May 3, 2007

Silver Bullish: New Solar Cells See the Light

New Solar Cells See the Light

By John Simpson
ScienceNOW Daily News
24 April 2007

A team of Australian researchers has cleared an important hurdle in the development of cheap solar power. The scientists have devised a new manufacturing technique that could boost the efficiency of an inexpensive type of solar cell by up to 50%, making the technology an economically feasible alternative to fossil fuels in the search for sustainable energy.

The high cost of solar cells means that the energy they generate is about five times more expensive than conventional power, keeping the technology off the roofs of the average citizen. Much of the expense comes from the silicon in the wafers that make up the cells. As a result, researchers have focused on improving so-called thin-film cells, which minimize the use of silicon. The downside to these one- or two-micron-thick films is that they can only convert about 5% to 10% of incoming sunlight into electricity, versus up to 25% for thicker silicon wafers. That's because a process called etching, which is used to maximize light absorption by the cell, reduces the cell's current, voltage, and overall output.

So researchers led by doctoral candidate Supriya Pillai of the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, took etching out of the equation. Their new approach involves depositing a thin film of silver (measuring about 10 nanometers thick) onto a solar cell surface and heating it to 200° Celsius. That breaks the film into flattened spheres, called islands, which are about 100 nanometers in diameter. When struck by light, these islands achieve the same feat as etching by a natural but complex process. Incoming light, as an oscillating electric and magnetic field, strikes the silver nanoparticles, which also oscillates the metal's free electrons back and forth. These oscillating electrons, known as surface plasmons, reradiate light into the underlying silicon, which increases light absorption into the cell. Plasmons have been used in wafer-type cells, but Pillai's group is the first to experiment with them in thin films.

Most thin-film solar cells are about 8% to 10% efficient, says Kylie Catchpole, a co-author of the study, but this technique could increase the value to between 13% and 15%. That's an important advance, she says: "If they're below 10% efficient, then you can't really afford to install them, because it would take up too much of your roof area, for example, to power your house." Once the technology approaches 15% efficiency, says Catchpole, it becomes commercially viable. An average house could be powered for a one-time investment of $10,000, including installation of panels that cover eight square meters, she says. Further research and development should bring prices even lower, the team reports in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Applied Physics.

The use of plasmons to enhance solar cell technology is promising, says materials scientist Mark Brongersma of Stanford University in California. "There's a huge opportunity ... to manipulate light in ways that semiconductors and insulators never have been able to do," he says.

April 28, 2007

Just Say No to the Silver ETF

Rube Goldberg Strikes Again

I just read the recent Rubino/Turk article on SLV, the silver-backed ETF.
So it seems that the SLV Investor(1) owns the iShares(2), which are issued by the Trust (Bank of New York)(3), which hires a Custodian (JPM Chase Bank)(4), which can have any number of Sub-Custodians, Agents or Depositories(5), where the silver(6) might be held. Compare this schematic with the true silver owner(1), who owns and controls his own silver(2).

JP Morgan Chase, as I'm sure we all know, was implicated in the Enron accounting fraud, the Blanchard/Barrick lawsuit, and many other high-finance scams too numerous to recount. I guess that makes them a perfect choice for this assignment.

You might have innocently thought that all this 100+ million ounces of silver is sitting quietly in one place in a New York vault. Maybe it is.

But, if there should ever be an audit, JPMC has TEN DAYS to round up enough silver to satisfy the auditors. Even then they don't actually have to have it on hand for inspection by the auditors, or anything as tedious as that. This is the 21st Century! All they have to do is to say it is located at one of those Sub Custodians and it would be too much trouble and expense to move it.

This is just custom-made to allow real silver to do double and triple duty. If the auditor wants to get snotty and insist on seeing all the silver assembled in one place, JPMC has to be assured of payment by "somebody" for the trouble and expense of doing so.

Never happen.

On the other hand, the auditor could just accept a document swearing that a certain amount of silver located in a certain place is part of the SLV hoard. It might even be "true", on that particular day.

And to top it off, the Custodian (JPMC) is absolved in advance for erroneous accounting entries and has the explicit right to make and reverse provisional entries and to back-date any necessary corrections. So no matter how much their records may differ from reality, it can all be fixed later on with no penalty. With this kind of accounting, the question of who owns what silver on any particular day becomes extremely hypothetical.

Gosh, this kind of thing makes the CRIMEX start to look good.

Now add to this the recent publicity by Patrick Byrne of the very widespread epidemic of naked short selling of stocks. So widespread and epidemic, in fact, that the stockbroker industry has tacitly admitted that they have no hope of ever cleaning out all those counterfeit shares known as FTDs (failures to deliver the promised stock). So, just live with it. Since SLV is nothing more than another share, I’m sure it is entirely possible to naked-short the exchange traded fund as part of a program to hold down the price of silver.

ANOTHER “WALL OF SEPARATION”

The net result of all this is that precious metals are to remain stored away in vaults and under centralized control as usual, while those interested in owning precious metals are systematically separated from those metals by elaborate financial structures subject to behind-the-scenes manipulation. The whole scheme is being sold to the retail investor on the basis of Convenience, and they are taking the bait. Come to think of it, Convenience has been used as bait to sell a long list of Centrist initiatives. Even slavery could be pitched as Convenient, since you’d have no responsibility for anything ever again, and all your food, clothing and housing would be provided to you for free.

The irony is that the SLV buyer is really only interested in convenience and FRN price appreciation. But by allowing control of the metals to remain in centralized hands, they are creating the conditions for more price manipulation, which will NOT be to the upside. At the same time, they increase their exposure to accounting swindles, bankruptcy, market closings, confiscation, rule changes, special taxes and what-have-you when the Emergency arrives.

I'm not telling you anything new, but the price suppression in precious metals is aimed at people who just want to see their stuff go up - people who, essentially, just want more FRNs. If it doesn't go up, they get antsy. If it goes down, they dump it. Unfortunately, this speculator/trader mind-set is extremely easy to manipulate and control.

On the other hand, the wise investor understands the value of his assets whether they "go up" this month or not. These are the people who add to their holdings on price weakness and wait for the fundamentals to make themselves felt - people who accumulate real wealth, and look beyond the ephemeral FRN price tag on that wealth to something more like true value.

