% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Silver Wheaton Corp. Message Board

  • sunbrookplace sunbrookplace Dec 5, 2013 10:41 PM Flag


    They are taking silver down over 1% now. It is never ending. Do technicals come into play here or does the relentless selling throw them out the window? Thanks. GLTAL

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Have been dealing with the same question for the last few years. Valuation and technicals have little to no value when markets are and stay whipsaw make NO sense whatsoever. This time of the year there used to be some stability and slow up moving in the markets but that is not so. It's a stock pickers market and we are subject to the manipulators. Stocks move more with news issues than technicals. Silver along with other commodities should be UP since $ index is down around the 80 mark. Hang in there. We are all in the dark right now and anyone who says they are making serious money in the market now are either a liar or just plain lucky and on the correct side of the trade after they open their eyes. VERY FEW are navigating the market well here.

      • 1 Reply to ufgtor
      • Likely the knock down and run up this morning abt 8:00 / 9:00 was a raid to cover a short position . . . about the time NY opened ? Once JPM and such cover they may not be allowed to reenter the futures markets again, but would count on it, the fight will go on. . . . News . . . Volcker Rule to Scrap "Portfolio Hedging", Would Make Trillions in Excess Deposits Inert

        As we have been covering for the past year and a half, most explicitly in "A Record $2 Trillion In Deposits Over Loans - The Fed's Indirect Market Propping Pathway Exposed", when it comes to the pathway of the Fed's excess deposits propping up risk levels, it has nothing to do with reserves sitting on bank balance sheets as assets, and everything to do with excess deposits (of which there are now $2.4 trillion thanks to the Fed) which are used as Initial collateral by banks such as JPM and then funding such derivatives as IG9 in a failed attempt to cover a segment of the corporate bond market. These deposits originate at the Fed as a liability at the commercial banking sector to the excess reserve asset.

        That much is clear and undisputed, and was admitted by none other than JPM itself.

        Which is why the news overnight from the WSJ that the Volcker Rule (if and when it is implemented) will do away with such "portfolio hedging" trades may have truly major, and potentially very risk adverse, consequences.

        The WSJ reports: "In a defeat for Wall Street, the "Volcker rule" won't allow banks to enter trades designed to protect against losses held in a broad portfolio of assets, according to people familiar with the rule. The practice, known as portfolio hedging, has become a focal point of regulators drafting the rule, a controversial plank of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial law that seeks to prevent banks from putting their own capital at risk in pursuit of trading profits.

        But it won't contain language permitting portfolio hedging, which has been "expunged" from earlier drafts of the rule, according to a person familiar with the matter. Regulators decided to remove portfolio hedging from the rule after J.P. Morgan Chase disclosed billions of dollars in losses from its so-called London whale trades in 2012."

        This Zero Hedge piece from yesterday is a bit of heavy reading, but is definitely worth your time if you have it

23.9199-0.3701(-1.52%)2:57 PMEDT