Rohstoffboom ...?

Jim Rogers, der Mitbegründer des Quantum Fonds, beschreibt in seinem unterhaltsamen New York Times Bestseller “Rohstoffe - Der attraktivste Markt der Welt” wie man von dem kommenden Bullenmarkt in Rohstoffen profitieren kann. Rogers prognostiziert einen Bullenmarkt bis mindestens 2015 und führt dies auf jene beiden Hauptfaktoren zurück, die immer im Mittelpunkt seiner Rohstoffanalysen stehen: Angebot und Nachfrage.

Zum einen die sinkenden Kapazitäten, die durch den langen Bärenmarkt in Rohstoffen bedingt sind, als niemand mehr in neue Förder- oder Anbaukapazitäten investierte. Zum anderen den kometenhaften Aufstieg Asiens und Chinas. Man könnte zu Rogers Analyse einen weiteren Punkt hinzufügen, nämlich dass Rohstoff auf Grund ihrer hohen Liquidität in inflationären Zeiten attraktiv sind. Oder wie der Österreichische Nationalökonom Carl Menger es ausdrücken würde: Rohstoffe besitzen eine hohe Absatzfähigkeit....more

http://de.liberty.li/?id=1456&…raktivste+Markt+der+Welt.

Sehr geehrte Leser

anbei die neue Ausgabe 06/2006 des Rohstoff Spiegels.

Dieses Mal erwarten Sie folgende Inhalte:

» editorial: Gründe für Backwardation
» titel: Die aktuelle Lage am Silbermarkt
» interview: Noch keine Public-Phase bei Edelmetallen!!!
» fundamental: Das Goldverbot funktioniert!
» minenecke: Neuer Junior mit hervorragenden Aussichten
» minenecke: MinenCheck
» marktmeinung: Nickel bleibt weiterhin knapp!
» leserservice: Leserspiegel
» trading tipps: Optionsstrategie: Dezember Silber 2006
» charts & co: Silver Standard – Seiner Zeit voraus
» community: Reden ist Silber, schweigen ist Gold?


Empfehlen Sie den Rohstoff Spiegel doch auch Ihren Bekannten und Freunden.

Eine Anmeldung ist möglich unter http://www.rohstoff-spiegel.de

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Chefredakteur
-------------------------------
Rohstoff Spiegel
Website: http://www.rohstoff-spiegel.de
E-mail: info@rohstoff-spiegel.de

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Um den Rohstoff Spiegel korrekt lesen zu können - benötigen Sie den Acrobat-Reader, der unter
folgender Adresse kostenlos heruntergeladen werden kann:

http://www.adobe.de/products/acrobat/readermain.html

Sehr geehrte Leser

anbei die neue Ausgabe 06/2006 des Rohstoff Spiegels.

Dieses Mal erwarten Sie folgende Inhalte:

» editorial: Gründe für Backwardation
» titel: Die aktuelle Lage am Silbermarkt
» interview: Noch keine Public-Phase bei Edelmetallen!!!
» fundamental: Das Goldverbot funktioniert!
» minenecke: Neuer Junior mit hervorragenden Aussichten
» minenecke: MinenCheck
» marktmeinung: Nickel bleibt weiterhin knapp!
» leserservice: Leserspiegel
» trading tipps: Optionsstrategie: Dezember Silber 2006
» charts & co: Silver Standard – Seiner Zeit voraus
» community: Reden ist Silber, schweigen ist Gold?


Empfehlen Sie den Rohstoff Spiegel doch auch Ihren Bekannten und Freunden.

Eine Anmeldung ist möglich unter http://www.rohstoff-spiegel.de

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Chefredakteur
-------------------------------
Rohstoff Spiegel
Website: http://www.rohstoff-spiegel.de
E-mail: info@rohstoff-spiegel.de

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Um den Rohstoff Spiegel korrekt lesen zu können - benötigen Sie den Acrobat-Reader, der unter
folgender Adresse kostenlos heruntergeladen werden kann:

http://www.adobe.de/products/acrobat/readermain.html

Front-Page News

By Chris Mayer

The global water crisis is not a front page story...yet.

But over the coming months, I expect this "middle-page"
story to make its way to the front of newspapers worldwide.
Already, "Water crisis" articles are appearing with
increasing frequency...

"Shortages of water are growing faster than expected," the
August 22nd edition of the Financial Times warned.
"Scientists had forecast in 2000 that one in three people
would face water shortages by 2025, but water experts have
been shocked to find that this threshold has already been
crossed."

Think of it; a forecast of an event that was not supposed
to happen until 2025. Yet, here we are in 2006 and that
forecast is already a reality. The idea of investing in
water-themed stocks has been kicking around the fringes of
the investment world for decades, but these stocks are
anything but fringy now. I believe we'll look back on the
current decade as the one that launched the most serious
natural resource crisis of the 21st century.

The water crisis that is now underway is both a physical
and an economic phenomenon.

On the physical side, much of the world's population
resides in locales where water is naturally scarce. Too
often, however, the supplies of fresh water become UN-
naturally scarce, due to reckless industrialization,
breakneck urbanization and chronic mismanagement.

Water is naturally scarce throughout Egypt, Australia and
the American Southwest. Even so, the Southwest hosts one of
the fastest growing populations in the country. Obviously,
when rapid population growth confronts a lean supply of
water, problems ensue. So it should be no surprise that the
U.S. is having increasing disputes with Mexico over sinking
levels of water in the Colorado River. Elsewhere in the
West and Southwest, cities and small towns are tussling
with one another over water rights and restrictions on
water use.

How bad can it get? Here's an interesting little tidbit: In
1944, Governor Benjamin Moeur sent the Arizona National
Guard during the construction of Parker Dam to prevent
California from stealing Arizona's water. When the unit of
about 100 men, with machine guns mounted on trucks,
arrived, construction stopped, as you might have guessed.
This issue was later resolved in the Supreme Court. Could
such standoffs happen again?

In Australia, water plays a big part in political
elections, where they are debating the reclamation of
sewage water and turning it into drinking water. "As
campaign promises, these are hardly pleasing," notes the
typically understated Economist. "Yet it illustrates the
increasing prominence of water, or the lack of it, in
Australian politics." According to the magazine, Australia
faces a water shortage unlike anything experienced in the
200 years since Europeans arrived.

The Economist quotes an Australian agricultural scientist,
Peter Cullen, who says, "People are frightened of running
out of water."

But clean water is not only in short supply where rainfall
levels are low; it is also in short supply where financial
resources are low. In other words, today's water crisis is
as much an economic problem as a physical one, perhaps more
so.

Although more than one billion people face physical water
shortages, the Financial Times notes, "a further one
billion people face economic water shortages because they
lack the necessary infrastructure to take water from rivers
and aquifers." The "economic shortages" also result from
inadequate or non-existent waste treatment. Throughout many
parts of the Developing World, wastewater receives minimal
– or no – treatment before flowing into lakes, rivers and
seas.

Then there is China, which no water enthusiast can ignore.
"China's Water Problems Set to Worsen" reads one headline.
The Chinese have found that despite massive investment in
water infrastructure over the last few years, water
pollution is actually worsening. Qiu Baoxing, minister of
Construction in China, said: "This is a critical point in
time – we are at a crossroads."

Indeed they are. Water is a major health issue in China – a
country that leads the world in incidences of stomach and
liver cancer, both traced to exposure to polluted water.

In my recently published water report, I examine the main
threads of the global crisis. But if there are still any
lingering doubts whether this crisis is real, consider this
alarming fact from my report:

"Contaminated water is deadlier than any other evil on
earth; deadlier than AIDS; deadlier than cancer; deadlier
than contagious diseases; deadlier even than World Wars.
During the Second World War, one soldier died every 8
seconds. Today, one human being dies every 6 seconds from
drinking contaminated water. The scale of this ongoing
international tragedy boggles the mind."

Fortunately, a growing water crisis is not a foregone
conclusion. But the effort to combat the crisis will
require an enormous commitment of planning, effort
and...yes...money. As the campaign against the water crisis
progress, hundreds of billions of dollars will flow into
the coffers of water-treatment and water infrastructure
companies.

Therefore, the long-term efforts to clean up and transport
the world's water supplies will provide extraordinary
investment opportunities for forward-thinking investors.

But mainstream newspapers are just starting to cover the
story. "Declining water supply brings a deluge of ideas,"
declares one headline from the Financial Times. "Global
shortages are giving companies a chance to develop
initiatives in infrastructure, filtration and irrigation."

Few people realize how much water agriculture and
manufacturing use up. There is this concept called
"embedded water" where analysts figure out how much water
it takes to make food and consumer goods.

For example it takes 200 liters of water to make one
kilogram of rice; 500 liters for 1 kilogram of potatoes.
That might seem like a lot of water until you consider that
producing one kilogram of beef requires a whopping 100,000
liters of water. (The "typical" American lunch - hamburger,
fries, and a soft drink - takes more than 5,000 liters of
water to produce). It takes 200,000 liters for a kilogram
of cotton. And perhaps most surprisingly, it takes about
150,000 liters of water for Ford Motor to produce a single
Transit van.

These facts are butting up against the reality of rising
water demand and falling supplies. In India, analysts
project water demand from industry alone will more than
triple over the next 20 years. Every industry from textiles
to electronics will have to consider risks in water supply.

"This explains why a company such as Unilever has
initiatives ranging from a detergent that requires less
rinsing for the Indian market to support for tomato farmers
in Brazil to introduce drip irrigation, which cuts water
use by 30 to 70 percent," the FT reports.

Developed countries could spend over a trillion dollars
upgrading water and wastewater systems over the next two
decades. That's a tremendous opportunity for companies
providing the skeletal basics of water systems – things
like pumps, pipes and filtration technology.

It's a huge topic, and I've only scratched the surface. In
the last few months I've recommended a number of water-
related companies: a water pump company, an irrigation
equipment company, a water pipe company and more. Several
of these recommendations are up over 20% already. But we
are in the very early stages of a water-infrastructure
boom.

James Cameron, vice chairman of a U.K. bank focused on this
area, says, "Managing water will be a premium business to
be in." It already is.

Now's the time to explore for attractive water-focused
investments...before the water crisis becomes front-page
news.

[Joel's Note: Come all ye contrarian investors! Unlike
other natural resources there are not going to be any new
water discoveries. There will not be any "water
alternatives." There will be no abating of thirst for this
increasingly precious commodity.

Already water restrictions are encroaching on the thirst of
first world countries...and this is just the beginning.
Predictably, companies are scrambling to get in first with
innovations in piping, filtration, membrane technology,
purification...the list goes on.

Front-Page News

By Chris Mayer

The global water crisis is not a front page story...yet.

But over the coming months, I expect this "middle-page"
story to make its way to the front of newspapers worldwide.
Already, "Water crisis" articles are appearing with
increasing frequency...

"Shortages of water are growing faster than expected," the
August 22nd edition of the Financial Times warned.
"Scientists had forecast in 2000 that one in three people
would face water shortages by 2025, but water experts have
been shocked to find that this threshold has already been
crossed."

Think of it; a forecast of an event that was not supposed
to happen until 2025. Yet, here we are in 2006 and that
forecast is already a reality. The idea of investing in
water-themed stocks has been kicking around the fringes of
the investment world for decades, but these stocks are
anything but fringy now. I believe we'll look back on the
current decade as the one that launched the most serious
natural resource crisis of the 21st century.

The water crisis that is now underway is both a physical
and an economic phenomenon.

On the physical side, much of the world's population
resides in locales where water is naturally scarce. Too
often, however, the supplies of fresh water become UN-
naturally scarce, due to reckless industrialization,
breakneck urbanization and chronic mismanagement.

Water is naturally scarce throughout Egypt, Australia and
the American Southwest. Even so, the Southwest hosts one of
the fastest growing populations in the country. Obviously,
when rapid population growth confronts a lean supply of
water, problems ensue. So it should be no surprise that the
U.S. is having increasing disputes with Mexico over sinking
levels of water in the Colorado River. Elsewhere in the
West and Southwest, cities and small towns are tussling
with one another over water rights and restrictions on
water use.

How bad can it get? Here's an interesting little tidbit: In
1944, Governor Benjamin Moeur sent the Arizona National
Guard during the construction of Parker Dam to prevent
California from stealing Arizona's water. When the unit of
about 100 men, with machine guns mounted on trucks,
arrived, construction stopped, as you might have guessed.
This issue was later resolved in the Supreme Court. Could
such standoffs happen again?

In Australia, water plays a big part in political
elections, where they are debating the reclamation of
sewage water and turning it into drinking water. "As
campaign promises, these are hardly pleasing," notes the
typically understated Economist. "Yet it illustrates the
increasing prominence of water, or the lack of it, in
Australian politics." According to the magazine, Australia
faces a water shortage unlike anything experienced in the
200 years since Europeans arrived.

The Economist quotes an Australian agricultural scientist,
Peter Cullen, who says, "People are frightened of running
out of water."

But clean water is not only in short supply where rainfall
levels are low; it is also in short supply where financial
resources are low. In other words, today's water crisis is
as much an economic problem as a physical one, perhaps more
so.

Although more than one billion people face physical water
shortages, the Financial Times notes, "a further one
billion people face economic water shortages because they
lack the necessary infrastructure to take water from rivers
and aquifers." The "economic shortages" also result from
inadequate or non-existent waste treatment. Throughout many
parts of the Developing World, wastewater receives minimal
– or no – treatment before flowing into lakes, rivers and
seas.

Then there is China, which no water enthusiast can ignore.
"China's Water Problems Set to Worsen" reads one headline.
The Chinese have found that despite massive investment in
water infrastructure over the last few years, water
pollution is actually worsening. Qiu Baoxing, minister of
Construction in China, said: "This is a critical point in
time – we are at a crossroads."

Indeed they are. Water is a major health issue in China – a
country that leads the world in incidences of stomach and
liver cancer, both traced to exposure to polluted water.

In my recently published water report, I examine the main
threads of the global crisis. But if there are still any
lingering doubts whether this crisis is real, consider this
alarming fact from my report:

"Contaminated water is deadlier than any other evil on
earth; deadlier than AIDS; deadlier than cancer; deadlier
than contagious diseases; deadlier even than World Wars.
During the Second World War, one soldier died every 8
seconds. Today, one human being dies every 6 seconds from
drinking contaminated water. The scale of this ongoing
international tragedy boggles the mind."

Fortunately, a growing water crisis is not a foregone
conclusion. But the effort to combat the crisis will
require an enormous commitment of planning, effort
and...yes...money. As the campaign against the water crisis
progress, hundreds of billions of dollars will flow into
the coffers of water-treatment and water infrastructure
companies.

Therefore, the long-term efforts to clean up and transport
the world's water supplies will provide extraordinary
investment opportunities for forward-thinking investors.

But mainstream newspapers are just starting to cover the
story. "Declining water supply brings a deluge of ideas,"
declares one headline from the Financial Times. "Global
shortages are giving companies a chance to develop
initiatives in infrastructure, filtration and irrigation."

Few people realize how much water agriculture and
manufacturing use up. There is this concept called
"embedded water" where analysts figure out how much water
it takes to make food and consumer goods.

For example it takes 200 liters of water to make one
kilogram of rice; 500 liters for 1 kilogram of potatoes.
That might seem like a lot of water until you consider that
producing one kilogram of beef requires a whopping 100,000
liters of water. (The "typical" American lunch - hamburger,
fries, and a soft drink - takes more than 5,000 liters of
water to produce). It takes 200,000 liters for a kilogram
of cotton. And perhaps most surprisingly, it takes about
150,000 liters of water for Ford Motor to produce a single
Transit van.

These facts are butting up against the reality of rising
water demand and falling supplies. In India, analysts
project water demand from industry alone will more than
triple over the next 20 years. Every industry from textiles
to electronics will have to consider risks in water supply.

"This explains why a company such as Unilever has
initiatives ranging from a detergent that requires less
rinsing for the Indian market to support for tomato farmers
in Brazil to introduce drip irrigation, which cuts water
use by 30 to 70 percent," the FT reports.

Developed countries could spend over a trillion dollars
upgrading water and wastewater systems over the next two
decades. That's a tremendous opportunity for companies
providing the skeletal basics of water systems – things
like pumps, pipes and filtration technology.

It's a huge topic, and I've only scratched the surface. In
the last few months I've recommended a number of water-
related companies: a water pump company, an irrigation
equipment company, a water pipe company and more. Several
of these recommendations are up over 20% already. But we
are in the very early stages of a water-infrastructure
boom.

James Cameron, vice chairman of a U.K. bank focused on this
area, says, "Managing water will be a premium business to
be in." It already is.

Now's the time to explore for attractive water-focused
investments...before the water crisis becomes front-page
news.

[Joel's Note: Come all ye contrarian investors! Unlike
other natural resources there are not going to be any new
water discoveries. There will not be any "water
alternatives." There will be no abating of thirst for this
increasingly precious commodity.

Already water restrictions are encroaching on the thirst of
first world countries...and this is just the beginning.
Predictably, companies are scrambling to get in first with
innovations in piping, filtration, membrane technology,
purification...the list goes on.

In a low-return world, high-yielding commodities have become the siren song of the asset-liability mismatch. Well supported by seemingly powerful fundamentals on both the demand (i.e., globalization) and the supply sides (i.e., capacity shortages) of the macro equation, investors have stampeded into commodity-related assets in recent years. Once a pure play as a physical asset, commodities have now increasingly taken on the trappings of financial assets. That leaves them just as prone to excesses as stocks, bonds, and currencies. This is one of those times.

Previously, I argued that Chinese and US demand were both likely to surprise on the downside -- outcomes that would challenge the optimistic fundamentals still embedded in commodity markets (see my 15 September dispatch, “Whither Commodities?”). I also hinted that the asset play could well reinforce this development -- largely because commodities have now come of age as a legitimate asset class in world financial markets. This companion note develops the asset-driven adjustments that could well lie ahead in commodity markets. The sociological context is key to this dimension of the issue: Virtually every major institutional investor I visit around the world -- from pension funds and insurance companies to mutual fund complexes and hedge funds — has a large and growing commodity department. The same is true of foreign exchange reserve managers and corporate treasury departments of multinational corporations. One major Wall Street firm is now run by a former commodity executive, and another has turned over management of its global bond division to the architect of its thriving commodity business.

Like all such trends, the expansion of the commodity culture is rooted in performance. It’s not just the physical commodities themselves -- most commodity-related assets in cash and futures markets have also delivered outstanding relative returns. For several years, the so-called commodity currencies of Australia and Canada have been on a tear, and big commodity producers like Russia and Brazil have led the recent charge in high-flying emerging markets. Within the global equity universe, the materials sector has been the number-one ranked performer over the past year -- up 14%, or double the 7% returns of second-ranked financials. And, of course, there is the growing profusion of commodity-related ETFs. Meanwhile, Commodity Trading Advisors (CTAs) now collectively manage over $70 billion in assets -- more than three times the total three years ago -- and the IMF reports inflows of approximately $35 billion into commodity futures last year alone.” (See the IMF’s September 2006 Global Financial Stability Report).

Significantly, the consultants are now urging institutional investors to implement a major increase in their asset allocation weightings to commodities. A recent Ibbotson Associates study recommends that commodity weightings in a multi-asset balanced portfolio could be increased, under conservative return and risk-appetite assumptions, to a high of nearly 30%. That would be more than three times current weightings and greater than seven times the estimated $2 trillion value of current annual commodity production (see T.M. Idzorek, “Strategic Asset Allocation and Commodities,” March 2006, available on http://www.ibottson.com). The Ibbotson analysis praises commodities for their consistent outperformance and negative correlations with other major asset classes -- going so far as to praise commodities for actually providing the protection of “portfolio insurance.” It concludes by stressing “…there is little risk that commodities will dramatically underperform the other asset classes on a risk-adjusted basis over any reasonably long time period.” Laboring under the constant pressure of the asset-liability mismatch, yield-starved investors can hardly afford to ignore this enthusiastic advice. As a result, with multi-asset portfolios likely to have ever-greater representation from commodities, the financial-market dimensions of the commodity trade are likely to become increasingly important.

This transformation from a physical to a financial asset alters the character of commodity investments. Among other things, it subjects the asset to the same cycles of fear and greed that have long been a part of financial market history. From tulips to dot-com and now probably US residential property as well, the boom all too often begets the bust. Yale Professor Robert Shiller puts it best, arguing that asset bubbles arise when perfectly plausible fundamental stories are exaggerated by powerful “amplification mechanisms” (see Shiller’s, Irrational Exuberance, second edition, 2005). That appears to have been the case in commodities. In this instance, the amplification is largely an outgrowth of the China mania that is now sweeping the world -- the belief that commodity-intensive Chinese hyper-growth is here to stay. That’s why I blew the whistle on this one: Not only do I believe that the Chinese authorities will make good on their efforts to cool off an over-heated economy, but I also suspect they will succeed in engineering a well-publicized shift toward more efficient usage of energy and other commodities (see my 2 June essay, “A Commodity-Lite China”). The potential for post-housing bubble adjustments of the American consumer could well be the icing on this cake -- not only lowering US commodity demand through reductions in residential construction activity but also by reducing end-market demand in China’s biggest export market. The recent data flow hints that such adjustments are now just getting under way -- underscored by reports of a meaningful slowing of Chinese investment and industrial output growth in August and a continuing stream of bad news from the US housing market.

Meanwhile, the performance of commodity-based financial assets is starting to fray around the edges. That’s true of energy funds as well as those asset pools with more balanced portfolios of energy, metals, and other industrial materials. While most of these investment vehicles have outstanding 3- and 5-year performance records, the one-year return comparisons are now solidly in negative territory for many of the biggest commodity funds. And this is occurring at the same time that the MSCI All-Country World index has delivered a 14% return for global equities over the past year. Underperformance for a few months is hardly cause for concern, but for both relative- and absolute-return investors, negative comparisons over a 12-month period are raising more than the proverbial eyebrow. As usual, the “hot money” has been the first to head for the exits, but more patient investors may not be too far behind. Shiller-like amplification mechanisms could well compound the problem. Just as they led to near parabolic increases of many commodity prices in March and April, there could be cumulative selling pressure on the downside -- taking commodity prices down much more sharply than fundamentals might otherwise suggest.

For my money, there is far too much talk about the globalization-led commodity super-cycle. It gives the false impression of a one-way market, where every dip is buying opportunity. Yet commodities as a financial asset are as bubble-prone as any other investment. As is always the case in every bubble I have lived through, denial is deepest when asset values go to excess. That’s very much the case today. After three years of extraordinary outperformance, denial over the possibility of a sustained downside adjustment in commodity prices is very much in evidence -- underscoring the time-honored sociology of an asset class that has gone to excess. Meanwhile, China and US-housing-related fundamentals are going the other way -- setting up increasingly tender commodity markets for unpleasant downside surprises on the demand side of the global economy. The herding instincts of institutional investors could well magnify the price declines -- when, and if, they emerge. All this suggests there is still plenty of life left in the time-honored commodity cycle.

Barton Biggs always used to chide me that “Dr. Copper” was his favorite economist -- possessing an uncanny knack to provide a real-time assessment of the state of the global economy. I suspect that the good doctor has now taken his or her finger off the pulse of the real economy and spends far more time looking at Bloomberg screens. Pity the poor patient -- to say nothing of the doctor!

In a low-return world, high-yielding commodities have become the siren song of the asset-liability mismatch. Well supported by seemingly powerful fundamentals on both the demand (i.e., globalization) and the supply sides (i.e., capacity shortages) of the macro equation, investors have stampeded into commodity-related assets in recent years. Once a pure play as a physical asset, commodities have now increasingly taken on the trappings of financial assets. That leaves them just as prone to excesses as stocks, bonds, and currencies. This is one of those times.

Previously, I argued that Chinese and US demand were both likely to surprise on the downside -- outcomes that would challenge the optimistic fundamentals still embedded in commodity markets (see my 15 September dispatch, “Whither Commodities?”). I also hinted that the asset play could well reinforce this development -- largely because commodities have now come of age as a legitimate asset class in world financial markets. This companion note develops the asset-driven adjustments that could well lie ahead in commodity markets. The sociological context is key to this dimension of the issue: Virtually every major institutional investor I visit around the world -- from pension funds and insurance companies to mutual fund complexes and hedge funds — has a large and growing commodity department. The same is true of foreign exchange reserve managers and corporate treasury departments of multinational corporations. One major Wall Street firm is now run by a former commodity executive, and another has turned over management of its global bond division to the architect of its thriving commodity business.

Like all such trends, the expansion of the commodity culture is rooted in performance. It’s not just the physical commodities themselves -- most commodity-related assets in cash and futures markets have also delivered outstanding relative returns. For several years, the so-called commodity currencies of Australia and Canada have been on a tear, and big commodity producers like Russia and Brazil have led the recent charge in high-flying emerging markets. Within the global equity universe, the materials sector has been the number-one ranked performer over the past year -- up 14%, or double the 7% returns of second-ranked financials. And, of course, there is the growing profusion of commodity-related ETFs. Meanwhile, Commodity Trading Advisors (CTAs) now collectively manage over $70 billion in assets -- more than three times the total three years ago -- and the IMF reports inflows of approximately $35 billion into commodity futures last year alone.” (See the IMF’s September 2006 Global Financial Stability Report).

Significantly, the consultants are now urging institutional investors to implement a major increase in their asset allocation weightings to commodities. A recent Ibbotson Associates study recommends that commodity weightings in a multi-asset balanced portfolio could be increased, under conservative return and risk-appetite assumptions, to a high of nearly 30%. That would be more than three times current weightings and greater than seven times the estimated $2 trillion value of current annual commodity production (see T.M. Idzorek, “Strategic Asset Allocation and Commodities,” March 2006, available on http://www.ibottson.com). The Ibbotson analysis praises commodities for their consistent outperformance and negative correlations with other major asset classes -- going so far as to praise commodities for actually providing the protection of “portfolio insurance.” It concludes by stressing “…there is little risk that commodities will dramatically underperform the other asset classes on a risk-adjusted basis over any reasonably long time period.” Laboring under the constant pressure of the asset-liability mismatch, yield-starved investors can hardly afford to ignore this enthusiastic advice. As a result, with multi-asset portfolios likely to have ever-greater representation from commodities, the financial-market dimensions of the commodity trade are likely to become increasingly important.

This transformation from a physical to a financial asset alters the character of commodity investments. Among other things, it subjects the asset to the same cycles of fear and greed that have long been a part of financial market history. From tulips to dot-com and now probably US residential property as well, the boom all too often begets the bust. Yale Professor Robert Shiller puts it best, arguing that asset bubbles arise when perfectly plausible fundamental stories are exaggerated by powerful “amplification mechanisms” (see Shiller’s, Irrational Exuberance, second edition, 2005). That appears to have been the case in commodities. In this instance, the amplification is largely an outgrowth of the China mania that is now sweeping the world -- the belief that commodity-intensive Chinese hyper-growth is here to stay. That’s why I blew the whistle on this one: Not only do I believe that the Chinese authorities will make good on their efforts to cool off an over-heated economy, but I also suspect they will succeed in engineering a well-publicized shift toward more efficient usage of energy and other commodities (see my 2 June essay, “A Commodity-Lite China”). The potential for post-housing bubble adjustments of the American consumer could well be the icing on this cake -- not only lowering US commodity demand through reductions in residential construction activity but also by reducing end-market demand in China’s biggest export market. The recent data flow hints that such adjustments are now just getting under way -- underscored by reports of a meaningful slowing of Chinese investment and industrial output growth in August and a continuing stream of bad news from the US housing market.

Meanwhile, the performance of commodity-based financial assets is starting to fray around the edges. That’s true of energy funds as well as those asset pools with more balanced portfolios of energy, metals, and other industrial materials. While most of these investment vehicles have outstanding 3- and 5-year performance records, the one-year return comparisons are now solidly in negative territory for many of the biggest commodity funds. And this is occurring at the same time that the MSCI All-Country World index has delivered a 14% return for global equities over the past year. Underperformance for a few months is hardly cause for concern, but for both relative- and absolute-return investors, negative comparisons over a 12-month period are raising more than the proverbial eyebrow. As usual, the “hot money” has been the first to head for the exits, but more patient investors may not be too far behind. Shiller-like amplification mechanisms could well compound the problem. Just as they led to near parabolic increases of many commodity prices in March and April, there could be cumulative selling pressure on the downside -- taking commodity prices down much more sharply than fundamentals might otherwise suggest.

For my money, there is far too much talk about the globalization-led commodity super-cycle. It gives the false impression of a one-way market, where every dip is buying opportunity. Yet commodities as a financial asset are as bubble-prone as any other investment. As is always the case in every bubble I have lived through, denial is deepest when asset values go to excess. That’s very much the case today. After three years of extraordinary outperformance, denial over the possibility of a sustained downside adjustment in commodity prices is very much in evidence -- underscoring the time-honored sociology of an asset class that has gone to excess. Meanwhile, China and US-housing-related fundamentals are going the other way -- setting up increasingly tender commodity markets for unpleasant downside surprises on the demand side of the global economy. The herding instincts of institutional investors could well magnify the price declines -- when, and if, they emerge. All this suggests there is still plenty of life left in the time-honored commodity cycle.

Barton Biggs always used to chide me that “Dr. Copper” was his favorite economist -- possessing an uncanny knack to provide a real-time assessment of the state of the global economy. I suspect that the good doctor has now taken his or her finger off the pulse of the real economy and spends far more time looking at Bloomberg screens. Pity the poor patient -- to say nothing of the doctor!

hübschen Schwestern ja auch leben.

Und würden sie schreiben, daß der Trend wohl 2008-2012 zu Ende ist, dann müssten sie sich Gedanken machen, was danach wäre.

Niemand kann 14 Jahre in die Zukunft sehen.

Außerdem muß unterschieden werden zwischen GOLD und Rohstoffen. Gold hat neben seiner Funktion als Schmuckrohstoff in Extremsituationen auch Geldersatzfunktion.

Wer das nicht tut, der kann bitterböse erwachen.

hübschen Schwestern ja auch leben.

Und würden sie schreiben, daß der Trend wohl 2008-2012 zu Ende ist, dann müssten sie sich Gedanken machen, was danach wäre.

Niemand kann 14 Jahre in die Zukunft sehen.

Außerdem muß unterschieden werden zwischen GOLD und Rohstoffen. Gold hat neben seiner Funktion als Schmuckrohstoff in Extremsituationen auch Geldersatzfunktion.

Wer das nicht tut, der kann bitterböse erwachen.

Zitat

Original von mesodor39
hübschen Schwestern ja auch leben.
(...)
Außerdem muß unterschieden werden zwischen GOLD und Rohstoffen. Gold hat neben seiner Funktion als Schmuckrohstoff in Extremsituationen auch Geldersatzfunktion.

Wer das nicht tut, der kann bitterböse erwachen.

Hallo mesodor,

im Moment ist diese Unterscheidung sicher wichtig, so kann Silber, das immer noch nicht vollen Anlagemetallstatus zurück erlangt hat, möglicherweise stärker betroffen sein, wenn es weiterhin in eine mehrmonatige Konsolidierung hinein geht.
Und die Wirtschaft einknickt.
Dann ist es für ein paar Monate womöglich auch egal, dass der Silbermarkt nur durch Shorties gedrückt wird.
Verzögerung ist aber auch schon alles, was drin ist.

Gold wird sich in dieser Zeit, vermut ich mal, besser halten, bei den politischen & wirtschaftlichen Wirren derzeit (Welt(un)ordnung ...).

Aber das Physische braucht einem eh keine Angst zu machen.
Es erfährt keine Verwässerung durch gierige Manager ...

Grüsse,
gutso

PPS: je schneller die Korrektur weitergeht, umso besser. Dann ist sie schneller vorbei & kann man bald wieder rein, die Gegenreaktion in den Edelmetall-Märkten dürfte sich dann gewaschen haben. Vor allem bei den Minen.
Was ich mehr fürchte würde, wäre ein langsames Abbröckeln der Kurse bei den Minen ... .

Zitat

Original von mesodor39
hübschen Schwestern ja auch leben.
(...)
Außerdem muß unterschieden werden zwischen GOLD und Rohstoffen. Gold hat neben seiner Funktion als Schmuckrohstoff in Extremsituationen auch Geldersatzfunktion.

Wer das nicht tut, der kann bitterböse erwachen.

Hallo mesodor,

im Moment ist diese Unterscheidung sicher wichtig, so kann Silber, das immer noch nicht vollen Anlagemetallstatus zurück erlangt hat, möglicherweise stärker betroffen sein, wenn es weiterhin in eine mehrmonatige Konsolidierung hinein geht.
Und die Wirtschaft einknickt.
Dann ist es für ein paar Monate womöglich auch egal, dass der Silbermarkt nur durch Shorties gedrückt wird.
Verzögerung ist aber auch schon alles, was drin ist.

Gold wird sich in dieser Zeit, vermut ich mal, besser halten, bei den politischen & wirtschaftlichen Wirren derzeit (Welt(un)ordnung ...).

Aber das Physische braucht einem eh keine Angst zu machen.
Es erfährt keine Verwässerung durch gierige Manager ...

Grüsse,
gutso

PPS: je schneller die Korrektur weitergeht, umso besser. Dann ist sie schneller vorbei & kann man bald wieder rein, die Gegenreaktion in den Edelmetall-Märkten dürfte sich dann gewaschen haben. Vor allem bei den Minen.
Was ich mehr fürchte würde, wäre ein langsames Abbröckeln der Kurse bei den Minen ... .

Jede Menge Meinungen...
jetzt meine: daß die Amis wegen der Wahl die Kurse - Währung stabiliesieren wollen - glaube ich
auch wenn sie dazu Ihre letzten Möglichkeiten mobilisieren.
Börsengurus sehen z.Z. noch bessere Möglichkeiten Gewinne zu realisieren, aber gerade die sind es auch, die zumindest besser als ich wissen, wie es um die Weltfinanzen aussieht.
Wenn ich also davon ausgehe, daß wir alle ( im Forum) auch nicht gänzlich verblödet sind, so sollten doch alle (auch Gurus) zu dem Schluß kommen, daß erstmal das Papier "nur noch auf der Rolle" benötigt wird und deshalb das Kapital gewinnbringend zwischengeparkt werden muß.
Uns fällt natürlich nur EM ein, aber demeinen oder anderen Guru vieleicht ja auch.
Deshalb steht für mich fest : EM wird ohne größere Korrektur steigen,und zwar so lang, bis wieder ein Währungssystem greift.
Die Korrekturprognosen - Silber auf 6$ - sind für mich ein Zeichen, daß der Aufschwung ganz kurz bevorsteht.
Ich hoffe ich irre mich nicht.

Irren ist Menschlich

Jede Menge Meinungen...
jetzt meine: daß die Amis wegen der Wahl die Kurse - Währung stabiliesieren wollen - glaube ich
auch wenn sie dazu Ihre letzten Möglichkeiten mobilisieren.
Börsengurus sehen z.Z. noch bessere Möglichkeiten Gewinne zu realisieren, aber gerade die sind es auch, die zumindest besser als ich wissen, wie es um die Weltfinanzen aussieht.
Wenn ich also davon ausgehe, daß wir alle ( im Forum) auch nicht gänzlich verblödet sind, so sollten doch alle (auch Gurus) zu dem Schluß kommen, daß erstmal das Papier "nur noch auf der Rolle" benötigt wird und deshalb das Kapital gewinnbringend zwischengeparkt werden muß.
Uns fällt natürlich nur EM ein, aber demeinen oder anderen Guru vieleicht ja auch.
Deshalb steht für mich fest : EM wird ohne größere Korrektur steigen,und zwar so lang, bis wieder ein Währungssystem greift.
Die Korrekturprognosen - Silber auf 6$ - sind für mich ein Zeichen, daß der Aufschwung ganz kurz bevorsteht.
Ich hoffe ich irre mich nicht.

Irren ist Menschlich

Silber 6 $, ja das ist scho aweng arg. Hat mich auch gewundert, in dem einen Artikel drüben im anderen Thread ... Wenns kurz die 8 sind, wäre es schon viel. Würde mich ehrlich wundern.

Gruss,
gutso

Silber 6 $, ja das ist scho aweng arg. Hat mich auch gewundert, in dem einen Artikel drüben im anderen Thread ... Wenns kurz die 8 sind, wäre es schon viel. Würde mich ehrlich wundern.

Gruss,
gutso