CONCENTRATED OWNERSHIP THREATENS LIBERTY

I conclude that gold and silver can only be fairly valued to the extent that physical control is decentralized. That creates the conditions for a true free market in precious metals. This is the logic of our Constitution in requiring the US Mint to provide free coinage of circulating silver and gold money.

The distribution of precious metals into retail hands seems to be happening in spite of the CRIMEX, SLV and similar pseudo-metallic schemes, but they are certainly slowing it down. Unfortunately for America, too many of those hands reside on the other side of the world. Americans have the freedom to own precious metals and thereby undo monetary centralization; they just don't yet have the understanding or the will to do so. As in so many other things, the power to break our chains lies unused in our own hands.

Or as Bob Dylan once put it:

Freedom? "Just around the corner" from you.
But with Truth so far off, what good will it do?

It is reported that in the Persian Empire, in the days before Alexander the Great, all gold and silver resided in it’s rightful place in the King's treasuries, not even guarded, while the serfs had to invent their own worthless scrip to use for exchanging their daily necessities.

Stephen Kovaka
Corydon, IN

April 21, 2007

Jason Hommel: How to Buy Silver & Avoid Getting Scammed

How to Buy Silver, & Avoid Getting Scammed

Silver Stock Report

by Jason Hommel, April 20, 2007


People continually ask me about all kinds of physical silver investments. I have avoided writing this article for years because people are always telling me to not say anything bad about anyone, or your competition. But I don't need to name names, and liars are not my competitors. So, here's how to avoid getting ripped off.

Never buy silver from TV ads. Ads are expensive. TV ads sell silver for up to $50 or $100/oz., up to ten times more than the silver price. They sell as "rare, limited, collectibles" things that are mass produced, and newly minted. In coin shops, you can buy the same products that were sold on TV ten years ago, right at the cost of the silver itself.

Never buy the Silver ETF. First, they may not own the silver as it is unaudited and unauditable. The nature of silver, and the reason you are buying it, is that silver is "payment in full" not a promise to pay. The ETF is not even a promise; for you can never withdraw your silver, but only sell it for dollars--if the institutions running it don't go bankrupt. See Jame's Turk's recent analysis of the ETF for more on why you probably should not trust the silver ETF:
http://www.dollarcollapse.com/iNP/view.asp?ID=52

Never buy silver "certificates" or any other form of "paper silver"; not even if guaranteed by a government. Goverments are the least trustworthy to back silver certificates. If governments were trustworthy, why would they issue unbacked paper money in the first place? Think about it.

Don't let anyone other than you, store your silver. If someone else is storing your silver, then you own a promise to receive silver, (for a fee), and you don't own silver itself.

Never buy "leveraged" silver products. I don't trust futures contracts; they can default, and I expect them to default. I believe it is a moral failure to gamble with futures contracts, and is not consistent with true Christian conduct. Futures contracts are a major scam. Minor scammers will offer you less leverage, and they will take your money and buy futures contracts for themselves, and keep the difference. Even worse, the minor scammers will talk you out of your orders, delay your orders, refuse your orders, purposefully trade you into losing positions, or confuse you with undisclosed costs and commissions.

Never attempt to buy silver or silver futures from a major brokerage house that may have a short position in futures contracts. They may offer you every excuse in the book to prevent taking your order. They may say that they must speak to a manager, or must wait for the market to open or for the "next price fix" on another day. They may bluff, saying "it's not worth my time", or that "you'd be killed by commission charges" (how contradictory!) or try to scare you with "unknown assay fees". (The assay is free at Brinks in LA.) They may try to get you to buy the ETF, or silver stocks, or futures contracts, instead.

Never buy rare coins or numismatics for investment purposes. I believe that rare coins are like idols. Stay away from idols made from silver! Up to 99% or more of the value can be in the image quality, or rarity, and not the substance of the silver. Further, you can lose up to 50% of what you paid for the item when you sell it back. As little as a $300,000 investment can be enough to unknowingly "corner" a market in certain rare coins, wildly driving up the value, because you are the only buyer, and you will have nobody to sell to. I've bought a few rare coins, a few Roman denari silver pieces for $20 that contained less than a dollar's worth of silver. But I bought them for the novelty, and curiosity, and as gifts, not for investment. Some dealers "push" rare coins because they get a larger commission on rare coins. Rare coins are illiquid and not fungible. Silver is money because it is fungible, and liquid.

Never buy a "pool" account of unallocated silver. Never let others hold your silver, either in allocated or unallocated form. A pool account is unallocated, meaning that no specific bars are yours. But even if it is allocated, and you have the serial numbers of the bars that you "own", your warehouse company can go bankrupt. Maybe you can invest a little bit into allocated silver; as a way to diversify the location of your physical silver. Two companies I would trust (but do not use) are goldmoney.com and the Anglo Far East Bullion Company; they will hold silver for you in allocated form. If you want to trust someone to hold your silver; trust your family first.

Personally, I avoid buying Silver-Eagles. Why? Because they typically cost about $2 over the "spot" price of silver.

Liberty dollars are even more overvalued. $20/oz.?! Ridiculous. And the Liberty dollar paper warehouse receipts? Even worse.

You do not have to pay more than about 7% over the spot price for your silver, in the U.S. Old silver coins are currently being sold for under the spot price of the silver content, which is 72% of an ounce in $1 worth of coins.

Shop around. Prices vary. Refiners manage to buy about 200 million ounces of silver under the spot price every year. Try to buy close to their price. Everything is negotiable. (But remember, the coin dealer also takes a risk just to sell silver, as silver prices can move up 5-10% in a single day, too!)

Beware of long shipping times. Long shipping times are a warning sign. Coin shops have been known to go bankrupt. Never buy more silver at one time than you can afford to lose. Therefore, if you buy silver from a dealer, break up your order over time, or use several different dealers at once. Diversify your investments at every stage.

The safest way to get silver is to buy from a local dealer, with "cash on the barrel". Get cash from your bank. If you plan to spend more than $5000 at once, order your cash from the teller a week in advance. If you withdraw more than $10,000, be prepared to help your bank fill out the CTR or "Cash Transaction Report" Federal form which asks for your social security number and occupation. In the meantime, locate various coin dealers that publish price quotes on the internet. For a start, see here: find-your-local-coin-shop.com

Take cash to a local dealer, negotiate heavily on price; & show the dealer various price quotes from other dealers on the internet! If your local dealer cannot fill your order at a reasonable price (within 1% of the lowest prices), then drive to another dealer, or break up your order, and order online from your sources.

