2013: A Silver Market In Review
That pie chart above is telling me that the other industrial metal, Palladium is a shoe in at $800 an oz.
It's 10 year trendline is not typical.
and it is showing some signs of life in the 1 year graph.
I don't know anything about this technical stuff beyond making up ying yang patterns and such, but I do see a tea party just briefly looking at the 10 year for palladium!
Certainly palladium is attractive based on where it is sourced from and you will probably make a lot of money on the speculation of it, but I would be concerned about holding palladium for the long-term. Gold and silver a very logical and secure investment in the long-term, whereas palladium seems more like speculation.
So for folks you can afford speculation (certainly not me), I think you are lucky because I can see how palladium is going to make folks a lot of money.
Nobody should really care here, but I deleted this wonderful exchange with a fellow youtuber out of anger and I have nobody to share this with that would understand the references so I wanted to post it here. I wish I didn't delete it though because he was still able to continue the discussion and his last post was hilarious. I thought I could recover the discussion by unblocking him, but the discussion was apparently deleted.I feel so bad for some of these guys who post videos frequently if they get guys like this visiting their work. People can suck.
Skirts365: If silver isn't available at a "cheap" (?) price, growth in the economy is stopped? I shut the video off at that point.
B. White: Here is the example I referenced in the video. Rising silver prices increased the production costs of solar cells in 2011. Rising cell production costs in turn made it harder to bring cells into the market at a cheap price. Rising prices are BAD for the economy because demand is reduced. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/31/silver-solar-idUSL4N09D2BB20121231
Another example is when you go to the gas station to fill your car tank. If you were spending $80 dollars at the pump instead of the $30-40 today you would most likely be driving less. Silver is an industrial commodity, and my comment only demonstrated one of the most core understandings of economics as shown in the diagram. http://i.investopedia.com/inv/tutorials/site/economics/economics8.gif
Thanks for watching.
skirts365:You are quite unenlightened as to the equilibrium price of silver. You sound like a Silver Users Association plant. I don't see any qualifications on your part to be expounding on silver. Silver mining companies aren't a pack of African slaves for plantation owners to loot, exploit, and send into bankruptcy. This is a know nothing, do nothing, be nothing video made by a total zero operator. Investopedia? So what. You can cite any number of establishment economics sources.
B. White: Do you know how rude and unproductive your comments are? That chart I posted is something everybody who has ever taken a course in economics is required to learn. It's the law of demand. When prices go up, demand declines. When prices go down, demand increases. It's a simple concept. There is a lot of incentive to keep industrial commodity prices from going bananas in this economy. It's not rocket science.
Now explain to me like an intelligent person as to what was so offensive about my video that you had to come on here and insult me for presenting you with hours of my research that everybody else seemed to have appreciated. This video explains the current price actions far better than half the crap floating around the internet. It's not a masterpiece, but this is not bad information either. So please, act like a grown-up or go bother somebody else with you mastery of the equilibrium of silver prices or whatever.
skirts365: You have no background as to how silver has been price managed especially since the FDR years. It shows, and is what I find annoying. Silver reserves have been destroyed by price managers and this yammering about prices and demand—in this instance—sure sounds like scripting for the Silver Users Association. Their interests have been wildly profitable while miners have tiny margins to huge losses. Anyone can make a video that commits neglected aspect fallacies and parrots establishment doctrine.
B. White: Great. You have no background in how the economy works or how natural resource management works and it shows. All I did here was present relatively unbiased data on a vital industrial metal for the modern economy. I don't even think you even understand where this data was gathered from or who gathered it which is actually the real joke here. If you wanted a video on market manipulation by the Rockefellers or whomever you think controls silver prices, then I'm sorry. This was not that video. This video is based on data, and interpreting and presenting that data in an understandable format. It's like a scientific research paper if you are familiar with those (probably not). Despite your wildly outrageous (and completely wrong) fantasy about how this silver market works, silver miners were pulling incredible profits in 2011. Even though they were apparently were being "squashed" by higher powers as you believe. In fact, they usually are turning profits and making money. THAT'S WHY THEY ARE IN BUSINESS! Go read a financial report and while you are at it, go learn some respect
skirts365: I read financial reports often. As for respect, those who deserve it–get it. You earn a pail of goat shit—nothing more. If I hear back from you, I'm blocking you Jeffrey Christian SOB clone. For the benefit of other readers—spring 2011 was an anomaly, and the price of silver was managed back down. Even Eric Sprott acknowledges silver is price managed. Who the hell is this B. White compared to Eric Sprott? Huh?? There is still no free market in silver pricing. For 2013, a survey of profits by Silver Users Association companies shows they earned $12.66 billion, while corresponding silver miners LOST $783.6 million. This dishonest, uneducated, or near illiterate B. White is saying silver mining is an OK biz for profits. Totally false. The figures for 2013 are NOT anomalies, and can be found at Brother John F site, April 16, 2014, "Silver Bully Boys and Their Kept Slaves." At TF Metals Report, March 16, 2013, a post by Astro Turd references a presentation "Users Demand 71 Cent Silver." Looking that up we find the original New York Times quotation, from April 20, 1946–"Silver users demand that the price of silver be fixed at 71 cents an ounce for all time," VERIFIED in a check of the New York Times online. This B. White comes across as an establishment source covering up for the price suppressors. How many hits on Google search do you find for "Ted Butler silver manipulation" versus "B. White says all is well in the silver market?" B. White is a zero operator acting like he's hot research shit. He should be entirely disregarded and as I said, if he spews any more banker vomit my way, it's Block User time, or he can hit that button, either way—there's no gain in debating with uninformed boors or intentional liars. I see the You Tube censor system is on. You can still read the crossed lines.
