PM Daily Market Commentary - 12/30/2013

davefairtex
By davefairtex on Tue, Dec 31, 2013 - 1:17am

Gold closed down -17.70 to 1196.00 on light volume, silver closed -0.53 to 19.78 on light volume.  The gold/silver ratio rose +0.73 to 61.16.  From what I could see, there were just no (COMEX) buyers in gold or silver today.  Prices dropped from the open in asia through the close in NY.  It was not pretty.

The dollar did not confirm the big USD rebound on Friday - it dropped -0.33 [-0.42%], but the drop in the buck didn't seem to help gold in the slightest.

GDX was off -2.87% on moderately heavy volume, while GDXJ was only down -2.02% on moderate volume.  Senior miners did relatively well until 1500 EST, when they just dropped off a cliff and sank into the close, a mirror image of what happened on Friday.  GDXJ did well for most of the day but faded into the close, behaving similarly to GDX but it did not sell off quite so hard.

My happy scenario that silver & the miners would drag gold up did not play out.  Instead it was the alternative scenario: the gold shorts that were not on vacation were selling a weak rally, at resistance, in a downtrend, and it was silver and the miners that were dragged down instead.  And in truth, the likelihood of a long trend continuing is higher than a trend change at any given point during that downtrend.

 

So is this the buy & hold tax loss sellers taking their last chance to take losses?  Are all the longs on vacation, with just the shorts remaining at work?  I sure hope so.  Despite today, the ratios are still mostly bullish, miners remain within their trading range, and the silver chart still looks all right.

However gold is just $10 away from its low, and is still not showing any strength in the price chart at all.  Gold's rally of last week was anemic, showing an almost complete lack of buying interest.  Possibly, the only reason it went up was because the shorts were just waiting for higher prices before they hit gold again.

For me the true test will be after New Years.  If gold can't get a bid then, we will definitely retest the 1179 lows, which are not all that far away.

 

21 Comments

robie robinson's picture
robie robinson
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 25 2009
Posts: 1191
Buy time

i'm in for more

davefairtex's picture
davefairtex
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 3 2008
Posts: 5459
gold buyers showed up

Gold hit 1181 on a spike down prior to market open.  Then, within an hour, gold was way back up above the starting point, now 1206 and climbing on some good volume.

The buyers showed up.  This could be the low.

edit: I always like to see a big flush on high volume that first washes out all the remaining longs, and then it gets bought hard, and that marks the cycle low.  What happened today is exactly what I mean.  Its like the fat lady singing - its not a low unless one appears.  Not always true, but is often the case.

 

Adam Taggart's picture
Adam Taggart
Status: Peak Prosperity Co-founder (Offline)
Joined: May 26 2009
Posts: 3102
Good to see this flush get bought

I'm with Robie and am buying this morning

cmartenson's picture
cmartenson
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 7 2007
Posts: 5752
I'm calling shenanigans

I think this was just another day of imperfect price discovery as the traders all goof around with each other.  Some longs got washed out and then some newly minted shorts got reversed upon and scalped.

I should know, I've been there before, and it hurts.

All of that said, and especially given all the information I can glean about the movements of physical across the globe, I see these as very good prices for those so inclined.

robie robinson's picture
robie robinson
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 25 2009
Posts: 1191
that was a short shenani...

gan

davefairtex's picture
davefairtex
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 3 2008
Posts: 5459
shenanigans - perhaps

So it certainly could be a series of big guys playing games with the market, moving things around - which ends up hosing first longs, then shorts.

Or it could have been a real short assault trying for the big prize of all the stops hovering under 1179 that then ran into some very serious buying at 1180, whereupon they tried a few more times after the bounce, and then decided to all bail out at once causing the rebound.

Or maybe that's all the same thing.