Remember, coin dealers are the "working rich". They take the risk of having a coin shop, which can be robbed, to make money, by serving you. Most are very honest, and earn their commissions. Many have had guns pointed in their face. They are our industry's heros. Treat them with respect; and don't waste their time; they are often too busy to write articles like this one to you; and most could not afford my advertising budget to be able to reach you.

If you want to acquire $1 million in physical bullion, it will take some time, and a lot of work, and you will be one of less than probably 100 people worldwide attempting such a feat. After years of searching, I have found only 5 coin dealers in the entire U.S. that consistently have as much as 100,000 ounces of silver in their own personal inventory. Many dealers who claim to be "the nation's largest dealer" (and there are about 5-10 companies making such a claim) do not have so much in inventory. Many dealers will claim that they can access as much, but that is because they will place your order with a larger dealer, and "drop ship" directly from the other dealer, to you.

Understand the difference between a price "indication" and a price "lock". An indication is only a guess on what the price may be. A "lock" means you are committed to buy at that price, and you have struck a deal, and cannot back out. Be aware of the potential risk to bullion dealers who will give you a price lock, before they get your money, in a bull market. (That is a standard business practice.) Unless they are buying on the futures markets when they take your order with their own excess cash, or unless they have more metal than they want, then bull market conditions can eventually bankrupt them, if that is their standard business practice, and if their order volume is high enough.

This is why it is so important to do a cash for metal purchase in person. It protects both you and your dealer.

The two largest dealers in the United States are Johnson Matthey, a silver refiner, and Amark who is Johnson Matthey's largest dealer.

Johnson Matthey has "run short" of silver several times in the last few years, where delivery times increased substantially, up to 6-8 weeks, and Johnson Matthey does not take orders from the public.

Amark will make you sign all sorts of government forms; and demand your social security number, and so I have never ordered from them directly.

If you live outside the United States, it may be much more difficult for you to find silver. You might want to think about traveling to the U.S. to buy silver, and fly it back with you, or have it shipped.

Do not let yourself be confused by the flow of silver at your local coin shop. In many cases, coin shops buy more silver from the public that continues to sell. The coin shop must then "dump" this silver to another, larger dealer, or the refiners, like Johnson Matthey, who are the biggest buyers in the industry, the buyers of last resort.

It must be this way, given the market structure. The silver mines produce about 700 million ounces of silver, and industry demands about 950 million ounces of silver annually. The difference is largely met by "recycled" silver, about 200 million ounces per year. In other words, investors are selling silver to the coin shops that ends up at the refinery.

Don't let your investment opportunity to buy silver go up in smoke, because if you don't act, it literally will.

And unless you end up with silver in your hands, you don't own silver at all. Phantom silver, or a promise to pay silver, is not the same thing, and I hope you don't realize it when the promise to pay silver also goes up in smoke.

For more on what kinds of silver to buy, and where to get it, see
http://find-your-local-coin-shop.com/

Thank you!

You can comment on this report at the "Hommel Forum" here:

http://hommelforum.com/showthread.php?t=101

April 17, 2007

Ted Butler: The day of reckoning

Silver market analyst Ted Butler's new commentary explains in detail how the silver market is manipulated by one or two short-sellers far beyond the manipulation of any other commodity market. Butler's commentary is headlined "The Day of Reckoning" and you can find it at GoldSeek's companion site, SilverSeek, HERE

April 10, 2007

James Turk: Can we trust the silver ETF?

GoldMoney founder James Turk, editor of the Freemarket Gold & Money Report and consultant to GATA, has studied the SEC filings and prospectus of the silver exchange-traded fund on the American Stock Exchange (SLV) and has discovered that they go out of their way to provide for not actually having allocated silver to back the shares sold in the fund. Turk's research revives the long-simmering question of whether the precious metals ETFs are secure investments or just more mechanisms to be used by the financial powers and the central banks behind them to short the metals.

You can find Turk's new report, "Can We Trust the Silver ETF?" at Dollar Collapse HERE

April 4, 2007

Ted Butler: The excellence of silver

In his new essay, silver market analyst Ted Butler makes the case for the white metal as well as it ever has been made.

Silver has done spectacularly well over the last five years but not as well as some other metals -- because, Butler says, of the huge and concentrated short position in silver on the New York commodities exchange. That short position, Butler writes, "must be resolved, and whether that resolution involves default or buying by short covering, it will have the same bullish impact on price."

(He's betting that the short position in silver will be resolved by default -- with a smile if not a hearty laugh at the commodities exchange's longs.)

You can find Butler's essay, "The Excellence of Silver," at GoldSeek's companion site, SilverSeek, HERE



February 13, 2007

Ted Butler: Time frames

Silver market analyst Ted Butler analyzes the commitment of traders report for the gold and silver futures markets and gets the feeling that the dealers, who are short, are again about to scalp the technical funds, which are long, sending gold and silver spiking down to wonderful new buy points in their steady ascents:

Time Frames

By: Theodore Butler

Investment cycles, like all things in life, run in both short-term and long-term time frames. I’ll define short term as days, weeks and months, and long term as years and decades. For the average investor, the best hope for success lies with a long-approach. Contrary to TV infomercials and other hype, short-term trading won’t and can’t make the masses rich. That’s why I have always counseled a long-term approach to silver and intend to do that again today.

But when you study the markets closely, there are times when the risk of a short-term sell-off becomes more likely than at other times. This does not mean a sell-off must occur, just that the odds may be greater for that to occur than at other times. Most importantly, it is imperative to understand the reasons behind such a potential sell-off, and to determine if those short-term reasons negate the reasoning behind the long-term bullish case for silver. This is important because the biggest mistake an investor can make is to lose a long-term investment for short-term considerations.

In fact, I have increasingly attempted to ignore the short-term situation in my public silver analysis, precisely to prevent long-term silver investors from fretting about the short term. But it is possible to be increasingly bullish about the long term, but to be concerned about risk and volatility in the near term. Even if those concerns are not realized, and the long-term fundamentals of silver overpower the short-term considerations, which can and will happen someday, it would be analytically dishonest to not acknowledge such concerns. At the very least, such an acknowledgement might better prepare one emotionally in the event of a sell-off. At the very best, it might assist in positioning for the long-term bull market in silver.