B. White: Thank you for your insight. I had actually blocked you from this channel, but I made the effort to unblock you just so folks can read the arguments from the guy that down voted this video. Again, thank you for sharing your intellectual capacity with me and please don't reply.
See my flame wars with DaveFairtex from 2012-2013. It's hard to deal with stuff that you know not to be true, i.e. non-manipulationists. Whatever. It's the internet. Oddly enough, these days when I see this kind of trolling it only serves to make me feel more sure of what I know. Who in their right mind would put energy into talking down PM's on the internet for their own gratification? To what end? Only folks or entities that have some stake in maintenance of the status quo would go to such lengths in my opinion.
Your troll said this;
When prices go up, demand declines. When prices go down, demand increases. It's a simple concept.'
And this is not true when when it comes to monetary metals, and some other investment vehicles. Gold and Silver are Giffen goods,
In economics and consumer theory, a Giffen good is a product that people consume more of as the price rises—violating the law of demand. Normally, as the price of goods rises, the substitution effect makes consumers purchase less of it, and more of substitute goods. In the Giffen goods situation, the income effect dominates, leading people to buy more of the goods, even as its price rises.
So your troll does need some schooling.
It was in reference to the price increase in 2011 where silver prices made it harder to bring solar cells to the market at a cheap price.
Silver is primarily an industrial metal, and my next research project is to explore that price/demand relationship a bit more
To be clear, I DO believe in price manipulation and suppression. I just think it's mostly related to economic stimulus, rather than some of the other reason I have heard suggested. Price suppression for economic growth makes sense to me. They do it with oil… why not silver.
That's the conclusion I have come to so far I guess.
I don't believe this idea has any connection to the price of Silver. Silver is tiny.. it's not even on the radar screen from an economic growth perspective, or even a solar panel cost perspective. If the price rises, the panel makers just find ways to use less. Silver is manipulated because it is a monetary metal… if Western investors get interested in Silver.. things will get out of control quite quickly as there is much less Silver (on a stock-to-flow basis) around than Gold.
Here are my thoughts, 50% of the market is giffen as you stated, but 50% is susceptible to price increases because it is used in industry.
In 2011, when the price of silver went up we only saw a decline of a couple percentage points in industrial demand. This suggest that either the price doesn't matter, or silver is an important, hard to replace member of industry.
Solar panels are one example, and they did cut silver content in panels by 1/3 as you suggested.
This statement in this Reuters article really stood out to me though,
"It suddenly went from not counting for anything to 20 percent of cost for cell makers," said Charles Yonts, an analyst at Credit Lyonnais Securities Asia, a Hong Kong-based brokerage.
20% of production costs at an average price of $35 an ounce for the year!? I think there is about an ounce or so of silver in each cell, so it’s not a crazy amount of silver.
Now was this an isolated event in industry? No way. I need more data to prove that, but I can imagine there is a lot interest out there from large electronic component producers to keep prices affordable.
This Isn't an outrageous idea…
When we see a chart that states Silver is something like 20% of solar panel costs… this is actually speaking to the cost of the formulated Silver paste that is used. While Silver itself is a component of the cost of this paste… I would suggest that the bulk of the cost is in the manufacture and formulation, packaging, quality control testing, and profit margin for the manufacturer.
In very small amounts, Silver only accounts for 1/4 of the cost of the as-purchased paste;
At larger scale my guess is that Silver cost would approach 1/2 the cost of the paste.
hmm you my be right there Jim. I will have to look into tomorrow night.
I think the biggest thing for me is that all the industrial metals are trending in similar ways. The economy is crap and the Fed and friends want to promote growth. A GREAT way to do that would to make the commodities cheaper that are used to make the goods that create revenue. Silver would be on that list.
It's a complicated dynamic though as silver has been knocked down harder than any other metal, and gold can't be left out of it's relationship.
Anyways, time for bed though.