But for me ultimately it doesn't matter.  In my surveys of "what makes a bottom" this is one of those magic signals.  It seems that when shorts run into this very sort of buzz saw, they stop shorting.  That's "observed behavior" on my part.  I can't tell you why, or who, or whether its a big game by TPTB or free market action.  Duck is either paddling madly, or drifting with the current.

But I do know when I observe this trading pattern, it has led to good things in the past, as long as the close for the day is (perhaps) above 1200 gold and maybe 19.60 in silver.  Not sure this will play out this way today, but we'll have to wait and see.

I call this thought process of mine "not overcomplicating things", with the objective being to buy after the knife has stopped dropping rather than buying because "prices are low."

Last observation.  When the NY market opened, gold was already down hard, yet the miners seemed to have a steady bid underneath them.  It was curious and a clear sign of strength.  Traders looked at the move down in gold as an opportunity to buy miners at a discount at the open, rather then as a reason to panic out and sell.

This would fit in with the "its just shenanigans, trying to smash gold in order to buy miners on the cheap" case.

But as I said before, don't overcomplicate.  Buying support was strong at 1180 leading to a big reversal.  That's a good sign that the low might well be in.

It all depends on the close.

BSV's picture
BSV
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 26 2009
Posts: 170
It all depends on the close.....

Yes, indeed. It all depends on the close. My working theory is that the gold shorts would like to close out 2013 trading with the metal below $1,200. We will know pretty soon.

BSV's picture
BSV
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 26 2009
Posts: 170
Gold's 2013 close

I am SO glad that I was wrong. According to the Kitco charts, the shorts did not manage to close out the year with the price of gold below $1,200. The last couple of years have been pretty discouraging. Thanks to Dave Fairtex for bringing us a thoughtful running commentary from a trader's perspective.

jbengfort's picture
jbengfort
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 22 2011
Posts: 3
The bottom of the Fat Lady...

Well, the problem is we don't know who pays the salary of the Fat Lady and for whom she sings....

jonarmst's picture
jonarmst
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 14 2011
Posts: 16
My two cents.

The bottom is not in.  I think we'll see gold test $1000/oz before this is all over.  The carnage in the mining stocks is certainly not pretty but I still haven't seen a 'total capitulation" psychological event that would signal an absolute bottom to me.  That being said, from a long-term investment perspective these prices look pretty good, but I dunno... we could be looking at another 2 years to get back up to a solid $1650 support level.

In the PM space, I just bought another small tranche of silver miners (FSM, SSRI, SLW, AG, and TAHO) and I plan on buying another small tranche of gold miners next week (RGLD, FNV, AUY, EGO, and NGD.)  After that, I'm not touching this space until I'm 100% sure the dust has settled, but some of these fire-sale prices on some of these top-shelf companies are just too good for me to pass up.  I never thought in a million years I'd have the chance to buy Yamana at < $10, but yet here we are.

As always, this is just me playing "Monday morning quarterback" and is just based on my obsessive (yet admittedly dilettantish) reading of the PM space and a whole pile of unquantifiable anecdotal evidence, but again, I just don't think the bottom is in yet and I'm not convinced that 2014 will be the year that the PM's will shine again by any stretch.

-Jonathan

gbcm's picture
gbcm
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 3 2009
Posts: 36
Eternal Optimism ?

Dave is certainly right about the gold chart - it looks very bearish and the current low volume oscillations at the lower border of a downtrend channel , merely mean that its very vulnerable to further bear raids. Where's the big buying going to come from - certainly not from the PP site followers or any other 'gold bug' site, be it King World News, "Jim Rickards, Advisor to Physical Gold Fund",  or conspiracy central - the Silver Doc site. Max Keiser has quietly walked away from promoting the "Silver Liberation Army" and is now heavily promoting another bubble in the form of Bitcoin, which I'm sure has been very rewarding for him.