The Short Term

Long-time readers know that my speculation for near term price change is based upon the futures market structure as depicted in the Commitment of Traders Report (COT). It is the current market structure that is the basis for my concern about near term risk. As a way of explanation for newer readers, I’ll offer a brief overview of the COT, but first I must clearly state that this has little importance in the long term. Long-term investment decisions should not be made based upon the COTs, simply because the COTs change much more frequently than do long term supply/demand fundamentals, which I’ll discuss shortly.


The COT is a weekly report, issued by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), on just about all major futures and options contracts traded on US commodity futures markets. As such, it is one of the most dependable and timely of information data sources available. The report breaks down, in great detail, the long and short positions held by certain categories of market participants, including by size of trader and the level of concentration of the largest traders.

The COT is an objective and comprehensive snapshot of the positions different types of traders are holding at any point. That objective data is studied to help predict future price movements. The trick lies in the interpretation of the data, which, by definition, is subjective. Ask ten analysts who study the COT for their opinion and chances are you may get ten different opinions.

Many analysts, including me, who study the COT as it pertains to gold and silver, focus on the interplay between two main categories of traders, the large commercial and non-commercial traders. Usually, the commercials are money-center banks and brokerages and non-commercials are technical futures trading funds, a specific type of hedge fund. The tech funds buy and sell on price signals, buying as prices go up and selling as prices go down, hoping to capture significant price trends and limiting risk. Generally, the commercials, or dealers, take the opposite side of whatever the funds buy or sell.

Whenever the tech funds have established their maximum long or short total position, we have arrived at the "moment of truth", from which point either the tech funds or dealers will have to aggressively liquidate positions. In essence, the dealers have never panicked as a group and liquidated in a disorderly manner. It has always been the tech funds that have liquidated in a panic. That is not to say that it is not possible for the dealers to liquidate in a panic, just that they never have in gold or silver, to my knowledge. This can be seen in the basic chart patterns for the life of the gold and silver bull markets so far. Prices climb over longer periods of time, as trend-following tech funds establish positions, compared to sell-offs, which occur abruptly and feature urgent tech fund selling to limit losses. That’s why we go down faster than we go up.

The key to accurately determining the "moment of truth" is in trying to guess when the tech funds have built up their maximum position and are likely to begin to liquidate. This maximum position is, admittedly, a moving and variable target that can only be known for sure in hindsight. Sometimes the funds put many more contracts on than they have put on before, sometimes less. But there is little practical good in waiting for the benefit of hindsight. After the tech funds establish a maximum long position and have begun to liquidate in earnest, the top in price has come and gone. Therefore, one is forced to guess before the liquidation process has begun, even though you risk looking dumb for a while.

I’m guessing that we are at or very close to the tech funds having a maximum long position in gold and silver futures contracts. We are at, or above, recent high water extremes in tech fund long/dealer short positions in gold and silver, which have resulted in significant sell-offs in the past, even though we are not near the all-time historical maximum levels currently. So the question becomes how likely are we to move from the recent extremes to the all-time historical extremes of a year and a half ago? That question is important because a move from here to the all-time maximum tech fund long position would necessarily involve higher prices. While that can certainly occur, my sense is that it won’t. Let me explain my reasoning.

Many factors go into how much of a position the tech funds can build up to. Price action, margin requirements, volatility, and the perceived risk on a trade (how close are the moving averages) all play an important role in determining the tech funds’ full position. Of basic concern is the actual amount of assets that the funds are controlling. More assets under management equal more of a potential position, all things being equal. Fewer assets indicate a smaller position. It is this basic concern that troubles me at this time. Using the John Henry & Company (www.jwh.com) as a proxy for the tech fund sector, at the time of the historical maximum gold and silver long position in Sep–Dec 2005, the tech funds held more assets under management than at any other time. Since that time, principally due to trading performance (but also due to investor withdrawals), assets under management are down close to 45%. If the assets under management in the tech fund sector mirror those of Henry, this would argue against a much bigger position than currently held.

Since the second week of January, the price of gold has risen more than $60. Using the most recent COT data and extrapolating from Tuesday’s cut-off, the net tech fund long/dealer short futures position on the COMEX and the CBOT has risen by more than 80,000 contracts, in my opinion. That’s the equivalent of 8 million ounces of gold, or 250 tons. (Silver has gone up by almost 15,000 net contracts, or 75 million ounces, as prices rose by $1.50.) This is one of the largest 5-week increases in net gold contracts in history, especially considering the tech funds’ reduced assets under management. It appears obvious to me that gold rose by $60, in that period, precisely because the funds and other speculators bought 8 million ounces of futures contracts. In contrast, during that same period of time, the big gold ETF, GLD, added less than 10 tons, or around 300,000 ounces of gold.

If I am correct and the tech fund buying was the reason gold went up over the past 5 weeks, the market could be at risk of a significant decline if those positions are liquidated. Further, I get the feeling that the tech funds were intentionally lured onto the long side in a big way by the dealers, whose plan it is to trigger a big tech fund long liquidation to enable the dealers to buy back large numbers of gold and silver short positions. If and when this liquidation does occur, it should present a phenomenal buy point once that liquidation is complete. As always, don’t even think about liquidating long-term silver positions because of a one or two dollar temporary sell-off that might not occur, or might occur from higher levels.

If I am wrong about anything, it is likely to be on short-term prognosis. It is entirely possible that the dealers could get over-run or for the tech funds to put more longs on at higher prices before liquidating, or even that the buying was not by tech funds, but some other entity. But if I am not going to report on negative readings in the COT when they occur, I would not consider myself to be objective.


February 3, 2007

January 28, 2007

Jason Hommel reports on silver

Silver Stock Report editor Jason Hommel reports on silver, particular silver mining companies, the Vancouver conference, and GATA's growing acceptance...

Review on Vancouver & Silver
Silver Stock Report,
by Jason Hommel, January 26, 2007

I just returned from the Vancouver Gold show, attended by about 8000 investors, and 380 resource companies, and 50 speakers. This was the biggest show by Cambridge House by far. I gave 2 speeches, was on a panel discussion, and did two interviews. Having taken a year off from attending most shows, I decided to revise my old speech, and focus on the most important, non-religious reasons to buy silver. In a nutshell, here's what I presented, and learned, from the show.

I write this free newsletter that goes out to 36,500 opt-in subscribers (increasing at a rate of about 100/day, or 100% per year), and I have about 850 subscribers who pay $40/month to look at my portfolio. I spend the subscription money on advertising, to get the word out. I carefully study the feedback from my readers to help me find the best investments in the industry. In 2003, my portfolio was up about 300% in silver stocks. In 2004, I was up another 100%. In 2005, I was up about 40%. In 2006, my portfolio grew another 100%. That track record is about the best in the world for that time period, on par with the best funds in the business of gold, silver, and resource stocks.

My overall view of silver has grown far more bullish since 1999, when I started investing in silver, and here is how my view has changed.

To really understand silver, you have to first understand gold. You don't understand gold unless you know what GATA knows. GATA has done the research to show that about 15,000 tonnes of about 30,000 tonnes of central bank gold has been lent into the gold market, and this has depressed prices. I'm a big GATA supporter, and for more information, you should see the following video, and order the DVD.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha-j7fH7sAo
Order here:
http://www.goldrush21.com/

I was attracted to silver, because I thought I could make more money in silver than in gold. I have.

At first, I thought silver was merely "cheap" at $5/oz., thinking that the downside was limited, and that we had a good shot at silver repeating the performance in 1980 of $50/oz. But now, I think $50/oz. will just be the start, and here's why.

In 1980, M3, the measure of money in the banks, was about $1.8 trillion, and today, it's closer to $11.5 trillion. So, a comparable price for silver would be 11.5 divided by 1.8 times $50/oz, which is $319/oz.

But that is just the beginning. The reason why is that the bear market for silver did not last 25 years, it was worse than that. In reality, we are still in the bottom of a 600-year bear market for the value of silver.

You can see the 600-year, inflation-adjusted trend in this graph:
http://goldinfo.net/silver600.html

The primary reason for this trend is the declining use of silver as money around the world. But silver is money, it has the properties of money, and the words for silver and money are the same in many languages. As paper money fails, the return of monetary demand for gold, and especially silver, will be astronomical, and will drive the value up tremendously. It's all about monetary demand.

Next, I used to think that the price of silver would rise a lot due to the excessive paper futures market contract short selling on the NYMEX, that would eventually result in runaway short covering. I do believe that selling paper contracts is manipulative in nature. However, today, I believe that paper money that is supposed to be "as good as gold", or "better than gold" is the far greater manipulation, perhaps 100 or even 1000 times greater. Paper money was originally a receipt for gold or silver on deposit at a bank that you could redeem at any time. Futures contracts for gold and silver, that expire, are, by definition, even less honorable. And if the first gold certificates were not honored, how can today's contracts remain honorable? The point is that it is all about monetary demand, and not futures contracts.

Finally, I used to think that silver would be a good investment because of the current supply and demand dynamics, whereby more silver than is mined each year is consumed by industry, jewelry, and photography, which leaves no room for investment demand. But the nuances of current supply and demand say nothing about the upcoming and future monetary demand. The vast portion of the price and value change of silver will mostly be moved by monetary demand.

So, in sum:

First, silver is not going to "spike again" to $50/oz. Instead, silver will roar past $300/oz. due to monetary demand.

Second, silver may well be manipulated due to the NYMEX futures contracts. However, silver is manipulated far more because of the existence of paper money, and as paper money continues to fail, and monetary demand for silver returns, silver's value will skyrocket.

Third, silver will skyrocket not due to current supply and demand fundamentals, but due to the overwhelming monetary demand in the future.

The trouble is that people have a difficulty in understanding how monetary demand for silver can or will return, and have a difficult time envisioning what that would look like, and what it would mean both in terms of prices, and values for silver.

To help explain, let me explain compound interest or exponential growth rates and decay rates; especially how they are often a function of size.

Small things can grow fast, but big things cannot grow as fast.

Acorns can grow to big oak trees, but oak trees cannot grow to the moon.

Babies grow fast, but adults stop growing, and will one day die.

Silver is the small market. If there are about 4 billion ounces of silver in the world, meaning that only 10% of the 40 billion ounces estimated to have been mined still remain, then the size of the market is about $50 billion.

The Fed often adds $50 billion to the money supply in one week!

So, in contrast, the world paper money market is about $50 trillion in size, about 1000 times bigger. The paper money market is like the mature oak tree that cannot significantly grow any further, but is dying, as branches rot, and fall off.

When paper money dies, the price of an ounce of silver, or gold, will be beyond infinity dollars per ounce. This does not mean that gold or silver will become infinitely valuable; but rather, the dollars become worthless.

It is impossible for any market to grow exponentially forever, but that is not what happens to the silver price as paper money dies. A very high dollar value for silver is really a reflection of the decay rate of paper money. After paper money fails, silver's value may be up to 100 times or even 1000 times greater than today, but probably not more than that, regardless of whether the last quoted price for silver was a million dollars an ounce or a billion, or a trillion.

And when paper money fails, society will need a substitute, such as gold and silver. Monetary demand will return, and force silver's value much higher.

As silver's dollar price continues to gain 30% to 60% to 100% per year, more and more investors will be forced to take a look at silver to see what they have been missing. They will greedily seek after such rates of return. For capital to survive, it must. And as more and more people invest in gold and especially silver, it will continue to push up the price more and more, until paper money fails completely. People cannot be satisfied with 5% returns in bonds if silver is paying 30% to 100% per year.

How can paper money compete? Will they raise bond rates to 50%? And what happens when 50% more money is being created each year to pay to bond holders, wouldn't that cause enormous inflation that would simply drive metal prices that much higher? High interest rates would also cause a high bankruptcy rate, and in such a time of deflation due to bank bankruptcies, gold and silver, which cannot default, would be highly sought after safe havens.

As silver goes up, people will discover most everything that I discovered about silver. That it hit $50/oz., and that the inflation adjusted price of $50/oz. in 1980 is really over $300/oz.

Is silver money? Can it be money again?

Money is at least three things: a medium of exchange, a unit of account, and a store of value.

Silver is my store of value; I'm storing my value in silver, and silver's been great to me. Not that silver cares about me, or even knows my name; silver is an inanimate object.

