California | The Best Way to Buy Gold

Sep 23

"Contained" Inflation

What’s in a word from the Fed…?

IT IS TOO BAD that the media fails to make use of an accessible resource, writes private investor and author Fred Sheehan from North Weymouth, Massachusetts, in Bill Bonner’s Daily Reckoning.

Itself.

Newspapers and financial TV are generally content to report what is being said today with no reference to the past. There seems to be no memory. A recent instance is Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke’s opinion that inflation is not a concern. In a sane world, his opinion would not matter much. But we live in a more nonsensical atmosphere in which abstractions substitute for reality.

The Fed chairman’s inflation prediction is thought to reflect whether the Federal Reserve’s Open Market Committee (FOMC) will raise the fed funds rate from zero. It is not, then, Bernanke’s opinion about inflation that stirs imaginations (very limited imaginations, to be sure), but the train-of-thought that the global yield curve is a consequence of his purported wisdom. If the Fed Chairman’s public view changes, the residence of several trillion Dollars will also change: carry trades, institutional asset mixes, and potential reallocations from stocks into money markets are examples of financial securities that are shipped from asset class to asset class according to the Fed chairman’s price-change gazetteer.

The real world today is repeating a pattern of a couple of years back. Prices are rising everywhere. This was also true when Bernanke became chairman of the Fed, in February 2006. Shortages, bottlenecks, black markets and prices were increasing when Bernanke became chairman. They continued to do so into late 2008. These conditions then retreated but are charging upward again.

To cut to the finale, a search through the files shows that Ben Bernanke was neither concerned nor understood the 2006 to 2008 inflation. It is certain, reading the evidence, that once again he will ignore (or remain malignantly ignorant, as the case may be) inflation until long after rice riots outside California supermarkets are a feature on the evening news.

To those unaccustomed to Fed-foolery, there is a motive for the chairman to day-dream through an inflationary swindle. The Federal Reserve wants to print money at will. An admitted problem with inflation would make it difficult to keep pumping money into the market.

Two conclusions can be drawn with near-certainty: the FOMC will not raise its zero-percent fed funds rate as long as Ben Bernanke remains Federal Reserve chairman. (A trivial 0.25% or 0.50% increase is possible.) Prices of things, particularly of commodities, will keep rising. This is an area to make money.

The Prosecutor’s Brief

In 2006, Bernanke had the excuse of being new to the job, without his predecessor’s experience at judging how every comment would be interpreted and analyzed. In the end, his inexperience with the media was not a disadvantage. (Discussed in the past tense, all of this is just as true today.) He talked in circles, made little sense, but criticism of the Federal Reserve Chairman’s remarks was confined to vocabulary. He could have bellowed his discontinuities of thought, of logic, of basic economics through the public address system before a full house at Yankee Stadium and the financial media would have remained deferential. An instance was his inflation commentary. An abbreviated sequence of Bernankeism follows.

Chairman Bernanke discussed inflation before the Joint Economic Committee on April 27, 2006. He sent written responses to the committee following his testimony. In this take-home exam, the new Fed chairman pronounced "inflation is overstated" and expectations are "well contained." His contentions were controversial, not for the obvious reason that crude oil prices had risen 50% since the beginning of 2005. Such comparisons between what is real and what Bernanke recites do not interest the media. Again, his economics are illogical. This was the real story, but was not discussed.

Instead, the press and financial TV grew aggressively neurotic when the Federal Reserve issued a statement, on May 10, that inflationary expectations are "contained". The media was consumed with the distinction from "well contained" in Bernanke’s April 27, 2006, statement.

On June 5, Bernanke, speaking at the IMF, admitted inflation, not inflationary expectations, was a problem. Again this distinction in vocabulary was front page news. Barely discussed were announcements in the same week that mergers and acquisitions for the year had already passed the record level of 2000 ($1.4 trillion), private equity in Europe was "loading companies with a record amount of debt," and home mortgage debt in the US was increasing at a 12.2% pace (when the national income was rising at a 3% rate).

On June 15, 2006, Bernanke spoke about expectations (not inflation, as he had on June 5). He believed expectations remained within historic ranges, which seemed to be consistent with his May 10 statement, but he was chastised for "giving mixed signals," maybe because he discussed expectations rather than inflation, though this was not clear, and who cared other than the panting, breaking-news media and the trading desks that might unwind billion-Dollar arbitrage positions in reaction to the media’s portrayal of the Fed chairman’s word choice?

On November 28, 2006, he told the National Italian American Foundation that inflation expectations were "contained." He repeated this assessment on many other occasions. The chairman may have thought his personal contentment would sooth the masses. Whatever the case, Simple Ben applied the formula to any topic that popped into his head. On March 28th, 2007: "At this juncture … the impact on the broader economy and financial markets of the problems in the subprime markets seems likely to be contained."

In his November 2006, address to the National Italian American Foundation, Bernanke talked in clichés that had lost all meaning. He would "continue to monitor the incoming data closely." The FOMC is "prepared to take action to address inflation if developments warrant." The chairman, at best, made glancing references to what he was monitoring, when the FOMC would take action, and what form the action might take.

Seven months later, in July 2007, Bernanke finally gave a speech devoted to the Federal Reserve’s measurement of inflation: "First, how should the central bank best monitor the public’s inflation expectations?" Bernanke’s description of the Fed’s methods could not be refuted, since there was nothing to refute: "The Board staff employs a variety of formal models, both structural and purely statistical, in its forecasting efforts. However, the forecasts of inflation (and of other key macroeconomic variables) that are provided to the Federal Open Market Committee are developed through an eclectic process that combines model-based projections, anecdotal and other ‘extra-model’ information, and professional judgment. In short, for all the advances that have been made in modeling and statistical analysis, practical forecasting continues to involve art as well as science." This means nothing. Dan Quayle was ransacked for misspelling "potato," yet the media adored Bernanke for sounding like an idiot savant.

He went on to ask critical questions (e.g.: "Do we need new measures of expectations or new surveys?"). There were no answers. Bernanke described some of the inputs to the Fed’s models, but then crushed hopes of those who were trying to understand how the Fed measures expectations: "[T]he model specifications employed differ considerably in their details, including how lagged inflation enters the equation, how resource utilization is measured, and whether a survey-based measure of inflation expectations is included. In principle, formal econometric tests could determine how much weight should be put on the forecast of each model, but in practice the data do not permit sharp inferences…." In the end, he confirmed what Fed skeptics already believed – the Federal Reserve is a Works Project Administration for failed statisticians: "Because of these considerations, as I have already noted, the staff’s inflation forecasts inevitably reflect a substantial degree of expert judgment and the use of information not captured by the models."

Others disagreed. In April 2007, Harry Landis, 107 years old, a World War I veteran, was interviewed by the St. Petersburg (Florida) Times: Landis had "lived through the invention of airplanes, televisions, interstate highways and cell phones. But the biggest change? ‘Money has decreased in value,’ he said. ‘There is so much more of it.’"

Not according to Simple Ben. On July 10, 2007, Bernanke addressed current inflation, then dismissed it: "The steep run-up in oil prices in recent years has not triggered either high inflation or recession, in large part because consumers and businesses expect price increases to remain tame." Three days before Bernanke spoke, Lehman Brothers (R.I.P.) released its food ingredients cost index for the first 6 months of 2007. It had risen 14.9%.

The value of stuff was rising against Dollars and against paper assets in general. Detachment of prices from previous levels leads to poverty, desperation, and crime.

California suffered a copper crime wave. Irrigation systems were stripped from farms; their replacement had cost $2 billion in 2006, a 400% increase from 2005. Value investors "pulled plaques off cemetery plots, raided air-conditioning systems in schools, yanked catalytic converters from cars." The copper in a penny was worth more than one cent; the Treasury Department decided melting pennies for the copper was a crime with a sentence of up to five years in jail. In Britain, Monopoly, the board game, cut costs by replacing paper money with a calculator. In the United States, those who lacked formal education knew best: Twenty-two percent with a high school education or less named the economy as the country’s worst problem, compared to eight percent with college degrees. Through history, inflation first attacked the lower classes and not stopped until it consumed the upper classes. This time looks no different.

Get the safest gold at the lowest prices by using BullionVault here…

Sep 23

Dollars, Debt & Gold

Gold Price No Comments »

Don’t say "we" when you mean "the government" and the massive debt it’s created…

WITH THE WESTERN WORLD sinking deeper into what Doug Casey calls the Greater Depression, he now sees default on the US national debt as inevitable – albeit probably in the guise of currency destruction.

Chairman of Casey Research – and one of the world’s most respected mining-stock analysts – Doug speaks here with The Gold Report about why Gold Mining juniors might "go up by an order of magnitude or more, even while most other stocks are going down…"

The Gold Report: Doug, at a recent conference you said that the US ought to default on its national debt now. Why that rather than letting it play out?

Doug Casey: Several other things almost equally radical should be done besides defaulting on the debt. I recognize that an outright default is most unlikely, but the national debt should be defaulted on for several reasons.

To start with, once the US government defaults on its debt, people will think twice before lending it any more money; giving politicians the ability to borrow is like giving a teenager a bottle of whisky and the keys to a Corvette. A second reason is that the debt is an albatross around the necks of the next several generations; it’s criminal to make indentured servants out of people who aren’t even born yet. A third reason would be to overtly punish those who have been lending money to the government, enabling it to do all the stupid and destructive things that the government does with that money.

The debt will be defaulted on one way or another. The trouble is they’re almost certainly going to default on it through inflation, by destroying the currency, which is much worse than defaulting on it overtly. That’s because inflation will wipe out the relatively few people who are prudent in this country, those who are actually saving money. Because they generally save in the form of Dollars, they’re going to wipe them out financially.

It’s just horrible. Runaway inflation will reward the profligates who are in debt – people who’ve been living above their means. And punish the producers who’ve been saving and trying to build capital. That’s in addition to the fact it will destroy millions of productive enterprises. A runaway inflation is the worst thing that can happen to a society, short of a major war. They just should default on it honestly, as it were.

TGR: But your belief is we’ll try to inflate our way out of it to pay for it…

Doug Casey: Don’t say "we". Say "the US government". I don’t consider myself part of the problem. Americans have to learn that the government isn’t "us." It’s an entity that has its own interests, its own life, its own agenda. It views citizens as milk cows – or perhaps even beef cows – strictly as a means to its ends.

TGR: Whether it’s overt or by default, doesn’t that end up in the same place down the line?

Doug Casey: There are two ways they can default – one by saying, "We don’t have the money and we’re not going to pay you," and the other by continuing to print up money and giving people the number of Dollars that they’re owed, except the Dollars are worthless. The first alternative is by far better, for many reasons we can’t fully explore now. But it’s going to be traumatic either way.

TGR: But the assumption that we could actually just print more Dollars and pay off the debt implies that somewhere the debt will stabilize.

Doug Casey: Oh no. It doesn’t have to stabilize. To pay interest on the national debt, and to pay for additional spending, all the Federal Reserve has to do is buy bonds from the US government. It doesn’t have to stabilize at all. The government is most unlikely to cut back on its spending, most of which has become part of the social fabric – Medicare, Social Security, unemployment benefits, food stamps, corporate bailouts, continuing foreign wars, domestic "security"…These people are crazy enough that it could get like Germany in the ’20s or Zimbabwe a few years ago.

TGR: At what point do we tip over and turn into a situation such as Zimbabwe or the Weimar Republic?

Doug Casey: At the moment we’re in an economic twilight zone or, if you wish, the eye of a hurricane. There is apparent stability in the economy. The stock market’s high. The bond market’s high. Only the real estate market is in visible trouble. Retail prices are level; they’re not going up and maybe they’re even going down in some cases. This is a temporary situation. We will inevitably – and soon – hit the other side of the storm. At some point those trillions of Dollars created by the US government – and many other governments around the world have created trillions of currency units – are going to have an effect. When will that be? The timing is uncertain. But I think it’s going to be soon.

TGR: Will it be rapid?

Doug Casey: If these things were perfectly predictable, it would be easier to dodge the bullet. This is an almost unique time in world economic history, and I think we’re not only going to have economic consequences, but social and political consequences, and very likely military consequences. So hold on to your hat.

TGR: To protect what individual wealth we may have, you’ve recommended selling real estate and renting, holding assets outside the United States, Buying Gold, etc. When we’re out of the eye and in the thick of this economic hurricane, what types of equity investments should people be holding?

Doug Casey: Now is a very bad time to have most kinds of equities; stocks in general are very overpriced, by almost every parameter. I’m not looking to sell my gold until I can buy solid blue chip stocks for dividend yields in the 8% to 10% area. That’s after they cut their current dividends. Although it’s certainly not the bargain it was 10 years ago. Nonetheless gold will go higher. Stocks will go lower. I don’t know exactly when I’ll sell my gold and buy stocks, but it will be when there’s a panic into gold and when stocks are bargains. I’m sure I’ll be afraid to make the trade when the time comes – but good trades almost always run counter to your emotions. Perhaps the tip-off will be when Newsweek or Time – if either still exists then – run a front cover with a golden bear tearing apart the New York Stock Exchange.