Meanwhile the US$ looks strong and interest in gold outside Chindia remains at decadal lows. Having just read Hussman's last commentary for 2013, I remain skeptical of the stock market's bullishness. http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc131230.htm

If the IOUSA stock market does correct significantly, then the Japanese, Chinese and Indian markets may have an exaggerated crash , which would be very bad for gold as leveraged players will be forced to sell all liquid assets - gold went from $1000 to $700 in 2008 - the only buyers of PMS in such a scenario are those sitting in cash, and will the average person get out of cash in a depression like scenario, even if they can get their money out of their 'Cyprus like banks' ??? 

So, can gold go down another 30% ?? If $1180 gives way then the next firm support will be $1000, and one can only imagine how many 'stops' are sitting at $1050 ?? , so if that gives way will we see $850 gold ?? Gold may then rise over decade or more,  to new heights, if inflation really kicks in, but will us older guys live to see that ??

So, I'm with Jim Puplava and Erik Townsend - there's no stimulus in sight for gold and the restrictions that major central banks in the first world can place on gold may reduce it to the status of heroin - valuable, widely used but subject to harsh laws and confiscation. Silver on the other hand may merely be declared a "strategic metal" which can only be purchased by licensed users like certain end user industries.

 An interview / article on the PP site with a credible gold skeptic would be illuminating - or a 'round table' ? 

Cheers, GB

davefairtex's picture
davefairtex
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 3 2008
Posts: 5459
bottom not yet in?

You guys could certainly be right.  Downtrends in place tend to stay there until the selling gets exhausted.  I too see no change in the external macro picture as to why gold should rise.  Nothing has changed to give gold a boost in the last 3 weeks certainly.  The macro conditions remain largely the same all during gold's drop this year.

Then again, I didn't see a macro reason why gold should fall - at the start of the drop, I mean.  Two years later its clear to me why, but did I see this in 2011?  No.  It made no sense to me.

I conclude that sometimes markets just get overextended in a particular direction, and they change direction for reasons that surprise the observers, who watch the rally and think to themselves, "there's no good reason for this rally to be happening."

This sort of "thinking myself out of a good trade" is why I tend not to follow the macro stuff as much.  It confuses you.  I used to follow it religiously, but it led me astray so many times.  Now, I just watch the prices.  And if someone is buying heavy at 1180, I don't say "well now this can't be happening, the macro indicators suggest..." - no.  I just watch the prices and volume.  And price/volume right now suggests we may well have an intermediate low print at 1180.

Am I saying "this is the final, real low, forever and ever?"  It could be - or maybe not.  Maybe it will rally for a few months and then tank again.  We will have to watch and see.  But I do think it may be the low for right now.

In the future, things may explode in other areas that cause a lot of forced selling.  This will be visible in price & volume - buyers will vanish (like when gold broke 1210), and a careful trader will bail out when he sees this behavior, not waiting for the historians to explain it all 5 years from now.

The macro views work over 5-10 year periods.  Not so well over the 3 month time periods where most of our attention span is focused.

robie robinson's picture
robie robinson
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 25 2009
Posts: 1191
We look for

times and places to store funds outside the system. i realize our needs, financial, are probably much different than most @PP. the dips are entry points for us and we worry less about it once invested. we started accumulating 10+ yrs ago.

robie,husband,father,farmer,optometrist

Jim H's picture
Jim H
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 8 2009
Posts: 2387
Do fundamentals count once again?

Hmmmm... Gold and Silver up hard, in the face of a rising dollar, and weakening Oil... what's up?  Could the PM's be responding to their own fundamentals?  Their own oversold condition?   

http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/KWN_DailyWeb/Entries/2014/1/1_The...

