Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby Heineken » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 22:07:50

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BigTex', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BigTex', 'H')ere's a thought:

Smart money is getting out of PMs because they look overbought and it's profit taking. Smart money knows that bigger equity downers are coming, which will further depress PM prices short-term because investors will be selling everything. When PM prices are sucked down with the broad decline, the smart money will come back in and buy at the depressed prices before the PMs start back up while the rest of the equity market languishes. The small investor will miss out on the PM trough because they're too scared of the fact that everything seems to be tanking at once.

I can barely make out the outlines of this pattern, but this is what it looks like to me.

This pattern should repeat when the long term bond market explodes, probably later this year.

The good news is that when the long bond market corrects, there should be the opportunity to buy 30 year bonds paying 8-10%, which should be very good investments going forward.


Oh, I agree that there will be buying on short and mid term dips. But until the banks are cleared of all the bad debt that relates to sub-prime financing, I reckon the smart guys will be rotating their funds through the revolving door. That's the stance I've taken. Find somewhere as safe as possible to hold funds and then dart in and out of risk when appropriate...and the current risk averse volatility seems to bear me out.

I'm not sure just how good Treasury ratings will be if the Fed continues to take the shit stuff in as collateral. But then again, if there's an 8% correction, why not run with risk which should be ok by then? What do you reckon?


I can probably make a better argument right now than at any time in recent history for why there is NO real safe haven. Stocks, bonds, cash and PMs all have serious downside risk.

Think about it. Stocks are scary, the bond market is potentially even scarier. PMs look overbought, and cash loses a little of its value seemingly every day, and there don't appear to be any changes in the fundamentals that would strengthen the dollar on the horizon.

The only truly safe portfolio I could think of right now (and this is based upon thoughts from many of you) would be cash holdings in a basket of currencies, a basket of PM holdings, and perhaps a few defensive stocks like utilities with a reliable dividend that ought to backstop them in a hard selloff.

Of course, the safest investment of all, as usual, is to pay down debt. That gets you a guaranteed risk free return on investment.

Also, if you have any annuity type payment you make every month like health club dues, premium cable channels, stuff like that, think about the principal that would be necessary to generate that stream of income. If you cut off the annuity payment you are making, you are effectively generating for yourself extra tax-free income. This approach sort of creates what you might call "phantom wealth", in that you are creating a stream of income by foregoing consumption rather than placing capital at risk.

Note that there is a clever bit of risk shifting in the strategy described above as well. You would need $10,000 to generate enough income to pay the $50 a month health club dues, and there would still be risk in that approach. If you cancel the health club membership, however, you are basically equating the benefit of the health club membership to the return you would get on a $10,000 investment, EXCEPT there is no risk in canceling the health club membership (other than the risks associated with not being physically fit, but you can get that elsewhere for free).

Thus, you are generating the same income, but by doing so through foregone consumption you are generating the income RISK-FREE, as opposed to having to do it by investing your $10,000, which will always involve SOME level of risk.

This is just a fancy way of describing the benefits of living frugally, but I think that there is a lot of wisdom in it.


Land. Healthy productive land is an absolute safe haven, Tex.

I'm even more bullish on land than I am on PMs, although I dearly love both.
"Actually, humans died out long ago."
---Abused, abandoned hunting dog

"Things have entered a stage where the only change that is possible is for things to get worse."
---I & my bro.
User avatar
Heineken
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7051
Joined: Tue 14 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Rural Virginia

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 22:26:32

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', 'I')'m even more bullish on land than I am on PMs, although I dearly love both.


I think you're about the only one giving any loving to the PMs today. Gold's down to $917. 8O
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby anarky321 » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 22:36:04

no such thing as an absolute safe haven
User avatar
anarky321
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu 04 Oct 2007, 03:00:00
Location: North-East USA

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby BigTex » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 22:50:30

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', 'L')and. Healthy productive land is an absolute safe haven, Tex.

I'm even more bullish on land than I am on PMs, although I dearly love both.


I assume you are talking about rural unimproved farmland, right?

