controverse sur les mesures de la CFTC

Butler y est plutôt favorable

http://news.silverseek.com/TedButler/1250788825.php

notamment sur la suppression des exemptions limites à deutsh bank commodity service

par ailleurs, Butler pense que JPM ayant hedgé sa short position en dérivés, ne patira nullement d'une hausse du silver

http://www.gata.org/node/7705

réponse détaillée de Douglas, tout à fait interessante, notamment en ce qui concerne deutsh bank commodity service qui d'apres lui, est un hedge fund de la banque, long sur les mat 1eres ..( et non pas,DB bank elle même, short sur gold )
remarque d'autant plus interessante que goldman sachs commodity index n'a pour sa part , été aucunement privé de son exemption aux régles de limitation de position..eh oui ... c'est comme ça !
mais c'est pur hasard, bien entendu...
http://www.gata.org/node/7708

snip

I don't draw the same conclusion. Deutsche Bank is a hedge fund that is long commodities. The withdrawal of its exemption fits into my view of the new CFTC chairman, Gary Gensler -- that, like his predecessors, he wants commodity prices to be low, as that is thought to be good for the United States. So the CFTC continues to attack investors in commodities. The CFTC is convinced that long-side speculators caused the boom in commodity prices in 2008 and does not see the real problem, which is the unlimited creation of dollars, whose depreciation has to be hedged.
The suppression of prices by allowing short-side speculators unfettered freedom exacerbates the problem, choking off investment in commodity production.
I wonder if this singling out of the Deutsche Bank hedge fund could be related to speculation that Germany has asked to have its national gold reserve returned from storage in the United States. Now that Switzerland won't sell any more gold, its leading bank, UBS, is threatened with criminal action by the U.S. government for helping U.S. citizens evade taxes. Are these really just innocent coincidences?

bref, et je serais plutôt d'accord avec Douglas... Gensler tire à boulet rouge sur les longs, comme d'habitude...les shorts ne seront pas inquiétés.

la spéculation soit disant manipulatoire a bon dos ...et" nos amis" jpm, gs et consorts peuvent dormir tranquilles... c'est pas de ce coté là que le vent du boulet va venir ...

voila qui confirme l'anayse de Douglas ..

http://www.gata.org/node/7724

limitations de positions sur les futures us ..

excellent argumentaire de Butler qui propose de réduire de 6000 à 1500 contrats les limitations de position sur silver

selon le "modéle" proposé par la cftc pour les limitations futures énergie

au passage vous noterez que cette limite de 6000 contrats est identique pour silver et gold.. alors que les volumes quotidien ( et l'open interest ) gold sont 4 fois plus élévés que ceux de silver

http://news.silverseek.com/SilverSeek/1255368577.php

le tout dernier article de Butler sur ce sujet : limitations de positions

on arrive au moment où les décisions vont etre prises ..fin nov au plus tard


Butler fait le pari que Gensler prendra les mesures adéquates pour contrer la short position ( concentrée et abusive ) silver d'un JPM...

perso, j'en mettrais pas ma main au feu ..


http://news.silverseek.com/SilverSeek/1257430207.php

la directive est attendue pour début décembre et concernerait nrj et métaux

http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSTRE5A95K220091110

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is moving toward adopting a proposal in early December to rein in excessive speculation in energy markets by setting hard limits on positions investor entities can hold in a contract.
Bart Chilton, one of five CFTC commissioners, said until a draft is completed it will be difficult to determine where the commission stands as an entity, but there is a broad understanding "that there are issues that need to be addressed and that doing nothing is not an option."
"I think there will be" position limits, Chilton told Reuters in an interview.
"I don't want to prejudge where we'll be specifically but if I had to guess where we'll come out ultimately I believe that there will be hard position limits ... for energy commodities and for other physical commodities" such as metals, he said.
(Reporting by Christopher Doering; Editing by David Gregorio)

Pas de frénésie à ce stade, mais c'est la première fois qu'on a une nouvelle en ce sens et ça s'arrose...

Même si la limite est élevée, elle sera forcément inférieure à la position short Silver en cours...Gold aussi même si c'est moins caricaturalement délirant. ça c'est fantastiquement haussier...

En revanche, à moins d'assister à un renversement des positions du COT, ça va faire grimper le CPI et ça, ça va piquer le cul des taux d'intérêts...( enfin, j'entends pas là ceux des taux longs, savate de soie).
Vous avez déjà vu les indices indus, faire des étincelles avec des taux longs UP? Jamais durablement en tout cas...

BX4 ???

j'avoue ne pas partager l'enthousiasme de Butler sur ce projet de limitation des positions nrj ..

amah, ça ne va, une fois de + concerner que les longs .. qui ne bénificieront pas d'exemption, pour un soit disant hedging ..

voir ce commentaire midas sur la limitation des positions pour les pdts agricoles, l'année dernière


Position Limits
Dear Bill,
I am glad you had a good time in CO despite the frigid weather!

I read with interest the GATA link to Ted Butler's article on proposed position limits in energy contracts. While I admire Butler's tenacity, I am not as optimistic as he is about the impact on silver. Even if Commissioner Bart Chilton wants position limits in the metals, his boss Gensler is an alum of Hannibal Lecter (Goldman Sachs). No regulations will be passed that harm Goldman or impede the government sanctioned capping of gold and silver prices while Gensler is in charge.

For an example of what could happen, look at the CFTC's reaction in the agriculture markets last year. Gensler decided to revoke "no-action letters" for corn and wheat on August 19, 2009. These letters allowed ETFs to buy and hold enough futures to satisfy investor demand, even if this exceeded normal position limits, and to grow the size of the funds as necessary. The new limits become effective on October 31, but only for certain players like DBA.

What happened with Goldman's iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust? Nothing that I can find. According to its latest 10-Q filed on November 6, it was allowed to keep its exemptions of up to 40,000 contracts until the end of 2009, unlike DBA. (You can read it here: http://www.faqs.org/sec-filings/091106/iShares-SandP-GSCI-Commodity-Indexed-Trust_10-Q/). This is 4 times the normal limits. These exemptions must have been renewed for 2010, because there are no announcements that this fund had to rebalance and sell thousands of corn and wheat contracts. It just shows there are one set of rules for the "little people," and another for Goldman.

All the best,

Jennifer Barry
www.globalassetstrategist.com

Oui, tu as raison de tempérer son optimisme qui, pour le coup, confine à une certaine candeur, les exemples antérieurs de tentatives d'alerter les autorités sur le problème ayant démontré qu'il ne s'agit en aucun cas d'ignorance de leur part, mais bien de complicité; pour autant, Butler insiste bien sur le fait qu'il ne sera pas question de Silver (à aucun moment dit-il même), c'est plus général que ça et si, en effet, on est à 4 X les limites sur certaines denrées agricoles...sur le Silver c'est infiniment plus caricatural encore et Butler insiste bien, je trouve sur la dimension générale et compte sur ses effets ( ensuite) sur le Silver:

Citation :

let me set the stage for why this
meeting is so important and then speculate a bit for what this may mean
for commodity regulation in general and for silver in particular. Make
no mistake, even if the word “silver” is never uttered in this meeting,
I am certain that the eventual impact it will have on silver will be
nothing short of profound. Only the timing is in question.

et voilà ou il entend en venir et il fait référence au passé et dit qu'il ne se berce pas d'illusions, mais que si quelque chose en sort SAUF pour les métaux, pour lesquels rien n'est fait, ça va devenir franchement dur à justifier...

Citation :

I have raised and re-raised this issue with the CFTC and the exchanges continuously, always to be rebuffed. Yet I knew it went to the heart of commodity regulation, concentration and manipulation. I knew then and I know now that the manipulation in silver would end the moment legitimate position limits in silver, as well as the elimination of phony exemptions to those limits, were enacted.

I don’t delude myself into thinking that the current CFTC initiative and possible resolution of the issue of energy position limits had anything to do with me or with silver. But I do know that I have repeatedly demonstrated that COMEX silver stands out as the only one where current position limits are out of line with all other commodities and need to be drastically reduced. I have shown where the phony exemptions to the current limits in COMEX silver are absurd, with one US bank holding 40% of the market short.


Even though the historic meeting this week is about energy position limits, no meaningful reform on position limits can occur without addressing COMEX silver at some point. It’s just a matter of time before legitimate position limits are enacted in silver, as well as the elimination of phony exemptions to those limits. If the hearing this week does manage to propose specific energy limits and avoids addressing silver, then we will have hard position limits on energies and agricultural, but not on metals. At that point, I’d like to hear the explanation for why no metal position limits. Presumably, if the Commission does propose specific energy limits, as appears likely, they will also explain the formula they used to arrive at those limits. Whatever that formula may be, when applied to silver, it will show the COMEX silver position limit needs to be drastically reduced.

Bref, je ne suis pas plus enthousiaste que ça sur l'issue du meeting, mais, d'une part, je ne sous estime pas la lucidité de ted et, d'autre part, je pense, comme lui qu'à terme, ça ne peut que renforcer notre point de vue en plaçant les protagonistes sous les projecteurs avec la culotte sur les chevilles...

c'est pire que ça, amah Sandro ..
on va ( et pour nrj, pour le moment, puisqu'il n'est pas question d'autrechose ) limiter les longs .. et laisser tranquille les banks .. style gs et co .. censées hedger leurs positions ..

hoho, la CFTC prévoie un meeting sur limitations positions gold et silver, pour mars !

www.lemetropolecafe.com

13:11 14Jan10 RTRS-CFTC CHAIRMAN SAYS PLANNED MARCH AGENCY MEETING ON METALS POSITION LIMITS WILL FOCUS ON GOLD, SILVER
13:28 14Jan10 RTRS-U.S. CFTC to consider gold, silver position limits

WASHINGTON, Jan 14 (Reuters) - The chairman of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission said on Thursday that the agency's planned meeting in early March to discuss possible position limits on metal futures and options contracts will focus on gold and silver contracts. (Reporting by Tom Doggett)
Frank Tang
Journalist
Reuters
"GET AFTER THEIR ASS," said a Texas football coach years ago. And that is exactly what the GATA camp and Ted Butler and his forces have done for a very long time.
This is why GATA went to see the CFTC last December. This is why I have kept telling Café members that Bart Chilton is a good man, and quietly working hard to get our issues out there as best he can.
This is as good as can be expected at this point in time. You can be sure that the GATA camp will be well prepared for the coming hearings. More on that later.
This CFTC news is HUGE (comparable to the Indian central bank buying of 200 tonnes of gold from the IMF), even though few outside the GATA camp AND THE GOLD CARTEL, will appreciate the ramifications of what is to come. From yesterday’s MIDAS:
Hi Dave
What do you think is going on in silver? It is trading like a totally different market so far this year?
Do you think it could have anything to do with the CFTC?
B
…Yes, it’s very difficult for me to believe the CFTC will do anything about JP Morgan. But perhaps the issue will surface in some way. Dracula can’t stand the light of day and neither can JP Morgan’s short silver position. If so, it could set off bells and whistles, which the CFTC might have to respond to.

Tu vois bichette...parfois, j'ai du nez.

J'ai une totale confiance dans l'expertise de Butler et ce n'est pas trop le genre à s'enthousiasmer sur une vague impression.

En tout cas, ça allume les spots et comme le disait à juste titre bill, Dracula a horreur de ça...et comme ce qui fait chier cabalas va dans le bon sens, ça m'arrange.

Chier par contre que la news va tomber pile poil quand je serais sans ordi sur les pentes neigeuses...

oui, Dracula n'aime pas ça .. ça c'est sur ..



bon, on verra bien .. mars c'est pas si loin ..

voila précisément ce qui me rend pas optimiste .. voir § surligné en rouge

www.lemetropolecafe.com

CFTC Unveils Proposal To Rein In Energy Speculators
WASHINGTON—The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission unveiled a proposal Thursday to rein in energy-futures speculators by limiting the number of contracts they can hold across all exchanges.
The proposal, which aims to prevent any one trader from holding enough positions to affect energy prices, comes in response to criticism the CFTC faced in 2008 when oil prices hit record highs. Critics blamed speculators for the spike and accused the CFTC of lax oversight. Those critics put most of the blame on off-exchange trading by index investors, such as pension and endowment funds, for driving the volatility.
The CFTC's proposal seeks to impose trading limits on physically and financially settled oil, natural gas, heating oil and gasoline futures and options contracts. Those commodities are traded on CME Group's New York Mercantile Exchange and Atlanta-based IntercontinentalExchange's trading platform.
The proposal also outlines a stricter process for determining when banks that deal in commodity swaps should qualify to receive exemptions from speculative limits. Despite past CFTC reports that couldn't find a link between speculation and the 2008 oil-price spike, the agency plans to forge ahead with limits, saying they are a protective measure.
The limits in the CFTC's proposal are expected to be so high that they will only impact a handful of futures traders out of hundreds. Over the past two years, only 23 traders would have reached the limits proposed Thursday and only five or six of them would have been forced to reduce their positions.
Commissioners will likely vote to propose the rules Thursday at a public meeting, but it would take months of review and a second vote to implement it.
The proposal uses virtually the same method the CFTC currently follows when setting speculative trading limits in agricultural markets such as wheat.
But unlike agricultural markets where traders are subject to individual limits on each exchange, some of the proposed new limits for energy traders would be capped based on the combined number of contracts held on both CME and ICE.
Current limits for energy products are set by exchanges, which only impose speculative limits during the last three days of trading before a contract expires. All other times, traders are subject to nonbinding thresholds that are low compared to Thursday's proposed limits.
The CFTC is proposing to subject the four energy commodities to limits for all-months combined, limits in each single month and limits during the month a contract expires, known as a "spot" month.
CFTC Commissioner Bart Chilton, a Democrat, said he recognizes that some may view the limits as too generous.
"The levels set for the limits, in my opinion, actually err on the high side," he said in prepared remarks at Thursday's meeting. "However, should the limits prove inadequate, the agency can, and I hope will, recalibrate to ratchet them down."
The CFTC's proposal also significantly changes how the agency treats swap dealers, such as Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley, and companies in the commodity business such as oil producers that use futures to hedge risk.
Swap dealers act as intermediaries between the futures market and over-the-counter investors like index funds. Index funds, whose rapid growth some blame for high energy prices, generally track a basket of commodities to diversify their portfolios but rely on swap dealers to actually purchase the futures contracts on their behalf.
Today, swap dealers can seek speculative-limit exemptions in energy commodities from exchanges on the grounds that they are hedging the risks from their over-the-counter business.
Critics, however, have called this practice into question.
Under the CFTC's proposal, swap dealers would apply to the agency for exemptions and would face strict reporting and record-keeping requirements. Those who receive exemptions would have their company names publicized. Limits for companies granted exemptions would be capped at two times the federal limit.
Companies using the markets to hedge against risks would continue to be fully exempt from limits. A trader holding hedging positions greater than the speculative limit, however, wouldn't be able to simultaneously hold a speculative position.
The CFTC's proposal doesn't cap positions held in the over-the-counter market because the agency doesn't have the authority, but Congress is looking to expand the agency's power.
-END-



Energy Market Position Limits
Bill,
The CFTC has proposed position limits for energy. It is essentially aimed at trying to limit commodity price appreciation. The commercials can carry on doing what they have always done…short the heck out of any commodity with impunity. Here is the clause that achieves that:
"Entities using the futures markets to hedge commercial risks, or bona fide hedgers, would still be exempt from position limits under this proposal"
You have to laugh. "Hedging commercial risks"??!! That covers just about any reason to go short.
In the CNN article below Gensler says they will be looking at the metals market in March. It is interesting that they are apparently proposing a solution for the metals markets yet after 16 months of investigation they haven’t officially declared what the problem is they are solving! I expect that the CFTC will be responsible for blowing up the metals market (and all commodities) because they are trying to "ration" supply with these position limits. What does rationing tell you about something? It’s in short supply (excuse the pun!). If investors are rationed in precious metal futures they will go to the physical market, which is the last thing the Cartel wants but the CFTC will inadvertently create that scenario. If they think that rationing gold futures will drive investors into treasuries they had better think again.
QUOTE
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/201001141425DOWJONESDJONLINE000591_FORTUNE5.htm
Gensler: CFTC Will Examine Trading Limits On Metals In March
January 14, 2010: 02:25 PM ET
WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- Speculative energy traders are not the only ones who may face new trading limits by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
On Thursday as the CFTC unveiled the proposed new limits for energy products, its chairman, Gary Gensler, said the agency intends to move on to looking at metals next.
"The commission is interested in hearing from the public as to issues related to the trading of futures and options in the precious metals markets, such as silver and gold, and to consider the appropriateness of position limits in those markets," Gensler said at an open meeting. "I hope to have a public meeting on this separate topic in the beginning of March."
The CFTC's energy proposal unveiled Thursday aims to limit the number of contracts that energy speculators who bet on prices can hold. The proposal would set trading caps across all exchanges that list four major energy products: crude oil, natural gas, heating oil and gasoline. It comes in response to criticism that the agency did not do enough when oil hit an all-time high in the summer of 2008.
The proposal does not propose limits for metals, but it seeks comments from the public on potentially imposing similar cumulative-type limits in other commodities including metals and agricultural products like coffee and sugar. CFTC Commissioner Bart Chilton said he supports position limits for metals, and he was disappointed the CFTC is not able to propose limits for them at the same time.
END
Cheers
Adrian

Personne ne parle des "indulgences" administratives et autres "exceptions" ? Je partage bien les doutes de Marie.

En fait tout est plus ou moins "interdit" et sous "contrôle" et soumis à autorisation "administrative" quel que soit le domaine (économie, finance, immobilier, médecine , éducation, justice, presse etc) En France bien de chez nous , les DEROGATIONS (retour au "fait du prince" barbare) pullulent...

Une preuve? durant le crash 2008 et l'interdiction de VAD , naked short , ki k'avait une dérogation ? en plein dans le 1000 (ou dans not cul c'est au choix), JPM, GS pardi les usuals suspects.

Tout ça me fait penser aux partis politiques françouzes à une époque. Pluie de nouvelles lois et interdictions pour leur financement (avec amnistie à la clé tellement c'était plus possible avec une corruption trop visible. Le résultat ? d'autres filières étaient déjà en place.

La seule garantie est la TRANSPARENCE et ça , on en est loin ... tout le reste n'est que de la fumée de scène.

Hommel fait + que partager vos doutes et là, il se fâche vraiment

http://silverstockreport.com/2010/Jan14-update.html


When Heroes Disappoint


(Don't you hate it when your saviour goes up and dies on you?!)


Silver Stock Report


by Jason Hommel, January 14th, 2010


Yesterday, many said I published my greatest newsletter
ever.

IRA & 401k Theft Plotted by US
Government
http://silverstockreport.com/2010/Jan-update.html

But
many reported that the link to the Businessweek article from Jan 8th was dead.
I don't like it when Businessweek goes out of their way to make me look like I'm
inventing things, with no proof.

They moved their link, at the very
inconvenient time of around 10pm West coast time, which would have been around
1am eastern, 4 hours after I sent out my article, but was 5 days after their
original publication. Looks like they did this in response to my report. They
also changed the title.

I've read of many other bloggers complaining
about this, but it's never happened to me before.

Here's the new
link:

http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/jan2010/pi2010018_130737.htm

They
changed the title from:

"Americans Oppose initiatives limiting 401 k
choices ici says

to:

Retiree Annuities May Be Promoted by Obama
Aides

Shocking. It's like 1984 the way they revise a historical article
from the 8th, on the evening of the 13th like that.

I suppose one way to
"promote" the "conversions" is to remove links, and change the titles when
bloggers who disagree highlight the theft that they are plotting.

And
it looks like Businessweek just lost all credibility forever among anyone who
reads this.

In case they do it again, here are more links to the story,
more links to the theft of retirement accounts that they are plotting. They
can't possibly change them all, since many are on servers they don't control.
Some of these are forums that also complain about the link that
moved.

I googled and it is all over, Here are just a
few;

Washingtons Blog
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2010/01/flashback-will-obama-seize-americans.html

North Jersey
http://www.northjersey.com/community/seniors/personal_finance/81056982_White_House_eyes_retiree_annuities.html

BLOOMBERG
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20603037&sid=aR9zVMXzOeX0

AIP NEWS
http://aipnews.com/talk/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=861&posts=5

"By
now, many of you may have read about a new Democratic proposal to eliminate the
tax incentives provided to 401(k) retirement plans, and replace
them with 'government-guaranteed' retirement accounts."

PIT BULL TALK
http://www.pitbulltalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=65&p=369027

Godlike Productions;
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bbs/reply.php?messageid=962346&page=1"e=15003694

Military Photos Forum;
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?172082-Americans-Oppose-Initiatives-Limiting-401(k)-Choices-ICI-Says(k)-Choices-ICI-Says

This
Blue Marble Forum;
http://thisbluemarble.com/showthread.php?p=179483

TOPSY
http://topsy.com/tb/www.businessweek.com/news/2010-01-08/americans-oppose-initiatives-limiting-401-k-choices-ici-says.html

Integral
http://integral.virishi.net/category/person/phyllis_c_borzi

Slick Deals
http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?p=26506729

And it goes on and on like wildfire!!!

The problem
is government. AND THE MEDIA!

The solution is silver, and gold. AND THE
INTERNET!

==========

Another "so-called" hero of silver investors
is Bart Chilton of the CFTC, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, whose job
is to prevent fraud in the marketplace.

But the selling of unbacked
silver futures contracts is fraud, and it takes place all the time.

The
BIS reported that the mark to market value of over the counter, "other precious
metals" (mostly all silver) derivatives went from under $100 billion to over
$200 billion in 6 months, as I reported here:

http://silverstockreport.com/2009/BIS-and-updates.html

But
the total value of all 600 million ounces of silver mined each year, at $18/oz.,
is only $10.8 billion. So where did they find the new pile of $90 billion worth
of silver to sell, or nearly 8 years worth of world mine supply? In other
words, they didn't, it's all fraud. THE BIS ADMITS SO, based on the
math!

So, with that background, please understand my stance. The
"regulators" can do NOTHING to prevent the fraud. There is no possible way to
verify that people or corporations have the silver that they say they plan to
sell in the future, unless all new sales of futures contracts are fully backed
up by a 100% deposit of real silver now. But that kind of defeats the point of
futures, now does it not? In other words, the ENTIRE CONCEPT OF FUTURES MARKETS
IS ENTIRELY FRAUDULENT.

I have even written an article on that,
explaining exactly why it is impossible to regulate futures.

The U.S.
Government can't stop Silver Fraud
(But you can!)
Silver Stock
Report
by Jason Hommel, April 16th, 2009
http://silverstockreport.com/2009/govcant.html

You
cannot regulate futures any more than you could effectively ban debt. Even I
engage in futures contracts, the only difference is speed. I sell silver
online, and my customers get silver in a few days, not months.

To write
legislation that would prevent futures selling, you'd effectively have to ban
all trading. This is why it's impossible to regulate.

The only way to
"regulate" it is to educate people to the fraud. No other way is
possible.

The CFTC can do nothing, and will do nothing, especially when
they are IN ON THE SCAM. THE CFTC IS A PART OF THE PRESIDENT'S WORKING GROUP ON
FINANCIAL MARKETS, OR PART OF THE "PLUNGE PROTECTION TEAM". Their goal is to
specifically maniulate the value of the dollar higher, and keep silver and gold
down.

As proof, I have emails from "Bart Chilton" who some in this
industry feel might do something productive.

Again, there is no way to
create "position limits" on shorts that would be effective. JP Morgan, the big
short, could easily set up numerous offshore dummy corporations who could all
short silver to keep the massive short position in tact.

At least now we
know it's JP Morgan who is the massive short. The exposes the SLV as fraud, as
JP Morgan is the silver custodian!

Here is the email exchange that led
Bart Chilton to tell me to "F Off"

It started off with a man who wrote to
Bart, and me, saying why the CFTC will do nothing.

His Reason? Gary
Gensler spent 18 years at Goldman Sachs, a corporation in on the gold
manipulation scam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Gensler

Bart
replied:

Hey Roger
I don't have time for that crap -- I'm trying
to
make a difference. Please peddle it somewhere
else.
B

Roger
copied the email to me, and asked: "Hey Jason Are they maybe feeling the
pressure?"

I responded to Roger, and Bart Chilton of the
CFTC:

> Position limits would have no influence, even if JP
Morgan
> and silver were explicitly mentioned.
>
> Do you
think they don't know how to set up, and fund, dummy
> corporations, as
many as are needed, to continue the fraud,
> to hide their tracks? JP
Morgan taught Enron how to do
> that. The only reason they are not doing
so now is
> that most people are too stupid to notice, and too dumb
to
> care, and they have already bribed or taken down all the
>
officials who would interfere.
>
> Chilton is as effective as a
burnt brick.
>
> But hey, I don't have a solution either; I would
not stop
> them. I would only try to educate the public to the
>
fraud that is going on.
>
> Chilton should at least do that, but,
again, he is like
> dust in the wind, and useful only for blinding the
foolish
> masses into thinking the government is "on it". I
> think
he's even got GATA and Ted Butler fooled.
>
> Chilton has never
written anything that remotely sounded
> intelligent to me.
>

> Sincerely,
>
> Jason Hommel
> silverstockreport.com

Bart
responded:

Jason
> Sorry I won't play your childish game. These are
serious
> issues. Please don't email again.
> B

I responded
to Bart again:

Bart Chilton,

Please don't be rude, don't close
your ears, don't make yourself appear more ignorant than you already do.
Besides, you work for the public, remember!