The following gold chart which starts at the beginning of 1974 shows the MACD indicator on gold has never been this oversold in history (note - click above link to see the chart) 

It seems almost silly to talk about fundamentals after such a long period of them not mattering... but could it be that they matter once again?  Was it just a fluke that my favorite miner (Seabridge Gold, ticker SA) was up 12% today?  Could it be that the markets are waking up to the fact that Europe will be joining the (explicit) QE party soon... because really, if you do "sterilized" bond buying, but then fail to actually sterilize, isn't it just QE anyway?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-12-30/record-ecb-bond-sterilization-failure  

On December 17, the ECB failed to sterilize its cumulative €184 billion in SMP bond purchases by a whopping €32 billion, the second such failure in one month. Since then things have gotten progressively worse, as banks, already scrambling for year-end liquidity, and eager to preserve their windows well-dressed by having crisp European currency on their balance sheet instead of sterilized ECB bonds on December 31, have led to two more sterilization failures, first a week ago when 103 bidders only indicated interest for €140 billion of SMP bonds, leaving a €39 billion shortfall, culminating with the sterilization failure from this morning, when a tiny 89 banks submit bids for only €104.8 billion in ECB purchased bonds, leaving a record unsterilized gaping hole of €74 billion.

Other commentators see ECB QE coming as well;

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/10546281/Great-dollar-rally-of-2014-as-Fukuyamas-History-returns-in-tooth-and-claw.html

America is poised to meet its own consumption, its industries rebounding on cheap energy. Europe will have to generate its own stimulus this time. Don't laugh.

The European Central Bank can counter imported tightening by loosening pari passu, with a €1 trillion blast of QE that ingites the wet kindling wood. That would require a Damascene conversion in Frankfurt, or a debtors' cartel of Latin states to wrest control of policy and force through reflation. Such a cartel is taking shape. Chancellor Angela Merkel was badly mauled at the EU's December summit. Romano Prodi - former "Mr Euro" - has called for France, Italy and Spain to join forces and "bang their fists on the table". But no leader has yet emerged.

The ECB's Mario Draghi has, of course, eliminated the acute tail-risk of sovereign defaults in Italy and Spain with his bond-buying ruse, though the German constitutional court has yet to rule on the scheme. All five expert witnesses questioned its legality. But even assuming there is no bombshell from Karlsruhe, the deeper crisis keeps grinding on.

As we all know.. it's too early to tell if fundamentals matter once more in this market where the paper Comex tail wags the physical price... but that day will come, regardless of GBCM's bear conversion... or maybe because of it. 

Jim H's picture
Jim H
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 8 2009
Posts: 2387
WOWEEE! 1235 Gold

So far I am liking 2014   wink    Then again, you can't wash:rinse:repeat unless you throw the longs some red meat every once in a while.  Time will tell. 

KennethPollinger's picture
KennethPollinger
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 22 2010
Posts: 654
Hey there, Jim

So,  " my favorite miner was SA."  If you care to share, once more, what are some of your other favorites, and why?  I know from the past that you somewhat (?) follow these miners, so your input might prove beneficial to some of us. What do you think of TAHO?

 

As for comparing Panama and Costa Rica, I will shortly send info on this, as there actually was a contest

sponsored by  International Living about which was better and why.  If I remember correctly, they were about even, with each having pluses and minuses.  I guess it all depends on what you desire most.  I have not yet visited Panama but have friends who have and most of them prefer Costa Rica, but again IT DEPENDS (always does) on which life-style is of value to you??

I personally am in LOVE with Costa Rica, a modified paradise, the real thing only after passing over (to where?), says an ex-Jesuit.

Jim H's picture
Jim H
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 8 2009
Posts: 2387
Miners

Hello Kenneth.  Although some pundits like Andy Hoffman think miners are dead meat.. I think that a rising Gold price will bring the sector, and the stock prices, back to life.  

I have been watching how the miners behave for several years now and I just like the way SA acts.  SA is not presently profitable, but based on this list;

http://www.24hgold.com/english/listcompanies.aspx?fundamental=datas&data...

you are buying known reserves in the ground for $11.72 (market cap) per oz., and they are #12 on the list of total resource... so it is a nice, "Gold in the ground" play.  It is a real stock, on a real (NYSE) stock exchange.  You can pay more per on a market cap $/oz basis with the big boys.... $39 for GG, or a whopping $ 142 for NEM... I just happen to think that SA is in a sweet spot in terms of a smaller market cap, without being a penny stock.  Just my opinion.  You can analyze balance sheets all day, but like DaveF has said, in the end, the trash is the stuff that might run the most.  Today at least, my gut was a good indicator;

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nyse-stocks-posting-largest-percentage-174...