If you have the skills to make the land productive, I can see your point. If you don't have the skills, I would be less comfortable owning the kind of land you describe (as an alternative to other forms of investment), presumably relying on someone else's skills to make it productive. Even if you were leasing it out, you are relying on the management skills of the tenant to make it productive enough to pay you rent.

The other concern I have with land is the local government's taxing authority. That's just an unknown that is very hard to quantify. I think that the tax burden at all levels of government is likely to increase, and productive pieces of real estate are a GREAT target for taxing authorities. Thus, the appreciation in value (or the preservation of value in an inflationary environment) of productive land could be very tempting to tap in the form of property tax increases (or maybe just the removal of agricultural exemptions).

All that said, though, productive land and gold are probably the oldest forms of durable wealth around.
:)
User avatar
BigTex
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3858
Joined: Thu 03 Aug 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Graceland
Top

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby Newfie » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 22:51:43

Pops,

"put your money into something you can use and no one else can loose"

I like the way you think. You have any more concrete suggestions? For a city dweller?
When going through hell, keep going! Churchill
Nothing is ever lost by courtesy. It is the the cheapest of pleasures, costs nothing, and conveys much. E Wiman
I know there’s no solution, so I just enjoy what’s here and I enjoy the journey G Carlin
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby threadbear » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 23:01:25

Paul Krugman weighs in on pricing of commodities.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/
User avatar
threadbear
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7577
Joined: Sat 22 Jan 2005, 04:00:00

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby Heineken » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 23:04:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', 'I')'m even more bullish on land than I am on PMs, although I dearly love both.


I think you're about the only one giving any loving to the PMs today. Gold's down to $917. 8O


Buying opp.
"Actually, humans died out long ago."
---Abused, abandoned hunting dog

"Things have entered a stage where the only change that is possible is for things to get worse."
---I & my bro.
User avatar
Heineken
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7051
Joined: Tue 14 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Rural Virginia
Top

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby anarky321 » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 23:06:06

or a signal to sell (*_*)
User avatar
anarky321
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu 04 Oct 2007, 03:00:00
Location: North-East USA

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby BigTex » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 23:06:39

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('anarky321', 'f')ractional reserve banking + credit collapse = deflation

FRB + credit collapse + increased reserve ratios due to higher risk = serious...serious deflation (credit is decreased exponentially)

commodities are going to tank for the simple fact that noone will be buying

there's alot of speculative money in commodities right now but those positions will be unwound as the financial crisis progresses ever further

gold is going to break for the simple reason that in a deflationary environment there's no need to hold gold (except if your government is at risk of defaulting of course); gold has been pushed to nosebleeding heights by misinformation and misunderstanding; a huge percentage of the population actually buys the inflation prognosis with all seriousness - they see food prices and oil prices and gold prices shoot up and think *f*ck i need to get into gold to preserve my savings"

this is not so, the runup in oil prices and food prices is not inflationary in nature, it is simply a factor of supply and demand

the runup in housing prices was inflationary because it was fueled by expansion of money - cheap cheap credit, now that the credit is gone we're going to see it collapse on itself in a spectacular deflation

as the economy goes down the tubes commodity prices simply cannot be sustained due to vastly decreased demand for goods (its not that people dont want to buy...they simply cant)

the US consumer has been on a credit binge for the last 5 years

the party is over, and the hangover is going to be a b*tch


anarky321, I have to pause for a moment here and note how ridiculous it is to visualize my current avatar having this discussion with your avatar.

***

So euros and Swiss francs are where you would want to be in your scenario?

It sounds like if you knew deflation was coming you would want to stock up on as much of the strongest currencies that were available.

How does your thesis dovetail with the idea that the extraction costs for natural resources are likely to continue to rise? If it costs $50 (in 2008 dollars) to extract a barrel of oil, presumably something north of $50 will be a long term floor in the price of oil. What does a commodity price collapse look like in this kind of environment?

What stocks would be good in a deflationary environment? I would probably want to stick with utilities here, too.

