Some of the key soundbites from Faber: “Gold is quite oversold and I would consider buying some gold in the next two days… We overshot on the upside when we went over $1,900. We’re now close to bottoming at $1,500, and if that doesn’t hold it could bottom to between $1,100-$1,200. “Both equity markets and gold markets have become very oversold, and I think a rebound is occurring. Following this rebound, which I expect to get underway this week, there will be a longer slowdown.” In other words, Faber shares our undying certainty that should stocks plunge and they will once the rumor mill halflife is measured in nanoseconds, the Fed will have no choice but to intervene again, with trillions of monetization. We speculate that that would not be exactly negative for gold…

And naturally, CNBC’s spin on this same interview is that according to Faber gold is plunging to $1,100… Sigh.

Gold this morning is plunging by the most since December 2008. For those seeking the reason for the sell off, it once again appears that the market is about 24 hours late in processing news that has been out for over a day. One of the main catalysts for today’s gold price is the realization that the Shanghai Gold Exchange hiked gold margins by 26%. Of course that this happened not one but two days ago (as we reported) is irrelevant. There are other factors to be sure: on Tuesday holdings of the SPDR Gold Trust , the world’s largest gold-backed exchange-traded fund, fell by nearly 25 tonnes, their biggest one-day outflow since Jan. 25. Furthermore, there is another rumor that hedge funds that have been crushed by the market volatility over the past month are shoring cash ahead of Jackson Hole by selling their winners. Either way, at last check gold was down to $1770. This is the price it was on August 16: about a week ago. As for where gold will go next: we suggest investors consider what the options for the world central banking cartel are, and how many of them do not include diluting paper. We are eager to hear the alternatives.

Source: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/biggest-gold-drop-december-2008-send-metal-week-ago-levels

So much for the interesting theory presented a few days back from Bernstein that one contrarian response from China to its electricity shortage problem is not to hike prices but instead to slow down its economy by pushing the margin producers out and allow the economy to slow down on its own. As a reminder, last Friday Bernstein analysts Parket and Leung, in discussing the 30 gigawatt power shortage currently gripping China, was the following: “a nationwide power price increase to alleviate the problem is not likely. Letting the current stand-off run its course – in the worst case scenario, allowing electricity shortages and the high price of fuel substitutes to force factories to shut down – would slow the economy. And that’s the key point in our view: increasing electricity prices is inflationary while holding prices steady would achieve the NDRC’s current economic goals.” Alas, China has opted for the convention path, and as Business China reports, “China will raise prices for electricity used for industrial, commercial and agricultural purposes to curb demand from energy-intensive industries and encourage power generators to increase electricity supplies.” Sigh – add more inflation, more resultant PBoC tightening, and more of the same dog chasing its tail failed policies that will lead the world’s fastest growing economy nowhere fast.

From Business China:

Prices for non-residential users in 15 provinces will be raised by an average RMB 16.7 per megawatt-hour, while prices for residential users will remain unchanged, according to an unnamed official at the National Development and Reform Commission, China’s top economic planning agency.

Prior to that, the country’s on-grid power tariffs were raised in 12 provinces by an average RMB 20 per megawatt-hour on April 10.

The recent hikes in on-grid and retail power prices aim to solve power outages from the perspectives of supply and demand; raising on-grid power prices can ease the enduring losses of thermal power plants, while the increase in retail prices will curb the excessive growth of energy-intensive industries, said Lin Boqiang, director of the China Energy Research Center of Xiamen University.

China may face the worst electricity shortage since 2004, and it is conservatively estimated that there will be an electricity shortfall of 30 million kilowatts this summer, according to Xue Jing, director of the statistics department of the China Electricity Council (CEC), the industry group for operators of power plants and utilities.

Here are the industries that are about to experience yet another margin shortfall in the mainland unless the succeed in raising prices… Many of which will impact none other than the US consumer.

CEC data show China’s industrial power consumption in the first four months amounted to 1071.6 billion kilowatt-hours, up 12% from a year earlier. In April, daily average power usage of the manufacturing sector reached 7.3 billion kilowatt-hours, breaching the monthly record of 7 billion kilowatt-hours for the first time.

Chemical, construction material, steel and non-ferrous metal refining consumed a combined 481.3 billion kilowatt-hours, up 11.6% year-on-year, according to the data, reflecting the rebound in the consumption of energy-intensive industries.