Besides, you don't want to
risk me publishing your own childish responses to my list of 80,000 silver
investors, do you? After all, I don't consider it a coincidence that your
announcement today

CFTC considers gold and silver position limits
http://www.chrismartenson.com/forum/cftc-considers-gold-and-silver-position-limits/33945

comes
after my email to you last night.

After all, these are serious issues,
and you should be more careful on who you upset.

I'm serious that I have
much sympathy for you. After all, it is YOU who the public expects will "do
something" to correct the ongoing fraud taking place under YOUR "watchful" eye,
and it is YOU and men in your office that the public will want to "hang" and
have executed when things go wrong in the world of finance.

They have
done that before, in places like France, where they invented the
guillotine, remember, or do you not know your history?

I'm not making any
threats, I'm trying to help you avoid that fate!

It is my job to help
keep you alive, to help direct the public to helping to understand that there is
little you can do, that it is the fault of the public that they are the ones who
are guilty of trusting paper promises of banks that should not be trusted in the
first place.

To help keep yourself alive, you should follow my advice.


Expose the fraud taking place.

Explain why you cannot
regulate.

Explain how and why they could easily jump over any hoops of
regulations that you put in place, by setting up dummy corporations to continue
to short excessive amounts of silver that no man could possibly keep up with it
all, or really know if they have the ability to back their short positions with
silver, as it's completely unauditable.

You should consider yourself
fortunate that I'm your friend, and in great sympathy for your predicament, and
that I understand it as well as I do.

I understand you are damned if
you do, damned if you don't.

I understand that the banks put tremendous
pressure on men in your position.

I'm not your enemy, I'm your
friend.

I cannot guarantee that I won't email you again, after all,
people continue to copy me the emails that they send to you!

You should
have more respect for a man who can help you like I can.

Do you need men
to pray for your protection? I know thousands of righteous men who would gladly
do just that.

The Bible
says that the prayer of a righteous man can do a
lot.

==========

Bart finally emails me to say: "F
off"

Here are the full email headers for proof to all who know how the
internet works:

Re: CFTC impending whitewash
Thursday, January 14,
2010 4:45 PM
From Chilton, Bart Thu Jan 14 23:45:46 2010
X-Apparently-To:
bibleprophesy@yahoo.com via
67.195.22.86; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:45:47 -0800
Return-Path: <bchilton@cftc.gov>
X-YMailISG:
UeN4Pm8WLDv67v6ieQeZbmAg1v4thiN92FIjnav9zWxfD9nWe08L.
Qs8UidUhJKoOyVaayutusnhvUTMizm21cucnrDsnHaoR3aurSxD2ntl85l1N8IL
tsdvk46.cUQyF8ZxfSXV.2i0awUkoL7JUN0bEZ5V6JAzeRxqtyks0wqwjvZ_qcIh1O
qjxORmixhM0fdizHCLJVwtZX4MSEUq5l0Al1psLI7F_sDWyQ.27N_r9qIIont1KH.
0NI4JYvoISezLy3WvMnCpI0G0cJBrBSai9SADaKhssUg_JmVeaU8fFexhx9stjl7
jwamHy6epY9UF0ZyYkwOvugRKB05Jq9B7sD8VOdv1UJmDbzcJrNZ4SnDMQk
sxNFhwysLk1NDctNpMsqKnnQL2gFHwuD_fXHHDKhQ9CA--
X-Originating-IP:
[208.253.23.130]
Authentication-Results: mta1017.mail.ac4.yahoo.com
from=CFTC.gov;
domainkeys=neutral (no sig); from=CFTC.gov; dkim=neutral (no
sig)
Received: from 127.0.0.1 (EHLO cftcfw.cftc.gov) (208.253.23.130) by

mta1017.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with SMTP; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 15:45:47
-0800
Received: from DC2KPEX.cftc.gov ([169.254.1.67]) by outlook.cftc.gov

([172.16.1.175]) with mapi; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:45:46 -0500
From:

"Chilton, Bart" <BChilton@CFTC.gov>
Add sender to
Contacts
To: "'bibleprophesy@yahoo.com'" <bibleprophesy@yahoo.com>
Date:
Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:45:46 -0500
Subject: Re: CFTC impending
whitewash
Thread-Topic: CFTC impending whitewash
Thread-Index:
AcqVcvR5N4r92bkPQ5mYp9VSNRAfIAAALzWu
Message-ID: <F28030C054869C4191C8B82597DAE6B4068C0DEB93@DC2KPEX.cftc.gov>
Accept-Language:
en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:

X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Length: 10343

I'm only
somewhat disappointed that he could not communicate in a rational manner. But
then again, I have no faith in him to begin with. I publish this because it
helps to expose these men who help to conceal the fraud and continue to delay
contemplating any "regulation" for another two months, until March, but it also
shows they are helpless in the face of regulating the manipulation, and that may
come as a surprise to many.

Roger finally wrote back to
me:

Jason

It's pathetically hilarious! Gensler to investigate
possible limits in gold/silver in March, now . I thought that this was a
part of the agenda for today. Midas in Le Met was hailing this as a
breakthrough- Rubbish. Mr Chilton's fangs have finally come out. I think that
you and Adrian Douglas are spot on- it'll come down to massive shortfalls- the
physical will in the end write the script. CFTC are are stalling massively: I
wonder whether there'll come as USD devaluation in the interim period. As I
denoted in the email to you yesterday, they must be feeling a fair bit of
pressure. God's powerful light is scattering the cockroaches. They're running in
all directions, now. SEC and CFTC are puppets!

I for one feel pretty
comfortable though. The impetus for me coming into the silver market was you, my
friend. I have physical and stocks in gold and silver. I turned the whole thing
over to God long ago. In His time.

Blessings and God's loving
protection to you and your family.

Roger
Smith

==========

In conclusion, while many said yesterday's
email was my greatest ever, it cause many people to lose faith in me, their now
"former" hero.

What, I don't believe in evolution?

What, I think
there are questions about 911?

What, I think people who are too stupid to
hold on to their money deserve to lose it?

Heresy! While I gained a few
more devoted readers, 53 more left forever and even said why. Pity. I suppose
you just can't burst too many cherished bubbles at once or people think you are
crazy.

Guess what? I also don't drink flouridated water, and I think
flouride is a poison.

I also don't believe in vaccines! If they were
effective, they certainly would not need to force them on everyone.

I
also didn't get a social security number for my little baby Jude.

And two
of my own heroes lost a little luster today.

Two of my mentors, Bill
Murphy and Ted Butler seem to have put faith in Bart Chilton lately. Rubbish.
Foolishness. How could they?! Am I the only one that sees through this
deception?

Clearly not. Not any longer.

excellent Hommel !!



et pour ce qui est de se lacher .. Bart Chilton n'est pas en reste, ( mais pas dans le même style ) avec son dernier mail ..

F .off

perd son sang froid, le Bart

CFTC: the Common Fraud Training Committee


(The Silver Investor's Best Friend! Oh yes!)


Silver Stock Report


by Jason Hommel, January 18th, 2010


If you ever write to someone, like me, to say that you disagree with them,
you should at least be able to say why. I do, and I will. Here's an example:
I think futures contracts are a form of fraud because there are more paper
contracts than real silver, and I think "regulating" fraud is simply fraud on
top of fraud.

So far, nobody has demonstrated any capacity to explain how
new position limits on metals, even applied to short sellers, would end the
endless short selling. Nobody has explained how the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (CFTC) would be able to detect, and/or catch, and/or prevent an
entity like JP Morgan from setting up many dummy shell corporations to short all
the silver contracts that they wanted to avoid and get around any
new regulation.

Therefore, my view is that new position limits
contemplated by the CFTC would be irrelevant. CFTC regulation of short
positions is impossible and a waste of time. What the CFTC has been capable of
doing so far is to criminalize and outlaw "excessive" long positions, as if it's
somehow criminal to spend your money on what you want.

Furthermore, if
I acted or believed as if I could help convince the CFTC to do a "better job" of
regulating silver futures contracts, doing so would merely help the deception.
Therefore, I have no interest in trying to "be nice" to the CFTC in the hopes
that my tone would have a meaningful impact on the silver market.

What
are the sayings that come to mind? You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's
still a pig.

"Regulating" futures contracts is a doubly fraudulent
concept to begin with. The so-called regulation makes futures appear more
honorable than they are, but it is all a deception. The CFTC is the lipstick on
the pig of futures contracts. I have no interest in helping to apply the
lipstick. My ministry is one of pointing out that the pig is still a pig,
despite the appearances of lipstick!

The CFTC's real job is to help make
the prostitute look more tempting. People will falsely reason to themselves,
"Futures contracts must be safe, after all, they are regulated by the CFTC who
oversees the markets and prevents manipulation from taking place." But it's all
just lies upon lies.

How can anyone deliver between 600 to 800 million
ounces of silver in futures contracts, when there are only about 50 million
ounces in the warehouses? Easy! Most futures contract holders, only putting
down a small fraction of the value of the silver, never can afford, nor do
they intend, to take delivery, so the scam of "endless" paper
silver contracts continues.

What's worse is that the BIS, the Bank of
International Settlements, released a report showing that "over the counter",
"other precious metals" (mostly all silver) derivatives, (which are not futures
contracts, which are IN ADDITION TO FUTURES CONTRACTS), could expand by a
notional value of over $107 billion in a mere 6 months! The BIS report fails to
mention that the total global annual production of silver, at 600 million
ounces, is worth less than $11 billion!

http://www.bis.org/statistics/otcder/dt21c22a.pdf

The
unregulated "over the counter" silver bullion market is ten times larger than
the futures contracts the CFTC is authorized to regulate, further making the
CFTC completely irrelevant, and in fact, impotent as far as regulation goes,
even if they could regulate futures, which they can't. They only help to
prosecute the righteous, not the criminal.

Some people say that our CFTC
Appreciation Medallion is offensive. But the CFTC is part of the group that
allows cheap silver to exist. We should thank them and bless them for creating
this wonderful investment opportunity that exists only for the little guys, and
is completely closed to all billionaires. Billionaires can't buy silver because
they will be prosecuted for having an "illegal" long position exceeding 1500
contracts!

For those who understand the nature and limits of the fraud,
and why it can't last forever, there is the realization of silver as the best
investment opportunity in the history of humanity.
==========

Adrian Douglas released a report explaining how and why banks
hold more gold than exists for their customers who never take delivery in
his latest article:

Adrian Douglas: The 'tiny' gold market is actually
the world's biggest
http://gata.org/node/8248

By
"biggest" he means that the daily volume turnover of "gold held on account" by
bullion banks and brokers is about 3 times larger than oil. But the daily gold
turnover is about as much as annual gold production, indicating that
it's mostly all fraud.

==========

Here are two more examples of
good men prosecuted to the fullest extent of creative law:

Walter Burien
had his 5 year old son kidnapped by police in 2005, and to this day has not seen
his son. He is asking, no, challenging, any righteous FBI agent or US Attorney
to come to his aid in his case.

http://cafr1.com/Plea.html

Walter
writes: I just launched my new video "The Only Game in Town - The Way Our
Government Can Be" as a $3 click per
view for a 24-hour pass http://CAFR1.com/BuyNow.html

It hits
the nail on the head and shows the comprehension on how all taxation can be
phased out. Not reduced but eliminated and have a thriving economy to boot!


==========

Martin Armstrong was put in prison and now writes one
of the best financial newsletters exposing corruption in the business--still
writing from prison.

http://www.martinarmstrong.org/economic_projections.htm

His
latest letter, Behind the Curtain -
The Full Monty

starts off explaining the corruption of
the CFTC.

==========

It's all so utterly typical. The government
always does the opposite of the intended, or proposed effect.

Government
healthcare will destroy healthcare.

Government welfare creates
generations of people addicted to welfare.

Government bail outs for big
banks encourages bankrupt behavior of leaders of big banks.

Making war on
people all over the world makes the US less safe as it increases
retaliation called blowback.

Someone should come up with a "strengthen
the dollar" bill in congress that mandates the US government pay for everything
only in silver or gold coin. Why? Obviously, it would reveal the fraud of the
dollar, and destroy it!

So, the CFTC is supposed to regulate markets to
make sure they are fair? No. The CFTC guarantees the markets remain unfair,
that the government granted monopoly of printing paper money is
protected.

Again, if you write to say you disagree with me, please have
the courtesy to say WHY. And by WHY, I don't mean to suggest that you simply
state that you believe I'm a pompous fool. No, please suggest to me how the
CFTC would actually be able to detect, catch, and prosecute dummy corporations
set up by JP Morgan, in the event that position limits are ever applied to the
short sellers. Simply saying that you think I'm a pompous fool, does not count
as a reason why you disagree with me.

Gene Arensberg pense lui aussi que la nouvelle réglementation CFTC n'a pour but que de limiter les positions des larges spécs, autrement dit des longs ..
et que nos suspects habituels ( JPM et cie ), classé en commerciaux pourront continuer tranquillement à concentrer des shorts positions hallucinantes

puisque ceux ci continueront de bénéficier de l'exemption sur la nouvelle limitation des positions .. en tant que soit disant hedgeurs

http://www.stockhouse.com/Columnists/2010/Jan/19/Got-Gold-Report--CFTC-eyes-position-limits-for-gol

un graph vaut mieux que 1000 discours :

au 15/ 12/2009, marché de futures us: concentration des shorts positions des 4 + gros commerciaux, et des 5 à 8 plus gros commerciaux
vs nb de jours de production mondiale pour couvrir ces horts

source Ed STEER



comme vous le voyez au 1er coup d'oeil, c'est gold et silver qui sont les marchés les plus manipulés ..
et pourtant c'est celui de l'énergie, auquel s'attaque la CFTC...
pour la simple et bonne raison, amah, que les shorts positions concentrées des commerciaux, ne sont pas du tout ce qu'elle entend réguler ..
mais bien les longues positions des "gros" traders, larges spécs ..


commentaires de Bill Murphy www.lemetropolecafe.com

And what certainly is not changing is the role the major US banks are playing in the gold and silver markets. Why the CFTC exists is beyond me. Recently they held hearings about position limits in the energy arena and made a flap over it. Yet, talk about farce. Look at what they are not dealing with, courtesy of GATA’s Ed Steer

There ought to be some hearings in the months to come. Why bother having hearings on energy position limits when there is such concentration of so few shorts in gold and silver, which blows away the other markets?
Should anyone like to resister some thoughts to the CFTC on the gold/silver price manipulation issue, and the absurd concentration of traders in the precious metals markets compared to the other commodity markets, please mail your comments to secretary@cftc.gov.
Commenters should include in the subject field, "Proposed Federal Speculative Position Limits for Referenced Energy Contracts and Associated Regulations."
From what I think I know, any of your comments from hereon in will be part of the CFTC public record and will be available on the internet for future reference. To be effective, be as forceful as possible, and be just as courteous. If this phony Obama Administration wants to be transparent and accountable, then they should encourage unfettered discussion of the concentration issue in gold and silver, as well as a decade of charges of market manipulation by those very folks.
Day’s over and gold made quite the comeback considering the euro was down .0055 when it closed. However, there was no chance gold was going to be allowed to make a key reversal AND to close over $1100 on this option expiry day. NONE. Gold was at $1099 with less than two hours to go and I had to leave to get a haircut. I returned with a few minutes to go before the Comex close. I said what are the odds gold put in a serious reversal and closed above $1100? One in a thousand I thought to myself. Sure enough, it was business as cartel usual.

de mieux en mieux !
l'agence internationale de l'énergie, rencontrera l'OPEP,les banques ainsi que les régulateurs, afin de discuter sur la nouvelle réglementation des limitations de position , sur les marchés de l'énergie.
JPM fait bien entendu partie des invités




http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aMVtmkxhM6jk&pos=7QUOTE
The International Energy Agency will meet OPEC, banks and U.S. and U.K. regulators in Tokyo next month to discuss limiting energy-price speculation.
IEA Executive Director Nobuo Tanaka said today he has asked U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman Gary Gensler, officials of the U.K. Financial Services Authority, and bank executives including Lawrence Eagles, head of commodities research at JPMorgan Chase & Co., to take part. The two-day meeting will start Feb. 25.

******************

commentaires de Adrian Douglas
www.lemetropolecafe.com


QUOTE
The International Energy Agency will meet OPEC, banks and U.S. and U.K. regulators in Tokyo next month to discuss limiting energy-price speculation.
IEA Executive Director Nobuo Tanaka said today he has asked U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman Gary Gensler, officials of the U.K. Financial Services Authority, and bank executives including Lawrence Eagles, head of commodities research at JPMorgan Chase & Co., to take part. The two-day meeting will start Feb. 25.
END
The CTC is meeting with a openly declared price fixing cartel, OPEC to discuss limiting energy price speculation. Time and time again it is the same theme that the only possible market manipulation is upward.
QUOTE
The proposed meeting follows a roundtable in Tokyo last April, where ministers of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and 13 Asian nations agreed to look for ways to contain price volatility. OPEC unveiled a plan in January last year seeking regulations to cap speculative trading by investors who buy oil without planning to use it.
END
What about limiting the positions of the traders who sell oil that they don’t intend to deliver??
And the cherry on the cake is that JP MorganChase will attend the meeting! A cozy little meeting of the greatest Cartel representatives on the planet with the CFTC in the thick of it.
I am not a lawyer but surely this type of collusion is illegal! This reminds me of the biggest bankers getting together on Jekyll Island to write the Federal Reserve Act. Here we have regulators, a producing Cartel, market intelligence organizations, and the Cartel of Banks getting together to discuss how to restrict trading in energy markets!! Free markets?...dream on!
Cheers
Adrian …

le projet concernant l'énergie est toujours en débat ... mais ya des développements qui soulévent déjà des protestations chez les producteurs et les banquiers .. qui n'avaient peut etre pas compris les choses comme ça ..

le projet est super mal expliqué, dit 'on .. mais il en ressort tout de même que

celui qui voudrait bénéficier d'une exemption sur la limitation de ses positions, ne pourrait plus, dans ce cas, cumuler des positions de hedgeur et de spéculation .
il lui faudrait donc, s'il veut bénéficier de l'exemption sur les limitations de position, renoncer
- soit à son activité de hedgeur
- soit à son activité de spéculation ( trading desk ou swaps dealers )

bien évidemment, la chose est contournable .. soit en créant une division fictive.. soit carrément en reportant l'activité "en trop" sur le marché bien plus opaque des dérivés .. ..
menace que les protestataires s'empressent d'agiter ( on ira sur l'otc, si vous nous nous mettez des batons dans les roues .. )
en attendant, ça fait jaser.. et la CFTC se donne belle allure ..

amah, Hommel a raison ( voir plus haut ).. il est impossible de réguler les marchés de futures.. sachant qu'on laisse à disposition l'otc..( les dérivés ).. c'est se foutre du monde ..
sachant qu'en cas de serrage de vis .. ce sont bien les banksters qui y ont déjà leurs habitudes qui iront s'y réfugier en priorité, pour échapper aux nvelles réglementations "trop contraignantes"

www.lemetropolecafe.com

GATA is gearing up for supposed CFTC hearings on the precious metals. Thus, in full:

Big Traders Face "Landmine" In CFTC Energy Rule

Reuters - February 17, 2010

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Buried deep in the proposal to set position limits on oil and gas futures is a possible "land mine" that could force the industry's biggest traders to make a stark choice: Keep your hedging exemptions, or keep your speculative book. But you can't keep both.
Weeks after the Commodity Futures Trading Commission unveiled its long-awaited proposal to prevent concentration in energy markets, industry executives have zeroed in on a little-noticed clause that would force big players to exit speculative trading positions if they wrest an exemption from regulatory limits on their hedging operations.
That could be a big blow to traders at the likes of oil giant BP Plc (BP.L) or Swiss trading house Vitol VITOLV.UL, who regularly use futures contracts both to protect themselves from risks on physical market positions and to make bets on prices.
And it could be wrenching for swaps dealers, such as Goldman Sachs (GS.N) or Morgan Stanley (MS.N). Large dealers may need to back away from some swaps business to avoid hitting the limit, spawning new players that customers fear will add costs and risk.
"Unless you're willing to drop your speculative trading desk altogether, this effectively ends exemptions, for all practical purposes," said a Washington-based industry source who has examined the proposal in detail.
CFTC Commissioner Bart Chilton, a strong proponent of position limits, was unapologetic, arguing exemptions have given too much flexibility to players without stakes in the physical commodity.
"There should be zero patience for trading on your own book, if you have an exemption," Chilton told Reuters, defending the new proposal as a safeguard against the impact of large traders roiling markets by making risky bets for their own accounts.
"Perhaps, if our proposal goes into effect, some will have to choose a business model," he said. "Are they a speculator, a swaps dealer or a hedger? Part of the problem we have had over the years is that some wanted to be everything to everybody."
The proposal is another source of discomfort to companies nervous about the Obama administration's proposed "Volcker rule," which seeks to ban banks from proprietary trading.
The exemption restrictions would likely face the same logistical challenges as the Volcker proposal -- the line between prop trading for your own account, versus taking on customer business or hedging, is often extremely blurry.
The exemption rules have rattled experts who initially dismissed the CFTC plan as a fairly light touch.
"It's absurd," said Dennis Gartman, publisher of the closely followed Gartman Letter, a newsletter for traders, who first raised awareness of the issue in a report this month. "The ability to transact business would be greatly inhibited."
It also heightens the risk that hedgers and swaps dealers who also have proprietary trading desks may forced to take their business off U.S. exchanges into unregulated, over-the-counter or overseas markets, hurting transparency and liquidity and undermining the very aim of the regulations.
"At this point it's very unclear how a bank would be able to use the proposed hedge exemption process and still serve customers," one Wall Street dealer told Reuters. The measure "is definitely a source of confusion for the major dealers."
Exemptions With A Catch
When the CFTC first released its proposal, traders were relieved the limits were set so high that they seemed only to restrict a handful of big traders, a far cry from the hard-edged crack-down they feared amid the political furor over oil's surge to $147 in 2008.
And, after all, companies needing to hedge physical positions could apply for exemptions to the limits based on demonstrated needs, as could large swaps dealers, limited to two times the normal limits.
But when the proposal was published for public comment, traders were surprised to find an important catch. Triggering those exemptions would mean giving up speculative positions.
For example, if a limit for a non-spot month was set at 1,000 contracts, a dealer could hold any mix of speculative positions and hedge positions for clients under that level.
But, if the dealer asked for and was granted a CFTC exemption, and put on more than the 1,000 positions, the dealer could not hold any speculative positions at all.
"I view it as one of those things ... that probably didn't look like a big deal, but it's a potential land mine," said Craig Pirrong, an oil market expert and a professor at the University of Houston.
Traders say the reality of making a market is not always so black and white, and they need more clarity on how the CFTC would discern what trades are speculative.
"It's so grey in terms of when you're putting a position on and putting on the offsetting hedge," said Adam Felesky, head of BetaPro Management in Toronto, manager of the second-largest natural gas exchange-traded fund in North America.
"If you have client flow going the other way, sometimes it's a timing issue of minutes or seconds or hours. It may be more efficient for you to hold the position," Felesky said.
If the cap was rigidly enforced, risk managers would have to spend more time ensuring they weren't putting on positions that could be deemed speculative, said Gartman, forcing them to widen bid-offer spreads and driving up costs to customers.
Much Greyness
Now exposed, the question is whether the CFTC will provide the detail that industry participants need in order to assess implications that remain far from clear.
"They have done a very poor job of explaining this 'crowding-out' concept and it is very difficult for people to follow," a Washington-based derivatives lawyer said.
The CFTC is seeking comment on the position limit proposal until April 26 to help it hone its proposal, and then commissioners will weigh whether and how to move forward.
Three of five CFTC commissioners have expressed concerns about the overall proposal, noting the limits could drive volumes outside regulated markets, unless Congress gives the CFTC power to oversee OTC markets.
Traders said they hoped the commission would rethink the rules, or wait until Congress decides whether to broaden the CFTC's authority before applying them.
President Barack Obama's offensive against the banking industry and anti-bank populist sentiment have given added impetus to any measures that will curtail excessive risk-taking.
"The atmosphere now is so charged against banks and so charged against speculators," Gartman said.

La cftc va tenir une réunion "métaux" le 25 mars prochain .. pour examiner une éventuelle régulation des limitations de positions !

ça va donc concerner tout les métaux, de base ou précieux .. y compris gold et silver

http://www.reuters.com/article/hotStocksNews/idUSWBT01365220100223

On va surveiller ça de très près, sans illusions, mais avec attention quand même car la situation du Silver est trop extreme pour ne pas attirer l'attention et ceux qui ont intérêt à ce que ce scandale perdure comprendront peut être qu'il est temps de donner des gages de bonne foi ( des faux, certes) de telle sorte que la mascarade puisse durer encore un peu... faute de quoi, àmha, la situation risque bel et bien de leur échapper définitivement... donc au final, quoi qu'il survienne, c'est bon pour nous, car on en parle et ce genre de scandales ne peut pas s'accommoder de la transparence.

S'ils limitent la position, ce sera big UP etça attirera l'attention...s'ils ne changent rien, le volume des paper metals va graduellement diminuer... au grand bénéfice du véritable Silver.