Are you thinking Japan's experience? If you think it will be different, what would cause the U.S. experience to be different?

What about the U.S. demographic shift? How will this impact your deflationary scenario? I assume the demographic shift would make the deflation that much worse, right?
:)
User avatar
BigTex
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3858
Joined: Thu 03 Aug 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Graceland
Top

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby BigTex » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 23:11:30

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('anarky321', 'o')r a signal to sell (*_*)


I would say that $940 is not even close to a sell signal.

I would think more like $750 would be a sell signal based on the chart.

Image
:)
User avatar
BigTex
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3858
Joined: Thu 03 Aug 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Graceland
Top

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby idiom » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 23:12:18

Hang on a sec, I r a newb. In a deflationary environment don't you want to stock up on dollars?

Doesn't their rarity increase their buying power?
User avatar
idiom
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Mon 23 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby BigTex » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 23:15:02

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('idiom', 'H')ang on a sec, I r a newb. In a deflationary environment don't you want to stock up on dollars?

Doesn't their rarity increase their buying power?


Yes, but if you have the choice of several kinds of dollars, I would choose the strongest currency available.

I think Japan probably has some lessons for us here.
:)
User avatar
BigTex
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3858
Joined: Thu 03 Aug 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Graceland
Top

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby Heineken » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 23:18:06

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BigTex', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', 'L')and. Healthy productive land is an absolute safe haven, Tex.

I'm even more bullish on land than I am on PMs, although I dearly love both.


I assume you are talking about rural unimproved farmland, right?

If you have the skills to make the land productive, I can see your point. If you don't have the skills, I would be less comfortable owning the kind of land you describe (as an alternative to other forms of investment), presumably relying on someone else's skills to make it productive. Even if you were leasing it out, you are relying on the management skills of the tenant to make it productive enough to pay you rent.

The other concern I have with land is the local government's taxing authority. That's just an unknown that is very hard to quantify. I think that the tax burden at all levels of government is likely to increase, and productive pieces of real estate are a GREAT target for taxing authorities. Thus, the appreciation in value (or the preservation of value in an inflationary environment) of productive land could be very tempting to tap in the form of property tax increases (or maybe just the removal of agricultural exemptions).

All that said, though, productive land and gold are probably the oldest forms of durable wealth around.


If we have a bad recession or depression it will be difficult for governments to raise property taxes. In fact, the opposite would tend to happen---and has already begun to happen.

Land has intrinsic (and even spiritual) value that is outside the economic sphere. Also, IMO an investment doesn't have to increase in dollar value to be a safe haven. To me a safe haven means you don't lose your shirt. Perhaps I'm an oddball, but I'm satisfied with that sort of investment performance, and this philosophy has served me well. (Similarly, I see PMs as a store of value, not necessarily a route to riches. As long as you're dollar-cost averaging over long periods, the fluctuations in the value of PMs are incidental.)

It doesn't have to be farmland. I personally prefer timberland (and own some).

Certainly, there are no guarantees in life. That point comes through in many of your posts, and I'd be a fool to argue with it.
"Actually, humans died out long ago."
---Abused, abandoned hunting dog

"Things have entered a stage where the only change that is possible is for things to get worse."
---I & my bro.
User avatar
Heineken
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7051
Joined: Tue 14 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Rural Virginia
Top

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby BigTex » Wed 19 Mar 2008, 23:36:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', 'I')f we have a bad recession or depression it will be difficult for governments to raise property taxes. In fact, the opposite would tend to happen---and has already begun to happen.

Land has intrinsic (and even spiritual) value that is outside the economic sphere. Also, IMO an investment doesn't have to increase in dollar value to be a safe haven. To me a safe haven means you don't lose your shirt. Perhaps I'm an oddball, but I'm satisfied with that sort of investment performance, and this philosophy has served me well. (Similarly, I see PMs as a store of value, not necessarily a route to riches. As long as you're dollar-cost averaging over long periods, the fluctuations in the value of PMs are incidental.)

It doesn't have to be farmland. I personally prefer timberland (and own some).