NEW YORK (AP) -- A look at the 10 biggest percentage gainers on New York Stock Exchange at the close of trading:

Seabridge Gold Inc. rose 12.1 percent to $8.18.

Molycorp Inc. rose 11.9 percent to $6.29.

Fusion-io Inc. rose 8.0 percent to $9.62.

Furmanite Corp. rose 7.3 percent to $11.39.

SunEdison Inc. rose 6.7 percent to $13.92.

First Majestic Silver Corp. rose 6.6 percent to $10.45.

Delek Logistics Partners LP rose 6.4 percent to $33.69.

           

gbcm's picture
gbcm
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 3 2009
Posts: 36
Gold technicals

Just a brief word about gold technical's - one days price action does not signal the end of gold's winter of discontent ! Having formed a ' hammer candle ' at an important support is interesting , but until gold establishes  $1320 as firm support, it hasn't even broken the down trend , let alone formed a new bullish uptrend - over to you Dave.

While we are at , whats the inflation adjusted 2008 price - could the current price already be at 2008 levels if one use ShadowStats inflation figures ? The AISC's (all in sustaining costs of gold production) certainly suggest that cost inflation has made most gold miners uneconomic at current gold prices.

Cheers, GB. 

davefairtex's picture
davefairtex
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 3 2008
Posts: 5459
gbcm - the grinch that stole the gold rally

gbcm wrote:

Just a brief word about gold technical's - one days price action does not signal the end of gold's winter of discontent ! Having formed a ' hammer candle ' at an important support is interesting , but until gold establishes  $1320 as firm support, it hasn't even broken the down trend , let alone formed a new bullish uptrend - over to you Dave.

Well sure, two days doesn't quite get us back to $1600.  But we did manage to break the most recent "daily chart" downtrend line which currently is at 1216.  And we can't just look at gold in isolation - or we might remain tearfully crying in our beer all the while an actual rally starts to happen.

Is it early?  Yes, its early.

Typically, leading indicators of a rally in gold are silver, and the miners.  At this point, both are outperforming gold - everything is saying "risk on" in the PM complex - and in the past this had often led to good things happening (eventually) for gold.  Its one of those "probability" things - the more stars & moons that line up, the higher the chances that the signal we saw on the 31st (that hard bounce off 1181 support) actually was the cycle low in gold.

Of course, timeframes are important too.  This is all viewed from the "daily chart timeframe" perspective.  If we look at the weekly timeframe, the picture is considerably less happy.

On the weekly chart, silver has the potential for a double-bottom, but we have to break above 25 for that "weekly chart double bottom" to be a valid pattern.

Gold's chart is similar, and weaker, and the target to validate the double bottom pattern is 1445.

Before that happens, we need to break the current gold weekly downtrend line, which is currently at 1280.

So gbcm has a valid point; for the longer term people (likely most of you), the weekly chart is what you probably want to look at, and you have to zoom in pretty darn close right now to see "the big gold rally" that happened over the last few days.  Its far easier to see the April gold crash, and the June gold crash.

Here, I'll do it for you:

KennethPollinger's picture
KennethPollinger
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 22 2010
Posts: 654
Interesting CHARTS and analysis

 

I think you folks might enjoy what's below.  Sorry I can't seem to condense it or get a proper link--forgive me.

