cours de l'argent en cas de panique des vendeurs à découvert / short squeeze

Short squeeze /Cours de l'argent / quel serait le prix de l'argent en cas de panique des vendeurs à découvert ?

c'est ce que nous verrons plus bas dans cette file

en tout cas, c'est AVANT qu'il convient de se placer et d'acheter l'argent métal
voir le dernier Hommel
short squeeze sur l'argent métal , opportunité d'achat unique

http://www.silverstockreport.com/index2.html

Short Squeeze in Silver!
(Commercials pay up!)
Silver Stock Report
by Jason Hommel, March 3, 2008

What is a short squeeze?

A short squeeze is one of the most exciting events in finance, and could drive silver to $100/oz. very quickly! A short squeeze happens when those who manipulate the market begin to act according to old Wall Street rhyme,

"He who sells what isn't his'n, buys it back or goes to prison!"

The silver shorts, who have been one of the key forces capping the price of silver ever since 1980, are buying back the silver they sold, the silver that they don't have, the silver that may not exist, and they are buying "contracts for it" from people who might not have it either, in a rising market, because the shorts have begun to panic.

Another way to say it, is that the fat cats are beginning to wake up, repent and change, and realize the error of their ways! Perhaps we are seeing the inevitable failure of a 100+ year war of the international bankers, a war waged against an inherent property of silver. But silver is a monetary metal, and the failure to recognize that truth has consequences.

Dan Norcini reports at http://www.jsmineset.com/ that the commercial shorts in silver last week were "buying on the way up!"

http://www.jsmineset.com/cwsimages/Miscfiles/5830_Charts_for_2-29-2008_COT.pdf

The commercials are buying silver futures contracts from the category of traders that is labeled "non reportable" which are mostly small capitalized individuals, while the funds, or "speculators" have not changed their long positions much.

Short Squeeze definition:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_squeeze

"Short squeezes result when short sellers cover their positions on a stock. This can occur if the price has risen to a point where these people simply decide to cut their losses and get out. Since covering their positions involves buying shares, the short squeeze causes an ever further rise in the stock's price, which in turn may trigger additional covering."

See also:
http://www.investorwords.com/4559/short_squeeze.html

The reason why a short squeeze is so exciting is that in theory, there is no limit to the upwards price movement, especially if there is a shortage.

This is the kind of event that could drive silver prices to $100/oz. or higher very quickly. The chance of such an event is higher now than ever before, in my opinion.

As of Feb 26th, the commercials are long 53,358 contracts, and short 126,584 contracts, for a net short position of 73,226. Multiplied by 5000 oz. per contract, that's 366 million ounces of silver that they might need to buy back, on the NYMEX alone.

But NYMEX only has 87 million oz. of silver in the warehouses, registered for delivery. http://www.nymex.com/warehouse.aspx

Thus, there is a shortage. And as they shorts pay up, the shorts are getting squeezed.

(The 366 million oz. that they need to buy back does not count short positions "over the counter", nor does it count "pool accounts" or unallocated silver storage, nor silver certificate programs, nor does it count failed silver deliveries from corrupt coin dealers. )

Three hundred and sixty six million ounces is a lot of silver when the world mines only about 650 million ounces of silver per year, and when world industry consumes more silver than that each year. Thus, the shorts can't get 366 million ounces of silver from the mines; as that silver, and more, is already being purchased.

A mere 50 million ounces of silver being bought by investors in a year caused the price of silver to double from about $7/oz to $14.

If the silver does not exist to buy, a real buying frenzy and panic could break out.

A short squeeze took place when the silver price hit $50/oz. in 1980. That squeeze was ended when they changed the rules to allow no new long positions! (And when the Fed allowed interest rates to rise above 20%!)

The last time we saw a mini short squeeze in silver was around 1997, when Warren Buffet put an end to the squealing and panic of the silver shorts (and caused them to really worry) by announcing that he had invested less than 1% of Birshire Hathaway's net worth in silver. That caused the silver price to rise from about $5 to $7 very fast.

