Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

    a case in point - aluminum - AL on the Breaking Bad Periodic Table



    A Shuffle of Aluminum, but to Banks, Pure Gold

    By DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI

    MOUNT CLEMENS, Mich. — Hundreds of millions of times a day, thirsty Americans open a can of soda, beer or juice. And every time they do it, they pay a fraction of a penny more because of a shrewd maneuver by Goldman Sachs and other financial players that ultimately costs consumers billions of dollars.

    The story of how this works begins in 27 industrial warehouses in the Detroit area where a Goldman subsidiary stores customers’ aluminum. Each day, a fleet of trucks shuffles 1,500-pound bars of the metal among the warehouses. Two or three times a day, sometimes more, the drivers make the same circuits. They load in one warehouse. They unload in another. And then they do it again.

    This industrial dance has been choreographed by Goldman to exploit pricing regulations set up by an overseas commodities exchange, an investigation by The New York Times has found. The back-and-forth lengthens the storage time. And that adds many millions a year to the coffers of Goldman, which owns the warehouses and charges rent to store the metal. It also increases prices paid by manufacturers and consumers across the country.

    Tyler Clay, a forklift driver who worked at the Goldman warehouses until early this year, called the process “a merry-go-round of metal.”

    (hey Tyler, is Goldman managing your 401K? Then you have nothing to worry about . . .)

    The inflated aluminum pricing is just one way that Wall Street is flexing its financial muscle and capitalizing on loosened federal regulations to sway a variety of commodities markets, according to financial records, regulatory documents and interviews with people involved in the activities.

    The maneuvering in markets for oil, wheat, cotton, coffee and more have brought billions in profits to investment banks like Goldman, JPMorgan Chase and Morgan Stanley, while forcing consumers to pay more every time they fill up a gas tank, flick on a light switch, open a beer or buy a cellphone. In the last year, federal authorities have accused three banks, including JPMorgan, of rigging electricity prices, and last week JPMorgan was trying to reach a settlement that could cost it $500 million.

    Using special exemptions granted by the Federal Reserve Bank and relaxed regulations approved by Congress, the banks have bought huge swaths of infrastructure used to store commodities and deliver them to consumers — from pipelines and refineries in Oklahoma, Louisiana and Texas; to fleets of more than 100 double-hulled oil tankers at sea around the globe; to companies that control operations at major ports like Oakland, Calif., and Seattle.

    In the case of aluminum, Goldman bought Metro International Trade Services, one of the country’s biggest storers of the metal. More than a quarter of the supply of aluminum available on the market is kept in the company’s Detroit-area warehouses.

    Before Goldman bought Metro International three years ago, warehouse customers used to wait an average of six weeks for their purchases to be located, retrieved by forklift and delivered to factories. But now that Goldman owns the company, the wait has grown more than 20-fold — to more than 16 months, according to industry records.

    Longer waits might be written off as an aggravation, but they also make aluminum more expensive nearly everywhere in the country because of the arcane formula used to determine the cost of the metal on the spot market.

    The delays are so acute that Coca-Cola and many other manufacturers avoid buying aluminum stored here.

    Goldman Sachs says it complies with all industry standards, which are set by the London Metal Exchange, and there is no suggestion that these activities violate any laws or regulations. Metro International, which declined to comment for this article, in the past has attributed the delays to logistical problems, including a shortage of trucks and forklift drivers, and the administrative complications of tracking so much metal. But interviews with several current and former Metro employees, as well as someone with direct knowledge of the company’s business plan, suggest the longer waiting times are part of the company’s strategy and let Goldman increase its profits from the warehouses.

    Metro International holds nearly 1.5 million tons of aluminum in its Detroit facilities, but industry rules require that all that metal cannot simply sit in a warehouse forever. At least 3,000 tons of that metal must be moved out each day. But nearly all of the metal that Metro moves is not delivered to customers, according to the interviews. Instead, it is shuttled from one warehouse to another.

    Because Metro International charges rent each day for the stored metal, the long queues caused by shifting aluminum among its facilities means larger profits for Goldman. And because storage cost is a major component of the “premium” added to the price of all aluminum sold on the spot market, the delays mean higher prices for nearly everyone, even though most of the metal never passes through one of Goldman’s warehouses.

    Aluminum industry analysts say that the lengthy delays at Metro International since Goldman took over are a major reason the premium on all aluminum sold in the spot market has doubled since 2010. The result is an additional cost of about $2 for the 35 pounds of aluminum used to manufacture 1,000 beverage cans, investment analysts say, and about $12 for the 200 pounds of aluminum in the average American-made car.

    “It’s a totally artificial cost,” said one of them, Jorge Vazquez, managing director at Harbor Aluminum Intelligence, a commodities consulting firm. “It’s a drag on the economy. Everyone pays for it.”

    Metro officials have said they are simply reacting to market forces, and on the company Web site describe their role as “bringing together metal producers, traders and end users,” and helping the exchange “create and maintain stability.”

    But the London Metal Exchange, which oversees 719 warehouses around the globe, has not always been an impartial arbiter — it receives 1 percent of the rent collected by its warehouses worldwide. Until last year, it was owned by members, including Goldman, Barclays and Citigroup. Many of its regulations were drawn up by the exchange’s warehouse committee, which is made up of executives of various banks, trading companies and storage companies — including the president of Goldman’s Metro International — as well as representatives of powerful trading firms in Europe.

    For much of the last century, Congress tried to keep a wall between banking and commerce. Banks were forbidden from owning nonfinancial businesses (and vice versa) to minimize the risks they take and, ultimately, to protect depositors. Congress strengthened those regulations in the 1950s, but by the 1980s, a wave of deregulation began to build and banks have in some cases been transformed into merchants, according to Saule T. Omarova, a law professor at the University of North Carolina and expert in regulation of financial institutions. Goldman and other firms won regulatory approval to buy companies that traded in oil and other commodities. Other restrictions were weakened or eliminated during the 1990s, when some banks were allowed to expand into storing and transporting commodities.

    Over the past decade, a handful of bank holding companies have sought and received approval from the Federal Reserve to buy physical commodity trading assets.

    According to public documents in an application filed by JPMorgan Chase, the Fed said such arrangements would be approved only if they posed no risk to the banking system and could “reasonably be expected to produce benefits to the public, such as greater convenience, increased competition, or gains in efficiency, that outweigh possible adverse effects, such as undue concentration of resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interests, or unsound banking practices.”

    By controlling warehouses, pipelines and ports, banks gain valuable market intelligence, investment analysts say. That, in turn, can give them an edge when trading commodities. In the stock market, such an arrangement might be seen as a conflict of interest — or even insider trading. But in the commodities market, it is perfectly legal.

    “Information is worth money in the trading world and in commodities, the only way you get it is by being in the physical market,” said Jason Schenker, president and chief economist at Prestige Economics in Austin, Tex. “So financial institutions that engage in commodities trading have a huge advantage because their ownership of physical assets gives them insight in physical flows of commodities.”

    After Goldman bought the company in 2010, Metro International began to attract a stockpile. It actually began paying a hefty incentive to traders who stored their aluminum in the warehouses. As the hoard of aluminum grew — from 50,000 tons in 2008 to 850,000 in 2010 to nearly 1.5 million currently — so did the wait times to retrieve metal and the premium added to the base price. By the summer of 2011, the price spikes prompted Coca-Cola to complain to the industry overseer, the London Metal Exchange, that Metro’s delays were to blame.

    Industry analysts and company insiders say that the vast majority of the aluminum being moved around Metro’s warehouses is owned not by manufacturers or wholesalers, but by banks, hedge funds and traders. They buy caches of aluminum in financing deals. Once those deals end and their metal makes it through the queue, the owners can choose to renew them, a process known as rewarranting.

    To encourage aluminum speculators to renew their leases, Metro offers some clients incentives of up to $230 a ton, and usually moves their metal from one warehouse to another, according to industry analysts and current and former company employees.

    To metal owners, the incentives mean cash upfront and the chance to make more profit if the premiums increase. To Metro, it keeps the delays long, allowing the company to continue charging a daily rent of 48 cents a ton. Goldman bought the company for $550 million in 2010 and at current rates could collect about a quarter-billion dollars a year in rent.
    Metro officials declined to discuss specifics about its lease renewals or incentive policies.

    On the warehouse floor, the arrangement makes for a peculiar workday, employees say.

    Despite the persistent backlogs, many Metro warehouses operate only one shift and usually sit idle 12 or more hours a day. In a town like Detroit, where factories routinely operate round the clock when necessary, warehouse workers say that low-key pace is uncommon.

    When they do work, forklift drivers say, there is much more urgency moving aluminum into, and among, the warehouses than shipping it out. Mr. Clay, the forklift driver, who worked at the Mount Clemens warehouse until February, said that while aluminum was delivered in huge loads by rail car, it left in a relative trickle by truck.

    “They’d keep loading up the warehouses and every now and then, when one was totally full they’d shut it down and send the drivers over here to try and fill another one up,” said Mr. Clay, 23.

    Because much of the aluminum is simply moved from one Metro facility to another, warehouse workers said they routinely saw the same truck drivers making three or more round trips each day. Anthony Stuart, a forklift team leader at the Mount Clemens warehouse until 2012, said he and his nephew — who worked at a Metro warehouse about six miles away in Chesterfield Township — occasionally asked drivers to pass messages back and forth between them.

    “Sometimes I’d talk to my nephew on the weekend, and we’d joke about it,” Mr. Stuart said. “I’d ask him ‘Did you get all that metal we sent you?’ And he’d tell; me ‘Yep. Did you get all that stuff we sent you?’ ”

    As Goldman has benefited from its wildly lucrative foray into the aluminum market, JPMorgan has been moving ahead with plans to establish its own profit center involving an even more crucial metal: copper, an industrial commodity that is so widely used in homes, electronics, cars and other products that many economists track it as a barometer for the global economy.

    In 2010, JPMorgan quietly embarked on a huge buying spree in the copper market. Within weeks — by the time it had been identified as the mystery buyer — the bank had amassed $1.5 billion in copper, more than half of the available amount held in all of the warehouses on the exchange. Copper prices spiked in response.

    At the same time, JPMorgan, which also controls metal warehouses, began seeking approval of a plan that would ultimately allow it, Goldman Sachs and BlackRock, a large money management firm, to buy 80 percent of the copper available on the market on behalf of investors and hold it in warehouses. The firms have told regulators that these stockpiles, which would be used to back new copper exchange-traded funds, would not affect copper prices. But manufacturers and copper wholesalers warned that the arrangement would squeeze the market and send prices soaring. They asked the S.E.C. to reject the proposal.

    After an intensive lobbying campaign ($$$) by the banks, Mary L. Schapiro, the S.E.C.'s chairwoman, approved the new copper funds last December, during her final days in office.

    Robert Bernstein, a lawyer at Eaton & Van Winkle, who represents companies that use copper, said that his clients were fearful of “an investor-financed squeeze” of the copper market. “We think the S.E.C. missed the evidence,” he said.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/21/bu...gewanted=print

  • #2
    Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

    This is interesting - supposedly the big Russian aluminum firm is doing similar stockpiling operations:

    http://johnhelmer.net/?p=9347

    The share price of United Company Rusal, the Russian state aluminium monopoly, has again dropped below the three-dollar (Hong Kong) level, and is heading towards oblivion – that’s the Citi Bank forecast of HK$1.80. In London and Moscow the market calculation is that, despite the company’s announced cuts to production of aluminium, Rusal’s second-quarter sales, revenues, costs, profit and loss to be released shortly, will reveal a worsening picture.
    Just how much worse the share price can get Rusal insiders realize at Moscow headquarters. That’s because they say that a very large volume of metal Rusal has produced, reported as exported and sold, is stocked in a warehouse beside the Baltic Sea. Only this aluminium hasn’t really been sold – it has been hidden by Rusal and its chief trader, Glencore. A company source said the number is so secret that only chief executive Oleg Deripaska (image right), Glencore chief executive and Rusal board member Ivan Glasenberg (left), and a handful of others know it.

    Last month at Rusal’s request, New York lawyers for Citi issued a copyright violation notice, trying to suppress circulation of Citi’s oblivion forecast. But in a subsequent interview the bank’s London-based aluminium analyst Jatinder Goel insists that “nothing has changed. This [$1.80] is still the TP [target price].” His analysis suggests the size of Rusal’s debt is now larger than the value of its equity, while its cashflow is drying up. If there were to be significant negative changes in the Citi estimates of aluminium price, Rusal sales, stocks, and the premium Rusal claims to be getting for direct metal deliveries to customers, the company risks insolvency. According to the New York lawyers, Georges Nahitchevansky and Kristin Garris, “Citigroup is one of the world’s leading financial institutions… Our client invested a significant amount of time and effort creating and developing its proprietary CR reports.” There can be no doubting the reliability of Citi’s forecast for Rusal’s future.
    The company reported that in the first quarter it managed to cut its output of primary aluminium by 4% (42,000 tonnes) compared to the first quarter of 2012, or by 3% (31,000 tonnes) compared to the fourth quarter of 2012 . This, according to the Rusal operating report, “was mostly attributable to the decreased production at certain less efficient smelters located in European part of Russia and Urals.”
    Moscow analysts to whom Rusal has confided preliminary production and sales data for the second quarter are divided between those who believe Rusal’s second-quarter results will show a flat line and those who expect a declining one on the key indicators. One analyst says that “volumes will remain about the same [level], that is, there will be no significant changes.” The downward shift in the aluminium spot price, he added, may have been offset by an increase in the premium which aluminium buyers pay to receive Rusal metal without warehouse delivery delays. Nonetheless, according to this source, Rusal’s earnings (Ebitda) may drop from $200 million to $100 million.
    Other Moscow analysts are forecasting a flat line – no change in volume of production, sales tonnage, or reported sales revenues.
    Rusal insiders warn that volume numbers for production and sales are misleading because they believe Rusal is shipping its metal to an Estonian warehouse complex where it is counted as sold; in fact, the sources allege, it is being withheld from the market in order to stop the trading price for the metal falling further.
    So far this year, the price of aluminium (3-month mean, month of June) is down 12% from January, according to the London Metals Exchange (LME) figures. The current LME cash spot price is $1,765 per tonne. The Kitco chart shows the downward trajectory expressed in US cents per pound for 6-month spot.

    Source: http://www.kitconet.com
    Threatening these prices, and thus Rusal’s future revenues, according to the official data of the LME, today’s unsold stockpile of metal is enormous — 5.41 million tonnes. Kitco illustrates in these two tables how the warehouse stock level of aluminium has been heading steadily upwards since the global trade collapse of 2008.


    Source: http://www.kitcometals.com
    However, the LME stock data refer only to aluminium in the LME’s approved and monitored warehouses, principally those in Rotterdam and Detroit. Take a close look at this list, and you will see that no warehouse has been authorized either in Russia or in Estonia. Rusal keeps unsold inventories on its balance-sheet in Russian warehouses, and reports them. As aluminium prices fall, Rusal must report a reduction in value for these stocks.
    In the first quarter this year, Rusal claims that “as a result of weaker aluminium demand and a growth in warehouse stocks, the regional duty-unpaid premium for primary aluminium ingots declined in February and March from USD210-233 per tonne to USD200-215 per tonne.” Also, the shrinking value of unsold stocks is a known quantity. In its annual report for 2012, Rusal reports its inventory position at Note 21.
    But a Rusal source, together with an Estonian source close to Glencore, have revealed there is a large, unreported Rusal stockpile of unsold aluminium at a complex at the Estonian seaside town of Sillamae.
    Another source who declined to be identified confirms that the complex is owned and operated by a company called Silmet. Ostensibly engaged in the mining and trade of rare metals, with a 90-year history of Swedish, German, and Soviet occupation, Silmet acknowledges that its high-security warehouses are being used to stock aluminium. The capacity there is several hundred thousand tonnes; that’s at least 10% of the official LME count. If Rusal’s hidden stockpile in Estonia were to be added to the global stockpile, the number would be stratospheric. A Silmet source says the company’s aluminium stocking capacity is a commercial secret.
    Here’s a bird’s-eye view of Rusal’s latest secret to surface.

    This is not the first time that Rusal schemes have been discovered for making production, exports and sales revenues appear to be more closely matched than they really are. In 2004 an investigation by a trade consultancy in London discovered anomalies in the volumes of primary aluminium traded by Rual, a trader associated with the group, and Wainfleet Consultadores, a company reported to be doing business in Madeira, Portugal. Further investigation by the Moscow-based Aluminy Consultancy in 2007 and by the European Commission cast doubt on the reliability of the match between production volumes and sales tonnage and revenues.
    Also problematic for Rusal is the proposed change in the international warehousing rules for aluminium. For the rule change, planned to take effect early in 2014, threatens to cut the premium in the price Rusal claims to receive for its shipments. According to Rusal’s first-quarter 2013 report, “the decrease in average LME aluminium prices was slightly offset by a 60.0% growth in premiums above the LME price in the different geographical segments (to an average of USD264 per tonne from USD165 per tonne for the three months ended 31 March 2013 and 2012, respectively).”
    A report this month by the Financial Times credits the takeover of the LME by the Hong Kong Stock Exchange company, six weeks ago, with forcing a reduction in warehouse delays in shipping out aluminium once sold. “ ‘Premiums have to come down,’ says one senior trader. ‘We’ve essentially taken out a bid from the market.’ The immediate effect would be to put pressure on aluminium producers such as Rusal, Chalco, Rio Tinto and Alcoa, already struggling with low aluminium prices… The second order effects of the change in rules are less easy to predict. The prospect of falling premiums may make banks and traders less willing to buy aluminium for so-called ‘financing deals’ – potentially putting additional downward pressure on prices.”
    A report by Andrea Hotter of Dow Jones explains that warehousing schemes benefit aluminium producers who play the warehouses against the metal consumers in order to jack up the delivery premium. “ Traders, merchants and banks are using the warehouse system as a financing mechanism for various storage deals, cancelling tonnages and putting them into bonded warehouses when financially viable. Consumers are getting the worst deal because they can’t use the system for physical delivery… Consumers such as U.S. aluminum sheet maker Novelis and U.S. canmaker Coca-Cola Co (KO) have both complained to the LME, directly or indirectly. Coca-Cola told Dow Jones Newswires that it takes two weeks to get metal into warehouses and six months to get it out, and that the situation has been ‘organized artificially to drive premiums up.’ An even larger portion of those complaining are banks, merchants and traders who have warrants in warehouses that they can’t immediately get to. Producers don’t really care, because they are able to command higher premiums for their metal, although they continue to say that they sell to consumers and only supply parcels to the spot market as and when they have aluminum available.”
    In practice, by concealing unsold aluminium in warehouses Rusal is trying to ensure that the LME warehouse system keeps the spot price from falling in line with demand, and supports the delivery premium for buyers who want on-time delivery. So the more metal which can be concealed in Estonia, or other places off the LME-approved map, the better for Rusal’s balance-sheet.
    What will happen when the premium dwindles, though? One Moscow analyst is sanguine. “The new warehouse rules are being considered for introduction sometime in April 2014,” he says, “and they will be applicable only to the warehouses with a queue longer than 100 days. No doubt that premiums will fall from the current level; but since the realized price for the Western producers is LME plus premium, if the premium goes lower, we may either get more capacity reductions or the LME going slightly higher to offset some of the premium lost. My guess is that the effective realized price if and when new warehouse rules get introduced will not fall much.”
    In Russia, for capacity reductions read job layoffs and social protests. As a Russian monopoly in which state shareholders exercise virtual control over the company’s revenues, as well as personal control over Deripaska, this is unacceptable. What will happen when the LME warehousing rules change and the premiums are cut, claim Rusal insiders, is that even larger volumes of production will be shipped into hiding in Estonia.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

      The story Don posted was on the front page of the Sunday Columbus Dispatch yesterday.
      I was surprised to see such bad PR for the Squid and JPM in a mainstream paper here in the heartland.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

        Originally posted by don View Post
        A Shuffle of Aluminum, but to Banks, Pure Gold
        The writing is on the wall. At some point, the authorities will not allow banks to trade in physical commodities for profit. The one line sentence in the Fed's statement on Friday, that it was reviewing the previous decision from 2003, is a signpost.
        --ST (aka steveaustin2006)

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

          Originally posted by thriftyandboringinohio View Post
          The story Don posted was on the front page of the Sunday Columbus Dispatch yesterday.
          I was surprised to see such bad PR for the Squid and JPM in a mainstream paper here in the heartland.
          Some time back EJ, writing about the banks and bankers, said that the wheels of justice grind slowly (or words to that effect).

          Since the onset of the financial crisis, when it comes to the bankers the public seems to have moved through the phases of Disbelief, Anger, Resignation, and Fatigue (wanting to move on and stop hearing about it).

          But I am sensing that behind the scenes, away from the media bullhorn, there are some things happening that are going to clip the bankers wings. One is the higher than Basel III capitalization requirements that the Fed and other US regulators are imposing on the TBTF US banks.

          Another is that some version of the Warren-McCain proposals to reinstate provisions of Glass-Steagall seems likely to be imposed as it has wider support among regulators, including the Fed, than the Bubblevision announcers would want us to believe. Some form of separation of investment banking activities from custodial banking activities is going to happen.

          There won't be another bailout of the investment banks by the politicians or the Federal Reserve...which now has direct regulatory authority and responsibility that it did not have before.

          steveaustin2006's comment on this thread is one more sign the times are changing...

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

            The "authorities" ARE the banks.

            It seems to me that nobody trusts the dollar to maintain value. Aluminum, especially if you can get the sheeple to pay to store it, is just like gold. It may even be better since it represents A LOT of stored energy needed to produce it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

              Originally posted by aaron View Post
              The "authorities" ARE the banks.

              It seems to me that nobody trusts the dollar to maintain value. Aluminum, especially if you can get the sheeple to pay to store it, is just like gold. It may even be better since it represents A LOT of stored energy needed to produce it.
              Store of value? Really??

              Priced in US Dollars, and doesn't look to me like it's done any better over the past quarter of a century.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

                Originally posted by steveaustin2006 View Post
                The writing is on the wall. At some point, the authorities will not allow banks to trade in physical commodities for profit. The one line sentence in the Fed's statement on Friday, that it was reviewing the previous decision from 2003, is a signpost.
                Shuttling metal among warehouses may conform to the letter but certainly not the spirit of the law. It's right up there with train loads of biofuels shuttled across the U.S.-Canadian border for the tax credits. If the SEC and Fed were as politically independent as they like to think they are they'd be able to shut this down without the air cover from The Grey Lady.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

                  Originally posted by EJ View Post
                  Shuttling metal among warehouses may conform to the letter but certainly not the spirit of the law. It's right up there with train loads of biofuels shuttled across the U.S.-Canadian border for the tax credits. If the SEC and Fed were as politically independent as they like to think they are they'd be able to shut this down without the air cover from The Grey Lady.

                  This was front page on the New York Times Sunday July 21, 2013. GS has engaged in quasi monopolies in the distribution of various commodities, resulting in price gouging.

                  There are other views, but I would like to see them explain why a bank would involve itself in warehousing services.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

                    Originally posted by steveaustin2006 View Post
                    The writing is on the wall. At some point, the authorities will not allow banks to trade in physical commodities for profit. The one line sentence in the Fed's statement on Friday, that it was reviewing the previous decision from 2003, is a signpost.
                    An interesting read from Bloomberg:

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

                      Originally posted by EJ View Post
                      Shuttling metal among warehouses may conform to the letter but certainly not the spirit of the law. It's right up there with train loads of biofuels shuttled across the U.S.-Canadian border for the tax credits. If the SEC and Fed were as politically independent as they like to think they are they'd be able to shut this down without the air cover from The Grey Lady.
                      Right, but since we know they are not, and not a single meaningful reform has been implemented since the start of the AFC (5 yrs plus ago), I for one have 0 faith in the current system - the idea that the wheels of justice grind slow but fine is just another bs slogan to keep folks believing "in change" and from recognizing the degree of regulatory capture, crony corporatism and outright criminality that occurs daily. By the time reform is implemented, after the next crisis, we may be dead, and those who profited from the privilege and their children have moved on to looting another economy by capturing the political class. Obama elected in 2012 was the confirming event that showed the US population is either willfully complicit or willfully ignorant, either of which foreshadows a lot worse times for America (oh yeah, unless they can kick start growth and everyone jumps back into the "get rich" by flipping assets, and don't worry that inflation in >10% p.a. "love it or leave it" indeed! - (sorry, for the somewhat strident rant, but this whole corruption with apparently no recourse is confoundingly frustrtating)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

                        Originally posted by steveaustin2006 View Post
                        The writing is on the wall. At some point, the authorities will not allow banks to trade in physical commodities for profit. The one line sentence in the Fed's statement on Friday, that it was reviewing the previous decision from 2003, is a signpost.
                        Position limits in commodities futures are nothing new. And holding large volumes of physical commodities with no intent on ever putting them to productive use equates to the same behavior.

                        The very concept harkens back to John Locke's Second Treatise:

                        Originally posted by John Locke
                        As much as any one can make use of to any advantage of life before it spoils, so much he may by his Tabour fix a property in: whatever is beyond this, is more than his share, and belongs to others. Nothing was made by God for man to spoil or destroy. And thus, considering the plenty of natural provisions there was a long time in the world, and the few spenders; and to how small a part of that provision the industry of one man could extend itself, and ingross it to the prejudice of others; especially keeping within the bounds, set by reason, of what might serve for his use; there could be then little room for quarrels or contentions about property so established.

                        Meaning simply that taking commodities out of circulation where they might be put to productive use defies the theory of property set forth by one of the originators of the modern doctrine of private property.

                        And the law often enforces that. If JP Morgan wanted to go out and buy up all the jet fuel tomorrow to put Delta under, well, they probably could.

                        But it certainly wouldn't be an efficient use of resources.

                        Last edited by dcarrigg; July 23, 2013, 11:41 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

                          Banks Tell Fed Commodity Business Benefits Outweigh Risks
                          The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association and four other groups representing lenders including Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) pressed their case in a letter meant to counteract calls by Senators Sherrod Brown and Elizabeth Warren to bar bank ownership of “physical assets like warehouses, pipelines and tankers” because of safety, legal and reputation risks that could harm the financial system.
                          http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-0...igh-risks.html

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: R TBTFs into Commodity Speculation?

                            I would start my own warehouse of flattened Al cans, but I'd probably get sued by GS.
                            "I love a dog, he does nothing for political reasons." --Will Rogers

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X