But silver has provided me with a good rate of return, and the returns are outside of the banking system, and are largely not really taxable, and not easily found or taken by government. By the time I sell my silver, who knows what government will be in power, and who knows what the capital gains tax rates may be?

So, which should one buy, stocks or silver? I currently have about 11% of my portfolio in silver, and about 85% in stocks; mostly silver stocks. I plan to increase my holdings of silver to about 20% very soon, within the next year, and up to 50% as time goes on. I don't like the thought of having to move and store several tonnes of silver, but I'm lazy, and I like to earn money the easy way.

Recently, silverstrategies.com posted the results and performance of many silver stocks. About half of the stocks under-performed silver, and about half over-performed. I've done better than most, and slightly outperformed silver in the last year.

I disagreed with 3 other panelists on the topic of whether we should buy the stocks of the major silver companies. Over a year ago, I predicted that the major silver companies would not outperform silver prices. I was mostly correct. I don't own any of the 6 major silver companies with market caps higher than $500 million: Silver Standard, Pan American, Apex Silver, Silver Wheaton, Hecla, Couer d'Alene. I think they are all overvalued.

I take profits in the form of silver bullion. Silver is my money; it's my unit of account. I feel I have gained only if the dollar value of my portfolio can buy me more ounces of silver, and I only truly gain if I actually go out and buy those extra ounces of silver.

Silver today is as cheap as it was at $5/oz. about 12 years ago. In 1995, M3 stood at about $4 trillion. Today, silver is at $13/oz., and M3 is at $11.5 trillion. So the silver price over the past 12 years, has, on average, kept up with inflation.

But today, we have price action. Today, silver's gains are outpacing the rate of money creation inflation. Silver gained about 40% in 2006, and M3 went up by about 10%. Silver's gains will likely accelerate even faster, with continued volatility, of course. I expect silver prices to hit $20-25/oz. in 2007. Afterwards, I'd expect maybe a drop to as low as $15, before soaring yet again to new highs past $30 to $50 perhaps in 2008.

I really don't think it matters much what kind of silver you buy. Silver is not produced by anyone in the form of the money of the future, which may be 2 gram coins or 1/10th ounce coins, who knows. Today, it may cost 10% to re-melt and refine silver into new forms. But when silver was money, 100 years ago, smelting and minting costs were 1/2 of 1%. This is not because energy costs more today, it's because the price of silver is at least about 1/20th of what it could be.

Just get silver cheap, get the most silver for your money, at the least price, which is typically 90% junk silver, or silver rounds, or 100 oz. bars, and take physical delivery of your silver, and store it in your own safe, the combination to which only you know. Only then, do you truly control, and own, your silver.

If you can afford to invest in silver, then you can afford to spend 1-10% on protection, whether a safe, or home security system.

To get started buying silver:
http://find-your-local-coin-shop.com/

So, what did I learn at the Vancouver show? Many things.

As my email list has tripled in the past year, I'm more well known than I once was.

I spoke to many friends and company managers, too many to list them all here.

I ran after John McPherson of Canadian Zinc (CZN.TO). He's frustrated with the slow pace of permitting; and looking for acquisitions, since they have $35 million in cash, about half the market cap of the company.

I sought John Versfelt of Cabo, and International Millennium, a company that now has Cabo's Cobalt silver properties, and many other silver properties that may get a listing in February. He was wondering if I was going to sell my shares in International Millennium if it becomes free trading (I own about 3% of the company), and I told him that I originally bought Cabo because I was interested in the silver properties, and that it was up to him to convince me to hold on. (My way of encouraging him to provide value.)

I ran into Don P. the man who spent nearly 4 months convincing me to look into Canadian Zinc back in 2003. We sat to chat, but did not have nearly enough time.

I ran into Gene Larabie of Coronado, (CRD.V) market cap about $15 million. I learned that they have a mining permit, and they are dealing with water in their decline ramp to the high grade zone where they hit 60% copper, the highest grade copper in the world, and may have resources worth about $200 million.

I had dinner with Vance Loeber who has been promoting U.S. Silver, (USA.V) (CHRYSALIS CAPITAL III), market cap about $200 million, which recently acquired the Galena mine in Couer d'Alene, the former flagship mine of Couer d'Alene mining company (CDE).

I had dinner with the men of Arian Silver, (AGQ.V) market cap around $40 million, who are hoping to find up to 100 million ounces of high grade silver in Mexico.

I asked nearly every newsletter writer what they thought of Noront, (NOT.V) a $100 million market cap company, that hit 50-30 ounces per tonne of gold over 15 feet on December 4th, which is the highest grade intercept that I've ever heard of. Most had not heard of it. The two that did, did not yet buy shares.

I also asked my peers what they thought of Pacifica (PAX.V) a $100 million company, and their 100 billion dollars of zinc at 5% grade, which is the largest mining project on earth. Most had not heard of Pacifica either.

I was walking past Cathy Fong of Silvercorp, ($800 million market cap) who invited me to lunch on Tuesday. I learned of New Pacific ($50 million market cap) (NUX.V), another company in development by the same management team, but is not focused on silver.

I made a point to attend the workshop by Dennis Gartman, who appeared to have a free market perspective, yet he has scorned GATA's work. Dennis's main points in his speech were that investors ought to buy things moving up, and sell things moving down. I suppose he is a momentum trader then, and I'm a value trader. His other main point is that the trade deficit does not matter, since the Government measures exports by Microsoft in terms of the price per pound of plastic, and not by the value of the software. We export knowledge, was his theme. Dennis also does not trust the GDP growth numbers of 3%, saying that people pay taxes on what they have actually earned, which shows growth more like 10%. (He did not acknowledge or mention that money creation also stands at about 10%).

This was the first time that I heard John Embry speak at the Cambridge House shows. John Embry runs one of the best performing metals funds in the industry. He was very articulate, as he was at GATA's Gold Rush 21 conference, and endorsed GATA's work. I heard that his fund owns 10% of about 100 resource companies in the industry, a virtual monopoly on resource exploration and emerging production. He read a fact-filled well-organized speech that was well received. I noted that at this conference, there was far more awareness and respect for GATA's work than in prior years. John Embry also ended his speech by noting that he was more bullish on silver than on gold!

On a panel discussion, there was a bit of a debate on whether the China boom will continue, and whether it is sustainable. Frank Veneroso said that he has predicted that many third world booms would collapse, and that he feels that China's boom will collapse -- that China's banks are over extended. On the other hand, China's banks have seen fresh capital infusions from Wall Street, and can draw on China's 1 trillion in foreign reserves. Dennis Gartman, who charges $500/month for his newsletter, had the opposite view, and that the rising middle class in China will make many people millionaires. His view was that one should go to China to open up a plumbing distributorship in the 13th largest city in China, because those were the businesses that made the most money in America's boom times. (Even though he does not know what China's 13th largest city actually was!)

My own view is that China has returned economic freedom in a large degree to its people, who are more free than we in the U.S. in many respects. My view is that freedom is generally quite sustainable. Furthermore, when people are earning $300/year, they can grow such incomes at 10% per year for a long, long time, for far more years than the Dow could grow at such rates, and that this will fuel the commodities boom for perhaps decades to come.

I'm not a doom and gloomer. I believe that mankind is progressing through increased trade and increasing economic freedom, and increasing knowledge. More newsletter writers and investors seemed to understand the GATA story on gold lending, and the specific fundamentals that make silver a much better investment.

Although you now know far more than you need to know, many of you have not yet taken action. It is not the knowledge you have, it is whether you act on it, that is most important. Take action, and get some silver for yourself.

Disclaimer: I own silver, CZN.TO, International Millennium (not yet public), CRD.V, USA.V, AGQ.V, NOT.V, PAX.V, NUX.V, and no company has paid me to send out this article. Please do not email me for specific stock picking advice. Instead, if you would like to see which stocks I own the most of in relation to my holdings of silver, you may purchase the “look at my portfolio”. Thank you.

December 27, 2006

Could Silver Cost More Than Gold?


Could Silver Cost More Than Gold?

By: Jim Otis


21 December, 2006

Silver Season's Greetings to all!

Conventional wisdom (published 12/21/06)

Have you heard these lines before?

  • Silver is the poor man's gold. Rich people prefer to buy gold.
  • Gold will rise and drag silver up with it.
  • Gold is a store of wealth, but silver is just an industrial commodity.
  • Silver is cheaper than gold because more silver is mined than gold.
  • Silver is a better investment in good times when the economy is humming, but gold is best when global financial concerns predominate.
  • Swap silver for gold and vice versa when the gold/silver ratio is at extremes.

Many people accept the above statements as truisms, but the Optimist offers a different perspective. Let's take a look at how silver has performed relative to gold in the past, and then take a flight of fantasy to see how silver might do in the future.

Gold/Silver ratio

For a long term view of the relationship between gold and silver from 1970 through 2003, consider the chart above. During the metals bull market of the 1970s, gold rose rapidly, but silver consistently outperformed gold, so that the gold/silver ratio was low and falling. For the 1980s and 1990s, gold was a losing investment throughout the metals bear market. With the exception when Warren Buffet bought silver in 1997, however, silver performed even worse than gold over those two decades, and the gold/silver ratio was high and rising. The Optimist's clear conclusion is that it has been better to own silver during metals bull markets, and better to own neither silver nor gold during metals bear markets. A quick look at real interest rates shows that we are still solidly in a metals bull market, and the Optimist is convinced that this time will not be different.

Silver/Gold ratio

From 1980 to 2003, silver was solidly locked in the claws of the bear. To get a better perspective of the relationship between silver and gold since 2003, I prefer to look at the ratio of silver divided by gold because it helps me to better focus on silver than the traditional reverse ratio of gold divided by silver. A chart of the silver/gold ratio from 2001 through 12/15/06 is presented below. A link to the weekly updated chart will be added to the Optimist charts page.

Ratio of Silver Divided by Gold






This chart of the silver/gold ratio tells me that since 2003 when the silver bull awakened from a 23 year slumber and chased the bear away, silver has been gaining steadily against gold. Obviously, the Optimist cannot promise that past trends will continue, but that is part of the basis for my continued preference for being long silver instead of gold. Just as the battle is not always to the strong or the race is not always to the swift, the Optimist prefers to bet his money on strong and swift silver.

My mind's made up already. Don't confuse me with facts!

All of the above historical data can be summarized with the statement that silver rose faster than gold in a precious metals bull market, and did worse than gold in a precious metals bear market. Unfortunately, that simplified view of the past does not give clear guidance for the future. Assuming (which I do) that we are still in a precious metals bull market, how much faster than gold can silver rise? Should we swap out of silver and into gold before the bull gives ground to the bear? How will we know when the time arrives? Those are all great questions. Since the past data doesn't tell all the answers, maybe we can find some interesting guidance in a fantasy future.

What if the prices of silver and gold were forced to be equal?

Yes, I know that it is crazy to talk about silver and gold prices being equal, and that it has never been that way, so obviously there is no need to waste time with that ridiculous idea. Humor me for a few seconds. Suppose that 20 or 30 years in the future there could be a nation that can be isolated from the rest of the world economy, and that can be ruled absolutely by an iron fisted dictator. Let's call it Nutzy Kookoo and abbreviate that name as NK. The previous supreme ruler of NK had an abundance of irrational exuberance about nuclear weapons and old American films, but his replacement is reasonably rational and sane. Other than sharing his predecessor's compulsion about isolation from the world, the new leader had only one small mental deficiency. That new leader of NK insisted for a generation that all precious metals must be considered equal. The supreme edict of NK was that silver, gold, platinum, and palladium must all be priced exactly the same throughout NK. Since the people of NK were all isolated from the real world so they did not have access to real world prices, those people would have no alternative but to believe the official proclamation from their supreme leader. During the first generation that the new ruler imposed his equal pricing command, the people wouldn't care about it anyway because they had not enough money to buy food, and they couldn't consider buying metals. After more than a generation of life in an isolated NK where all precious metals were legally required to cost exactly the same, the people would not question or even consider that it could be any other way. It was just an accepted fact of life that the prices of silver, gold, platinum, and palladium were all exactly the same throughout the kingdom of NK.

