any time, net long or short. That solution has
stood the test of time, and exists to this day. Both the CFTC and the
COMEX, by their very own words, embrace speculative position limits to be
a cornerstone, or even, the cornerstone to commodity trading regulation.
Unfortunately, while their words about speculative position limits are
fine, their actions and deeds are leave a lot to be desired.
Here's my gripe - While the CFTC and COMEX proclaim and embrace the
importance of speculative position limits, in general terms, they both
allow the law to be violated when it comes to COMEX silver futures. How
so? By allowing the COMEX insiders to set speculative position limits at
such absurdly high limits, the COMEX has been able to evade the law
requiring such limits in regulated commodities. Let's face it - limits are
supposed to limit, or restrict, otherwise why have them at all? We
wouldn't tolerate a speed limit in an elementary school zone of 100 mph.
We would see immediately that the limit was set so high as to be
counterproductive. Worse, in the case of COMEX silver speculative position
limits, not only are the limits set at the equivalent of a 100 mph speed
limit in a school zone, there is no enforcement even when the 4 or less
traders break that limit by double. Please hear me out.
If speculative position limits are designed to limit the price influence
that speculators exert on prices, such limits must be set in relation to
what real producers and consumers make and use in the real world. Quite
simply, this means that speculators must not be allowed to control more
than the quantities of what AVERAGE-SIZED real producers and users deal
in. I've added the emphasis of "average-sized" because commodity law is
incredibly clear on this point. Commodity law intends for speculators to
be limited to no more than what average-size producers and users make and
use, by specifically including, in the law, exemptions to speculative
position limits by bona-fide hedgers. The law further spells out, in
incredibly clear language, just what constitutes an exemption to the
speculative position limits by a bona fide hedger, namely, such a hedger
could hold more than the rigid existing spec position limits, but only up
to 12 months' production or consumption, or existing inventory. In
essence, the framers of commodity law were so smart and logical, that in
allowing an exemption from speculative limits by bona fide hedgers, that
they still set a limit on these exempt hedgers. The framers of commodity
law did not want anyone to have the ability to go long or short in
unlimited quantities, because they knew that anyone having the power to
buy or sell in unlimited quantities would, by definition, manipulate
prices. The framers of commodity law, must be rolling in their graves,
over how the 4 or less COMEX insiders have distorted and evaded that law.
The mechanism that the COMEX insiders used to circumvate the clear intent
of commodity law, was the passage, some 10 or 15 years ago, with the full
approval of the CFTC, of a new type of speculative position limit for
silver and other commodities traded on that exchange. Out went the old
limits (which were too high anyway) and in came something known as
"accountability" limits. To this day, I don't know what that word means.
All I know is that the accountability limit is 7500 contracts (there is a
seperate 1500 contract limit in the spot delivery month). 7500 contracts
is equal to 37.5 million ounces. It is equal to a 100 mph school zone
speed limit. You can count on one hand the number of producers AND
consumers, combined, who make or use that quantity annually. An
accountability limit of 37.5 million ounces limits no one. It gives
speculators (especially the New York dealers) complete dominance over real
world producers and consumers. It isn't even close to what commodity law
intends.
Worse, according to the COTs, this no-limit limit of 37.5 million ounces
isn't even observed by the 4 or less traders. They held 260 million ounces
net short recently, for an average (if there were really 4, and not less
traders) of 65 million ounces each, or 13 thousand contracts. These
traders were driving 180 mph through the school zone, and the regulator
state troopers from the CFTC and the COMEX didn't blink an eye.
What would compromise legitimate speculative position limits in COMEX
silver? Well, if you look at representative silver producers, such as
Coeur d'Alene, Hecla and Pan American silver, their annual production runs
between 8 and 15 million ounces a year. They're not the largest producers
of silver in the world, but they are much more than average-size
producers. This can be a discussion for reasonable people, but commodity
law would dictate that no one speculator should have more price influence
on silver than any of these miners. Therefore, a 5 million ounce
speculative position limit, or 1000 COMEX contracts, would seem to be a
reasonable limit. This is the limit I siggested in my first letter this
year to the Chairman of the CFTC, on Feb 12. Remember, larger producers
and consumers can get an exemption to to the 1000 contract limt, if they
want. Let's be honest - allowing, as current "limits" do, speculators to
hold positions many, many times larger than the above mentioned miners, is
nuts and against everything in commodity law.
Anyone who can buy and sell in unlimited quantities of futures contracts
controls the price. Period! That's why commodity law dictates speculative
position limits. Setting speculative position limits so high, as to not
limit anyone, is a cheap end run-around the law. The CFTC and COMEX must
stop dancing around this issue and institute and enforce legitimate
speculative position limits in silver.
E-mail addresses:
Neal L. Wolkoff, Executive Vice President N.Y. Mercantile Exchange –
nwolkoff@nymex.com
Michael Gorham, Director of Market Oversight, CFTC –
mgorham@cftc.gov
(This essay was written by silver analyst Theodore Butler. Investment
Rarities does not necessarily endorse these views, which may or may not
prove to be correct.)
Investment Rarities Incorporated has prepared this
material for your private use. Although the information in this
publication has been obtained from sources which Investment Rarities
Incorporated believes to be reliable, we do not guarantee its accuracy and
such information may be incomplete or condensed. All opinions expressed in
this publication are those of Investment Rarities Incorporated and are
subject to change without notice. Predictions or projections can be wrong
and financial advice can prove to be unprofitable. Gold and silver can go
up or down in value. Gold, Silver and coins are not necessarily a medium
appropriate for every individual. All rights reserved. Copyrighted 2002
Investment Rarities Incorporated. |