Certainly, there are no guarantees in life. That point comes through in many of your posts, and I'd be a fool to argue with it.


I agree with you 100%. The ultimate goal should always be to preserve value--financial, spiritual and otherwise, rather than chasing the latest scheme to make a little more money than the next guy. With this orientation you can speculate a little, but you know it's speculation, as opposed to something you can rely on to support you and your family over time.

Probably the best thing a landowner can do to protect their property is to just keep up with what is going on with the local government.

On the topic of preserving value, choosing investments and speculation, I would love to know what the average 401(k) account performance was for all employees making $50,000 or less. Something tells me that this group has been treating their retirement money as speculation money--chasing returns, buying high selling low. This may be true of all 401(k) plan participants, but I think the lower paid employees are especially at risk for making poor investment decisions as a group (rich get richer, poor get poorer kind of thing).
:)
User avatar
BigTex
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3858
Joined: Thu 03 Aug 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Graceland
Top

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby Heineken » Thu 20 Mar 2008, 00:14:00

An interesting point about timberland I forgot to mention: It may be possible relatively soon for timber owners to sell carbon credits to polluters, via an exchange. You'd get paid some amount per acre per year not to cut your timber.

Landowners may also ultimately be paid for other "services" their land provides, such as filtration of water.

There was much talk of this at a recent forestry convention I attended.

From an investment standpoint I like the notion, not that I think it will make much difference environmentally.
"Actually, humans died out long ago."
---Abused, abandoned hunting dog

"Things have entered a stage where the only change that is possible is for things to get worse."
---I & my bro.
User avatar
Heineken
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7051
Joined: Tue 14 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Rural Virginia

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby Iaato » Thu 20 Mar 2008, 00:38:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'P')aul Krugman weighs in on pricing of commodities.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/


TB, Krugman is trying to explain the situation of commodities with a graph with an x and a y axis. Only 2 variables. I don't think that will do it. Anyone trying to explain a complex global system with two axes is hopelessly lost.
“Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value ---- zero.” --Voltaire
User avatar
Iaato
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1008
Joined: Mon 12 Mar 2007, 03:00:00
Location: As close as I can get to the beginning of the pipe.
Top

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby Ming » Thu 20 Mar 2008, 07:07:19

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('DantesPeak', 'I')t's funny that the drop in oil is characterized as huge drop when it is at the highest price in history, except for a few recent weeks.

Those hoping that 'speculators' leave the oil markets may get what they wish for, but those speculators may not be on the side of the market they think are.

If anyone has proof that speculators are on one side of the market or another, let's see it. We've discussed PO here for years with facts, figures, and data. Why should those talking about a speculative bubble get a free ride without presenting any rational evidence to support their position?

I suspect a lot of the drop these last two days is just a normal correction in a very powerful bull market.

Damn, Dantes, I already answered that!
Do you need prof?
Check this: COT
See the entry about the Non-commercial net position on crude oil?
That means 150k+ net long contracts, equivalent to 150M+ barrels on the hands of purely financial large investors.
Check the evolution (the weekly change) of those net long positions and its correlation with the weekly change of the crude oil price.
Use this site to get historical COT values.

After that, if you still feel like it, get back to insisting that financial speculation is not the main driver for short-term price movements of the crude oil prices.
(But dont insist on that before checking the proof that has already been presented to you!)
User avatar
Ming
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 287
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby mkwin » Thu 20 Mar 2008, 07:15:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', 'G')old and silver are also down massively.

And the dollar is stronger.

Makes no sense on the back of a .75-point interest-rate cut, does it?



I think the main reason is symbolic. The FED disappointed the markets by only cutting by 75 basis points and the markets, including the dollar, gold, and oil, were pricing in a 100 basis point cut as a minimum. This decision by the FED sent a signal that the FED is not going to be dictated to by the markets.

The other reason is both Goldman Sachs and Lehman Brothers beat analysts expectations in their profit performance. Plus the FED will now lend to banks directly in exchange for MBS, which will mean another bank will not become illiquid again. So some of the problems with banks, like what happened to Bear Streans, have become less probable of occurring.

