PDA

View Full Version : About Barrick's covering its short position



goldsilber
17th September 2009, 06:30
Shouldn't Barrick's covering its short position push the gold price substantially upwards?
I wonder why nobody point at that. Am I wrong? :confused:

Somebody know how big this short position is?

Cup-of-Ruin
17th September 2009, 06:54
Shouldn't Barrick's covering its short position push the gold price substantially upwards?
I wonder why nobody point at that. Am I wrong? :confused:

Somebody know how big this short position is?

Barrick were forward selling gold at 1990's prices to the bullion banks, which they in turn would sell at discount prices on the market to suppress the price, this could continue if wasn't for the fact that gold is finite and hard to mine, the money is not a problem, if Barrick wants money they can just ring up the Fed and they can get as much as they like, that's how it goes, you just ring up as money supply is infinite. Barrick just cannot deliver the same amount of gold to keep up with demand, the orders come in, they can't be filled so Barrick just gets some more greenbacks and buys out the unfilled orders, it's better that way then declaring to the market that they're short millions of ounces - 'we are running out of gold'!

And I think this has pushed the demand for gold up and its created upward pressure and so we see the increase in the amount of shorts from the bullion banks, it dosen't matter how many short bets they place or how much money they lose doing it - money is not a problem for them - what they don't want the market to know is that they're short on the ounces, that they don't have the gold they say they do, that is the issue.

goldsilber
17th September 2009, 09:39
No matter who you are (voyeur or not), thanks :) for the 5 stars encouragement...
Now I believe this question was not totally meaningless.

Cash2Riches
17th September 2009, 12:40
Exactly, Barrick has no intentions of paying back their obligations with gold bullion, just more funny money. Which they know is becoming worth less and less everyday. Trying to pay back with physical gold would drive the market up massively.

Kayaker
17th September 2009, 13:03
9.5 million ounces contracted. Their annual production is a little over 7 million ounces.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aoEmio7nFbWY

akak
17th September 2009, 14:12
I have a good friend who is a geologist in the gold mining industry, and he tells me that Barrick is and has been widely referred to by many in that industry as "The Evil Empire" for their shady dealings in regards to the gold futures market and on behalf of the US government to short gold and hold its price down for years. He has had the chance to work for them at very lucrative wages, but categorically refuses to do so, considering them traitors to their industry and to financial ethics.

akak
17th September 2009, 14:25
From today's Goldseek article about Barrick by Jim Willie:

"Their operations suffer greatly, from capital drained for balance sheet repair rather than mine development. They boast being a giant among miners, but their production given their equity is pathetically low. They remain a finance firm masquerading as a mining organization, and have finally been caught with their pants at their ankles ... It is NOT a gold mining firm. It is a gold suppression financial subsidiary to Wall Street with an under-developed capital-starved mining business."


http://news.goldseek.com/GoldenJackass/1253217600.php

Cash2Riches
17th September 2009, 14:55
Good article, and I agree, they definitely don't have the most reliable track record, thats for sure.

goldsilber
18th September 2009, 07:13
9.5 million ounces contracted. Their annual production is a little over 7 million ounces.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aoEmio7nFbWY

Thanks for the link Kayaker

"The company, which had contracts for 9.5 million ounces of gold as of Sept. 7, will take a $5.6 billion third-quarter charge to eliminate some of the hedges, Barrick said yesterday."

I don't know yet how much of these 9.5 mil oz short contracts (am I right?) will be eliminated.
I don't understand either what means "third-quarter charge", but $5.6 bil. are the equivalent to ca. 5.6 mil. oz.

My question: could it be that Barrick's counterparts, in front of Barrick's default, will then with Barrick's money acquire physical?
THAT would namely push the POG REALLY onwards...