You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.

Does gold already price in the future inflation that may or may not happen?

Vitaliy Katsenelson's picture




This is the fourth in a series of what some may consider as “gold bashing” articles. I am not short gold in any shape or form. I have no axe to grind against gold bugs. I am simply presenting the other side of the argument in response to what I deem to be dishonest, gold-pimping commercials (e.g., “If gold prices went up to $5,000 this pile of gold would be worth $300,000”) that we are subjected to all day long on TV. I may be wrong, but I am honest.

Inflation is a possible but not a guaranteed outcome of what is taking place in the economy today.  Deflation or a muddle-through economy with very low nominal growth are possible and probable outcomes.  We are seeing signs that point away from inflation: the money supply declined at a 12% annualized rate over the past four weeks, according to David Rosenberg of Gluskin Sheff. 

Though gold bugs argue that gold will perform well in either an inflationary or deflationary scenario, history doesn’t support that conclusion. Gold has done well in inflationary environments but not during deflation or low nominal economic growth.  In the 1970s, when inflation in the US was raging, gold performed better than any other asset class (though remember, at the time gold had no competition in the inflation trade, no TIPS, or ETFs that long other commodities, short US Treasuries etc..).  However, one had to know exactly when to get on and off the gold bus.  If gold was bought after considerable appreciation, that investment/speculation resulted in losses.  Gold has more than doubled in price since 2005, but has it already priced in future inflation?  I have no idea; you cannot value it.

 

Vitaliy N. Katsenelson, CFA, is a portfolio manager/director of research at Investment Management Associates in Denver, Colo.  He is the author of "Active Value Investing: Making Money in Range-Bound Markets" (Wiley 2007).  To receive Vitaliy's future articles by email, click here.




Similar Articles You Might Enjoy:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 10/01/2009 - 06:27 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 20:52 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 09/15/2009 - 05:14 | Link to Comment Mediocritas
Mediocritas's picture

Anon #69398,

When Barrick forward sells to a bullion bank, that bank onsells (or leases) into a short position, not a long position, trading gold that effectively does not exist yet, and can only cover its position when Barrick actually gets around to mining said gold and delivering it.

When Barrick bailed on a portion of its hedge, it did not deliver physical metal, it simply cashed out (at the expense of shareholders who were diluted). That's all well and good if all participants in the paper trail are prepared to accept cash, but if somebody big stands for physical delivery then the counterparty is going to be left holding an obligation to deliver gold that doesn't even exist.

For the price of gold, such a situation is....rather bullish.

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 23:01 | Link to Comment Gunther
Gunther's picture

Anon #69398,
have you checked COT numbers lately?  The commercials are heavily short. Do you have any proof that the big American guys are long?
An alternative scenario is that somebody bought and buys bullion and big guys and miners like Barrick try to suppress the price of gold. 
How do you explain the shortage of bullion last fall?
Is the financial crisis over? If not, golden insurance helps a lot.

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 20:40 | Link to Comment ED
ED's picture

thanks for throwing these articles out there vitaliy.

But with the graphs I think there are two things you can do with it.

1-in a fiat currency system, draw a line connect the 2 peaks and extend it back to 1913 and forever into the future, else

2-flatline at $50 and extend it back to 10AD and forever into the future.

 

 

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 20:13 | Link to Comment TumblingDice
TumblingDice's picture

the severe lack of imagination prominent in this article disturbs me.

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 19:11 | Link to Comment Gunther
Gunther's picture

Vitaliy,
what about answering comments to prior articles?
As well as others, I took your arguments apart and – no response. If you believe government statistics, gold quadrupled since 2001 without apparent reason. There was neither big inflation nor deflation. If you trust shadowstats.com, and be it only for the purpose of having comparable numbers, there was moderate inflation and more important a negative real interest rate. Defined as ten-year-government-bond yield minus pre-Clinton-CPI the real interest is negative since the start of 1997.  Interestingly, the trend in real interest rates turned in late 2008 but is still negative.
In history when gold was money, it did very well in deflationary times. Keep it under the mattress and it gains value! Please provide any example of a deflation in a paper money system where gold did bad.
What timeframe does your chart use?
On 01/21/08 I found a London PM Fix of 850$, see http://www.lbma.org.uk/?area=stats&page=gold/1980dailygold
On 09/01/99 the PM fix was 254.2$
Again, better arguments, please.

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 18:48 | Link to Comment RagnarDanneskjold
RagnarDanneskjold's picture

Vitaly should have spent more time on the question, "Does gold defend against inflation or inflation expectations?" There are plenty of places to poke at the inflation scenario, but Vitaly's not bringing the arguments to the table.

As Hugh Hendry asked, "What if we've seen the inflation?"

There are several ways the inflation scenario dies. One is that the public isn't buying it. (see consumer credit). Another is that the expectations exceed the reality. Another is that the extent to which the expectations are correct, they are in fact deflationary. High interset rates, high oil prices, etc. act as a tax on the economy and are the cure for the disease. 

 

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 18:54 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 18:32 | Link to Comment lookma
lookma's picture

Price level is driven by fiat currency and debt chasing goods.

The debt level faces default and more deleveraging - this debt deflation leads to a fall in the price level.

With a full fiat currency, the money printers face enourmous pressure to print/create more fiat to counter-act debt deflation and maintain the nominal price level (e.g. the FED monetizing 1.75 trillion)

As debt faces default, more fiat is printed (monetary inflation). 

Debt deflationary pressures in a full fiat currecy ultimately = hyperinflation (a currency crisis from too much fiat money being printed).

====

Evaluate gold as money/currency compared to fiat money/currency, which is being rapidly created (monetary inflation).

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 18:29 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 17:30 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 17:16 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 17:14 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 19:19 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 17:13 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 20:16 | Link to Comment Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

2300 dollars.

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:45 | Link to Comment ellidc
ellidc's picture

The reason why gold does all right in deflation is suggested in this article

http://www.financialarmageddon.com/2009/09/a-universal-option.html

highlighting the renewed appeal of barter transactions when cash is short.

Just like the first time around, it is a logical step from barter to a system of

what we call "money" by using a commodity as a universal medium of exchange.

Just like in the article, how a coupon at a restaurant could be readily re-traded,

barter systems short on cash will eventually come to rely on alternative "money"

that has many of the attributes of gold.

But yeah it could all be priced in already and the economy, fed and congress might all

get their act together and make gold unappealing again.

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:42 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:42 | Link to Comment roadlust
roadlust's picture

You're right, Vitaliy, there IS no way to "value" gold.  But we DO know that it has enjoyed an almost uninterrupted run up, and physics tells us that simply can't continue.  

Once the people who bought in at $999 get burnt, and start selling, the mass exodus will begin.  Good luck finding buyers at that point.

Gold is the "investment" vehicle most subject to "perceived" value, and with the deflationary scenario we're facing for the foreseeable future (years) the only justification for gold continuing to go up is the political (as opposed to economics based) perception that "Obama is trashing the dollar!" and thus we must all pile into gold (and canned food and ammo, presumably.) 

When the meltdown finally begins, unfortunately for gold bugs, the rich bastards from around the third world who have been looting their "emerging economies," will start buying dollars and treasuries.  (They know we protect our rich bastards here at all cost.)  

Since nobody can eat gold, or in most cases even get possession of it, GLD will be one of the first casualties of the next leg down.   (There's simply no reason to believe that you'll be able to fly into Heathrow and pick up your bars at the GLD storage depot, when the real shit hits the fan.)

Somebody is gonna get very rich shorting gold. 

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 20:50 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 19:08 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 21:04 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:40 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:54 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:40 | Link to Comment Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

You don't get it. Fractional reserve currency systems always distort. They always get so out of whack that they are useless they always use gold to correct. In 2006 it costs 140 million dollars to make 100 million dollars worth of pennies. Can you not get the distortion and manipulation that has occured? There is no gold bus. You simply buy it and wait to get paid.

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:31 | Link to Comment Lionhead
Lionhead's picture

The fourth installment of "rubbish." No further comment necessary.

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 20:45 | Link to Comment Uros Slokar
Uros Slokar's picture

Well put. By far the weakest writer on ZH, and by a country f-ing mile at that. His "4" articles could have been rolled into one, medium-length crappy piece instead of making us suffer.

Tue, 09/15/2009 - 01:34 | Link to Comment Mr. Mandelbrot
Mr. Mandelbrot's picture

I emphatically second your comments.  I'm sorry I wasted my time reading these four posts and I won't bother reading the fifth.  The intelligence level doesn't warrant any time or effort on my part to try to be original, witty, combative, or even a little educated or intelligent sounding on the subject.  The discussions that have followed all four posts have been in near unanimous agreement that the guy is clueless, stupid, handicapped, hired, high, Hungarian or something.  Why bother posting?  Does this guy deserve an audience anywhere?

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:30 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:27 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:52 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:27 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:23 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:20 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:16 | Link to Comment Daedal
Daedal's picture

Vitaliy, you are once again missing the purpose of gold. People ought to look to gold to preserve their spending power, not to generate income.

Having said that, Gold outperforms in times of economic uncertainty/distress -- not inflation, per se, see 1980-2000, where inflation was prevalent but there was economic certainty/calm for the most part -- and that certainty made people hold income generating assets, instead of 'currency'. Thus, your statement "Gold has done well in inflationary environments but not during deflation or low nominal economic growth." is False.

Tue, 09/15/2009 - 04:54 | Link to Comment Mediocritas
Mediocritas's picture

You are exactly right Daedal. Far too many people think of gold as an inflation hedge and are then puzzled when the historical correlation of inflation to gold prices is weak.

As you say, precious metals are a hedge against uncertainty, being favoured when central banks are playing fast and loose with money supply in an unpredictable manner. Consequently, if inflation is ongoing, but very stable, gold will not do anything of note. Precious metals are favoured now because the future is highly opaque and central banks are behaving like bulls in a china shop.

Viewed this way, it can be understood that high precious metal prices are equivalent to a vote of no confidence in the fractional reserve system, fiat currency, and governments, inversely explaining why central banks desire to keep precious metal prices low.

Finally, I add the tale of Homestake (a gold miner) to demonstrate how gold can do extremely well during deflation:

"Homestake stock sold for about $65 per share in 1929. By 1933, the average stock price for Homestake was around $370. This represents a gain of more than 450% over the course of four years. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 89% over the three years between its 1929 peak to its 1932 bottom. Not only did stock prices increase for Homestake, but dividends also skyrocketed. In 1929, Homestake paid dividends of about $7 per share. By 1935, dividends had increased to $56, a staggering rate of 800% over six years. During these deflationary times, gold stocks not only retained their values but provided significant returns for investors."

Gold was confiscated in 1933 so it's hard to know how it would have continued to perform.

Mon, 09/14/2009 - 16:09 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!