In many regions in Zhejiang, one of China’s most industrialized provinces, power supplies are being strictly controlled and many factories are taking a 1 day break after every 3 days of operation to reduce demand for electricity.

“Releasing the production capacity of high energy-consuming enterprises has intensified the power shortage,” said Yang Janhua, a professor at the Zhejiang Academy of Social Sciences.

In the first quarter, Zhejiang’s fixed asset investment advanced 29% on a yearly basis, with the added-value of heavy industry up 13.7% and electricity usage in the chemical and non-ferrous industries up 20%.

For those that may be unfamiliar the primary cause for the latest spike in inflation in everything from food to goods and services is the worst drought to hit the country in half a century, discussed previously here.

China is suffering from the worst drought in more than 50 years as hydropower plants are unable to operate at full capacity.

In Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Hunan and Guangdong provinces, average utilization hours of hydropower equipment fell to historical lows either in the first four months or in April alone, according to Shao Minghui, an analyst at China Post Securities.

“In Zhejiang and Hunan, the actual utilization hours of hydropower equipment slumped 73.87% and 55.34%, respectively, compared with a year earlier, which fully proves insufficient hydropower supply is one of the vital cause of the present power shortage,” Shao said.

In China, thermal power makes up 77% of total electricity output, and hydropower accounts for around 20%.

“In newly installed equipment, the proportion of thermal power continued to fall, leading the growth of effective power supply capacity in summer 3 to 4 percentage points lower than the growth of maximum loading,” a CEC report said.

“If coal prices remain high and the drought continues in central and eastern China, the limited supply of electricity will get worse,” Xue said.

And by that they mean that contrary to Bernanke’s hopes for a prompt “15 minute” inflation resolution, the re-exporting of inflation is about to begin in earnest, likely peaking some time in July, just as the US economy is really hitting the skids.

As we said back in January, unlike 2010, when the keyword was “stagflation”, the word of choice to describe 2011 will be stagflation. We are sticking with this prediction.

Source: ZeroHedge

Most interesting in the report, which is for the most part trivial, is its analysis of ever greater Chinese relevance in global capital flows (much more in the slide presentation below):

More from the FT’s take on this report:

The World Bank expects the US dollar to lose its solitary dominance in the global economy by 2025, as the euro and the renminbi establish themselves on an equal footing in a new “multi-currency” monetary system.

The implications are wide-ranging. For instance, Mr Dailami said this power shift would lead to big boosts in investment flows to the countries driving global growth, with a significant increase in cross-border mergers and acquisitions activity, and a changing corporate landscape in which “you’re not going to see the dominance of established multinationals”.

In addition, a different international monetary system will gradually evolve, wiping out the US dollar’s position as the world’s main reserve currency.

“The current predominance of the US dollar would end sometime before 2025 and would be replaced by a monetary system in which the dollar, the euro and the renminbi would each serve as full-fledge international currencies,” the report said, highlighting what it considered the “most likely” of three scenarios for the currency markets in 15 years.

The dollar’s successors: EUR and CNY.

The report identified the euro as the most “credible” rival to the US dollar, with one caveat. “Its status is poised to expand, provided the euro can successfully overcome the sovereign debt crises currently faced by several of its member countries and can avoid the moral hazard problems associated with bail-outs of countries within the European Union,” the report said.

On China, the report noted that authorities there had already started “internationalising” the renminbi by developing an offshore market in the currency and encouraging the use of the renminbi in settling and invoicing international trade transactions.

“A larger role for the renminbi would help resolve the disparity between China’s great economic strength on the global stage and its heavy reliance on foreign currencies,” the report said.

The report’s conclusions summarized:

• The postwar global economic structure –defined by the dominant position of advanced countries –is in the midst of a fundamental change
• Rapid globalization and expected higher growth rates in emerging market economies will translate into greater economic influence for developing countries
• The move to multipolarity will be by and large positive for developing countries, but the transition needs to be managed

Source: ZeroHedge

More from the article:

If the gold standard had been in place in recent years, the value of the U.S. dollar would not have weakened as it has and excessive federal spending would have been curbed, Forbes told HUMAN EVENTS.  The constantly changing value of the U.S. dollar leads to marketplace uncertainty and consequently spurs speculation in commodity investing as a hedge against inflation.

The only probable 2012 U.S. presidential candidate who has championed a return to the gold standard so far is Rep. Ron Paul (R.-Tex.).  But the idea “makes too much sense” not to gain popularity as the U.S. economy struggles to create jobs, recover from a housing bubble induced by the Federal Reserve’s easy-money policies, stop rising gasoline prices, and restore fiscal responsibility to U.S. government’s budget, Forbes insisted.

With a stable currency, it is “much harder” for governments to borrow excessively, Forbes said.  Without lax Federal Reserve System monetary policies that led to the printing of too much money, the housing bubble would not have been nearly as severe, he added.

“When it comes to exchange rates and monetary policy, people often don’t grasp” what is at stake for the economy, Forbes said.  By restoring the gold standard, the United States would shift away from “less responsible policies” and toward a stronger dollar and a stronger America, he said.  “If the dollar was as good as gold, other countries would want to buy it.”

An encouraging sign for Forbes is that key lawmakers besides Rep. Paul are recognizing that the Fed is straying well beyond its intended role of promoting stable prices and full employment with its monetary policies.

And speaking of Ron Paul, today the Subcommittee chairman will hold a 10 am EDT hearing on “Monetary Policy and the Debt Ceiling”, which we hope to broadcast live, as it should further reinforce the logic of all those who are calling for the overthrow of the central bank cartel.

Post Source: Zero Hedge

A month ago, Zero Hedge first reported that Bill Gross had taken the stunning decision to bring his Treasury exposure from 12% to 0%: a move which many interpreted as just business, and not personal: after all Pimco had previously telegraphed its disgust with US paper, and was merely mitigating its exposure. This time, in another Zero Hedge first, we discover that it is no longer business for Bill – it has now become personal (and with an attendant cost of carry). In March, Pimco’s flagship Total Return Fund (TRF) has now taken an active short position in US government debt: -3% on a Market Value basis (or $7.1 billion), and a whopping -18% on a Duration Weighted Exposure basis. And confirming just what PIMCO thinks of US-related paper is the fact that the world’s largest “bond” fund now has cash, at a stunning $73 billion, or 31% of all assets, as its largest asset class on both a relative and absolute basis. We repeat: cash is more than PIMCO’s holdings of Treasurys and Mortgage securities ($66 billion) combined. To paraphrase: in March PIMCO was dumping everything related to US rates (see chart below). This is the first net short position that PIMCO has had in Government-related debt since the Great Financial Crisis of 2008, and going positive in February of 2009 only after it became clear that the Fed would commence monetizing US debt one month later. This is the closest that Gross has come to making a political statement and is now without doubt putting his money where his mouth is. The only event that could possibly derail Gross’ thinking is a huge market crash forcing a rush to Treasury safety. Alas, as has been made all too clear recently, US debt is no longer the safe haven it once was. Which begs the question: when will the TRF break out a “gold” asset holdings line item.

And another side effect of the firm’s scramble away from debt and into cash is that the effective duration of TRF is now down to 3.6: only the second lowest since the 3.38 posted in December of 2008… when the world was on the verge of ending.

That Bill Gross is willing to risk a surge in redemptions (after all who would be wiling to pay PIMCO to manage a third of their assets in the form of supposedly devaluating cash) in order to make a statement about the credibility of the US government, and specifically the viability of its IOUs, is easily the only thing that the US government has to consider when evaluating the prospects for funding trillions and trillions of US deficits at “acceptable” rates in the absence of further quantitative easing by the Chairman.

If Gross is indeed right, something very wicked this way comes.

Source

That a CEO of a silver miner sees precious metals prices rising, especially on a day like today when silver hit a new 31 year high (and gold is at a record) is not surprising. Especially since that is precisely what happened: “The head of U.S. silver miner Coeur d’Alene Mines Corp said on Thursday that he “would not be surprised” if silver prices reached the mid-$40s per ounce and gold prices rose to $1,500 to $1,600 an ounce this year.” What is, however,  surprising is that another prominent silver miner, Pan American silver, announced during its earning call that “it plans to produce between 23-24 million ounces of silver in 2011, down from 24.3 million ounces in 2010. The company said it expects to produce between 76,000-78,000 ounces of gold in 2011, down from the 89,555 ounces it produced last year.” So despite a record price in silver, the company is unable or unwilling to mine more to keep up with demand? Perhaps the peak [blank] crowd should take a long hard look at silver.

From Reuters:

In an exclusive interview at the Reuters Mining and Steel Summit, Coeur Chief Executive Dennis Wheeler said heightened uncertainty in the world due to geopolitical turmoil and natural disasters, has increased demand for gold and silver as investment vehicles, and will continue to push prices higher.

And also from Reuters:

Pan American Silver said its fourth-quarter profit rose 67 percent on higher prices for all metals that it produces, but forecast lower gold and silver production levels next year.

Pan American said it plans to produce between 23-24 million ounces of silver in 2011, down from 24.3 million ounces in 2010. The company said it expects to produce between 76,000-78,000 ounces of gold in 2011, down from the 89,555 ounces it produced last year.

The Vancouver-based silver miner, which operates in Mexico, Peru, Bolivia and Argentina, posted net income of $46.4 million, or 43 cents per share, in the quarter ended Dec. 31.

This compared with $27.8 million, or 31 cents per share, in the fourth quarter of 2009.

Spot silver prices nearly doubled over 2010, rising from $16.86 to $30.86, as investors turned to precious metals as a safe haven from currencies.

 

Source: Zero Hedge

 

Several days ago there were a few rather amusing anecdotes in the blogosphere that just because Sprott filed a selling shareholder shelf in PSLV, the ETF was about to crash and burn. What was not disclosed is that in 2011 there have been about 200 comparable shelves filed for public companies, yet nobody called for the imminent anihilation of 40% of the S&P. Stunningly, just because someone requests the right to sell an asset they own when said asset is trading at all time highs, apparently does not mean they intent to exercise said right. To wit: the premium to NAV for the Eric Sprott physical silver ETF just hit an all time record of 23%. We are confident that this is due to JPMorgan being massively long the metal, and also because anywhere one walks these days, physical silver lying on the ground is more prevalent than dog excrement. Also, those who decided to play the premium-NAV compression trade, are advised to promptly close it unless, of course, they are a TBTF bank.

Source: Zero Hedge

There has been a lot of speculation about just what the JPMorgan note that claims the Portuguese government can fall as soon as tomorrow, says. The speculation can now end. “The likelihood that the Portuguese government will fall this week looks high. This suggests that the sovereign will likely access the EFSF in the near term, despite the current government’s efforts to avoid this outcome.” Incidentally if JPM is right, the market better have priced in the next insolvent domino to drop in Europe, although judging by where the EURUSD is these days, the market decided to take a long hard sabbatical about 2 weeks ago.

From JPM:

Portuguese government could fall tomorrow: EFSF access increasingly likely

Faced with increasing market pressure, the Portuguese government a couple of weeks ago announced a new set of fiscal measures aimed at achieving its ambitious plan to push the deficit to 2% of GDP by 2013. The new plan included additional tightening measures worth 0.8%-pts of GDP for 2011, and detailed spending cuts and revenue-boosting measures worth a total of 2.5%-pts of GDP for 2012 and 1.2%-pts of GDP in 2013. The plan was spelled out more clearly yesterday, when the finance ministry published its latest update of the Stability and Growth Program (see table below). According to the program, the government will achieve a rapid deficit reduction thanks to front-loaded tightening, which will push down the primary balance by 3.4%-pts of GDP this year and 2.4%-pts next year. Partly in response to the new measures, the government lowered its growth projections, and now sees GDP contracting 0.9% this year and growing at a modest rate over the following two years.

The announcement of the new measures received the blessing of the EC, the ECB and the European Council, but was not welcomed by the main opposition party in Portugal, the centre-right Social Democrats, which have blamed the government for acting without informing them in time. This poses a clear challenge as the current Socialist government led by prime minister José Sócrates is a minority government.

It looks like the Portuguese parliament will vote on the new fiscal plan tomorrow. Prime minister Sócrates has already announced that, if the plan is rejected, he will resign, something that will lead to a general election. The prime minister has been attempting to find a compromise with the opposition, saying that the current plan could be discussed and amended as needed, but the opposition does not seem to buy into this. The head of the Social Democrats Passos Coelho, who enjoys a lead in opinion polls, has been critical of the measures, despite mentioning that he fully supports Portugal’s deficit-reduction targets. This seems to suggest that his party would likely implement an equally austere plan, but in a new government structure.

The likelihood that the Portuguese government will fall this week looks high. This suggests that the sovereign will likely access the EFSF in the near term, despite the current government’s efforts to avoid this outcome.

You already know the basic reasons for owning gold – currency protection, inflation hedge, store of value, calamity insurance – many of which are becoming clichés even in mainstream articles. Throw in the supply and demand imbalance, and you’ve got the basic arguments for why one should hold gold for the foreseeable future.

All of these factors remain very bullish, in spite of gold’s 450% rise over the past 10 years. No, it’s not too late to buy, especially if you don’t own a meaningful amount; and yes, I’m convinced the price is headed much higher, regardless of the corrections we’ll inevitably see. Each of the aforementioned catalysts will force gold’s price higher and higher in the years ahead, especially the currency issues.

But there’s another driver of the price that escapes many gold watchers and certainly the mainstream media. And I’m convinced that once this sleeping giant wakes, it could ignite the gold market like nothing we’ve ever seen.

The fund management industry handles the bulk of the world’s wealth. These institutions include insurance companies, hedge funds, mutual funds, sovereign wealth funds, etc. But the elephant in the room is pension funds. These are institutions that provide retirement income, both public and private.

Global pension assets are estimated to be – drum roll, please – $31.1 trillion. No, that is not a misprint. It is more than twice the size of last year’s GDP in the U.S. ($14.7 trillion).

We know a few hedge fund managers have invested in gold, like John Paulson, David Einhorn, Jean-Marie Eveillard. There are close to twenty mutual funds devoted to gold and precious metals. Lots of gold and silver bugs have been buying.

So, what about pension funds?

According to estimates by Shayne McGuire in his new book, Hard Money; Taking Gold to a Higher Investment Level, the typical pension fund holds about 0.15% of its assets in gold. He estimates another 0.15% is devoted to gold mining stocks, giving us a total of 0.30% – that is, less than one third of one percent of assets committed to the gold sector.

Shayne is head of global research at the Teacher Retirement System of Texas. He bases his estimate on the fact that commodities represent about 3% of the total assets in the average pension fund. And of that 3%, about 5% is devoted to gold. It is, by any account, a negligible portion of a fund’s asset allocation.

Now here’s the fun part. Let’s say fund managers as a group realize that bonds, equities, and real estate have become poor or risky investments and so decide to increase their allocation to the gold market. If they doubled their exposure to gold and gold stocks – which would still represent only 0.6% of their total assets – it would amount to $93.3 billion in new purchases.

How much is that? The assets of GLD total $55.2 billion, so this amount of money is 1.7 times bigger than the largest gold ETF. SLV, the largest silver ETF, has net assets of $9.3 billion, a mere one-tenth of that extra allocation.

The market cap of the entire sector of gold stocks (producers only) is about $234 billion. The gold industry would see a 40% increase in new money to the sector. Its market cap would double if pension institutions allocated just 1.2% of their assets to it.

But what if currency issues spiral out of control? What if bonds wither and die? What if real estate takes ten years to recover? What if inflation becomes a rabid dog like it has every other time in history when governments have diluted their currency to this degree? If these funds allocate just 5% of their assets to gold – which would amount to $1.5 trillion – it would overwhelm the system and rocket prices skyward.

And let’s not forget that this is only one class of institution. Insurance companies have about $18.7 trillion in assets. Hedge funds manage approximately $1.7 trillion. Sovereign wealth funds control $3.8 trillion. Then there are mutual funds, ETFs, private equity funds, and private wealth funds. Throw in millions of retail investors like you and me and Joe Sixpack and Jiao Sixpack, and we’re looking in the rear view mirror at $100 trillion.

I don’t know if pension funds will devote that much money to this sector or not. What I do know is that sovereign debt risks are far from over, the U.S. dollar and other currencies will lose considerably more value against gold, interest rates will most certainly rise in the years ahead, and inflation is just getting started. These forces are in place and building, and if there’s a paradigm shift in how these managers view gold, look out!

I thought of titling this piece, “Why $5,000 Gold May Be Too Low.” Because once fund managers enter the gold market in mass, this tiny sector will light on fire with blazing speed.

My advice is to not just hope you can jump in once these drivers hit the gas, but to claim your seat during the relative calm of this month’s level prices.