The last obvious point is people have just made so much money from the run up in gold and oil prices that they want to take profits. The downside risk both in oil and gold now far out weigh the upside.
User avatar
mkwin
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Fri 01 Jun 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby mkwin » Thu 20 Mar 2008, 08:04:30

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')fter that, if you still feel like it, get back to insisting that financial speculation is not the main driver for short-term price movements of the crude oil prices.
(But dont insist on that before checking the proof that has already been presented to you!)


I'll take that bet! :)

Although I am sure there are small price swings because of speculators, their impact on the market overall is still relatively small. Traders acting on behalf of commercial entities will react to economic news as well. This may be the point you are making as well but I just wanted to be clear the bull market in oil is not caused by speculators.

The table you posted fails to show the overall positions of both Commercial (oil companies and refiners) and Non-commercial (Speculators). Commercial market particpants clearly dominate the market. Speculators also have lots of short positions. The percentage of the net postive long position for speculators to total contracts has only increased by 2% since the price of oil has gone up $40. Are we to believe the extra demand for 2% worth of long positions has caused the oil price to almost double. I don't think so.

Commitments May 1st 2007 : Oil Price approx $64

Non-Commercial Long = 195,239
Non-Commercial Short = 129,116
Net Non-COM Position = 66,123
% of Speculators long = 60%

Commercial Long = 830,557
Commercial Short = 890,444
Net COM position = -59,887

% of Net NON-COM position to open Interest = 4.9%
% of Commercial Short Positions to total positions = 66.36%

Commitments March 4th 2008 : Oil Price approx $102.5

Non-Commercial Long = 258,292
Non-Commercial Short = 159,390
Net Non-COM Position = 99,539
% of Speculators Long = 61.8%

Commercial Long = 879,674
Commercial Short = 982,509
Net COM position = -102,835

% of Net NON-COM position to open Interest = 6.8%
% of Commecial Short Positions to Total Contracts = 67.7%

Yes the level of speculation has increased both on the long and short side, but so has the volume of commercial users.

JD and co will have us believe that speculation is the key to the bull markets in commodities and oil but the decline in the value of the dollar and the industrialisation of Asia are far bigger drivers. Even in the oil market, speculators are out numbered 4 to 1 and even then, only 60% are long.
User avatar
mkwin
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Fri 01 Jun 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: It sure did get quiet in here all of a sudden

Unread postby DantesPeak » Thu 20 Mar 2008, 08:19:09

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ming', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('DantesPeak', 'I')t's funny that the drop in oil is characterized as huge drop when it is at the highest price in history, except for a few recent weeks.

Those hoping that 'speculators' leave the oil markets may get what they wish for, but those speculators may not be on the side of the market they think are.

If anyone has proof that speculators are on one side of the market or another, let's see it. We've discussed PO here for years with facts, figures, and data. Why should those talking about a speculative bubble get a free ride without presenting any rational evidence to support their position?

I suspect a lot of the drop these last two days is just a normal correction in a very powerful bull market.

Damn, Dantes, I already answered that!
Do you need prof?
Check this: COT
See the entry about the Non-commercial net position on crude oil?
That means 150k+ net long contracts, equivalent to 150M+ barrels on the hands of purely financial large investors.
Check the evolution (the weekly change) of those net long positions and its correlation with the weekly change of the crude oil price.
Use this site to get historical COT values.

After that, if you still feel like it, get back to insisting that financial speculation is not the main driver for short-term price movements of the crude oil prices.
(But dont insist on that before checking the proof that has already been presented to you!)


In addition to what mkwin said, this doesn't explain if there was so much speculation why physical inventories of oil haven't changed much at all in the last few years.

So no, I am not convinced that speculators are keeping much if any oil off the physical market.

Even if I did agree with you, 150 million barrels of speculation is a drop in the bucket compared to demand of 85 million barrels per day.
User avatar
DantesPeak
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6277
Joined: Sat 23 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: New Jersey
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest