|
Archives
TED
BUTLER'S ARCHIVES
TED BUTLER
COMMENTARY
August 22, 2008
The Smoking Gun
(This essay was written by silver analyst Theodore Butler, an
independent consultant. Investment Rarities does not necessarily endorse
these views, which may or may not prove to be correct.)
For years, the data contained in the weekly Commitment of Traders
Report (COT), issued by the CFTC, have indicated that several large
COMEX traders have manipulated the price of silver and gold. For an
equal number of years, the CFTC has reluctantly responded to public
pressure over this issue with blanket denials of any wrongdoing. Many
analysts have agreed with the CFTC’s position, conjuring up various ways
to explain why a massive short position held by a handful of traders is
not manipulative.
The recent widespread shortage of silver for retail purchase coupled
with a price collapse appears to have shaken these analysts’ confidence
that the COMEX silver market is operating ‘fair and square.’ Well it
should, since there is no rational explanation for a significant price
decline going hand in hand with product shortages other than collusive
manipulation.
For any remaining doubters that COMEX silver and gold pricing is
manipulated, the following CFTC data should be considered. This data is
taken from a monthly report issued by the CFTC, called the Bank
Participation Report. Here’s the link for the report -
http://www.cftc.gov/marketreports/bankparticipation/index.htm
The relevant data is found in the July and August futures sections. I
will condense it.

These facts speak for themselves. Here are the facts. As of July 1,
2008, two U.S. banks were short 6,199 contracts of COMEX silver
(30,995,000 ounces). As of August 5, 2008, two U.S. banks were short
33,805 contracts of COMEX silver (169,025,000 ounces), an increase of
more than five-fold. This is the largest such position by U.S. banks I
can find in the data, ever. Between July 14 and August 15th,
the price of COMEX silver declined from a peak high of $19.55 (basis
September) to a low of $12.22 for a decline of 38%.
For gold, 3 U.S. banks held a short position of 7,787 contracts
(778,700 ounces) in July, and 3 U.S. banks held a short position of
86,398 contracts (8,639,800 ounces) in August, an eleven-fold increase
and coinciding with a gold price decline of more than $150 per ounce. As
was the case with silver, this is the largest short position ever by US
banks in the data listed on the CFTC’s site. This was put on as one
massive position just before the market collapsed in price.
This data suggests other questions should be answered by banking
regulators, the CFTC, or by those analysts who still doubt this market
is rigged. Is there a connection between 2 U.S. banks selling an
additional 27,606 silver futures contracts (138 million ounces) in a
month, followed shortly thereafter by a severe decline in the price of
silver? That’s equal to 20% of annual world mine production or the
entire COMEX warehouse stockpile, the second largest inventory in the
world. How could the concentrated sale of such quantities in such a
short time not influence the price?
Is there a connection between 3 U.S. banks selling an additional
78,611 gold futures contracts (7,861,100 ounces) in a month, followed
shortly by a severe price decline in gold? That’s equal to 10% of annual
world production and amounts to more than $7 billion worth of gold
futures being sold by 3 U.S. banks in a month. How can this
extraordinary concentrated trading size not be manipulative?
Because prices fell so sharply after the short sales were taken (with
the appropriate dirty tricks as I have previously explained) holders of
known physical silver in the world suffered a decline in value of more
than $2.5 billion and long COMEX silver futures holders suffered a
similar $2.5 billion decline in the value of their contracts. In gold,
because the dollar value held is much greater than silver, investor
losses were much greater, on the order of hundreds of billions of
dollars on their physical holdings. Declines in the value of mining
shares adds many billions more. Was this loss of value caused by the
concentrated short selling of 2 or 3 U.S. banks?
What real legitimate business do 2 or 3 U.S. banks suddenly have for
selling short such quantities of speculative instruments over a brief
time period? Do we want banks to be engaging in this type of activity?
If the manipulation was not successful, would U.S. taxpayers be called
on to bail out yet another bank speculation gone bad?
Do the traders who lost money in the recent price collapse of silver
have a reason to believe that their money is now in the pockets of these
two or three U.S. banks? If so, do they have recourse?
The data in the Bank Participation report is so clear and compelling
that it is hard to conclude anything but manipulation. It is beyond
credulity to conclude other than two or three banks caused one of the
most severe price collapses in precious metals history. The CFTC has a
lot to answer for as the regulatory agency responsible for preventing
this type of blatant manipulation. |