Thai Guru's Gold und Silber ... (Informationen und Vermutungen)

Der heutige live Gold Chart!

[Blockierte Grafik: http://www.galmarley.com/Chart…USD_Line_1day_300x150.gif]

24-Hour market price quotes

http://www.mrci.com/qpday.asp

Falls Argentinien heute wirklich nicht 3.1 Milliarden Dollar an den IMF überweisen kann, und damit seinen Zahlungsverplichtungen nicht nachkommt, dürfte das dem Goldpreis zusätzlichen Auftrieb geben.

Bin gespannt auf den heutigen Comex Handel in den USA, geht ja gleich los. Nachdem die heute im Londoner Handel Silber wieder runtergedrückt haben, nachdem in Hongkong 7.05 Dollar pro Unze erreicht wurde, dürfte heute in den USA eine Entscheidung anstehen.

Die Chancen stehen gut, dass Silber heute nochmals die 7.- Dollar Hürde versucht zu nehmen. Noch besser wären 7.10++ Dollar Schlusskurs. Wir werden es bald erleben, ob`s klappt.

Gruss

Thaiguru

[Blockierte Grafik: http://images.bloomberg.com/nav/bblogo.gif]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/economy/economies.html

Argentina Must Make $3.1 Billion IMF Loan Payment Today to Avoid Default

March 9 (Bloomberg) -- Argentina today may miss a $3.1 billion loan payment to the International Monetary Fund, two years after it defaulted on $99 billion of bonds.

President Nestor Kirchner has said he won't make the payment unless he gets assurances from the IMF that it would free this month a $3.1 billion loan to the nation, South America's second- biggest economy. The payment is equivalent to 20 percent of Argentina's $15 billion of foreign reserves.

Failure to pay the IMF would place Argentina with such nations as Sudan and Liberia, limiting the prospects of further assistance from intergovernmental organizations and reducing the chances of negotiations with investors, who have waited more than two years for a restructuring agreement.

``Argentina is isolating itself from the world,'' said Mauro Sandri, an Italian lawyer who helped set up the Argentine Creditors group in Rome, which represents 270,000 individual investors. The group is attempting to seize Argentine property and funds in Italy worth about $93 million, Sandri said. ``They are sliding into the ridiculous.''

Argentina was late in September on a $2.9 billion payment to the IMF. It made the payment after the fund committed to the new loan accord.

``I don't expect agreement today but it will probably be settled over the next few weeks,'' said Edwin Gutierrez, who helps manage $1.5 billion of emerging-market debt, including about $50 million of Argentine government bonds, at Deutsche Asset Management in London. ``Argentina won't want to join the ranks of those pariah states.''

The country's most-traded defaulted security, the 7 percent bond due 2008, fell 0.85 cent on the dollar to 27.75, raising the yield to 69 percent, according to J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. at 7:26 a.m. New York time.

Scenarios

``Kirchner is getting too tough,'' said Silvia Marengo, who sold her last holdings of Argentine sovereign bonds about 10 days ago out of the $210 million of debt assets she manages at Clariden Bank in Zurich, a unit of Credit Suisse Group. ``I've just got fed up of waiting for the restructuring.''

The IMF, which said it will make a decision on Argentina this month, has said the country needs to make further progress in restructuring the defaulted bonds. The country met its quarterly budget targets set in the $13.3 billion loan accord, the fund has said.

``A delayed payment by Argentina, as occurred last September, is possible as negotiations appear to be ongoing,'' said Vladimir Werning, chief economist at J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. Buenos Aires, in an e-mailed report. ``However, we don't consider that such a possibility would lead to a breakdown in relations with the IMF, as negotiations would continue.''

Demands

Argentina still hasn't accepted IMF demands for direct talks with the Global Committee of Argentina Bondholders, a representative group, Werning said.

Argentina offered in September during an IMF meeting in Dubai to repay $250 per each $1,000 in defaulted bonds. The offer, which does not include recognition of past due interest and extends maturities on some bonds up to 42 years, amounts to recouping about 10 cents on the dollar, said economists such as Daniel Marx, a former Argentine finance secretary.

Kirchner has said the government will ignore ``arm- twisting'' by special interest groups seeking to get it to improve its offer.

``Despite Kirchner's tough rhetoric, I believe he will negotiate to the end to get the IMF aid agreement back on track,'' said Jorge Todesca, who was Argentina's vice economy minister in 2002 and now runs a research consultancy in Buenos Aires. ``Argentina needs that support and Kirchner knows it.''

To contact the reporters on this story:
Daniel Helft at dhelft@bloomberg.net;
Gavin Serkin at gserkin@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor for this story:
Laura Zelenko at lzelenko@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: March 9, 2004 07:27 EST

[Blockierte Grafik: http://www.moneyweb.co.za/images2/logo.gif]

http://m1.mny.co.za/BusToday.n…6E510057469B?OpenDocument

Phillip Klapwijk: Chairman, GFMS

By: Alec Hogg

Posted: 2004/03/08 Mon 21:00 | © Moneyweb 1997-2004

MONEYWEB: In tonight’s top story, we pick up on the Frankfurt Agreement, today the central banks got together in Frankfurt to sign an agreement which will limit the amount of gold that 14 national banks and the European Central Bank will sell over the next five years. My colleague, Stewart Bailey, has some background for us.

STEWART BAILEY: Yes, Alec. Today we saw the long-awaited renewal of the Washington Agreement which was the agreement, if you cast your mind back to 1999, where 14 central banks effectively rescued the gold market when they agreed to limit their bullion sales to 400 tons of gold a year. Now, that agreement effectively removed the risk of a large overhang of central bank sales in the market and, although it does seem like decades ago, almost, gold bugs might remember that rumours of massive reserve bank selling were the biggest single dampener on the gold price at the time. Well, today, those banks, excluding the Bank of England, agreed to extend that accord for another five years to 2009. The only material change is that they will sell an extra 100 tons a year, which is really not much in the bigger scheme of things. The response to the new agreement has been almost unanimously positive. I spoke to Kelvin Williams, who is AngloGold’s marketing director, just a few hours ago. He thinks the banks are going to struggle even to fill that 2,500-ton quota that they’ve set themselves. He reckons they might scratch to find sellers for the whole lot, and that view is echoed by Phillip Klapwijk, who is the executive chairman of GFMS Mineral Services, which is one of the biggest and most renowned gold research agencies around.

MONEYWEB: Phillip’s in Barcelona, and we link up with him right now. Phillip, the Frankfurt Agreement, I guess, is the way it’s going to be called now – after the Washington Agreement of 1999. It didn’t have any impact on the gold price, much different to what happened five years ago. I guess that suggests it was well expected.

PHILLIP KLAPWIJK: Oh, I think that’s true. That 500 tons is perhaps a little bit towards the upper range of expectations, but it’s within that range. I think the interesting thing to point out is that, in US dollar terms of course, the gold price is the best part of 50% higher today than it was at the time that the first agreement was put together.

MONEYWEB: Mmm. What about the Latin American banks and the new EU nations who are going to be joining the European Union? They aren’t specifically included in this accord.

PHILLIP KLAPWIJK: Yes. Well, I think it’s curious, in a sense, that the new European Union countries haven’t signed up to that. Mind you, there’s a lot of T’s to be crossed and I’d to be dotted in many other areas when it comes to those countries still, so perhaps it’s not entirely surprising. But I had expected perhaps some of the smaller gold holders in central and eastern Europe to be on board this time. I actually don’t think it makes any difference though in the wider scheme of things to the market. And when it comes to South America, Central America, there’s really on one country there which has got anything in terms of serious gold holdings, and that’s Venezuela. The interesting thing about Venezuela is that, in spite of all the ups and downs of the economy and indeed the political situation there over recent years, one thing they’ve held fast to is their gold holdings.

MONEYWEB: Will the market be able to absorb 500 tons a year?

PHILLIP KLAPWIJK: Yes, I don’t think it’s a problem. The quantity certainly has increased. I reckon that those who have drafted this agreement have taken into account the fact that gold is trading $130 or so higher than it was at the time of September 1999, and believe that the market can take that extra quantity without too much of a problem.

MONEYWEB: Phillip, how important is gold in international central banks’ reserve holdings?

PHILLIP KLAPWIJK: Well, gold is still the second largest asset that central banks hold after US dollars. So, in terms of their overall gold and foreign exchange holdings, it’s an extremely important asset, although it will have to be recognised that that asset, to a large extent, is a legacy of decisions that were taken the best part of a generation ago. And what we’re seeing in Europe in a sense is the unwinding of some of those decisions taken 30-plus years ago.

MONEYWEB: If they were allowed to sell without any agreement amongst themselves, is it likely that they would have sold more than 500 tons, or is someone like Kelvin Williams from AngloGold right in suggesting that they’re going to find it difficult to get to that number?

PHILLIP KLAPWIJK: Well, I think that, when it comes to getting to that number, the question you’ve got to ask is who precisely is going to make up that number within the 15 signatories. Now, Germany, which is the largest single holder, has come out publicly and said that it’s going to sell no more than 600 tons over the life of the agreement. They’re going to struggle to hit 2,500 tons, unless either France and/or Italy turn out to be sellers of a significant quantity of gold. Neither of those countries so far has made a comment publicly as to what its plans are going to be over the lifetime of this agreement.

MONEYWEB: The fact that Germany will be selling 600 tons – does that give an indication of a conservative approach from the German central bank, or is that quite an aggressive …

PHILLIP KLAPWIJK: I think that’s quite a conservative approach. I think if you’d asked me a couple of years ago what sort of quantity the Germans would be selling, I would have probably expected something more in line with what Switzerland have, and is still selling – in other words, something north of 1,000 tons. The fact that they’ve stuck to 600 tons could mean a couple of things, but in terms at least of their own policy it’s a pretty conservative number.

MONEYWEB: What about France? Are they likely to follow as conservative a route as the Germans have?

PHILLIP KLAPWIJK: Well, that I think is one of the key questions – what is France going to do? France has hitherto been, of the European countries, one might argue, the most conservative in its approach to gold holdings and gold management. Back in 1999 it made its position quite clear and it was quite a conservative “let’s do nothing” type of approach. I think this time round everybody is looking at France and maybe expecting some movement there, and it would not surprise me if they come out with a quantity to sell which would be not far away from the German number. But I must stress they have made no public comment that I’m aware of.

MONEYWEB: Put it all together, and is this a bit of good news for gold or not?

PHILLIP KLAPWIJK: I think overall, if people focus on the volume number and the fact that we have another five-year agreement, the fact that it’s an extra 100 tons per annum is really, I would consider, largely irrelevant. What I’m not entirely sure about is: has the market digested the fact that there could be let’s say a new seller of the likes of France or possibly Italy, which would, let’s say, have the potential for sending a somewhat negative signal, even though those sales would be within the quota agreed in Frankfurt?

MONEYWEB: Phillip Klapwijk is the executive chairman of GFMS Mineral Services.

[Blockierte Grafik: http://www.financialsense.com/…ges/banner_editorials.gif]

http://www.financialsense.com/…ls/kosares/2004/0308.html

The New Gold Accord
by Michael Kosares
Centennial Precious Metals
http://www.USAGold.com
March 8, 2004

I see the renewal of the European central banks' gold sales agreement as a positive for the gold market. Here's why.

When you look a the supply demand tables, the one thing that stands out clearly is that mine production is static in the 2,200-2,600-tonne range and has been for almost a decade. Given the statements of industry stalwarts, it doesn't appear that the production is going to improve any time soon. Exploration budgets were cut to the bone during the quiet years, and it takes upwards of seven years to bring a known deposit to production. Scrap is another constant in the 600-tonnes-per-year range.

Meanwhile gold usage is on a steady growth curve from 3,400 tonnes in 1994 to 4,000 tonnes per year now. That gap between mine-plus-scrap production and usage must be filled. But how?

In years past most of that gap has been made up through mining company forward sales programs, central bank sales, and net disinvestment. Now forward sales programs have gone to the other side of the ledger with the advent of dehedging.

For example, in 1997 hedgers were responsible for bringing an extra 470 tonnes "supply" to the table. In 2002 they bought back 420 tonnes and showed up on the "demand" side of the ledger. That's a 890-tonne turnaround! I disagree with the analysts who are saying that producer buy-backs will slow down or even disappear. This doesn't square with the hefty hedge books some of these mining companies will be burdened with as the price rises. If anything, I see even more de-hedging in the offing -- and the tonnages, I believe, will come as a surprise.

Today's announcement is important from another perspective. Let's keep in mind that all this started many years with a plea from N.M. Rothschild for more "transparency" in the gold business. The representative of Rothschild might well have used the word "predicablility" because that's what they were after. We now know that 500 tonnes will be coming on the market annually over the next five years from official sector sales and NO MORE. What's more the lease pool remains capped at the 1999 number.

With investment demand -- the big X factor heating up globally in the face of a dollar problem -- appearing increasing intractable, this cap on the supply side of the chart will figure mightily in the thinking of both long-term hedgers as well as speculators in the hedge funds and big bank trading departments. One London trader was quoted a few days ago as saying that he wasn't concerned about the rise in sales from 400 tonnes per year to 500 because the market needed the supply.

I concur. In fact, I believe the market could have withstood 700-800 tonnes per year without a blink in the current environment, and there is a possibility that the market will come up woefully short under these circumstances -- a prospect likely to be reflected in the price. Watch out for a delayed positive reaction or a protracted upturn in the gold price as a direct result from today's announcement.

The losing position will continue to be on the short side of this market and I think the players know it. The next phase of this secular bull market will display a strong and incessant undercurrent of physical demand with some nations seeking to bolster their official-sector holdings and some of the smaller central banks pressuring the bullion banks to have their gold deposits returned.