Mandated equal prices for all precious metals worked great for the first generation when no one had enough money to buy any of the metals, and there was no mining industry to produce more, and there was no industrial use of them. The government just kept a modest stockpile of the same amount of each, and the size of each stockpile did not increase or decrease. Alas, all things change, and the nation of NK is no exception. After more than 20 years with no mining to produce metals, and no investing to put them away, and no industry to consume them, NK began to make a transition to an industrial economy. The transition was slow at first, but the wise advisors of NK recognized that things would move faster later. As metals developed different values in the changing society, it would be essential to allow them to have different prices. The kingdom of NK was still perfectly isolated from the rest of the world, so prices elsewhere had no effect on the prices in NK. The only factors that impacted on prices inside NK were the relative utility of each and the relative ease with which a new supply of metals could be mined to satisfy the increasing demand. At the insistence of the advisors, the king of NK decreed that NK would keep gold at exactly the same fixed price, but that platinum, palladium, and silver would be allowed to gradually float higher or lower than gold, depending on relative supply and demand, in a price envelope which expanded by 1% per month. By letting the prices of each metal vary, NK planned to retain the same amount of each in its vaults.

Platinum higher and palladium lower than gold

As all would expect, NK mining, industry, investment, and consumption increased slowly at first. By an interesting coincidence, the availability of metals to be mined from the land in NK was in exactly the same percentage as the comparable availability throughout the world. Amazingly, that coincidence also extended to the total use of the metals through industry, investment, and consumption combined being in the same proportion as the average comparable use throughout the world. NK was exactly a microcosm of the entire world for precious metals supply and demand.

The new buyers and sellers in NK quickly realized that platinum had greater utility and less production than gold, so the price of platinum was continually elevated relative to gold. Similarly, palladium was found to have less utility, and its price was continually lowered relative to gold. Isn't it great how even in a fictional fantasy, prices properly respond to real world economics?

So, what happened to silver?

As the fledging NK mining industry began to develop, it quickly became obvious that there is more silver that can be extracted from the land than there is gold, and that silver costs less per ounce to mine than gold. The palace pool wagering on future prices bet early that the price of silver would quickly fall relative to gold because of the increasing amount of silver that could be mined. Those bearish betters were surprised, however, to find that the amount of silver consumed by the faster growing markets of industry and investment and jewelry was actually more than could be mined. In contrast, only a small percentage of the gold that was mined was consumed by industry or investment or jewelry. The amount of gold available to the market increased every month from the additional supply produced by mining. In order to keep the price of gold from dropping in the open market, NK found that it had to always print more paper currency so that the new supply of gold which was continuously added would always be matched with a comparable supply of additional paper currency. Since more silver was consumed by industry and investment and jewelry than could be mined, the amount of silver in the stockpile was continually reduced, and the result was that the price of silver began to rise relative to gold to reflect its greater utility.

The combination of mining, industry, investment, and jewelry resulted in decreasing availability of silver, and therefore in higher prices, compared to the increasing amounts of gold that became available over time. The additional amount of currency in circulation, which was required to hold the price of gold constant, also added to the increasing price pressures on silver.

Why is silver less expensive than gold?

Some people will object to my fantasy situation in NK by saying that the relative descriptions of silver and gold supply and demand only describe the same conditions that prevail now throughout the world, and the price of silver is only 2% as high as gold. Since the market is always right, gold must be much more valuable than silver. Right? Well, I'm not so sure about that. The market is composed of people, and sometimes people make mistakes. For thousands of years, gold was indeed more rare and more valuable than silver. Through countless generations, babies would grow to be grandparents in an environment where gold was rare and expensive, but silver was plentiful and cheap. That was just the way it has always been, so everyone simply accepted that relationship as an unchanging constant.

The future isn't what it used to be! (Yogi Berra)

Just like always, silver is universally considered to be less valuable than gold. There is no need for people to ask about how much of either is available for investment or use, because silver has always had plentiful supply while gold was scarce. Everyone knows that means silver must be much less expensive than gold, so sure enough, silver is much less expensive. But Ted Butler and other people ask questions about the relative availability, supply and demand factors. Those people noted that the U.S. Government storage shelves, which just a few decades ago were once stacked wall to wall and floor to ceiling with billions of ounces in silver bullion bars, are now conspicuously empty. At the same time, more gold was mined than could be used for jewelry, dental crowns, and a relatively small number of industrial applications. Every day, more gold is mined and refined into additional bullion bars and added to an ample supply already in storage. Compared to the consistently increasing quantity of gold bullion bars, the persistent drawdown of silver bullion bars can only result in silver prices increasing faster than gold.

One of the reasons that the rich preferred gold instead of silver is that they had lots of wealth to protect. Since gold is expensive, a very substantial amount of wealth can be stored in a small safe the size of a shoe box, or easily carried in a briefcase or backpack. The biggest problem with silver for storage of wealth is that it takes too much of it. A 70 pound bar of silver is currently priced at only $15,000. If Bill Gates or Warren Buffet wanted to sock away $15 Billion for their retirement, they would need to buy 1,000,000 of those 70 pound bricks! Imagine trying to coordinate the logistics to rent a thousand armored trucks just to transport a stash like that! Because silver is relatively cheap, physical silver has very limited utility in protecting a large amount of wealth. As the price of silver continues to increase faster than gold, however, silver becomes increasingly useful as a store of wealth and that added demand further escalates the relative price of silver. At the same time, the new silver ETF has created an easy way for high rollers to push a large amount of wealth into silver, with less worry about the previously insurmountable obstacles of movement and storage. All of those factors argue that the demand for silver will increase as prices rise, and silver will continue to outperform gold.

Another factor which strongly argues for silver instead of gold is an approaching shortage of physical silver, so that there will not be enough relatively cheap bullion bars available to supply the needs of industry. At the same time that industry is in a panic to purchase the silver it will need, publicity about the rapidly rising price of silver will propel investor demand into overdrive. The resulting price spike will become legendary. Gold will also rise during that frenetic time, but it will be silver that pulls gold to higher prices, and the ratio of silver divided by gold will rocket to heights that most cannot dream of today.

The Optimist hopes that all readers will have happy holidays filled with golden dreams and silver wishes. Cheers!

* * * Notice * * *

This commentary presents only the viewpoints of the Optimist, and it is intended only for perspective and entertainment. Please do not interpret any portion of this work as investment advice. If any of the concepts discussed here appeal to you, then you must do the work to decide if and when and how you should invest. The Optimist does not ask for any profits you make, and he cannot be liable for any losses incurred as a result of your investment decisions. The Optimist wishes you the best of luck in whatever you decide to do or not to do. Cheers!