A short squeeze drove palladium prices up from around $250/oz. to $1000/oz. back in 2000, due to temporary failed Russian deliveries (that resumed). That short squeeze ended when the TOCOM paper exchange put limits on the daily price changes, and let contracts be settled for cash, instead of palladium.

A short squeeze drove nickel prices up to more than double, to $23/lb. in June last year. That short squeeze temporarily ended when they ruled that it was illegal for two of the largest holders of physical nickel in LME warehouses to own nickel, and had to sell!

But unlike the other two times in silver, there might not be any major billionaire for the shorts to falsely "blame." And they might not be able to change the rules. This time, there might be a real shortage! They might have to blame themselves for being so reckless as to sell silver that does not exist to a world that consumes more silver than it mines.

We might see silver prices continue the parabolic move up. We might see failed silver deliveries with cash settlements. We might see further panic for real silver. We might see panic among industrial users who must buy silver or shut down their businesses. We might see the end of the NYMEX exchange itself. We might even see officials from the Commodities & Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) going to prison!

Why might the CFTC officials go to prison? Because they lied, and continue to point to the same lies to justify their inaction and incompetence. In May 2004, they lied, saying that manipulation in silver could not exist as long as there was unrestricted access to the market by longs (p. 5), but in the same report, they admitted that position limits prevent longs from entering the market (p. 8)!
http://www.cftc.gov/files/opa/press04/opasilverletter.pdf

Michael Gorham, author of that report, voluntarily resigned 3 weeks after writing it, in 2004.

That is why I continue to point out that there are position limits in silver contracts at the NYMEX. Position limits are the achilles heel of the world's fraudulent paper and electronic monetary system. Position limits are trade barriers and unfair, and are clearly the opposite of free market principles. Billionaires who would take on the desperate silver shorts need to know about that obstacle, so they can figure out how to overcome it.
http://www.silverstockreport.com/2008/billionaires.html

Position limits were imposed to protect the silver shorts (but that's not working, just like all trade bariers backfire), and they are bleeding money to the tune of $366 million dollars for every dollar that the silver price rises. And if they cannot or do not cover, then they lose $3.7 billion for every rise of $10.00/oz.! And in case we go over $100/oz., they lose $37 billion for every $100 rise in the silver price (if they can't cover.)

Here's a great article on the silver to gold ratio:
http://www.dani2989.com/gold/10aggb.html

A study of the silver to gold ratio shows quite clearly why the price of silver should be about $100/oz. right now, or more.

Right now is not a time period of business as usual. A short squeeze is a very unique event. It's unusual and rare.

This is the beginning of what could be the event that has been long predicted by myself and many other physical silver investors. This is exactly why you need physical silver in your own safe, and why you should not trust any form of paper promises, certificates, or pool accounts, nor should you trust anyone to hold your silver for you.

You ought to get silver now. No delay. Not even one day. Get cash from your bank, and get yourself to your local coin shop before they close their doors to the public. I'm serious. No joke. Act now. This is the beginning of what could be the long awaited major panic crunch time.

Buying silver ought to be your top priority right now. In fact, the situation is so dire, that if I had a job and a 401k, that I'd seriously consider quitting my job to cash out the 401k to invest in silver; especially if the 401k contains more than a year's salary.

If you order silver over the internet or mail, then don't order all your silver at one time. Instead, spread out your orders among several dealers, or spread out over time, in case they begin to fail.

The conditions were so ripe for this short squeeze, that this is why I got my silver long ago, and this is why I prepared the following information, long in advance:

http://find-your-local-coin-shop.com/



Sincerely,

Jason Hommel
www.silverstockreport.com
www.miningpedia.com

bon ...rien que pour démentir cette probabilité jamais aussi importante que now .. on a droit à notre attaque métaux , depuis la fermeture de londres

gold 962.30 $ -2.20%
silver 19.80$ -2.61%

à noter que tout ceci n'a AUCUNE incidence sur l'euro$ 1.5221 +0.10% ..

comme quoi, c'est pas facile de booster le $ ..
même en attaquant gold, ça ne marche plus

le dernier Butler évoque également ce point .. comme une probabilité..tres forte en ce moment ..mais se garde bien de le pronostiquer, un raid des gros shorts sur l'argent, restant tjs possible ..

avec une explication fort pertinente sur la différence entre
- couvrir ses shorts en panique
- ou liquider ses longues positions en panique ..

en effet liquider ses longues positions dans de telles conditions, fera baisser les cours, mais il se trouvera tjs un momentum de prix auquel un acheteur se présentera.. c'est une certitude, le prix ne pouvant pas devenir négatif

pour couvrir une short position massive ( comme celle de nos plus gros 8 traders) , il faut trouver quelqu'un qui accepte de shorter l'argent à votre place ... et ce moment peut etre attendu fort longtemps ... personne n'étant pressé de prendre un tel risque... les prix vont donc monter ..sans aucune limitation théorique, cette fois ci

autrement dit, en théorie, on ne sait jamais, une fois qu'il a commencé, quand et à quel prix va s'arreter un short squeeze
c'est là tout le charme du short squeeze

Citation :

There is a world of difference between liquidating a leveraged long position in a panic and doing the same with a short position. The simple difference is this; a long position can’t go below zero, and at some price above zero, an opportunistic buyer will purchase the position. A short position being liquidated under panic conditions contains no such guarantee. Finding an entity willing to assume a massive short position if the shorts start to panic, is a world apart from dumping a long position in a hurry.

autre point capital :

contrairement aux fonds analyse technique ( dead tech brain funds = cad les fonds dépourvus de cervelle) , les fonds institutionnels ( les raptors) n'utilisent pas d'effet de levier ... ce qui les rend invulnérables aux appels de marge ..

ça c'est capital ... et d'ailleurs ça explique bien le nouveau comportement du cours de l'argent, depuis l'entrée en scéne de ces intervenants


et surtout :
les shorts sur l'or et l'argent sont en ce moment au pied du mur ... ayant accumulé des pertes colossales ... vont t'ils encore une fois jouer à quitte ou double ? personne ne peut le dire, et surtour prévoir l'issue .. mais tjs se méfier d'un fauve blessé à mort ...


http://www.investmentrarities.com/03-04-08.html

on me demande souvent à quel prix serait le cours de l'argent s'il n'y avait pas cette fameuse concentration manipulatoire, de la position de vente à découvert entre les 4 plus gros traders .. ( en fait entre 1 à 4 traders au plus)

ou dit autrement : le short squeeze, ça méne le cours de l'argent à quel prix?

pour rappel, les commerciaux sont shorts depuis 1987, et n'alternent jamais leurs positions contrairement aux autres marchés de commodities ( excepté pour les futures de l'or ), pour voir graph de LT, cliquez ici

naturellement et comme explicité précédemment, c'est une question difficile ..

néammoins, un des gata soldiers a fait un calcul de "principe" ..qui est le suivant : ( résumé du texte de Bix Weir )

en partant du corner des frères Hunt ( cad une concentration opposée, en faveur des longs),on obtient les données suivantes:

selon la CFTC elle même ( qui comme vous le savez est intervenue contre les frères Hunt aprés la hausse fulgurante de début 1980 )

- la position concentrée des Hunt représentait 100 millions d'onces ( eh oui ... seulement 100 comparée aux 310 millions de la short position concentrée actuelle)

- ce qui a fait passer le cours du spot de 2 $ l'once ( debut 1970) à 54 $ en 1980.. avant la dégringolade abbyssale que vous connaissez ...soit un facteur 27

en prenant les mêmes ratios, et pour le cas qui nous occupe, on obtiendrait donc :

le prix suivant
- facteur 27
-short position concentrée : 310 millions d'once soit 3 fois plus que celle des Hunt soit 3
__________

total 3x27 = 81

cours actuel de l'argent =20$
cours de l'argent métal au final après short squeeze = 20$x87 = 1620$

1620$

fin du résumé

bon, naturellement c'est juste un calcul d'école ... mais ça a le mérite de mettre en relief à quel point cette position de vente à découvert, conséquente et qui dure depuis si longtemps, impacte négativement ( c'est peu de le dire ) le cours de l'argent .. qui ne se trade pas librement ...
on ne perdra également pas de vue .. que si la CFTC est intervenue en 1980 contre les frères Hunt pour une position 3 fois moins importante.. elle se garde bien de le faire actuellement ..
et pourtant, ce n'est pas faute d'avoir été prévenue ..

il n'empeche que si elle ne gére pas ce problème, ce short squeeze se fera ( ds de "mauvaises" conditions pour le marché et le comex ).. et il n'en sera que plus désordonné et violent ... avec pour conséquence possible un default du comex ..

