A Forensic Investigation from SSJ

Yesterday, longtime Turdite "StrongSideJedi" went off on a project. Inspired by the ongoing discussion of negative GOFO and a video which he had posted earlier in the day, SSJ began sniffing out the origins of the gold in the GLD. Rather than see all of his effort lost among the pages of comments, I decided to create this "guest post" out of the material he uncovered.

So this post is divided into three parts. First, after reading through all of SSJ's material, I posted my own summary and conclusions for SSJ to consider. (Frankly, his work is so extensive, I wanted to check to see if I was reading it right.) Next, there is SSJ's response to my conclusions and, finally, a full c&p that I've cobbled together from the string of information that SSJ posted through the day and evening yesterday. Please read this material and draw your own conclusions. Please also add any other information that you may think relevant. I'm sure that SSJ will be monitoring this thread and adding his further comments, too.

Before we begin, I just want to salute SSJ for his diligence in attacking this subject. As you all know, if we collectively wait for "mainstream" outlets to pursue the facts regarding gold rehypothecation and fractional reserve banking, the truth will remain hidden. It is only through the efforts of concerned individuals like SSJ that we will be able to prepare for and anticipate the next acts of the wicked central banks and their sinister bullion bank accomplices.

Alright...so let's begin at the end. Here are the conclusions I posted and asked SSJ to review:

  • GLD was "funded" with gold leased out (sold) by the BoE and SNB.
  • With everything going on, not only are those entities no longer willing to provide supply, they're actually taking their gold back before it's too late.
  • Holders like Paulson and Soros are the "fly in the ointment" as they have a GLD claim on the same gold that the BoE and SNB claim as their own "leased" assets.
  • We are witnessing a managed, slow-burn "run" on the London vaults, where supposed "allocated" gold rests for entities worldwide but this gold has instead been leased out, not only to the GLD, but sold into the market and currently dangling around the necks and wrists of Asians as well as being recast into 1Kg Chinese bars.

SSJ then reviewed my conclusions and posted this in reply:

The set of conclusions you've posted above are reasonable.
One of the key issues is that the SNB and BoE sales rates need to be cross correlated to the source of GLD ingots.
I'm guessing and speculating that the bars sold by SNB were in London and not in Switzerland.  If so, the SNB may have had 1200-1300 metric tons of gold allocated in BoE vaults.  Presumably those bars were sold through LBMA anyway.  Since BoE and LBMA mix their books (see BoE statement that they are "custodian" on their statements), the lack of transparency at LBMA is reaching a point that there is global economic ramification due to their gamesmanship.  This is unacceptable from a geopolitical sense.  Therefore, it is logical that the Chinese and others have lost confidence in the system.  It is also logical that those players are removing their bars from the LBMA/BoE system.  Even so, the British Empire and the LBMA clearly were the dominant player for several centuries, amassing and vaulting huge sums of gold.
We need to do some more forensic analysis based upon reports from the other up and coming players.  Dubai is one such player.  The other two are Hong Kong and Singapore.  So, the place I would like to go now is to look at the reports of gold shipments from London to those three places.  One of the videos yesterday that I posted (Mike Maloney) attributed the market action to Chavez and Venezuela.  It might be that Chavez was more of a symptom and response.  Libya and Quaddafi is an interesting player due to the fact that he was killed and Libya had gold reserves in London.  I've wondered if the Libya situation was due to the market needing to locate 100+ mt of gold to fulfill demands by players for their allocated gold ingots.
LBMA's lack of transparency in gold audits is highly problematic at this point.  LBMA needs to disclose their trading numbers and needs to publish regular reports on their vault.  Otherwise, why believe anything coming out of LBMA?
BoE online reports appear to combine leased and pledged gold with their own reserve in the reported line item.  Therefore, you can not evaluate or tease apart the amount of hypothecation or rehypothecation in the fractional gold reserve scheme in London.  I'm sure this is on purpose as GATA has so perfectly illustrated.
When I was studying that BoE spreadsheet, it looks like the spreadsheet has fixed quantities of gold (ounces) but that other financial instruments are moving quite a bit.  I've not studied the spreadsheet close enough to correlate the movement of the numbers to physical world events.
But, the gold reserves counted by the nations should not be screwy.  Otherwise, those financial analysts and political bureaucrats will be summarily penalized by their governments.  The bottom line is that the disclosures by SNB and GLD are sufficient to pinpoint what is really going on even if BoE is lying.  When dealing with 1000 metric tons of gold, you can not easily move that from one inventory to another.  Therefore, the BoE could be completely opaque and yet the SNB and GLD disclosures were sufficient to see the dynamics over time.
I need to extract the data from SNB annual reports.  If anyone knows how to locate SNB's statements on gold reserve held in London versus Switzerland, it would be helpful.  I've already located total SNB gold ounces per year.  It's just that you can not tell how much was in the London versus Geneva/Bern/etc.

And here is the complete, unedited string of posts from SSJ. This is a simple c&p of everything SSJ posted, in the order he presented it. Please read through it yourself and then post your own conclusions into the comments section of this thread.

TF

Swiss National Bank - SNB - Gold reserve number
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 4:00pm.

Several URL's on Swiss banking gold
From SNB's 2012 report:
"Gold sales have not taken place since September 2008."
On page 144:  2012 year end gold reserve is 1001 metric tons of gold ingots with 39 metric tons of gold coins.  2011 year end gold reserve was 986 metric tons of gold ingots with 39 metric tons of gold coins.  So, SNB acquired 15 metric tons of gold ingots in 2012. (So 1001 + 39 = 1040 metric tons at end of 2012)

From http://www.usagold.com/swissgoldwgc.html (a 1999 report on Swiss gold)

2,590 tonnes of gold in its official reserves (1) Switzerland is the world's fourth biggest individual official holder of bullion, after the Eurosystem (2) , the US and the IMF. As of April 1999, gold forms 38.3 per cent of the reserves of the Swiss National Bank (SNB). For many people, both inside and outside Switzerland, there has long been an assumption that the strength of the country's currency and its economy owes much to its considerable reserves of gold. The link between gold and the Swiss currency has been enshrined in the country's constitution for more than a century.
The media outside Switzerland were therefore taken aback when, on 24 October 1997, a joint group of the Swiss Finance Ministry and the SNB produced a report on reform of the country's currency laws which, among other matters, recommended that some 1,400 tonnes of the gold reserves should be sold.

Let's do some math.
If the 2590 mt number from 1999 is correct, then indeed the SNB sold off 1400+ metric tons.
The 1999 gold reserve appears to be 2590mt.
The 2012 gold reserve appears to be 1040mt.
The balance is 1550 metric tons.
Isn't that an interesting number?
1550 again.

Swiss Nat'l Bank report from 2000
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 4:14pm.

SNB report from 2000 shows the gold transactions and leasing numbers.
http://www.snb.ch/en/mmr/reference/annrep_2000_komplett/source
"The agreement on gold sales concluded in September 1999 between 15 European central banks (cf. 92nd Annual Report, page 45), also requires the National Bank to limit its gold lending to the previous level of 328 tonnes. It therefore kept its lending volume constant on that level; at the end of 2000, the amount of gold lent was 323.8 tonnes." - page 50

 "The National Bank sells gold no longer required for monetary policy purposes totaling 1,300 tonnes successively over a period of time on the market.  The proceeds are invested in various financial assets which are managed separately from the other assets. The investment process is structured similar to the foreign exchange reserves. Within the framework of the investment strategy fixed by the Governing Board, an internal steering committee determines the detailed investment guidelines and management measures. The yardstick for success is the yield achieved on benchmark portfolios.

The sale of the gold no longer needed began at the beginning of May. By the end of December, the National Bank had sold 170.8 tonnes of gold on the market at an average price of US dollars 275.58 per ounce. The proceeds from these sales amounted to Sfr 2.6 billion. The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) was entrusted with the sale. The sales were concluded at regular intervals and in quantities that protected the market as much as possible. They are effected within the framework of the agreement on gold sales concluded between 15 European central banks in September 1999. The agreement fixes annual sales quotas.

The possibilities of hedging additional gold holdings earmarked for sale against an unfavourable development of the gold price in Swiss francs are considerably limited by the agreement on gold sales of September 1999. The National Bank may therefore not hedge against the gold price risk with derivative instruments. It can, however, manage the currency risk of future US dollar-denominated proceeds from gold sales. For this reason, the National Bank has concluded dollar forward sales against Swiss francs and euros to the extent of roughly one-third of the future proceeds in dollars. A complete hedge of the currency risk is not necessary because, as a rule, any weakening of the dollar against the Swiss franc regularly coincided with a rise in the dollar price of gold.  Moreover, broad-based hedging could lead to disturbances in the Swiss franc forward market. In 2000, hedging transactions resulted in a profit of Sfr 82.8 million."

from page 90:
"Physical gold holdings, which are stored at a variety of locations in Switzerland and abroad, declined by 180.7 tonnes compared with 1999. Of this figure, 170.8 tonnes were sold and 9.9 tonnes are accounted for by lending transactions and higher balances on metals accounts.

Claims from gold transactions
This item relates principally to secured and unsecured claims from gold lending transactions. Transactions are effected with first-class Swiss and foreign financial institutions. At the end of 2000, there were outstanding claims of over 323.8 tonnes, corresponding to a market value of Sfr 4,685.4 million (including accrued interest) on gold lending transactions."

1999 holdings are listed as 2099.3 mt gold ingots, 175.2 mt gold coins
2000 holdings are listed as 1918.5 mt gold ingots, 175.2 mt gold coins

Bank of England gold sales
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 4:23pm.

SNB gold reserve is reported to be at 2100 mt in 1999, 1918.5 mt in 2000.
Now, it's reported to be around 1040 mt.
Therefore, about 1050 mt were sold between 1999 and 2008.
In that same time period, Gordon Brown started the famous gold sales in London.
How much gold did England sell?
see the Brit's Treasury Dept. report here:
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/28912647/Review-of-the-sale-of-part-of-the-UK-gold-reserves
Annex A on page 28 states that 12.7 million ounces were sold.
Convert 12.7 million ounces of gold to metric tons...
It's 360 metric tons.
The sales were over by 2002.

GLD inventory as of 2009
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 4:41pm.

GLD inspectorate certificate as of 2009 list is published by GLD's trust at:
http://www.spdrgoldshares.com/media/GLD/file/Inspectorate_Certificate_Oct21_2009.pdf
The report is interesting because the inspector clearly itemized every bar.  He lists a variety of reporting errors when reconciling the inventory lists.
Regardless, he counted 36,015,108.723 fine troy ounces of gold in 89,797 London Good Delivery bars.
These bars were listed as being at "London Vaults of HSBC Bank USA National Association"
I've previously published the quote from GLD that the HSBC custodian vaults are actually the Bank of England and LBMA vaults in London.
So, how many metric tons of gold are 36,015,108.723 fine troy ounces?
It's 1120 metric tons.  The numbers are getting interesting, aren't they?
Let's look at April 2011 near the peak.

GLD publishes its inspectorate certificate here:http://www.spdrgoldshares.com/media/GLD/file/Inspectorate_Certificate_Apr19_2011.pdf

They note 39,167,616.813 fine troy ounces of gold held in 97,677 London Good Delivery bars.
How many metric tons of gold in 39,167,616.813 troy ounces?
It's 1218.25 metric tons.
For more: http://www.spdrgoldshares.com/media/GLD/file/
For the Internet literate, crawl it and download while you can.

GLD inventory and SNB + BOE sales
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 4:51pm.

BoE sales were about 360 metric tons.
SNB sales were about 1050 metric tons.
BoE + SNB = 1410 metric tons.
GLD at peak in April 2011 reportedly had 1218.25 metric tons.
SNB was selling at a rate of about 1800 metric tons per year from 1999 to 2008.
1410 - 1218 = 190 metric tons.
The numbers are pretty obvious here.  There is wayyy to close of a match between these numbers and the GLD inventory numbers.
GLD piled together the title rights to the bars in London vaults from other central banks.  Those were probably lease rights.  The GLD title rights were allowed to run up to the level of nearly the entire gold sales from both Switzerland and England combined.
The SNB report from 2000 itself says it all:

"National Bank has concluded dollar forward sales against Swiss francs and euros to the extent of roughly one-third of the future proceeds in dollars. A complete hedge of the currency risk is not necessary because, as a rule, any weakening of the dollar against the Swiss franc regularly coincided with a rise in the dollar price of gold. "

Sounds like GOFO right?

@TF
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 5:01pm.

Maguire and McLeod and the rest of the gang have been right.
Plus, you set up that analysis with your pointing me to the GLD decline in inventory.
My guess is that the GLD inventory went back to Switzerland.
You have to wonder if Soros was being shielded by the Swiss.
I'm guessing the phone call is something like... "Bonjour Mr. Soros, I am calling from the SNB.  We'd like to discuss your investment accounts here.  Can we make an arrangement with you to keep your accounts quiet and your fund solvent?  By the way, we want our gold back in London.  Can you sell your gold to us at once?  After all, if you don't, we'll have to work your accounts with UBS, and we really wouldn't want to do that ... right? n'est pas?"
"oh oui oui msr."
"Danke, Merci, and Thank you Mr. Soros, you are such the team player"
"oh oui oui..."
hangs up and calls London desk
Maguire then sees what he sees....am I right?

More on GLD gold holdings
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 5:59pm.

http://www.spdrgoldshares.com/media/GLD/file/SPDR_Gold_Trust_10-Q_(quarter-ended_03_31_13).pdf
page 13 of the report:
"As at September 30, 2012, the Custodian held 42,803,608 ounces in its vault 100% of which is allocated gold in the form of London Good Delivery gold bars excluding gold payable, with a market value of $76,019,208,058 (cost — $50,726,261,488). Subcustodians held nil ounces of gold in their vaults on behalf of the Trust and 339,296 ounces of gold were payable by the Trust in connection with the creation and redemption of Baskets."
42,803,608 ounces = 1213 metric tons (in line with the estimate above).
Also they report "In the six months ended March 31, 2013, an additional 31,800,000 Shares (318 Baskets) were created in exchange for 3,080,127 ounces of gold, 64,000,000 Shares (640 Baskets) were redeemed in exchange for 6,195,243 ounces of gold, and 84,474 ounces of gold were sold to pay expenses.
As at March 31, 2013, the Custodian held 39,264,721 ounces of gold on behalf of the Trust in its vault, 100% of which is allocated gold in the form of London Good Delivery gold bars with a market value of $62,754,840,067 (cost — $47,757,325,849) based on the London PM fix on March 31, 2013. Subcustodians held nil ounces of gold in their vaults on behalf of the Trust."
6,195,243 - 3,080,127 = 3,115,116 ounces net lost
3,115,116 ounces  = 88.3 metric tons lost from GLD between 9/12 and 3/13.

And here are the Bank of England ledgers:

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/statistics/Documents/reserves/2012/Dec/Tempoutput.pdf

any conclusions?
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 7:03pm.

Any conclusions by anyone else?
Here's a few of mine
1.  It looks like the governments in the IMF certainly do align gold with SDR's and with other currencies.
2.  Gold can not be a barbaric relic when SNB and BoE ledger gold as part of their reserve.
3.  When Gold is included in the SDR "basket" at IMF, is that by "tradition" also?
4.  FRB-NY had huge outstanding debts purchased from big players in the 2009-2010 timeframe.  Where's the $1.2 trillion in assets to balance that sheet?  Or, are we still calling MBStuff "asset" instead of "liability"?
5.  When US Fed Reserve injects 85 billion per month on various contracts, is that supposed to provide insulation from moral hazard?  Who's hazard are we really talking about here?  
6.  Which rules supreme?  The privacy of the FRB or are we talking about the moral hazard of the currency in the United States of America?  Congress anyone?
7.  Geez, if I can put this together on TFMR, where the hell has Bart Chilton been?  He gets paid by US taxpayers for this crap and he's not done squat!
8.  Soros is no idiot.  That guy got something in return for relinquishing authority and title over the BoE and SNB ingots in London.  Or, is it possible that Soros' analysts in London were out having tea at Piccadilly while TMFR readers were triangulating on the prospective buyers?  If Au goes to 3000, then Soros' liquidation of GLD shares is a foolish mistake.  On the other hand, if Au goes back to 750, then Soros' liquidation of GLD shares will look incredible.  Didn't Soros scope out the numbers before he sold millions of shares?
9.  Where the hell is Bill Gross in this mix?  Was PIMCO completely asleep during the GLD action?  Or, is the Bill and Mo show just getting started?  Too much surf and turf at Balboa Island?
10.  Where is TimG?  He was at FRB-NY and had to have inside info on the Maiden Lane and the TARP/TALF/barf me with a spoon.  When our national government was coughing up 400 metric tons of GLD shares, did US Treasury department consider the impact on our national trade balance?  Or are the exchange of GLD allocated gold ingots in London "off ledger"?

Notes on LBMA gold bars
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 7:21pm.

LBMA gold in vaults...mentioned in this paper.

The Role of the Bank of England in the Gold Market

Michael Cross

Head of Foreign Exchange, Bank of England

The LBMA Annual Conference 2009, Edinburgh

http://www.lbma.org.uk/assets/cross.pdf

Bank of England has one of the largest gold vaults in the world; to give you a broad idea of the magnitudes, there are around 400,000 gold bars in our vaults, with a market value at current prices therefore of around £100 billion. The gold in our vaults is held on behalf of our customers and they include other central banks, international financial institutions, Members of the LBMA as well of course as the UK Treasury. The Bank is not unique in its role as custodian, and other central banks do offer similar facilities, most notably the Federal Reserve, and other commercial firms in London and around the world provide custodial services, although these are most commonly provided on an unallocated basis. As you know, the Bank provides an account management service on an allocated basis. That means that our customers holding gold at the Bank have title to specific bars.

As I’m sure you also know, owners of gold are able to mobilize those holdings conveniently by making or receiving book entry transfers between the accounts of our customers at the Bank. Transfers affected in this way are advantageous because there is [no?] requirement for the gold to be physically removed from the Bank’s vaults. Instead, the title to the bars is transferred in the Bank’s back office system. The Bank is probably unique in providing this kind of account management service on the scale that we do. The service provides an important element of the gold market infrastructure in London, which helps participants to trade in a secure and efficient way.

The system has grown up organically over a long period of time rather than by specific design – and very much in response to representations from participants in the London market. We certainly value the dialogue on this and on every other aspect of the gold market in London. As a parallel with the government’s gold lease facility on the Bank of England’s side, which grew out of our role as custodian, is that we used to accept gold unsecured deposits from other central banks and then on place them in the market in our own name at a price that took into account the operational and credit risk involved. However, like the government’s gold reserve, given historically low lease rates, the Bank is no longer able to on place gold deposits at a margin that justifies the credit or the operational risks involved. As such, we don’t currently accept gold deposits from other central banks for on placement.

For all those Turd beaters
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 7:32pm.

We all know who the guys are that show up here and talk their negativity in this forum.
http://www.lbma.org.uk/pages/?page_id=152&title=forecast_2013
Well, maybe the Turd mashers can go read the official forecasts posted at LBMA for 2013?
Somehow, despite this being a PM blog, and despite the blogosphere being so small, NOBODY went to LBMA and posted the actual forecasts from EVERY major player in the LBMA!
NONE of the analysts predicted the correct low.  All were off by 20% and NONE forecasted the gold sales from Jan to June 2013.
Want to conjecture why?
Because NONE of those analysts on the LBMA and looking at physical really understood the relationship between GLD and the title to the bars in the LBMA and BoE vaults.
And, NONE of those analysts work for Goldman Sachs or JPMChase (the "cartel" as TF puts it).  One analyst works for HSBC, but he was way off in his estimates.
If the world at LBMA is going to sit at St. Andrews enjoying the 3 PM hole 19 tea, maybe they can get into their offices and actually post a LBMA inventory report that is able to match to GLD's postings.
After all, it's the same vaults!
And, if you really have 400,000 GD bars there, GLD already counted some 80,000 of them...right?  Right?

@Kcap- may the force be with you!
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 10:30pm.

@Kcap
Look what I just found:
http://www.gwb.com.au/gwb/news/banking/rothchild.html
"To this day, N.M. Rothschild & Sons of London still lists as its primary business the selling and buying of treasuries and gold bullion. N.M. Rothschild helps fix the price of gold in London each day through the LBMA. A recent London Times articles explained that the gold price fix ceremony where five men (including a Rothschild) talk on their phones for 10 minutes, then lower tiny Union Jacks sitting on their desks, thereby fixing London's gold price each day. This ceremony takes place at 10:30 a.m. and 3 p.m., like clockwork, the same way, in the same place, and with mostly the same firms participating since the first gold fixing was enacted at Rothschild in St. Swithin's Lane on Friday Sept. 12, 1919. The company's name is also associated with many gold mining companies (e.g. Trillion Resources Ltd. and other Canadian mining companies)."
There is a reasonable rationale to argue that the arbitrary nature of setting international gold price at LBMA is posing a national security threat to the United States.
The video I posted earlier discussed fractional gold reserve banking.  The video caused me to dive into the SNB annual reports and to identify that Swiss gold reserves were sold for ten years.  The fact that those same quantities of gold (plus the gold sold by the UK in the exact same time frame) appear to have ended up in GLD is rather intriguing.
JPMC is wise to get out of that business.  If JPMC remained in that business, you would have US government interests running in opposition to the interests of the Rothschild's and the LBMA.  Is there really any question why Jes Staley ended up in London?  There really shouldn't be at this point.
More significantly, these observations regarding gold reserve movement between sov's also explains the departure and schism between Germany and the UK pre-WW2.
Let's rewind the clock by 150 years and take a closer look at the end of the reign of the Hanover clan.  The House of Hanover included King George II, King George III, and ended with Queen Victoria.  Sorry to the Brits who may be reading, but I'm decidedly American and will not be following any royal honorifics at this point.  It is rather disappointing that the Queen and the House of Windsor would choose these paths.  But, as an American and a patriot, my loyalty is to these United States and not to her financial encumberance on world gold supply.
Queen Victoria's father may have been Prince Edward, but her mother was princess of Coburg.  Victoria's mother was Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg in northern Bavaria.  The house of Windsor was formerly the House of Coburg in Germany's Bavaria.  In many ways, the German defeat in WW-1 was to the house of Saxe-Coburg/Bavaria. By then, the family renamed themselves the House of Windsor.  But, one can already see the impact of Victoria and Albert by going to the city square in Coburg, Germany (still standing despite both world wars).
Perhaps I "doth protesteth too much" but my allegiance and birth are decidely American.  I take great offense to the stealing of my fellow countrymen's wealth by Mr. Soros' schemes, Mr. Rothschild's quiet orchestration, or Her Majesty's feigned ignorance.
When citizens globally and more specifically investors in the United States (because GLD is uniquely available on NYSE) are taken for an ride by the BoE, you would think that large holders of GLD would be irate.
I wonder if we can find who the biggest holders of GLD are?
Who will we find among those still holding bigger investments in GLD?

JPMC politics
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 10:51pm.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/james-e-staley-to-join-bluemountain-186000162.html
http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2012/05/11/ina-drew-the-london-whales-boss-loves-a-good-crisis/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-08/jpmorgan-s-staley-quits-to-join-bluemountain-hedge-fund.html

Somebody needs to fill us in on the London Whale.
What was the trade and where was the guy situated?
Don't tell me that the Whale was at LBMA, was he?

Big holders of GLD
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 30, 2013 - 11:48pm.

http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/gld/ownership-summary
You have to love United States corporations and markets.
The Bank of England and LBMA apparently feel that opaque gold reserves are a part of business.

Owner Name    Date    Shared Held    Change (Shares)    Change(%)    Value(in 1,000s)
PAULSON & CO INC    03/31/2013    21,837,552    0    0.00    2,805,470
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO    03/31/2013    10,155,833    36,559    .36    1,304,720
BANK OF AMERICA CORP /DE/    03/31/2013    10,021,350    10,979    .11    1,287,443
NORTHERN TRUST CORP    03/31/2013    6,903,210    (9,104,784)    (56.88)    886,855
MORGAN STANLEY    03/31/2013    6,651,476    315,646    4.98    854,515
CREDIT SUISSE AG/    03/31/2013    6,247,052    153,100    2.51    802,559
UBS AG    03/31/2013    5,717,581    1,806,219    46.18    734,538
BLACKROCK ADVISORS LLC    03/31/2013    3,117,748    (3,451,284)    (52.54)    400,537
ALLIANZ ASSET MANAGEMENT AG    03/31/2013    2,887,943    (1,028,817)    (26.27)    371,014
FIRST EAGLE INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, LLC    03/31/2013    2,622,208    30,698    1.19    336,875
WELLS FARGO & COMPANY/MN    03/31/2013    2,139,671    (90,880)    (4.07)    274,884
SCHRODER INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT GROUP    03/31/2013    2,085,283    2,084,023    165,398.65    267,896
LAZARD ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC    03/31/2013    1,972,699    (148,735)    (7.01)    253,433
SCS CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC    03/31/2013    1,859,787    193,611    11.62    238,927
SUNTRUST BANKS INC    03/31/2013    1,827,282    (100,504)    (5.21)    
234,751

INSTITUTIONAL HOLDERS

Owner Name    Date    Shared Held    Change (Shares)    Change(%)    Value(in 1,000s)
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO    03/31/2013    10,155,833    36,559    .36    1,304,720
BANK OF AMERICA CORP /DE/    03/31/2013    10,021,350    10,979    .11    1,287,443
NORTHERN TRUST CORP    03/31/2013    6,903,210    (9,104,784)    (56.88)    886,855
MORGAN STANLEY    03/31/2013    6,651,476    315,646    4.98    854,515
CREDIT SUISSE AG/    03/31/2013    6,247,052    153,100    2.51    802,559
UBS AG    03/31/2013    5,717,581    1,806,219    46.18    734,538
BLACKROCK ADVISORS LLC    03/31/2013    3,117,748    (3,451,284)    (52.54)    400,537
ALLIANZ ASSET MANAGEMENT AG    03/31/2013    2,887,943    (1,028,817)    (26.27)    371,014
FIRST EAGLE INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, LLC    03/31/2013    2,622,208    30,698    1.19    336,875
WELLS FARGO & COMPANY/MN    03/31/2013    2,139,671    (90,880)    (4.07)    274,884
SCHRODER INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT GROUP    03/31/2013    2,085,283    2,084,023    165,398.65    267,896
LAZARD ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC    03/31/2013    1,972,699    (148,735)    (7.01)    253,433
SCS CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC    03/31/2013    1,859,787    193,611    11.62    238,927
SUNTRUST BANKS INC    03/31/2013    1,827,282    (100,504)    (5.21)    234,751
CTC LLC    03/31/2013    1,786,676    (2,034,331)    (53.24)    229,534

Elementary my dear RationalMind...elementary!
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 31, 2013 - 12:08am.

It appears that Mr. Paulson may have rights to more gold than the rest of the planet understands.
If the gold ingots in BoE vaults are as hypothecated and rehypothecated as Mr. McGuire believes, then I would say that the US government has ever reason to "encourage" our British friends to clearly allocate the ingots owned by GLD.
That would leave the rest of the world banks to argue over the scraps in London vaults.
And, it would leave Mr. Paulson's fund and Mr. Fink's fund (Blackrock) able to request delivery.
They are both gentlemen and would not seek to embarrass the crown in such a fashion.
But, then again, maybe President Obama's faux-pas when in attendance of her majesty wasn't such a spontaneous err.
Maybe the President knows what's up and that the crown of England should be eating a few more hot dogs for good times sake.

Libyan Gold reserve discussed by IMF
Submitted by Strongsidejedi on July 31, 2013 - 10:22am.

For some reason the 140-180 mt number keeps coming up.  It's like a magic number.
And, note the dateline... March 2011
IMF apparently discussed the Libyan gold reserve as being in the ballpark of 140 mt.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12824137

22 March 2011
Libya holding huge gold reserves IMF data shows
 By Andrew Walker Economics correspondent, BBC World Service
"The IMF data show Libya's reserves to be 4.6 million ounces, a figure of nearly 144 tons. At current market prices the value is over $6bn.
There are twenty countries with larger gold reserves. But, with the exception of Lebanon, they are all much richer or much larger in population.
Britain for example has twice as much gold, but ten times the population and an economy more than 30 times the size.
A closer comparison is Algeria, which is, like Libya, a North African oil producer - it has 20% more gold reserves, but more than five times the population."

THAT'S ALL FOR NOW. THANKS AGAIN, SSJ!

 

169 Comments

Turd Ferguson's picture

Appendix

MODERATOR

Here's the video that started the ball rolling for SSJ. It's very well done and kudos to Mike Maloney for putting it together. Please watch the entire thing but pay special attention from the 15:00 mark onward.

 

And here's an update from Alasdair MacLeod on the BoE gold sales that he discussed with Max last Friday: http://www.goldmoney.com/en-gb/news-and-analysis/news-and-analysis-archive/untangling-gold-at-the-bank-of-england.aspx

treefrog's picture

furst!

haven't they heard of smokeless powder yet?

printmemoney's picture

2nd

2nd

There's a ton of evidence that the system is about to crack. While I find some of SSJ's analysis conspiratorial, in the end, it won't matter. All fiat will burn.

DeaconBenjamin's picture

Confusion, not regulation the major dampener for Indian gold dem

 

 

Author: Geoff Candy
Posted: Wednesday , 31 Jul 2013

Last week's issuance by the Reserve Bank of India of fresh regulations with which gold traders must comply, has resulted in a great deal more questions than answers.  The new regulations repeal 'old' ones that were  implemented May and June in a bid to curb imports of the metal but, the question remains, as to whether or not these new regulations are likely to be any more effective than the previous set, which didn't seem to be solving the problem of too-high imports into the country.

Writing in its latest commodities note, UBS notes,  that it is quite difficult to gauge which framework is more limiting for gold importers in India.  "In the previous structure, gold for local consumption could no longer be brought in via consignments and instead had to be paid outright. This made the process more expensive for importers from a financing perspective. Indeed, the announcement of the consignment restrictions in May/June produced the desired results - import volumes declined significantly in June, although much of the impact could probably be attributed to the fact that players simply halted activities while they were adapting to the new rules. This would help explain why there was a recovery in volumes this month, as some of the players would have managed to alter their processes to comply with the May regulations. But the reality is that many were still in the process of changing their internal procedures when the new announcement was made last week. So, the full impact of the consignment restrictions cannot really be determined."

And, while it is likely that imports will be dampened as a result of the new regulations, at least part of the reason for that will be because of the sheer confusion as to exactly what is going on and, importantly, what is required for compliance.

http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/content/en/mineweb-gold-analysis?oid=199387&sn=Detail

FleetFeet's picture

OT - Impressive World Map

Takes just 27 seconds to review 130 years of temperature changes around the world.  

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/

If you read this after July 31, you'll have to use the back button "<", next to the word "Archive," to reach the July 31 video.  

Happy browsing!  

Just A Regular Guy's picture

@SSJ

As per other thread, 1000 hat tips!
Kudos to Turd for bringing it all together in this post. Fantastic stuff!!!!

PMBull's picture

Wow - Such Good Stuff SSJ!

Wow - Such Good Stuff SSJ!  Thanks for your hard work on this.  Amazing what this community can do.

California Lawyer's picture

This is the Reason We All Love this Place

TF and SSJ:  I wanted to chime in yesterday, but did not understand it enough to intelligently try to comment.

I am pretty sure I get it now.

(1) LBMA/BoE hold massive quantity of gold bullion in London, so they claim;

(2) SNB holds massive quantity of gold bullion, partly in Switzerland, partly in London, so it claims;

(3) GLD, the bankster paper gold investment scam entity, is itself claiming to be possessed of massive quantities of gold bullion;

(4) Between the LBMA, BoE, SNB and GLD, it seems there are multiple, competing claims to the same physical gold, i.e., fractionalized lending of physical gold has resulted in the same physical gold being lent out or sold many, many times;

(5) Soros, et al., hold possession claims to large amounts of the GLD bullion;

(6) The raw data from published reports from LBMA, BoE, SNB, has resulted in transparency to the formerly hidden facts of multiple sales/leases of the same physical gold;

(7) The Eastern elite have grown concerned enough about the veracity of the whole western banking cartel and fraudulent gold scheme to the point that the Eastern powers have demanded, and received delivery of actual physical gold from the western banking interests;

(8) There exists now, right now, today, an awareness of the western elite that physical gold is in short supply, and that a potential bank run on physical gold is actually taking place right now;

(9) Awareness of the physical gold shortage is causing disruptions in the market, leading gold commentators extraordinare to express opinions based suggesting systemic disruptions or, per Jim Willie types, imminent collapse, etc.

(10) SSJ, a long-time, brilliant poster, has unraveled the numbers and posted, in clear, undisputed terms, the actual facts proving the gold manipulation scam of fractionalize gold leasing/selling of the same physical gold to multiple persons/entities.

Well done!

¤'s picture

Epic post!

Very nicely done SSJ. yes

Intense informational posts like that and other interesting topical subjects in the forums are what make this site a unique place....and worthwhile.

At some point maybe all comments and forums go behind the pay wall? I know that's an unpopular thought at this point...or ever.

But....if you wanted more bang for your Turd dollar ( something many voiced) I suspect some or many of you would follow some or most of us in there. Maybe not.

There are many of you who post or lurk this site because of TF first and foremost. But many (like myself) are also here for multiple social media like purposes. I like the unique atmosphere and folks I've come to know fairly well because of the poster community itself.

I'll be on the other side of the wall posting alongside many of you hopefully at some point whether the forums remain free for however long they remain so.

Imho, I'd give new registrants 7 free days to view the pay side and then they'll have to make up their minds if they want to be on the inside with most of us....and maybe even the forums and new blogs...and maybe even one from myself in the future.

If the site is going the pay route I would seriously reconsider not giving away one of the sites prime assets....which is all of us and our comments and interactions.

Just food for thought put out there by myself.

(Let's keep this thread centered on SSJ's fine work. (Please, thnx)

Cononish1314's picture

Top Twenty Prose Producer

I didn't follow all of that -- and it contained some extraneous remarks about the British Royal Family. [I say that as something of a Scottish republican.]

Interesting to see a reference to Lebanon's gold at the end, though. I've mentioned it before on here. Maybe worth some study as part of the possible fallout from a "Greater Syrian" conflict. Let's be ahead of the game with this one.

Bollocks's picture

Yes, great work SSJ.

Excellent investigation.

There certainly does seem to be 'trouble up mill'.

Exbroker's picture

Had your point is?

Had your point is?

indosil's picture

@DPH

the XAU chart you posted in the previous thread had cycle depicted for 20 years..where exactly can i find/learn more about cycles??How do i plot them on the charts??

Warm Regards

Indosil

Pining 4 the Fjords's picture

SSJ knows what's going on

Turdville knows what's going on.

Heck, even Walter and The Dude know what's going on (as posted here at TFMR 6 months ago):

The question is, when will the bagholders of all that phony paper gold finally figure out what's going on?

That should be interesting.  Fabulous contribution StrongSide !

realitybiter's picture

and DB weak...

today...

think about this:   I see headlines today talking about Nazi's stealing Country's gold after invading them in the 30's, then having the BOE sell it for them, funding their army...

today:  Get those Countries to put their money into GLD, rehypothecate the funds, or duplicate it otherwise, then just take the gold.....no invasion necessary.  brilliant.

or warehouse it, lease it out, whatever, its gone.

seems to me, that payback will be a bitch.  Ask the Germans.  Or mussolini.

long rope.

Strongsidejedi's picture

@CalLaw - Soros

"(5) Soros, et al., hold possession claims to large amounts of the GLD bullion"

Correction - I believe that Soros HELD (past tense) those claims.

He sold out his position and by timing his sales, he appears to have been the hedge fund that started the avalanche in spot price.  When GLD liquidates its positions, GLD's custodian is in London.

I posted those SPDR GLD trust document links a few days ago, but the GLD gold custodian is HSBC in London.

Therefore, when the guys in London are seeing the gold price on LBMA moving, its because the desks at HSBC are moving the title for those "allocated" bars.

The title for those bars are clearly moving between big players.

Today, I started looking at IMF.

Remember those IMF Press announcements from 2009 to 2011?

I've C&P'd the pertinent phrase below, but interestingly, the same 400 mt number comes up again.

We keep seeing that same 400 mt number come up.  400 mt was the amount of gold SOLD by GLD in the last 6 months.

I'm getting the picture that 400 mt is the magic number and that those same bars could have been hypothecated and rehypothecated, causing the appearance of the 1200 mt ton (400 x 3).

Libya and Algeria are the other player here and likely Egypt.  Most of those nations probably keep their gold in London.  If GLD kept growing, it was going to eat the gold reserves of the governments.  The citizens of the world could have ended up with the control by calling delivery.

The question is whether or not Soros made a big mistake liquidating GLD position.  He could have called the delivery in London.  Paulson and Dimon are in position to do so, but Dimon just bowed out through JPMC.  Jes Staley is over at Blue Mountain so he knows something.  It would be wise for a Guardian or Daily reporter to call Staley and ask his opinion on the direction of the gold markets.

If Blue Mountain is long, then you've got a far better indicator than Soros.

I think Soros got out because the Swiss wanted the gold back and they got something else on the guy (hundreds of millions of gold or CHF or USD that belongs to him?).  But, Soros position was paper.

The question is between IMF and Soros, who sold more.  IMF probably is the answer.

They stated in 2009 they were going to sell 2000 mt by 2014.  It's 2013!

http://www.imf.org/External/NP/EXR/faq/goldfaqs.htm

Q. How much gold was sold?

 

• The Executive Board approved sales strictly limited to the gold the IMF had acquired after the Second Amendment of the Articles of Agreement in April 1978. This amounted to 12,965,649 fine troy ounces or 403.3 metric tons, which represented one-eighth of the Fund's total holdings at the time of approval.

• The volume of gold sales approved by the Executive Board was unchanged from the proposed sales in the new income model endorsed by the Executive Board in April 2008, which was also the same volume as recommended by the Crockett Committee in its January 2007 report on the sustainable long-term financing of the IMF.

• The IMF announced in February 2010 that phased sales of gold on the market would be initiated shortly. At that time, a total of 191.3 tons of gold remained to be sold, following the sale of a total of 212 tons to three central banks during October and November 2009.

Q. How was the gold sold?

 

• According to the modalities for the gold sales adopted by the Executive Board, the Fund initially stood ready to sell gold off-market directly to central banks and other official sector holders at market prices. During October and November 2009, the Fund sold a total of 212  tons in this manner to the Reserve Bank of India, the Bank of Mauritius, and the Central Bank of Sri Lanka. On September 7, 2010, the Fund sold 10 metric tons to the Bangladesh Bank.

• Second, the gold sales were conducted on-market in a phased manner over time, following the approach adopted successfully by the central banks participating in the Central Bank Gold Agreement (CBGA).

• Participants in the CBGA renewed in 2009 announced ceilings on sales of 400 tons annually, and 2,000 tons in total during the five years starting on September 27, 2009, and noted that the Fund's sales could be accommodated under these ceilings.

• As one of the elements of transparency in the sales, the Fund informed markets that on‑market gold sales were about to commence on February 17, 2010 (See Press Release No. 10/44). The IMF provided regular updates on progress with the gold sales through its normal reporting channels.

NonoverlappingMagicCereal's picture

OT(apologies to SSJ)- unsolicited comments on subscription model

I didn't comment regarding the new subscription system when it was announced, but I've seen so many comments that either (1) accuse TF of being greedy or unethical for moving to the system or (2) call people who announce that they won't subscribe free-loaders or idiots.  These are all counter productive, since TF has every right to try to do what he can to turn this into a reasonable income stream, and readers have every right not to subscribe.  All that matters is: will it work?
 
To answer this, it is helpful to understand how internet blogs and communities like this become successful, which has to do with the Power Law.  The Power Law is a model that describes all sorts of systems in nature where a small number of entities grow to disproportionate levels of size and influence, while most others stay small.  It applies to any number of physical, biological, and social phenomena, and is particularly applicable to those on the internet.  Rather than describe the law formally, I'll just describe TF's success as it relates it.
 
TF, you succeeded initially because you had more compelling content, better visibility, or just flat out being quicker to the party than other sites.  That gave you an edge that allowed you to get draw a greater share of readers from a financial/PM/prepper community that was hungry for a news source of this type.  Once you've got that, the power law takes over, and you get a positive feedback loop.  More readers begets more links, word of mouth, higher visibility on search engines.  These beget yet more readers, and this loop carries on, with the ultimate constraint being the overall size of the worldwide audience that's looking for this sort of material.
 
Once you hit that constraint and stop growing, you are more or less in maintenance mode, and really should just try to retain the readership you already have, albeit with some turnover, and do your best to optimize revenue within those bounds.  You can talk about 'growing' the community, but ultimately you are constrained by the number of people that are even interested in this sort of material, regardless of it's quality.  That, in turn, is ultimately controlled by economic conditions.  If economic conditions continue to improve, and PMs continue to tank, that pool of potential readers is only going to shrink.  
 
So you have to hold on to your existing readership, and starting a fee-based service is antithetical to that.  You are not a Giffen good, as price goes up demand will go down.  When it does, you will see the 'other side' of the power law.  As readership declines, so will the quantity (and possibly quality) of interaction in the comments and forums.  This will induce a negative feedback loop.  Less frequent commenting means that it is more challenging to sustain discussion, which inevitably leads to people dropping out of the discussion, further reducing comment frequency.  There is no doubt a good number of die-hards who will stick it out to the bitter end, but they will not be sufficient to pay the bills.  Last (and perhaps least), you will lose people like me, who if nothing else drive discussion via pot stirring (although that is not my intention, it seems to be my effect).
 
Recruiting contributors from your ranks was a shrewd move, as was committing to keep a significant portion of your own contributions public.  It may be that simply having *some* type daily thread for discussion will be sufficient to keep the community going.  Unfortunately, I suspect that this may be entirely offset by the fragmentation of the community that will be introduced by the subscription site.
 
I fear that your only hopes for success are (a) secure a sufficient number of subscribers very early on to achieve your desired profitability level and do everything you can do hold on to them or (b) hope that PMs take off soon so that the worldwide pool of folks interested in your point of view (and hence, your pool of potential readers and subscribers) grows.  My guess is that (a) or (b) needs to happen in the first six months, or tfmetals is toast.  Once readers are gone, they are very, very difficult to get back.  Subscribers are even harder.
 
TF, though I don't agree with you, I believe you are honest and hard-working, and wish you success.  If that success is with the new subscription format, I just hope that it's because I'm wrong in my analysis above and not because the economy deteriorates.  
 
To whatever extent your strategy is still in flux, I hope you find this input helpful.
Turd Ferguson's picture

Again, this is what so many

MODERATOR

Again, this is what so many seem unable to understand.

I have no right to take posts such as this one or the commentary from AM and put them behind a paywall. That would be unfair and stupid. The only items becoming subscription-based are my daily TA, my daily podcasts and my weekly webinars. THAT'S IT!

The rest of the site remains unchanged with ADDITIONAL CONTENT provided by the six, new regulars.

Please understand, I'm not aiming this at you, DPH. I'm just continually baffled at the inability of folks to see and understand anything that doesn't conform to their pre-conceived notions.

Response to: Epic post!
Jakarta Expat's picture

Ok a serious question

Some know me, I am not technical at all in these types of markets and paper vs physical ect ect so  reading the numbers it seems Henry Paulson (ex Goldman Sach douche and Secretary of the Treasury during the 2007/2008 financial fiasco) owns a huge amount of GLD paper which if there is such a shortage of physical then why is Paulson of all knowledgeable well placed friends in high places insiders holding so much of what could turn out to be worthless unbacked paper and not holding the real deal? It just seems like he would have converted ages ago if the shortage really existed, I would have thought he would have been one of the first getting his ducks in a row. Any thoughts?   

achmachat's picture

yay!

thank you so much for making this info this easily accessible!

this is much appreciated!

Turd Ferguson's picture

And if that's the case, so be it.

MODERATOR
"My guess is that (a) or (b) needs to happen in the first six months, or tfmetals is toast.  Once readers are gone, they are very, very difficult to get back.  Subscribers are even harder."
 
I appreciate the feedback but do you seriously think that I haven't taken all of this into consideration over the past 18 months?
 
I can't keep going the way I've been going. I developed this new idea to raise revenue and add additional value for those willing to pay the nominal fee. If it doesn't work, then it doesn't work. 
 
If I'm dead wrong and all of this kills the site, so be it. The proof will be in the proverbial pudding.
 
Turd Ferguson's picture

Uhhhh....

MODERATOR

Not HENRY Paulson, JOHN Paulson.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Paulson

On second thought, maybe you should consider the $10/month subscription?

RaRaRasputin's picture

Excellent stuff SSJ

The only thought that was going through my head when I read your investigative work was - hmm, and the BoE/Reichsbank/Nazi gold story broke yesterday too (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-07-30/bank-england-helped-reichsbank-sell-its-nazi-gold)  How curious is this news story timing?!  Why now and what is the aim/intention of the news story?

Curiouser and curiouser ....

Edited to add: And this work also has to highlight the need for the media pr stunt of the Queen touring the BoE gold vaults recently too, wouldn't you say? 

dropout's picture

Borrow - Sell - Lever Up and Buy

"If you borrow my car and sell it... I would be mad!"

Old Wall street saying; "Selling what isn't his'n then go to prison."

Ancient Legal Precedent:

Latin; "Nemo dat quod non habet."

Translation: "One cannot give what one does not have."

The entire 'fractional reserve' banking system is a fraud and deserves to die.  

Bollocks's picture

Pining

"when will the bagholders of all that phony paper gold finally figure out what's going on?"

Indeed.

Well, when they do, STAND WELL BACK!

NonoverlappingMagicCereal's picture

@TF - then we all can shut up about it

Including me.  Good luck.

realitybiter's picture

sell what isn't hisn

is no longer go to prison

It's pay a fine and book the diffr'n

Bollocks's picture

To be fair Turd...

You clarified your original special-announcement post with that info on Saturday afternoon, a day after it was first posted. I personally didn't notice the update until Monday, and perhaps DPH and some others didn't notice it at all.

indosil's picture

wowwwwwwww

no sooner the comex closes a $5 jump in Gold & 20 cents jump in Silver

Update: make that $8 & 30cents

Double Update:Reduce 50% 

Triple Update-Negative Territory

Jakarta Expat's picture

@ A Turd

See I learn something new every day here. Seriously I really thought they were one and the same. As I have stated here over and over I m not technical but I know when something defies common sense thus I bought all of our gold and silver between 2005/2006 before I heard of you or any of the other people promoting these kinds of sites.

So if John Paulson is such a wiz why is he still holding all of this supposed worthless paper?

Syndicate contentComments for "A Forensic Investigation from SSJ"