2011年12月20日星期二

影響黃金價格的因素


 金價格的變動,絕大部分原因是受到黃金本身供求關係的影響。因此,作為一個具有自己投資原則的投資者,就應該盡可能的了解任何影響黃金供給的因素,從而進一步明了場內其他投資者的動態,對黃金價格的走勢進行預測,以達到合理進行投資的目的。其主要的因素包括以下幾個方面:

 

(1)美元走勢
美元雖然沒有黃金那樣的穩定,但是它比黃金的流動性要好得多。因此,美元被認為是第一類的錢,黃金是第二類。當國際政局緊張不明朗時,人們都會因預期金價會上漲而購入黃金。但是最多的人保留在自己手中的貨幣其實時美元。假如國家在戰亂時期需要從它國購買武器或者其它用品,也會沽空手中的黃金,來換取美元。因此,在政局不穩定時期美元未必會升,還要看美元的走勢。簡單的說,美元強黃金就弱;黃金強美元就弱。
通常投資人士才儲蓄保本時,取黃金就會舍美元,取美元就會舍黃金。黃金雖然本身不是法定貨幣,但始終有其價值,不會貶值成廢鐵。若美元走勢強勁,投資美元升值機會大,人們自然會追逐美元。相反,當美元在外匯市場上越弱時,黃金價格就會越強。
(2)戰亂及政局震盪時期
戰爭和政局震盪時期,經濟的發展會收到很大的限制。任何當地的貨幣,都由於可能會由於通貨膨脹而貶值。這時,黃金的重要性就淋漓盡致的發揮出來了。由於黃金具有公認的特性,為國際公認的交易媒介,在這種時刻,人們都會把目標投向黃金。對黃金的搶購,也必然會造成金價的上升。
但是也有其他的因素共同的製約。比如,在89至92年間,世界上出現了許多的政治動盪和零星戰亂,但金價卻沒有因此而上升。原因就是當時人人持有美金,捨棄黃金。故投資者不可機械的套用戰亂因素來預測金價,還要考慮美元等其它因素。
(3)世界金融危機
假如出現了世界級銀行的倒閉,金價會有什麼反應呢?
其實,這種情況的出現就是因為危機的出現。人們自然都會保留金錢在自己的手上,銀行會出現大量的擠兌或破產倒閉。情況就像前不久的阿根廷經濟危機一樣,全國的人民都要從銀行兌換美元,而國家為了保留最後的投資機會,禁止了美元的兌換,從而發生了不斷的騷亂,全國陷入了恐慌之中。
當美國等西方大國的金融體係出現了不穩定的現象時,世界資金便會投向黃金,黃金需求增加,金價即會上漲。黃金在這時就發揮了資金避難所的功能。唯有在金融體系穩定的情況下,投資人士對黃金的信心就會大打折扣,將黃金沽出造成金價下跌。
(4)通貨膨脹
我們知道,一個國家貨幣的購買能力,是基於物價指數而決定的。當一國的物價穩定時,其貨幣的購買能力就越穩定。相反,通貨率越高,貨幣的購買力就越弱,這種貨幣就愈缺乏吸引力。如果美國和世界主要地區的物價指數保持平穩,持有現金也不會貶值,又有利息收入,必然成為投資者的首選。
相反,如果通漲劇烈,持有現金根本沒有保障,收取利息也趕不上物價的暴升。人們就會採購黃金,因為此時黃金的理論價格會隨通漲而上升。西方主要國家的通漲越高,以黃金作保值的要求也就越大,世界金價亦會越高。其中,美國的通漲率最容易左右黃金的變動。而一些較小國家,如智力、烏拉圭等,每年的通漲最高能達到400倍,卻對金價毫無影響。
(5)石油價格
黃金本身是通漲之下的保值品,與美國通漲形影不離。石油價格上漲意味著通漲會隨之而來,金價也會隨之上漲。
(6)本地利率
投資黃金不會獲得利息,其投資的獲利全憑價格上升。在利率偏低時,衡量之下,投資黃金會有一定的益處;但是利率升高時,收取利息會更加吸引人,無利息黃金的投資價值就會下降,既然黃金投資的機會成本較大,那就不如放在銀行收取利息更加穩定可靠。特別是美國的利息升高時,美元會被大量的吸納,金價勢必受挫。
利率與黃金有著密切的聯繫,如果本國利息較高,就要考慮一下喪失利息收入去買黃金是否值得。
(7)經濟狀況
經濟欣欣向榮,人們生活無憂,自然會增強人們投資的慾望,民間購買黃金進行保值或裝飾的能力會大為增加,金價也會得到一定的支持。相反之下,民不聊生,經濟蕭條時期,人們連吃飯穿衣的基本保障都不能滿足,又哪裡會有對黃金投資的興致呢?金價必然會下跌。經濟狀況也是構成黃金價格波動的一個因素。
(8)黃金供需關係
金價是基於供求關係的基礎之上的。如果黃金的產量大幅增加,金價會受到影響而回落。但如果出現礦工長時間的罷工等原因使產量停止增加,金價就會在求過於供的情況下升值。此外,新採金技術的應用、新礦的發現,均令黃金的供給增加,表現在價格上當然會令金價下跌。一個地方也可能出現投資黃金的風習,例如在日本出現的黃金投資熱潮,需大為增加,同時也導致了價格的節節攀升。
對於黃金走勢的基本分析有許多方面,當我們在利用這些因素是,就應當考慮到它們各自作用的強度到底有多大。找到每個因素的主次地位和影響時間段,來進行最佳的投資決策。
黃金的基本分析在時間段上分為短期(通常是三個月)因素,和長期因素。我們對於其影響作用要分別對待。