* mauvaises, comprendre bonnes pour les longs physique cad reel silver mais attention à l'argent papier ds ce cas .. le risque de default est important ..


************************
bon, ça y est, vous m'avez lancé des tomates?
ok, chipottons ...les calculs de Bix
au lieu de prendre le cours actuel de l'argent, 20$ .. soyons plus raisonnables .. et prenons celui du point bas de fin 2001 .. 4.25 $
ça me parait plus juste , puisque l'ascension des prix de l'argent a commencé précisément à cette date .. ( et pas seulement en 2008 )

ça nous donnerait tout de même un objectif final du cours de l'argent à 4.25 x87 = 369.75$

arrondissons à 370 $

et ça rien que pour la phase 1, de short squeeze, la plus courte ..ensuite nous aurons la phase 2 avec le juste retour de la loi de l'offre et de la Demande, la Demande investissement notamment ... qui a pour caractéristique de monter avec les prix

on comparera avec intérêt ces chiffrages avec ceux donnés par le ratio or / argent

___________

source www.lemetropolecafe.com


Question to David Kass of the CFTC:
Sent 2/21/08

If you removed the top 4 shorts from the COMEX silver market and made them close out their positions would that affect the freely traded price of silver?

Thank you for an answer.

Bix Weir
-------------------------------

David Kass Response:
Received 3/5/08

Mr. Weir,
We generally do not respond to hypothetical questions. It seems however that you have answered your own question. Forcing any trader-long or short, in futures or physicals-to trade or not to trade creates a market that, by definition, is no longer "freely traded."
Good day,
David Kass
------------------------------------------

Reply email to David Kass
Sent 3/5/08

Thanks Daivid -

You just defined the action the CFTC took against the Hunt Brothers when they were long around 100Moz and the CFTC decided to stop their "manipulation" of silver.

"Noting that the Hunts were unduly influencing the market, the exchanges and the CFTC took action that forced the Hunt brothers to sell off their silver holdings. Once that happened, the price of silver collapsed reflecting the abundance of silver in the markets. Market forces and regulatory intervention conspired to break the Hunt brother’s hold on the physical silver market."
http://www.cftc.gov/newsroom/speechestestimony/opabrownhruska-42.html

According to the CFTC this 100M oz (est.) accumulation was "in a large part" responsible for the silver price movement from $2 to $54:

"Due in large part to their accumulation of physical silver, futures prices rose from about $2.00 an ounce in the early 70s, to peak at $54 an ounce in 1980, before collapsing in dramatic fashion."

This is a 27 fold increase in price caused by a 100M oz manipulative long position. What does that say about the 310M oz short position held by 4 or less traders today? Why was it appropriate to stop the manipulation then and not today when the over sized position is 3x as large?

Let's do the math to see how to get back to "Fair Market Value" for silver based on the CFTC estimates.

27x = the manipulative result in silver price
3x = the size of the short position today vs the long position in 1980

27 x 3 = 81 fold downward manipulation in the price of silver

$20 x 81 = $1,620 per oz should be "Freely Traded" value of silver today.

This number does not even include silver shorted outside of the COMEX, leased silver, swapped silver, pooled silver, etc.

Obviously, this is a very flawed calculation BUT it does highlight that the CFTC has allowed silver to be manipulated for so long that a upside explosion of the price of silver is inevitable. Yes, it will be a disruptive move BUT it is the only way to get us back to a freely traded, fair market.

I hope you can see the problem that thousands of investors have with how the CFTC is handling this glaring problem.

Bix Weir

Super taf de Marie...
Excellente synthèse,
Sélection des liens pertinente,
Rédactionnel pédagogique...

La TOTALE...