SRSrocco Report via google.com 
12:43 AM (5 hours ago)
 
to me
 
 
 
 

http://srsroccoreport.com)" rel="noreferrer noopener">SRSrocco Report

 

The Historic Gold-Oil Ratio Forecasts A Much Higher Price For Gold

Posted: 02 Jan 2014 12:29 PM PST

While many analysts on Wall Street forecast gold to head lower in 2014, they fail to realize that its historic ratio to oil points to a much higher price.  It seems like everything today is based on financial wizardry rather than fundamentals of a physical economy.

The economy has moved so far away from the fundamentals that it no longer has any idea how to function without total market rigging.  The Fed and central banks believe they can continue to control the markets, however the weight of all that paper crap will overwhelm them at some point in time.

I recently wrote the article, Silver To Hit New Highs As The Quality Of Analysis Sinks To New Lows.  In the article I provided information on how the historic Oil-Silver Ratio would relate to a much higher price of silver today.

For example, the price of silver would be $92.67 today based on the average Oil-Silver ratio during 1961-1970.  For quick reference here is the table from the article:

Present Silver Value At Prior Silver-Oil Ratios (based on $111.30 Brent crude oil)

1981-2000 (3.8 ratio) = $29.30

1971-1980 (2.1 ratio) = $52.95

1961-1970 (1.2 ratio) = $92.67

Some of my readers asked me how the historic Gold-Oil ratio would impact the price of gold today.  So I decided to look at the data and put this article together.

From 1961-1970 the price of gold behaved similar to silver — basically flat compared to price of oil.  Of course this was due to the fact that the Fed & Central Banks had to manipulate the gold market through the London Gold Pool to keep the price fixed at $35 an ounce.

However, the London Gold Pool fiasco started to get into trouble by the end of the decade as the price of gold increased to $41.39 in 1969… shown in the chart below:

Gold vs Oil Price & Ratio 1961-1970

If we consider the average Gold-Oil ratio for 1960′s decade it was 20 to 1.  Which means one ounce of gold could buy 20 barrels of oil when gold was still functioning as a monetary metal.

After Nixon dropped the Dollar-Gold peg in 1971, all hell started to break loose in the gold market as the price of the yellow metal shot up to $97.32 by 1973.  You will notice that the Gold-Oil ratio increased substantially in 1973 compared to 1971.

The reason for this was due to the fact that the price of gold (1971-$40.80, 1973-$97.32) increased to a much larger degree than oil (1971-$2.24, 1973-$3.29).   This is shown in the next below:

Gold vs Oil Price & Ratio 1971-1980

As the price of oil nearly quadrupled in 1974 to $11.58 from the impact of the Arab Oil Embargo, the Gold-Oil ratio fell to 13.8.  Even though the price of gold declined a bit in 1976, it moved higher in tandem with the price of oil by the end of the decade.

After the Dollar was no longer pegged to gold, the average Gold-Oil ratio during 1971-1980 declined to 15.9 compared to 20 in the previous decade.

When I crunched the numbers for the Gold-Oil ratio for the years 1981-2000, I was quite surprised that the average was higher than the previous time period.

Gold vs Oil Price & Ratio 1981-2000

You will notice that from 1986 to 1999, the gold price trend line was above the oil price line.  Thus, we had very high Gold-Oil ratios during this time period.

The reason for the lower price of oil is that several new large fields came online.  We had the North Sea Oil Field come into production, Alaska Prudhoe Bay and a ramp up of the Gulf of Mexico.

Interestingly, gold was valued higher to oil than I assumed… even higher than the 1971-1980 time period when it reached a record of $850 an ounce.

The lower price of oil is what pushed the average Gold-Oil ratio higher to 18.6 in 1981-2000 compared to 15.9 in the prior time period.

Now… let’s look at what took place since 2000.  Here we can see a few noticeable trends.  First, during the majority of this time period, the oil price line was higher than gold.  Second, the average Gold-Oil ratio is much lower than in any of the previous time periods.