http://edu.forex.com.cn/

黃金明年或觸及2,500美元/盎司



美銀-美林(Bank of America Merrill Lynch)商品策略師SabineSchels週一(12月19日)表示,黃金價格將於2012年再度上漲,並將觸及2,000-2,500美元/盎司,因黃金需求依舊強勁,且其依舊被視作避險資產。
儘管金價最近幾個月出現下修,但Schels稱,持續的投資需求將導致2012年黃金均價達到1,850美元/盎司,較2011年均價1,573美元/盎司上揚。
Schels稱,歐洲主權債務危機的負面前景,以及歐元區、美國和日本的寬鬆信貸環境意味著黃金將維持其“避險天堂”地位,並將能夠提供相對可觀的回報率。她還表示,金價也將從各國央行對黃金的持續增持中獲益。
Schel的觀點不同於其他一些市場參與者,他們認為黃金的拋售潮將會持續。上週早些時候,獨立投資人加特曼(DennisGartman)表示,金價可能會跌至1,500美元/盎司,他已賣出所有手持黃金;同時,交易商科爾特斯(SteveCortes)預言,金價甚至可能跌至1,000美元/盎司。
另據某外媒日前對20名對沖基金經理、經濟學家和交易商的調查顯示,受訪者認為,金價將於未來三個月內下滑至1,500美元/盎司下方;並且,至少至2012年下半年之前,黃金不大可能重新測試9月份的記錄高位。


http://gold.forex.com.cn/ 

未來兩年黃金價格目標看向3400美元

花旗集團(Citigroup)外匯分析團隊週一(12月19日)表示,預計2012年下半年國際現貨黃金價格將漲至2300美元/盎司上方,未來兩年黃金價格將繼續攀升,目標看向3400美元。此外,預計未來數月道瓊斯工業指數平均為9300點,標普500平均為985點。
關於黃金走勢,花旗的分析師認為,依然對黃金價格近期走勢持謹慎觀點,金價可能跌至1600美元下方,同時或重新考慮1550美元附近區域。 2012年下半年,黃金價格或漲至2300-2400美元。
分析師並稱,未來兩年黃金價格目標看到3400美元甚至更高水平。
分析師們補充稱,觀測1970-1980年黃金價格走勢,黃金價格在俄羅斯入侵阿富汗期間上漲近一倍,但不會因此預計黃金價格將突破6000美元,而是剔除入侵事件影響做出保守預測。


http://gold.forex.com.cn/ 

金價或在未來3個月中跌破千五大關

某知名美商媒體週一(12月19日)最新公佈的調查顯示,金價或在未來三個月中跌至1,500美元/盎司下方,且至少在2012年下半年前,不太可能重新上探今年9月創下的歷史高位。
接受調研的20位對沖基金經理、經濟學家和交易員中,幾乎有一半人預計,金價將在明年一季度跌至1,450美元/盎司,其中三人認為金價可能跌至1,400美元/盎司
黃金大牛市是否終結暫難定論黃金價格回千六乏力是在上周金價經歷的黯淡表現後得出的,上周金價創下1,560美元/盎司的2個半月低點,​​黃金已失去其避險屬性。
對沖基金Tiberius執行總裁(CEO)ChristophEibl表示,在這樣一個受重大經濟事件影響的環境下,黃金其實已經從高位跌落了。
他並稱:"我們認為,所有貴金屬在2012年都將經歷糟糕的走勢。"
黃金本季度或將收出2008年9月以來第一個根季度陰線,那時正是全球信貸緊縮最嚴重的時期。
另一項顯示金市疲軟的直接信號是,美國商品期貨交易委員會(CFTC)上週五(12月16日)公佈的數據顯示,投資者連續第二週削減黃金期貨和期權的多頭頭寸。
此外,市場對黃金的長期預期也不再那麼樂觀,參與調研者中,超過一半的人認為黃金在2012年下半年前不太可能再次登上歷史高位。另有4人甚至認為,黃金至少在2014年前都無法重登歷史高位。
儘管在市場充滿不確定性的時代中,貴金屬是傳統的避險港,但各國央行不會出台直接的貨幣寬鬆或者刺激計劃促使投資經理人看空黃金。
DoubleLineCapital商品投資組合經理JeffreySherman說:"對我來說,黃金目前已經不具有吸引力,因為我們沒有看到任何通脹威脅。"
黃金跌破200日均線,也促使一位頗有影響力的市場觀察者宣布,黃金的十年牛市已經結束。
資深交易大師加特曼(DennisGartman)稱:"我們已經進入了真正的熊市開端,牛市已經結束。"他已於上週完全了結了黃金的投資頭寸。


http://www.licai18.com/ 

Buying Silver Is Like Buying Gold At $554 Today

http://www.pakalertpress.com/

By: Hubert_Moolman
Marketoracle
I think that buying silver today is like buying gold for $554 an ounce. Let me explain: As I am writing, silver is currently trading at about 65.2% (32.6/50) of its 1980 high. If gold was trading at 65.2% of its 1980 high, it would be trading at $554 (0.652*850).
Now, I really like gold, even at today’s price of $1 738, but why should I pay $1 738, if I can get it for $554 by buying silver and then exchanging it for gold when the gold/silver ratio is at an extreme (in favour of silver). The reason for this logic comes from the fundamental relationship between gold and silver as explained in  previous article.
For my argument to be valid, silver has to outperform gold over my investment period, and at least equal gold’s performance relative to its 1980 high. That is, for example, if gold reaches five multiples of its 1980 high ($4250), then silver should do the same ($250), in this example, giving us a gold/silver ratio of 17.

Now, if silver outperforms gold, then that means that the gold/silver ratio should decline over my investment term. In my previous article called: Why Silver for a Monetary Collapse, I analysed the gold/silver ratio from a very long perspective (200 years). Here I would like to take a slightly more short-term view (40 years).
Below, is a long 40 year chart of the gold/silver ratio:



On the chart, I have identified two fractals, which I have both marked with points 1 to 3. The two patterns are visually very similar. I have indicated two option of where we could be currently (on the current pattern), compared to the 70s pattern. The ratio appears to be at a major crossroads, ready to make a big move, up or down. This could means that a massive move in the gold and silver price is due shortly.
Based on the patterns, if it moves up, it would likely signal the end of the precious metals bull market, similar to January 1980. A move down would be an acceleration of the current bull market in gold and silver, similar to August/September 1979.
The question is therefore: Do you think the bull market in precious metals is over? Before you answer that, first consider the following:


On the above graphic, the top chart is the current gold bull market from 1999 to date, compared to the bull market of the 60s and 70s, the bottom chart. The previous bull market in gold was about 14 years long, from a peak in the Dow/gold ratio to the bottom in Dow/gold ratio. The current bull market is 12 year old, from the peak in the Dow/gold ratio to date.
The previous bull market ended with a parabolic move in gold (on the above scale). The current bull market has not made a parabolic move (on the above scale); in fact, it has been rising steadily over the last 12 years.
To me, these two charts suggest that we are more likely to have a parabolic rise in the gold price, than being at the end of this bull market. Therefore, it also suggests that price action for gold and silver, and the gold/silver ratio is likely to be more like 1978/1979 than like January 1980.
So, back to my argument of buying silver, in order to get gold at $554: I certainly think that silver will outperform gold over the remaining part of this bull market in precious metals, as well as, at least equal gold’s performance relative to its 1980 high. I can certainly see how gold could be at $4250 with silver being at $250, or at higher prices, with the gold/silver ratio being at 17 or less.

周大福金條 近全線斷貨

 http://news.mingpao.com/20111220/ek1a1.htm

 

金價回落 自由行客勁掃

 

近排金價跌番唔少,搞到小琴心郁郁想買番啲金儲下,第時嫁得出的話,可以用來做嫁妝。早兩日行過周大福(1929)的金舖,諗住入去買番d金條、金粒咁啦,點知店員姐姐竟然話賣晒,小琴當堂打左個突。

話就話金價跌,都唔係無貨賣咁誇呀。店員姐姐同小琴講,好多自由行客湧來掃清光。梗係啦,要投資的話,買飾金要蝕手工費,點計都係買金條金粒抵d。

個別分店 10月已斷貨

佢就話,因為要等總公司派貨,有幾多貨量都係今日唔知聽日事。就算入左貨亦唔一定有,皆因自由行一早就來掃走。聽聽下,覺得唔多忿氣,一於打去其他分店問下。問齊全港九咁滯,都話無晒貨,金條、金粒全線斷貨咁話。

周大福:日日有補貨

有分行仲同小琴講,話10月開始已經斷貨,申請左個幾兩個月都無貨返。好多客成日打來問,但係宜家無貨賣,唯有買住飾金。老實講,飾金點靚都好,一定唔及金條金粒咁紮實,畀到人安全感。

周大福品牌總監陳義邦同小琴講,話臨近年尾,加上新年快到,呢排佢地舖頭都多左自由行客,趁過年前入貨送禮自用,生意好左好多咁話。佢仲話,公司的庫存無問題,唔怕無貨賣,仲日日有補貨添。不過,小琴真係問極都冇,唔通真係要買番兩手周大福,就當自己買左?

王冠一...保護財富 各師各法

 夾萬好好賣......

債 務危機席捲歐元區,歐豬國家政府爭相推出規模龐大的緊縮政策,例如意大利國會剛於上周五通過 330 億歐元的節流方案,國民普遍生活於水深火熱之中,但亦有一些較富裕家庭或專業人士要為如何保障自己的財富而煩惱。他們既擔憂脆弱的銀行會倒閉,又擔心歐元 最終會瓦解並崩潰,更害怕本身國家一旦被迫退出歐元區,重新採用的原來貨幣會大幅貶值,令身家不見了一大截。

這些南歐國家的中上階層,正在採取不同途徑去保護自己的財產。部份人把存款轉至歐元以外的其他貨幣,例如瑞郎或英鎊,當中又以今年持續居高不下的瑞郎最受歡迎;亦有人把資金投向歐元區以外的房地產;更有人委托銀行家及律師於遙遠的地方例如新加坡或巴哈馬設立信託基金。

南歐國民即使不把財富轉移至國外,亦會把資產存放於保險箱(夾萬),以免出現銀行倒閉而存款遭凍結的情況,意大利的保險箱全部售罄,葡萄牙的保險箱需求亦見激增;而過去半年金條銷量大增,亦反映不少有錢人增購金條及鑽飾,作為避險途徑。

投 資者不信任銀行,令銀行存款大舉流失,此個情況在希臘尤其嚴重。自 2009 年底歐債危機爆發至今,希臘銀行被提走了逾 600 億歐元的存款,佔銀行體系存款的比重高達四分一,而由今年 9 月至 11 月初兩月,銀行流失的資金更達 140 億,反映資金外逃的情況正不斷加劇。據希臘央行統計,今年頭9個月被提取的存款,約有五分一已流往海外。

投 資者除了持現金,亦傾向相信磚頭,英國倫敦中部的住宅便水漲船高,今年至今樓價累升了 9%。據統計,希臘人前往倫敦置業的數量於過去 1 年增加了 2 倍,來自西班牙的買家亦翻了一番,而於 2009 年獲稅務特赦而湧往英國置業的意大利買家,是倫敦住宅的第 5 大海外業主,過去 1 年購買量仍處高水平。海外買家趨之若鶩,難怪倫敦地段優良的住宅成為天之驕子,絲毫不受經濟不景氣的影響。

銀 行面對存款不斷流失,亦另闢蹊徑拓展業務,主要是投客戶所好,例如葡萄牙不少銀行推出以盧森堡為註冊地的股票基金供客戶認購,又或者游說客戶把存款轉投外 幣戶口,提供美元、日圓和瑞郎等貨幣供選擇;德銀於意大利推出追蹤金價的產品,大受客戶歡迎;希臘的銀行則積極向客戶推銷外國的政府債券,亦容許銀行客戶 把歐元存款寄存在海外的支行,以釋除客戶對國家會破產,令銀行存款會受拖累的疑慮。

歐盟峰會雖達成加強歐元區財政紀律的協議,但投資者對歐債危機仍然憂心忡忡,不安情緒瀰漫,南歐國民各師各法,紛紛尋找避風港保護財產,背後原因,實在不難理解。

王冠一

Hyperinflation Watch - December 19, 2011

December 19, 2011 – In the first two months of the current fiscal year that began on October 1st, the US national debt has grown $320 billion.  That is $21 billion more than the same 2-month period last year, which illustrates that the growth of the national debt continues to accelerate. The reason of course is the federal government’s huge operating deficit, which is not getting any smaller.  This point is illustrated in the following chart.

Hyperinflation is always the outcome of unchecked government spending. The spending leads to ever greater deficits, which requires the government to borrow ever greater amounts of money. Eventually a point is reached when the government needs to borrow more money than lenders have the capacity – or willingness – to lend.  Thereafter the government can take either of two alternative paths.
Either the government cuts back its spending, facing the reality that it has run out of money. Or the central bank steps in to create ‘out of thin air’ the money the government wants to spend.  This second alternative inevitably leads to hyperinflation. A government’s decision to take the hyperinflationary alternative is what I call the “Havenstein moment”, with the dubious distinction going to the ill-fated governor of the Reichsbank whose decisions lead to the massive hyperinflation that destroyed the economy and devastated the middle class of 1920s Germany.
The US government has long passed its Havenstein moment.  With so-called “quantitative easing”, which is the modern term for money printing, the Federal Reserve is enabling the federal government to take the soft political option.  Spending has not been cutback, despite the perennial shortfall of government revenue.  This uncontrolled spending has been accommodated by money printing, which today means expanding bank balance sheets.
In this regard, the United States is different from Weimar Germany, which was a cash-currency economy with nearly all commerce conducted with paper banknotes.  In contrast, economic activity in the US is substantially conducted with bank deposits, circulated by check, wire transfer, plastic card, and the like. So ‘money printing’ today is accomplished by expanding bank balance sheets to create more deposit-currency.
In the past year, commercial bank balance sheets have grown $611 billion.  In addition, the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet has expanded $516 billion, or 21.6%.  This money printing is starting to have its inevitable effect.  Over the past six months, M1 is up 22.8%, while M2 has expanded 14.0%.  Inflation for the past year as calculated by ShadowStats.com is 11.0%.
As further proof that the Havenstein moment is behind us, consider that 58% of the money spent by the federal government in October and November came from borrowed money ($320 billion of debt against $551 billion of expenditures).  Monetary history shows that governments are on a hyperinflationary path when crossing the 40% threshold, a level long passed by the federal government.
The above chart makes clear that the US government does not face a cyclical problem, which can be overcome by robust economic activity that would bolster federal revenue. Rather, it faces a structural problem, or in other words, the system is broken.  Decades of spending, consumption and debt have taken their toll.
To put it bluntly, the US federal government is broke.  But the government and the Federal Reserve refuse to admit this reality.  So having long passed the Havenstein moment, the erosion of the dollar’s purchasing power is the inevitable outcome.
This debasement of the dollar will become increasingly clear in 2012.  As a consequence, it is logical to expect much higher prices for gold and silver in the year ahead.

http://www.fgmr.com