I think it will be a generation before American real estate is a solid buy again. And the world at large will likely have quite a different character then.

TGR: I take your point about equities in general, but are you also staying away from Gold Mining equities? Or do you maybe see an opportunity there?

Doug Casey: They’re a special situation; on the one hand they are a play on gold, but on the other hand they’re stocks. There’s an excellent chance that with the trillions of currency units being created, the government inevitably will wind up inflating other bubbles. There’s a very good chance for a bubble in gold and a very big bubble in gold stocks. So I would say that they are an exception to other equities. We could see these juniors go up by an order of magnitude or more, even while most other stocks are going down.

Historically, junior resource stocks are the most volatile class of securities in existence.

TGR: Might other sectors also be in that situation?

Doug Casey: My crystal ball is hazy, but it seems to me that junior resource stocks are the best speculative place in the equities market. There’ll probably be others, but I don’t see them very clearly at this time. I’m waiting to see what materializes. You have to look at all markets of all types, everywhere in the world, to find things that are overpriced, as well as things that are underpriced.

Most of the time the trend in any given market is uncertain. I prefer to act only when, in my subjective opinion, the odds are greatly in my favor, and when the potential return is a multiple of my investment. In other words, most people invest 100% of their capital in hope of a 10% return. I prefer to wait until I can invest 10% of my capital for a 100% return.

As to what’s going to happen over the next few years, I feel confident that we’ve entered upon the Greater Depression in earnest. It will be an extended period of time when most people’s standard of living drops significantly. But as I said, I think there’s an excellent chance of a bubble igniting in resource stocks. That will build on the bubble that’s going to come in gold.

High levels of inflation make "investing," in the Graham-Dodd sense of the word, very hard. And inflation makes speculation almost necessary. Just don’t confuse speculation with gambling – they’re very different. Speculation is the art of capitalizing on politically created distortions in the market.

TGR: What’s your definition of resource stocks? For some, it’s very broad and includes metals, agricultural commodities and such. Are you referring specifically to gold?

Doug Casey: I’m most friendly toward gold; it’s the only financial asset that’s not simultaneously someone else’s liability. I’m friendly toward silver, too, because silver is kind of poor man’s gold. I’m very friendly toward oil because I do believe a good, solid argument can be made for what was first defined by M. King Hubbert as "peak oil". Also, oil is likely to be a major player in the next major Mideast conflict. I like uranium; nuclear is certainly the safest, cheapest, and cleanest form of mass power generation.

There’s an excellent case to be made for agricultural commodities in general, and live cattle in particular. I’m not very friendly toward base metals such as lead, zinc, copper, aluminum, iron and so forth. Usage of industrial metals could drop considerably in the ongoing depression.

TGR: You mentioned earlier that you thought it would be a generation before real estate represents a good investment again. Many economic theories, though, tell us that real estate is a good thing to have in an inflationary environment. How do you reconcile those two schools of thought?

Doug Casey: The problem is that we’ve just finished a decade-long real estate boom. Actually, there’s been a property boom, largely driven by debt, since the end of World War II. There’s been immense overbuilding and it’s got to be absorbed. A lot of the overbuilding will have to be bulldozed, quite frankly, because it’s completely uneconomic. I think the economic contraction we’re going into is so serious that in this country you’ll be able to buy real estate for back taxes, much like in the last depression.

But it’s much more serious than what happened in the 1930s when real estate taxes were de minimis. Now many people have to pay $10,000, $20,000, even $30,000 a year in taxes on their houses before they even start paying the mortgage and the utilities and maintenance. And municipalities are likely to try raising the mill rate, because they’re largely bankrupt, and assessed values are way down.

There’s a great deal more I could say about what’s yet to come in the real estate sector. But let me just say the real estate bubble has a long way to deflate yet.

TGR: Is it both residential and commercial or is it worse in one sector?

Doug Casey: That’s tough. Is emphysema worse than Parkinson’s? I suspect, however, that commercial is going to be worse than residential.

People’s shopping habits are one of the things that the Internet has changed and will continue to change. It makes more sense to buy things online and have them delivered to you, than to take the time and expense of going shopping, and the merchant having to deal with retail space, inventory, a geographically limited clientele and so forth. I wouldn’t be surprised to see prices on a lot of commercial property come down 80% or 90%. You’ll see a lot of properties permanently shuttered. That’s a disaster for owners, who will still have to pay taxes. There will be no money for maintenance.

TGR: We spoke earlier about inflation and the likelihood of the US government printing its way out of debt. Do you see a point in time where the United States or even other governments will go back to the gold standard?

Doug Casey: It’s both essential, and inevitable. That’s because they have no reason to trust one another. They need a medium of exchange and a store of value that’s not faith-based.

All the other governments of the world know that the US is bankrupt and the Dollar is nothing but a floating abstraction. Why should they hold billions or in some cases trillions of these things on their balance sheets? They’re going to go back to gold because it’s the only financial asset that’s not simultaneously somebody else’s liability.

It’s not because gold is magic in any way. It’s just because it has characteristics that among the 92 naturally occurring elements make it uniquely well suited for use as money. It’s durable. It’s divisible. It’s convenient. It’s consistent. It has use value in and of itself. And it can’t be created out of thin air by some government. It’s a better combination of those things than any of the 92 elements. It’s infinitely better than paper. So yes, I think they’ll go back to gold within this generation.

TGR: You were speaking of buying things online. Most people today don’t even use paper bills. We do everything electronically in terms of banking. Aren’t those properties of gold that you described irrelevant in the electronic era?

Doug Casey: To the contrary. Gold is an asset. You can put it in your bank account and transfer it. You can buy and sell it electronically. The fact that it can be transferred electronically today makes it a better money than ever before. So no, not at all, gold is quite relevant. It’s not in any way an anachronism. I pity fools like Bernanke and Geithner who don’t understand that. If they totally destroy the Dollar, they may end up hung by their heels from a lamp post.

TGR: You said you’re very partial to oil and uranium. Are you attracted to any other energy resources?

Doug Casey: Yes. My friend Rick Rule has justifiably and very intelligently been a big promoter of geothermal energy, because it’s actually superior to even nuclear in some ways. It should have a huge future. There’s very little geothermal being generated right now, and a great deal could be generated in the future. Many other forms of power generation are possible – tides, ocean currents, heat differentials in the ocean, solar microwaved down from collectors in high orbit – there are many, many innovative technologies out there.

Of course as technology keeps advancing, conventional solar will become cheaper and more efficient. Energy shortages, and high energy costs, are totally caused by political issues. In a true free market world they wouldn’t even be worth talking about.

TGR: But will technology-reliant sources such as solar and wind power be able to sustain through this downturn that you’re expecting?

Doug Casey: Well, most of the power we have is now generated via coal. Coal is very problematical as an energy source – it’s dirty, bulky and could be used for better things than burning. Stupidly, most new plants will be running on coal, not nuclear.

That said, you can expect that the average guy will be cutting his standard of living, driving less, turning down his heat in the winter, turning down his air conditioning in the summer and turning off the lights when he leaves the room. So I’m not sure that electricity consumption will be going up for years to come, especially with a lot of stores being shuttered and so forth.

Wind and solar are trivial sources of power. Good for certain applications in certain locations, but not suitable for mass power in an industrial civilization with anything like our present technology.

TGR: So if electricity consumption goes down…wind and solar are barely economically viable now.

Doug Casey: That’s right. It’s just a question of the alternatives. You weigh what you pay for a kilowatt hour on the grid versus what it costs an individual to put up private wind or solar, or for utility to put up commercial wind or solar. I see no reason to invest in these alternatives other than economics.

The way I see it, arguments made about saving the planet and so forth are basically ridiculous, even if naively well intended. All the blather about "carbon footprints" is scientifically nonsensical. It’s not a matter of tree hugging. If you’re paying more for something than necessary, you’re misallocating capital. You’re destroying capital. That’s a real crime against humanity.

To me, it’s strictly a matter of economics. If at some point technology makes a great breakthrough, maybe solar will become the best and cheapest power source; that would be wonderful. That’s not the case right now. As I said before, maybe they’ll be able to put solar collectors into geostationary earth orbit and beam down solar to earth by microwave. There are lots of possibilities for solar to become economic. It’s just that right now, it costs several times what other forms of power do. It doesn’t make sense, except in certain places, in certain applications.

TGR: Given that, would we expect to see any solar in your portfolio?

Doug Casey: If somebody makes a cosmic breakthrough, I’m happy to buy the stock. I’m certainly not inclined against solar on any philosophical grounds.

TGR: The Chinese recently announced that they will start selling gold coins through their banking system. What do you make of that? Is it really big news?

Doug Casey: I think it is. The Chinese know that one of the reasons Mao took over is because the government of Chiang Kai-shek destroyed the national currency. The Chinese can see the problems with the US Dollar. That it could blow up in their hands. They also see the problems they’re creating for themselves by creating trillions of new renminbi. So I think that they’re encouraging the average guy in the street to do some saving with gold so that if things go sideways with these paper currencies, the average guy isn’t left too destitute and too angry. At least he’ll have some Gold Coins. I think they’re being quite intelligent about encouraging their people to Buy Gold.

TGR: What do you make of the fact that a country with a communist orientation encourages its citizens to Buy Gold, while the world’s supposedly premier democracy does not?

Doug Casey: First of all, let’s recognize that communism was a very short-term aberration in the 5,000-year grand screen of Chinese history. Mao only ruled the country for about 30 years. Since the late ’70s, China’s been returning to its old ways. Everybody knows that the Communist Party in China is nothing but a scam for its members to cream something off the top of everything. It’s ludicrous to say China is a communist country. It’s easier to do business in China than it is in the US – lower taxes, less regulation, less legal hassles.

In point of fact, the Chinese are reverting to the mean. For many centuries, up until the Industrial Revolution, China was much wealthier than the West. Now it’s rising again.

As far as the United States is concerned, unfortunately it’s going the other way. The issue has nothing to do with democracy. Democracy is just mob rule dressed up in a sports coat. It’s much overrated. The US government is becoming more powerful, and the US is radically departing from the economic philosophy of free markets that made it great. It’s simultaneously becoming more politically repressive. The Chinese are just reverting to their traditional economic philosophy, which is not communism, it’s capitalist trade and production.

TGR: Presumably, participants will get a lot more of what we’ve been talking about at the Casey Summit that you have scheduled for October 1-3 in Carlsbad, California.

Doug Casey: For sure. We’re going to be talking about specific ways to take advantage of the problems that we have today. It’s important to remember that as the Greater Depression deepens, most of the real wealth in the world still will be here. It’s just going to change ownership. The key for this conference is we’re going to examine why things are the way they are. But perhaps even more important is how to capitalize on them, how to take advantage of them.

TGR: Of course you’ll be at the conference too. And your lineup includes Bob Bishop, Eric Sprott, Richard Russell, Bob Prechter, and obviously Rick Rule.

Doug Casey: And Neil Howe, who with William Strauss wrote The Fourth Turning and Generations: the History of America’s Future, 1584 to 2069. It’s among the most brilliant, and original, analyses of long-term trends of history I’ve ever seen.

TGR: And I understand you’ll be introducing the Casey NexTen. How does that complement your Casey Explorers’ League?

Doug Casey: When Ross Beaty, Bob Quartermain, Simon Ridgway and the other members of our Explorers’ League come out with a new deal, it automatically carries a huge premium because they’re proven commodities; highly technically competent, honest guys with good work habits, who have found and made economic more than three mines.

Get the safest gold at the lowest costs – starting with a complimentary gram in Zurich right now – at BullionVault…

Tagged with: America • bank account • banking • Bishop • Bob Bishop • Bob Prechter • Bob Quartermain • California • Carlsbad • Casey Explorers' League • Chairman • China • Communist Party • decade-long real estate boom • Doug Casey • electricity consumption • Energy • energy resources • Energy shortages • energy source • Eric Sprott • Explorers' League • food stamps • geothermal energy • Germany • high energy costs • Hubbert • King • Major • Medicare • microwave • mining • Neil Howe • New York Stock Exchange • Newsweek • oil • peak oil • point technology • present technology • real estate • real estate bubble • real estate market • real estate sector • real estate taxes • Retail prices • retail space • Richard Russell • Rick Rule • Ross Beaty • Simon Ridgway • technology-reliant sources • United States • US Federal Reserve • US government • USD • William Strauss • Zimbabwe • Zurich

Aug 22

Any Growth in Gold?

Gold Price No Comments »

Physical gold looks like the best option according to this:

Gold Mining stocks face a slow, long-term decline in output…

PORTFOLIO Joe Foster calls himself a “stock picker”, says the Gold Report – and he’s pretty good at it.

Class A shareholders in Van Eck Global‘s International Investors Gold Fund have seen an average return of almost 25% for 10 straight years under his care. “I’m looking for the gold companies that are going to outperform the indexes, my peers and gold,” Joe says in this exclusive interview with The Gold Report…

The Gold Report: Joe, in your view, what are the catalysts that will push gold to the next level?

Joe Foster: Well, there could be a range of catalysts, any one of which could rear its ugly head.

TGR: Which ones are most likely?

Joe Foster: The financial system has not yet recovered from the shock of the credit crisis. We’re in the midst of a historic credit contraction that could turn into a deflationary credit contraction. As the Fed and the economy deal with this, there is a range of possibilities that could create a catalyst.

One would be further implementation of quantitative easing, where the Fed steps in and buys securities in order to prop up the financial system. A second is the housing market, which looks like it’s weakening again. If we see a double dip in the housing market, it could create the financial stress that provides a catalyst.

The sovereign debt issues are something that, to me, will be on the table for quite some time. They could flare up again in Europe and elsewhere. State and municipalities’ finances are in very difficult shape right now. We could see some form of stress in the municipal bond market that could cause some sort of a catalyst for gold, as well.

So there’s a range of catalysts that could come into the market over the next year or two that drive it higher.

TGR: The Fed may look at more quantitative easing, but it doesn’t really have a lot of room to operate as far as interest rates go. What sort of economic policy does America need at this point?

Joe Foster: I think our monetary system needs an overhaul. I guess some sort of stimulus, whether it be quantitative easing or some more fiscal stimulus, might be necessary to keep the economy from going into a deeper recession. But I think plans to create a more sound monetary system would go a long way toward boosting confidence in the government’s ability to handle these crises in the future or to prevent them from happening.

TGR: Do you think what is happening now will ultimately result in a new currency down the road? Perhaps even a global currency?

Joe Foster: A global currency would be very difficult. Just to have a sound Dollar again would create a lot of stability around the world. Many other countries still peg their currencies to the Dollar, so proper management of the Dollar would, in effect, create a sound global currency. The Dollar is still the world’s reserve currency. I’m calling for some sound money policies that we haven’t seen since the Dollar was floated back in the 1970s.

TGR: In a June commentary on gold you said, “states across the country are undertaking austerity measures to counter gapping budget deficits.” Could a state, or states, defaulting on loans or even declaring bankruptcy be the next leg down that turns the recession into something worse?

Joe Foster: Well, I doubt it would go as far as a state actually declaring bankruptcy. Congress looks like it’s going to approve another round of state aid to keep the states afloat. I think you would see the federal government step in before we saw a bankruptcy. But states like New York and California and others around the country are in serious financial trouble. We’ll have to see if the austerity measures that they’re implementing will keep them out of bankruptcy. I think this is more of a slow burn. I don’t see it as being the catalyst for the next leg in the gold market. I think we’ll reach the next leg in the gold market before any state reaches such a desperate situation.

TGR: How high do you see gold getting by the end of this year and through the end of 2011?

Joe Foster: I’m looking for it to make new highs as we trend into 2011, moving through the fall of 2010. The high was around $1,265 in June. We’ve been on a steady trend higher. There’s a lot of volatility in the gold market, but I would expect that trend to continue. It wouldn’t surprise me if it moved through the $1,400 level sometime during 2011.

TGR: You said that you believe that the government would step in and prevent a state from declaring bankruptcy or becoming insolvent. Do you believe the government is, to some extent, manipulating the gold market?

Joe Foster: I think that’s speculation. I haven’t seen solid evidence that the government is manipulating the gold market one way or the other. Even if they are, I think the market will determine where the Gold Price goes in the longer term.

TGR: You have managed assets for investors since 1998. In the post-2008 era, are you managing your gold fund the same way you did in the pre-2008 era?

Joe Foster: Well, we’re using the same strategies or similar strategies now that we have since this bull market began in 2001. Relative to our peers, we’re probably overweight in juniors and mid-cap companies and underweight in the large-cap companies. Some of the fundamental strategies that we use remain in place.

I would say that the big difference is that, prior to the credit crisis, we spent a lot of time explaining to investors why they should invest in gold as a hedge against financial stress. Since the credit crisis we don’t spend much time explaining why you should invest in gold because investors get it. Everybody gets it now that gold functions as a sound currency and as a financial hedge in times of turmoil.

I spend more time describing how we construct our portfolio and manage the fund because investors are now asking: “How do I invest in gold? Do I want Gold Bullion? Do I want a Gold ETF? Do I want a managed fund? Do I want an equity ETF?” Those are the questions that investors are asking now that we weren’t hearing prior to the crisis.

TGR: That’s noteworthy. But your asset allocation must’ve changed some since the crisis. You said it’s heavier than your competitors on juniors and mid caps.

Joe Foster: I’ve got an entire range. I’ve got companies from juniors all the way up to the largest producers in the fund. We play the whole spectrum of gold companies. It’s just that I’ve got a higher weighting in juniors and midtiers than I do in the large-cap companies. We’re stock pickers, we’re bottom-up, fundamentals-driven stock pickers. I’m looking for the gold companies that are going to outperform the indexes, my peers and gold.

TGR: You’ve certainly done a good job. Over the last 10 years, Class A shares in your International Investors Gold Fund are up almost 25%. Does gold’s steady climb upward provide a greater margin for error in gold fund management?

Joe Foster: Not really. When you look at Gold Mining, gold production peaked in 2001 and it’s been on a slow decline ever since. In an industry that’s in decline, you know you’re going to have winners and losers. The market likes companies that can provide growth. But in a declining industry those types of companies become fewer and farther between. And there are lots of gold companies that have underperformed gold in this cycle. So stock picking becomes very important. It’s not always easy to outperform gold in this type of an industry environment.

TGR: How do you go about picking stocks? What are you looking for?

Joe Foster: We look for growth. Companies that can develop properties at reasonable cost and that can increase their margins. The best kind of growth is organic growth, where companies discover deposits and develop them. That’s the first thing we look for, organic growth. The second thing would be growth through acquisitions. We look for management that can identify creative acquisitions and grow that way.

TGR: Is it still cheaper for companies to go out and raise money and drill for organic growth versus acquiring assets through M&A?

Joe Foster: It’s very difficult to do. For most of the industry, it’s almost impossible. The reason gold production isn’t increasing globally is that all the easy stuff has already been found. The prolific gold fields of South Africa, Nevada and Western Australia are all mature areas that are in decline. The industry hasn’t found another prolific gold area like Nevada. Instead, they have to look all over the world and into remote areas. There are new discoveries being made; it’s just not at the pace that we saw 20 years ago when Nevada and Western Australia were emerging.

TGR: You mentioned Nevada. When I was looking at your fact sheet on the International Investors Gold Fund, only about 10% of your holdings are based in the US Does America need more gold mines?

Joe Foster: The US is still one among the top-five gold producers in the world. It’s still a substantial gold producer. I don’t know if we need more gold mines. It’s a function of geology. Probably 90% of the gold production in the US comes out of Nevada. As I said earlier, Nevada is past its prime; it’s a region wherein production is in decline.

TGR: But California has banned new Gold Mining projects, and Montana has banned heap leaching as a form of gold extraction. We’re seeing some exploration success in places like Wyoming and Idaho. The US is still the fourth-largest country in the world by area, so you would think there are lots of areas that remain unexplored.

Joe Foster: Well, if the United States was more mining friendly, there’s no doubt it could be a much larger gold producer than it is; but, in all practicality, that’s not going to happen. Mining is such a miniscule part of the US economy that it’s not politically feasible to revise the mining laws in states like California and Oregon. It’s a bit much to ask in places like that.

TGR: Do you have some parting thoughts for us?

Joe Foster: Well, we talked about the gold market more in the near term, but this gold market’s been in bull mode for almost 10 years now. As far as we can tell, it could go on for another 10 years. Who knows? I think the actions we’re seeing among the monetary and fiscal authorities around the world are setting up a situation wherein we could see another inflationary cycle once we get through this credit contraction. I think in the longer term, the risk of an inflationary cycle is going to be with us for quite some time. That’s going to be the ultimate driver of this gold bull market.

Gold Investing now simple, safe and low-cost! Start with a free gram of free Swiss gold at BullionVault now…

Tagged with: America • Australia • California • Congress • Europe • Federal government • Idaho • International Investors Gold Fund • Joe Foster • larger gold producer • Montana • much larger gold producer • Nevada • New York • Oregon • South Africa • substantial gold producer • ugly head • ultimate driver • United States • USD • Van Eck Global 's International Investors Gold Fund • Western Australia • Wyoming

"Contained" Inflation

Dollars, Debt & Gold

Any Growth in Gold?

RSS Feed

Archives

"Contained" Inflation

Dollars, Debt & Gold

Any Growth in Gold?

RSS Feed

Archives

Tags