Capital Markets

There has been considerable throughput of gold in western capital markets, with substantial buying from all round the world following the April price crash. The supply can only have come from two sources: the general public, or one or more governments. It really is that simple. Two months later the gold price has only partially recovered, so physical supplies have continued to be made available. Physical demand cannot have been entirely satisfied by ETF liquidations, confirming governments are involved. This article looks at the dynamics of the gold market around this event and the implications.

We discuss legitimate credit vs. counterfeit central bank credit, the concepts of marginal time preference and productivity, speculation, and finally resonance.

Since the topic of quantifying how big the sovereign assistance to assorted banks - both in Europe and the US (which Bloomberg calculated at $83 billion per year) - has become a daily talking point, we are happy to read that Harald Benink and Harry Huizinga have reached the same conclusion as us in their VOX analysis, and further have shown that in Europe the implicit banking sector guarantee by the state is a whopping €650 billion. "Europe has postponed the recapitalisation of its banking sector for far too long. And, without such a recapitalisation, the danger is that economic stagnation will continue for a long period, thereby putting Europe on a course towards Japanese-style inertia and the proliferation of zombie banks... Banks are already saddled with ample unrecognised losses on their assets, estimated by many observers to be at least several hundreds of billions of euros and mirrored by low share price valuations, and an additional loss of their present funding advantage will be crippling."

Goldman Sachs has suggested that there may be up to 349 Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) taking place in China this year. But, it’s not the Chinese capital markets that those companies will be wanting. Chinese firms are still hell-bent on getting floated on the world’s biggest and best stock exchange, and rightly so.

Over a week into "Occupy Taksim", the Turkish situation is nowhere near resolution. In fact, judging by the capital markets response to news that hundreds of police stormed Taksim Square this morning using tear gas to disperse protesters, where the lira declined overnight to the weakest level since December 2011, bond yields dropped 29 bps, Turkish CDS rose wider than Russia, and where even the central bank has warned it may start engaging in tightening operations, things are going to get much worse. Finally, a big demonstration is due in a few hours: will Taksim Square June 2013 be the "Waddel and Reed/May 2010" Syntagma Square flash crash equivalent? Find out shortly.

All the news recently about the U.S. government’s telephone and online surveillance programs got ConvergEx's Nick Colas thinking about a rich academic field: the psychology of observation.  How do observers differ from actual actors in their explanations of events they either witness or in which they actually participate?  Scores of academic studies point to a key difference.  Actors tend to attribute their decisions to situation-specific inputs.  Those observing these actions, by contrast, tend to ascribe their ultimate cause as tied to the personality of the actors involved.  Same destination, but radically different interpretations of the journey.  Even the process of being watched can change human behavior.  Bottom line – observers and actors are rarely on the same planet, let alone the same page, when it comes to explaining a given event.  Keep that in mind as you try to understand Fed policy, or a company’s management, or even your own family.

In a confirmation that the S&P is starting to get worried about the drones surrounding the McGraw Hill building resulting from the ongoing litigation with Eric Holder's Department of Injustice, not to mention a reminder that US downgrades always happen after hours, while upgrades must hit before the market opens, Standard & Poors just upgraded the Standard & Poors 500 the US outlook from Negative to Stable. On what "receding fiscal risks" did the S&P raise its assessment of the US - the fact that the US is now at its debt limit, that there is no imminent resolution to the credit issue, or the 105% and rising debt/GDP - read on to find out. And of course, the countdown until the S&P wristslap settlement with the DOJ is announced begins now, as does the upgrade watch by Buffett's controlled Moody's of the US to AAAA++++.

On Monday we brought to you proof of a 15 millisecond frontrunning of the Mfg ISM number by what turned out to be HFT clients of Reuters which admitted subsequently it had "inadvertently" leaked the number to select clients. However, that was child's play compared to the absolute market farce that happened today which we can visualize courtesy of Nanex, and which impacted gold, ES, and Treasury Futures altogether.

US jobs data is important, but other forces are at work that seem more powerful.

India should monetise their huge gold stockpiles of over 20,000 metric tonnes according to the World Gold Council (WGC) as reported by Bloomberg this morning.

“In the long term gold could be monetized as a financial asset," Aram Shishmanian, the CEO of the WGC said in India overnight.

The World Gold Council has approached the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to work with it so that bullion could be used as a financial asset, rather than just a physical asset. 

It is clear that Western capital markets no longer generally regard gold as money. It has been relegated to the status of a risk asset, useful collateral, or simply a commodity with a history of being used as money. This is a mistake.

Now that the BOJ's "interventionalism" in the capital markets is increasingly losing steam, as the soaring realized volatility in equity and bond markets squarely puts into question its credibility and its ability to enforce its core mandate (which, according to the Bank of Japan Act "states that the Bank's monetary policy should be aimed at achieving price stability, thereby contributing to the sound development of the national economy) Japan is left with one wildcard: the Government Pension Investment Fund (GPIF), which as of December 31 held some ¥111.9 trillion in assets, of which ¥67.3 trillion, or 60.1% in Japanese Government Bonds. Perhaps more importantly, the GPIF also held "just" ¥14.5 trillion in domestic stocks, or 12.9% of total, far less than the minimum allocation to bonds (current floor of 59%).  It is this massive potential buying dry powder that has led to numerous hints in the press (first in Bloomberg in February, then in Reuters last week, and then in the Japanese Nikkei this morning all of which have been intended to serve as a - brief - risk-on catalyst) that a capital reallocation in the GPIF is imminent to allow for much more domestic equity buying, now that the threat of the BOJ's open-ended QE is barely sufficient to avoid a bear market crash in the Nikkei in under two weeks.

There are some problems, however.

Here is what is shaping the global capital markets.

There is something very wrong with this Bloomberg article screengrab.

Some of my first memories of television are of a series called The Rocky and Bullwinkle Show, which was a witty combination of animated cartoons about the exploits of the title characters, Rocket "Rocky" J. Squirrel and Bullwinkle J. Moose and their nemeses, two Pottsylvanian nogoodniks spies, Boris Badenov and Natasha Fatale. The show was filled with current event commentary, political and social satire. The show was also filled with commentary on economic and market conditions that resonated with the parents watching the show while the kids focused on the cartoons. Each show ended with the narrator describing the current cliffhanger with a pair of related titles, usually with a bad pun intended. So let's adapt some of my favorite Rocky and Bullwinkle episode titles to modern day; we might see that there are some political and economic challenges that are timeless, as it appears we have been doing the same thing over and over for decades and expecting different results.