Gold vs Oil Price & Ratio 2000-2013.New

If we disregard the 2009 Gold-Oil ratio as it was a huge anomaly and focus on 2010 and 2012, the price of gold valued in oil terms was at its highest.  Furthermore, even though the price of gold hit a record in 2011, the average price of gold was 2012 was higher.

Average Gold Price

2010 = $1,225

2011 = $1,572

2012 = $1,669

2013 = $1,411

So, when the price of gold was attempting to break-out above $1,800 in September of 2012 and surpass its 15 to 1 Gold-Oil ratio, the Fed & member banks came into the markets and decided enough was enough (shown by the nice Red Arrow).

This was also true with Silver:

Silver vs Oil Price & Ratio 2000-2013.New

(NOTE:  the chart should read Oil-Silver ratio)

An interesting factor as it pertains to energy and gold can be seen in the table below.  I have been compiling data for diesel consumption in the top gold miners.  Not only is the amount of diesel consumption per ounce of gold produced increasing… so is the price of diesel.

Top 5 Gold Miners Diesel Cost 2010-2013 Est

The majority of the diesel used by these mining companies is in the extraction of the gold ore.  A small percentage of overall diesel consumption is used in construction of mine sites as well as a source of electric generation in remote locations when electricity is not available.

In 2010, the top 5 gold miners produced 24.7 million oz of gold consuming 18.7 gallons of diesel per ounce to do so.  If we go by the U.S. price of a gallon of diesel in 2010 ($2.99), these top gold miners spent $1.38 billion for this fuel cost.  Thus, it took approximately $55.91 in diesel-fuel costs per ounce of gold to extract the ore.

If we make some conservative assumptions based on past trends, the estimated cost of diesel to extract gold in 2013 will more than double to $113.68 an ounce.  This is quite interesting once we consider that the current price of gold is $1,227 compared to the average of $1,224 in 2010.

The figures in the table are used as a form of reference.  Diesel prices throughout the world are higher or lower than the average shown in the U.S.,  but, at least it gives us a basic idea of just how much fuel costs are rising in the production of gold.

The gold miners are consuming more energy than ever to produce gold today, however Wall Street believes the price of gold needs to fall below $1,000 in 2014.  So it goes… as Wall Street becomes more insane, so do the markets.

Getting back to the Gold-Oil ratios, let’s look at what the gold price would be today based on the past ratios:

Present Gold Value At Prior Gold-Oil Ratios (based on $111.70 Brent crude oil)

1981-2000 (18.6 ratio) = $2078

1971-1980 (15.9 ratio) = $1,776

1961-1970 (20.0 ratio) = $2,234

If we go by the 1961-1970 historic Gold-Oil ratio when gold was a monetary metal, than the price of gold would be worth $2,234 today.  Of course this does not consider all the other factors such as the upcoming collapse of the global fiat currency system, U.S. Treasury Market and the majority of paper assets.

With the current price of Brent crude at $110 and gold at $1227, the Gold-Oil ratio is 11.1, lower than the 12.6 average for 2013 and 11.6 average for the decade.

As the Fed & Wall Street continue to delude the public that the proper value for the price of gold is to head lower, the energy fundamentals are pointing to a much higher figure.  Financialization and Bull Excrement rule the day in the economy.

Fortunately, those few who still adhere to the fundamentals will benefit tremendously when the $100′s of trillions of paper claims falls under the weight of Newton’s Law of Gravity.

You are subscribed to email updates from SRSrocco Report 
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

 

gbcm's picture
gbcm
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 3 2009
Posts: 36
Peak Oil

Ken,

I hate to be a grinch, but peak oil invalidates the historic oil / gold ratio - after peak gold the world goes on , after peak oil really hits, the world will never be the same. Also, modern fiat currencies are not like the pre-electronic ones (see previous posts) - the historical narrative so beloved by the gold camp has many theories - the latest one that is a real hoot is that the gold takedown was organized by the Chinese to secure cheap gold - novel I admit but without a shred of evidence.

Cheers, GB.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments