2012年8月28日星期二

Indian Gold Price: Wedding Spoiler?

truthingold.com / August 28, 2012Bad news for Indian brides-to-be and those looking to splurge during festival season: gold on Monday hit an all-time high on bullion markets in the subcontinent.

Gold prices rose to Rs93,193 per troy ounce, as the precious metal remained a safe haven amidst the European crisis and slow US economic growth.

High prices bode ill for the current festival season, which lasts until roughly mid-November. The wedding season begins then and stretches into late January – both periods during which Indians purchase a lot of gold.

“[Demand] during the festival season won’t be that high for very obvious reasons,” said Karan Vasa, of the Bombay Bullion Association. “But India has a sentiment of its own… they’ll buy less, but they’ll still buy – it’s good luck, and it’s wedding season.”
Gold’s cultural importance during Hindu holidays and weddings cannot be overstated: India’s super-rich can spend in the range of $250,000 solely on jewellery for a single wedding. As beyondbrics has reported, India’s gold obsession extends across the socioeconomic spectrum, and the $950bn worth of gold held by Indian households is the equivalent of 50 per cent of the country’s nominal GDP in dollar terms.
READ MORE

替金本位“復辟”算算賬

8月26日,周日。金銀價格上周並駕齊驅,分別上升3.35%和9.25%。美聯儲決策者圍繞應否進一步量寬各自表述,股市日升日跌,惟 金價銀價連漲多天,QE on固然造好,QE off亦無礙升勢,兩者皆突破200天移動平均,每盎斯金價上周五收報1666.72美元,銀價則報30.37美元。

不再天方夜譚黃金有勢,講金正合時宜。

美國共和黨全國代表大會將於本周二在佛羅裡達州召開,除了正式提名羅姆尼(Mitt Romney)和瑞安(Paul Ryan)為共和黨正副總統候選人外,盛傳還會在黨綱內落實設立“黃金委員會”,探討美元與黃金重新掛鉤的可行性。雖說只是研究,而且羅姆尼能否入主白宮 數在未知,但美元重掛黃金給正式放進共和黨黨綱,意味遭廢棄四十一年的金本位制“復辟”,不再是天方夜譚。

在一個全面的金本位制度下,貨幣發行量要有100%等值黃金儲備支撐。共和黨對恢復金本位制不管有多認真,此議是否可行,不難從美國貨幣供應與官方黃金儲備的對比中一探虛實。

神奇數字10萬億

世界黃金協會(WGC)統計顯示,美國黃金儲備以量計迄2010年底為8133.5噸,全球第一。一噸相當於3.215萬盎斯,也就是說,美國政府持有黃金合共2.615億盎斯。以上周五盎斯金價約1670美元計算,美國黃金儲備市值約為4367億美元。

貨幣供應一面,情況又如何?以M2為準,美國貨幣供應截至7月28日一周首次突破10萬億美元大關。這個數字,有意思。

世界黃金協會資料顯示,歷史上經開採而見天日的黃金,迄2009年底共16.5萬噸,即53億盎斯多一點。以上周五金價約1670美元計算,人類有 史以來開採過的黃金,加起來總值便是8.8510萬億美元左右。可是,若以去年9月盎斯金價歷史高位1900美元計算,這16.5萬噸黃金,總值剛好為 10萬億美元,跟美國一個月前首次突破此水平的M2貨幣供應如出一轍!

金價上落難料,官方儲備價值因時而異,上述比較只是一個參考,並非什麼鐵一般的依據。然而,在貨幣供應一面,大家不難發現,以當前市值4367億美 元計算,美國黃金儲備僅相當於M2的約4.4%。以此懸殊差距,美國自然沒有條件實行百分百的金本位制。退而求其次,把貨幣供應與持金水平以固定百分率相 連,比如美國必須持有10%等值黃金,貨幣供應才容許達到某個規模,又怎樣?

以M2 10萬億美元為準,10%就是1萬億美元。美國黃金儲備最新市值4367億美元,意味要支持當前的M2,美國必須持有相當於目前儲備2.3倍的黃金。

滿足要求三條路

要滿足貨幣供應至少有10%等值黃金支持的要求,方法有三個:第一,以市價增持黃金,直至儲備總值相當於M2規模的一成;第二,當局在設定美元於哪 一水平跟黃金掛鉤時,容許金價從現水平倍升,在毋須改變持金量的前提下,滿足貨幣供應須有至少10%等值黃金支持的要求;第三,既不增持亦不容許金價(以 美元計)一次性升值,而是通過收縮貨幣供應滿足要求。
貨幣發行量必須有10%等值黃金支持,等於M2規模最多隻能相當於持金總值的10倍,以美國黃金儲備4367億美元計算,即4.367萬億美元。以剛突破10萬億美元的M2為準,這一選擇意味美國貨幣供應得大幅收縮56%,方能滿足恢復金本位制的最低要求。

任由貨幣供應萎縮逾半,對美國經濟和物價有何影響,不言而喻。共和黨對恢復金本位制縱具誠意,閣下認為有政客可以承擔大蕭條/惡性通縮的後果嗎?

所以,第三個選擇,說什麼也不會發生。

再看第一選和第二選,殊途同歸而已,理由是美國目前已是全球黃金儲備最多的國家,恢復金本位制,哪怕只是局部恢復,當局也得吸納倍於目前儲備水平的黃金。市場供應有限,只要政府手影一現,金價怕不一飛衝天,比美國容許黃金價格一次性升值更快達標?

共和黨內有不少“金甲蟲”,當中令雷根經濟學得享大名的供應面經濟學倡議者中,“金甲蟲”尤其多。

雷根本人在三十年前問鼎白宮時,亦以研討恢復當時廢棄不足十年的金本位為名,設立類似的黃金委員會,結果當然是不了了之,美國進入長達三十年以信貸推動增長的繁榮期。

共和黨重提金本位,可能只是羅姆尼爭取初選期間打跟美聯儲勢不兩立旗號的“超級金甲蟲”保羅(Ron Paul)陣營的好感而為之,並非動真格。然而,一個“冰封”了數十年的話題再次引起熱論,總值得投資者格外留神!


Oridinal Source 

Your Window to Buy Below $1,700 Is Closing


caseyresearch.com / By Jeff Clark / August 27, 2012
Some investors lamented that gold prices had been stuck in a rut for a long time. Others were confused. A few bailed. And some, including me, have been stocking up because we’re convinced prices won’t stay down forever.
In fact, based on the data I chart below, I believe the window of time to buy gold for less than $1,700 an ounce is very limited.
Here’s why. I examined gold’s three largest corrections since the bull market began in 2001, including how long it took to recover from those corrections and establish new highs. The conclusion that emerged is that the current lull in gold prices will almost certainly end soon, if it hasn’t already.
Gold set a record on September 5, 2011 at $1,895 an ounce (London PM Fix) and to date has fallen as low as $1,531 (December 29, 2011), a decline of 19.2%. Gold has tested that level several times since but never broke below it. In order to determine how long it might take to breach $1,895 again, I measured the time it took to mount new highs after big corrections in the past.
The following chart details the three largest corrections since 2001, and calculates how many weeks it took the gold price to a) breach the old high, and b) stay above that level.


READ MORE

GOLD MINERS WILL NEED $3,000 IN FIVE YEARS TO BE PROFITABLE

The nitwits on MSM and CNBC who believe that gold is in a bubble, fail to understand that a large percentage of its recent price move higher has been due to the increased costs in the mining industry — and not because of rampant speculation.
This reminds me of a famous quote from the movie Aliens… “DID IQ’S JUST DROP SHARPLY WHEN I WAS AWAY?”
If we look at the information and data provided in the body of this post, you will realize that the price of gold will have to head much higher just to cover increased mining costs.  Furthermore, you don’t have to believe me… the title of this post came from an article quoting the World Gold Council’s chief executive, Aram Shishmanian.
Back on May 14th of this year Aram Shishmanian of the World Gold Council stated:
Miners currently needed a gold price of $1,300 to survive, Shishmanian said, but faced steep rises in mining costs, along with the cost of dividends and host nation taxes.
“If this continues for the next five years the gold price needs to be at least $3,000 just to stay in the business,” he said.
(article found at the link HERE)
This statement comes from one of the very organizations who has been blamed for supposedly being a part of the grand conspiracy to manipulate gold.  While I do believe manipulation is taking place in the gold and silver markets, one would wonder why on earth would they allow Shishmanian to make such a statement??…LOL.
Even though Shishmanian comes out with this startling main-stream forecast for much higher gold prices, he does not offer much in the way of detail.  This is where Nick Holland comes into the picture.  Nick Holland is the CEO of Goldfields, a gold mining company based in South Africa — the fourth largest primary gold producer in 2011.  Holland is a bit of a maverick in the gold industry.
Holland spoke at the Melbourne Mining Club on July 31, 2012 from his presentation “What do Investors want from their Gold Mining Stock?“  Holland basically calls a spade a spade as he shows how lousy the top gold miners have performed and why their stock prices have suffered.
I have taken what I believe are the four most important charts from his 35 page presentation and have posted them below with commentary.
The first chart deals with two of my favorite subjects in gold and silver mining industry:  Falling Ore Grades & Increased Costs.


In this chart (on the left), we see that the operating cost per tonne of gold has gone up 12% per year, while the top 8 gold miners average gold yield has declined 5% per year.
According to Holland:
What I thought was scary is that they were predicting — and this is just on a cost per tonne basis — that cost inflation was probably going to be 15% per annum going forward.  This means you’re going to see a doubling of costs over five years.
If we look at Goldfields average gold yield since 2005, it has fallen from 2.74 g/t to 1.83 g/t… or a 35% decline in 6 years.

As I have mentioned several times before, as ore grades decline more diesel is consumed just to produce the same or even less gold.  Below we see that Goldfields has doubled their diesel consumption per ounce of gold since 2005.

Just to give a frame of reference, in 2005 Goldfields produced 4.2 million oz of gold and only consumed 4.9 gallons of diesel per ounce in the process.  By 2011, their gold production declined to 3.5 million oz but they increased their diesel consumption  to 10.6 gallons per oz of gold.
I have received emails from people telling me that the increased cost of diesel is not that much of a factor compared to the increase of the gold price.  While I agree with this assessment, it’s not the price of diesel that concerns me the most, but rather the availability.   I would imagine both the escalating price of diesel on top of future shortages may cause more havoc in the industry than few have considered.
The next chart reveals the sobering truth that the percentage of CAPEX spending per ounce of gold by the top 8 gold miners has far outstripped the increase in the price of gold.  (CAPEX means capital expenditures or money spent on capital investment).

If you look at the chart above, you will see that even though the price of gold has risen 20% per annum over the past 10 years, CAPEX spending has increased 32% per ounce of gold.  Furthermore, Holland states that CAPEX spending has increased a staggering 50% per year between 2006-2011.
This brings us to the next chart that shows the past and future trends for CAPEX spending in the top 8 gold miners.

From 2006-2011, the top gold miners spent 40% or $54 billion of their market cap (average of $137 billion).  If all the projects that are slated to come online between 2012-2017, the top gold miners will have to spend $85 billion or 60% of their present market cap.  This goes to show that increased costs of mining and investment are really devouring the profits of the gold miners.
One more interesting trend to take note from the chart above is the average market cap.  The average market cap of the top gold miners was $137 billion between 2006-2011.  In 2012, it has fallen to only $135 billion even though the price of gold has increased 20% per year since 2002.
This is part of the very reason why Nick Holland made the 35 page report and presented it to the world.  He believes the top gold miners have been BLOWING A GREAT DEAL OF HOT AIR, but not backing it up with results.  Some have mentioned (such as Jim Sinclair) that the reason why the top gold miners stock prices haven’t performed is due low dividends paid to its shareholders.
The final chart below compares the dividend yields from different sectors of the market.

Here we can see that the top gold miners dividend yields are nearly half compared to the overall mining sector and the S&P 500.
Again….according to Holland:
I’ve been asked by some investors why we can’t pay out a dividend yield of 5% to 10%?  If we really want to get our stock up we’ve got to push dividend yields into those territories.  But we simply can’t do that, because then we will be paying out all of our earnings.  We won’t have anything left for sustaining capital or maintaining our current production base.
We have to Holland credit where credit is due.  Goldfield’s current dividend yield is 3.8%, more than twice the 1.8% average of the gold miners in its same class.
CONCULUSION 
There is so much miss-information and lousy analysis in the market that investors have become disenfranchised with the gold mining industry.  You can’t really blame them as the top gold miners have not been honest with the real costs to mine gold.  Instead they have been bragging about their huge profit margins per their cash costs.  This has motivated governments in foreign countries to increase or tack on higher royalties and taxes.
The top gold miners have basically shot themselves in their own foot due to their arrogance and stupidity.
Cash costs are a complete joke.  Anyone who still looks at that financial component is completely ignorant to the overall forces at work in the gold mining industry.  Costs are increasing exponentially as Nick Holland has presented in his recent report.
Even though Holland provides a sobering picture of the increased costs and CAPEX spending in the gold industry… I believe the future may be even more bleak when it comes to available liquid energy and affordable prices.  This is by no means a bad thing for the price of gold and silver, but rather quite bullish.  However, it will making the selecting of mining companies more difficult going forward.  This is where I see the overall gold and silver community totally ignorant.
That being said, we can now see that if operating costs and CAPEX are going to increase more than they have in the past, the price of gold will have to head  up much higher from here…..JUST TO KEEP IN PACE WITH THIS INFLATION…..FORGET ALL THE OTHER BULLISH FACTORS….lol
Got Gold?
To check out Nick Hollands full 35 page report go to the link HERE

Orginial Source

經濟扭曲要忍痛減速 - 黃元山

最近,很多投資者或投機者都問,中國政府為甚麼還不「放水」(寬鬆貨幣和積極財政政策)?甚麼時候再會大幅放水呢?一般認為是因為中國害怕刺激通脹,或是因為中國不想再重蹈09年「四萬億」的覆轍。這些說法不無道理,不過不能指出核心原因。

要回答「放不放水」這個問題之前,必先了解中國經濟放緩的主因。
阿爺調結構放慢增長步伐
中國經濟放緩的事實很清楚:GDP按年增長由09年高位12%回落至7.5%;工業生產按年增長只有9%左右。

一般認為的經濟放緩的原因包括︰歐債問題影響中國出口、需求減少導致信貸增長減速。

筆者認為,經濟放緩的主因是政策的人為因素,即是說,中國政府有意讓經濟減速;而減速的原因就是我們半年前在這裡談過的經濟改革和轉型。

經濟改革不是因為09年的「四萬億」,而是累計了十多年的經濟扭曲,已經到了一個臨界點,如再不改革可能會重蹈日本「迷失20年」的慘痛覆轍。

中國GDP多年來保持雙位數字增長,惟推動增長背後,是不平衡的經濟活動之價格扭曲所致。如今中央政府意識到,完善有效的經濟結構並非單靠修橋鋪路,即大幅增加政府基建投資這麼簡單,於是主動放慢經濟增長步伐,而「減速」正正是調整結構的喘息空間。

現時中央努力實行經濟模式轉型,減輕依賴基建作為經濟重心,利用各項政策,包括利率市場化、稅制改革、增加民間信貸渠道等,希望能擴大消費(出口轉內銷)、加大私人企業(不再讓國企「玩曬」)和服務性行業的經濟比重、改善中小企業的融資情況、提升產業附加值等。

中 國經濟減速卻引起市場憂慮,有人更認為「放水」救市最實際。雖然不少市場人士都萬分焦急,但中國政府遲遲不放水,是因為中國政府明白,真正的成長務必經歷 痛的階段;為了能令經濟持續及健康發展,現在必須忍耐經濟增長放緩、經濟模式轉型所帶來的各種痛楚。中央政府就像一個本來心急的司機,由於明白到超速駕駛 隨時帶來車毀人亡的後果,故自行把車速減慢,決心做個安全駕駛者。

外圍環境惡化改革路難行
所以,中國經濟放緩是一個自我節制的舉動,而遲遲不放水是希望長遠有更可持續的發展。

不過,要留意的是,內地水緊對本港經濟,特別是樓市的影響。
2011年,本港一手豪宅樓宇市場,內地買家平均佔四成;而內地樓市買家的意欲,和內地的貨幣鬆緊有密切的關係(見圖)。

在經濟改革過程中,經濟會經歷陣痛;內地不少的官員和學者專家都認為,為了將來幸福,經濟改革必須進行。

不過,碰巧歐洲外圍環境惡化,使改革路途更不容易,在逼不得已下,才可能有限度放水,來紓緩改革所帶來的陣痛。




 



黃元山
大學教授、國際投行前董事總經理