PDA

View Full Version : The Greediest, Vilest, Most Unethical Captialist Pigs are From . . .



Scott Rosen
12-19-2002, 07:10 AM
Canada.

http://savegold.com/litigation/20021218L02-3721SecC.pdf

They make the Enron boys look like Kindergarteners.

Mike H.
12-19-2002, 07:12 AM
Hey, Scot, the fight thread's over yonder! :eek:

stan v
12-19-2002, 07:38 AM
Yes, it's twue. Manipulating the price of gold. Destroying the environment. Dispictable (as said by Daffy Duck)

Mike H.
12-19-2002, 07:44 AM
Hey Stan, here's one for you!
http://www.artbell.com/images/deerhunter.jpg
(Sorry Scot, didn't mean to hijack the thread!)

Bruce Taylor
12-19-2002, 09:02 AM
What, you're surprised?

stan v
12-19-2002, 09:09 AM
Have I got to start looking up now?

John of Phoenix
12-19-2002, 09:12 AM
Scott, I'm curious. How did this suit come to your attention?

It seem odd that this suit is filed as gold is hitting prices it hasn't seen in five years. Barrick stock hasn't done especially well during the past decade either.

And Bruce, wipe that grin off your face. ;)

rodcross
12-19-2002, 09:15 AM
Aw, man! Scott.

Now you've gone and done it.

Accusing canadians of being bottom-dwelling, scum-sucking capitalists is the equivalent of calling a North Korean 'backward'.

They're going to get all bent out of shape.

(I wish you'd have used a better example, though. Talk about spurious lawsuits! A couple of gold speculators, crying about the price of a commodity that is increasingly losing value as economies become more stable doesn't make for a legitimate lawsuit. Change the commodity to copper, silver, wheat, rice, oil...etc. Now, if Barrick was selling at a loss to destroy competition, or limiting production to artificially inflate prices, that would be a different matter.)

Bruce Taylor
12-19-2002, 09:56 AM
Bent out of shape? I doubt it. We suck scum with the best of them. When we're finished sucking it, we spit it into the St. Lawrence, so the whales can have it.

Anyone remember Bre-X? I'll bet JimD does.

We're a capitalist country. Has anyone told you different?

Scott Rosen
12-19-2002, 10:05 AM
Well, those evil Canadians were working hand and hand with the blood-sucking American bankers at J.P. Morgan.

Rod, one of the plaintiffs in that case is the largest gold retailer in the world and is owned by GE. This case may or may not have merit, but it's a lot more than just a couple of disgruntled speculators. It's looking to be a battle of the titans, as GE takes on JP Morgan.

[ 12-19-2002, 11:06 AM: Message edited by: Scott Rosen ]

Adam C
12-19-2002, 10:39 AM
Bruce,

I recall a few Bre-X "millionaires". :D

rodcross
12-19-2002, 10:40 AM
I read parts of it again, Scott, and cannot see where Morgan has any motive for being an accomplice. The bullion bank invests the proceeds of the sale, pays the central bank a low rate and pays the balance of the income earned to Barrick. What's in it for Morgan? The complaint says the entire premium program couldn't happen without Morgan, yet they don't show that Morgan had any motive for acting as facilitator.

View it from another perspective for a moment. Any central bank with a vault full of gold is sitting on a vast amount of value that doesn't earn anything. It merely sits there. Offer them the chance to earn money on their gold reserves with the backing of a mining company guarantee to replace the gold. Now, tell these central banks that they can't do it anymore. If I were any of 50 central banks around the world, I would join the J. P. Morgan side, in a moment.

ACB
12-19-2002, 10:56 AM
Talking of which, is there any truth in this little lot, culled from a UK bulletin board? (MOD = UK Ministry of Defence, DEFRA = UK Defence Procurement Agency)

The Bush family?

The link from the UK might be:

MOD gets a brainwave: "lets flog off 50% of our defence research to this funny little company that nobody's heard of". Quinetiq gets formed from DEFRA and along with 9,000 civil servants, substantial chunks of land (1,000+ hectares) all over the UK especially in the south, the MOD gives preferential status (first refusal) to Carlyle Group.

Who are Carlyle? Mr Rumsfeld's oldest friend, Frank Carlucci, a former Defense secretary himself, now heads the Carlyle Group, an investment consortium which has a big interest in the contracting firm United Defense. Carlyle's board includes George Bush Sr and James Baker, the former secretary of state. One program alone – the Crusader artillery system – has earned Carlyle more than $2bn in advance government contracts. Carlyle's European chairman is John Major. The next link is Chevron.

Chevron:
Chevron imports a lot of oil from Iraq, more than any other US oil cpy. Condoleeza Rice, George W.’s chief foreign policy aide and leading national security adviser, had previously been a director of Chevron Corp since 1991. Rice was in charge of public policy for Chevron’s board of directors, and used her expertise in Russian issues to help Chevron navigate its way to investments in the Caspian Sea oil fields. In 1993, Rice was granted a rare honor when Chevron named an oil tanker after her.

Haliburton:
Lawrence Eagleburger, a seasoned Bush counselor who held top State Department posts under George W.’s father, is a director of Halliburton Corp., the world’s largest oil field services company. When looking for a running mate, George W. also turned to Halliburton. He asked Dick Cheney, Halliburton’s chairman and chief executive, first to vet other candidates and later to take the job. Haliburton built the defence utilities in Afghanistan and the UK tank transporters as well as delivering them (hopefully with the tank still on them).

The Axis of Evil?
Bush's grandfather, Prescott Bush and Prescott's father in law George Herbert Walker (GW Bush's namesake) made their initial fortune on Wall Street supplying Nazi Germany and the other Axis nations with money, steel, ships, munitions, formulas for synthetic gas and other materials vital to creating their armies. In 1942 the U.S. Congress seized the Bush families' banking assets as Nazi fronts under the Trading With the Enemy Act.

There is a conflict of interest? Iraq undoubtedly needs the services of companies such as Haliburton, Carlyle & Chevron - once Saddam's out of the way, of course.

And just a boating footnote on Quinetiq. In early spring of this year, they lost a pallet load of anti-tank warheads and mines which were washed away off mudflats at Weston-super-mare Thomas Head range in the Bristol Channel. They've never been found and are "live".

[ 12-19-2002, 12:00 PM: Message edited by: ACB ]

Scott Rosen
12-19-2002, 10:56 AM
Central banks lease gold and producers hedge their gold all the time. That's not the problem. I think the "evergreen" component is where it starts to get fishy. JP leases the gold to Barrick and doesn't get it back until Barrick wants to give it back. Imagine having a virtually unlimited supply of gold such that you can sell it short on the condition that you don't have to give it back until you want to. You lease the gold from JP Morgan and pay 1.5% (that's where JP gets it's $); then you sell it short and invest the proceeds at 5%. Since you don't have to return the gold, you can sell the gold you produce from your own mines at the rising market price, without having to allocate a portion to return on the short sales. By flooding the market with short sales, you can keep the price down and kill any rallies. Lower prices discourage other gold mines from tapping their reserves and producing more bullion, thus driving down their value. Barrick acquires the other mines at low prices.

I was impressed by the ingenuity of the scheme.

[ 12-19-2002, 11:59 AM: Message edited by: Scott Rosen ]

Cap'n R an R
12-19-2002, 11:00 AM
Will be interesting to see, thru disclosure, if Morgan sold Gold SHORT or purchased puts for it's own account BEFORE it sold the borrowed Gold...Barrick guaranteed Morgan the Gold Back at the price it was sold at...no risk to Morgan..."He that sells what isnt his'n, pays it back or goes to prison".... fun and games to unfold....the Government of the good old U.S.A. a la Rubin figured it broke the barometer by killing Gold....me thinks the barometer based on market action has been put back together again without "all the horses or all the Kings men"... is there a taint of"insider profiteering"????

James R
12-19-2002, 11:05 AM
Now, now Scott! What ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

The facts in the complaint are somewhat twisted. As an example, on pages 5 and 6 it's claimed that Barrick obtained the rights to the Goldstrike property by less than honest means. In fact, the property was thought to be nearly depleted and was only producing some 50,000 ozs of gold per year. Other mining companies, even Newmont which had an operating mine nearby, declined to bid for the property. If memory serves, Barrick paid in the neighbourhood of $100 million for the property. The $10,000 referred to in the complaint is the fee for the mining rights paid to the state. When the magnitude of the size of gold reserves was discovered legislators changed the laws to force Barrick to pay more. Barrick won "fair and square" only by taking the state to court.

Barrick's geologists at the time felt that the property had greater potential than anyone believed because none of the American companies were deep-drilling, nor were they using the then new autoclaving technology which allowed greater extraction of gold from the available ore. Barrick would go on to extract a substantial amount of gold from the tailings discarded by the previous operators.

As for its "Premium Gold Sales Program" it is nothing more than a combination of hedging and classical arbitrage programs involving bullion, spot prices and the LIBOR rate. The accusations that the fall in gold prices was caused by this program is ridiculous and usually made by those that have no understanding of derivatives. At the time this was leading edge stuff and many now kick themselves for not having done the same.

Peter Munk, Barrick's chairman, surrounded himself with good geologists (the late Bob Smith, Alan Hill, etc.) and a couple of financial whiz kids (Greg Wilkins, etc.). He trusted them, took their advice, and let them do their thing. That was the secret to the success of Barrick not the shady dealings that the plaintiffs accuse them of.

rodcross
12-19-2002, 11:32 AM
True, Scott, I did discount the 'evergreen' part as being ridiculous. Let's say you were the head of a central bank. Would you sign a deal with anyone, in which there is a provision that allows the mining company to replace your gold only when it is convenient for them to do so? Let the head of the Russian central bank go to Putin and tell him that he'd loaned their gold on such an agreement. Do you think the guy would still have his head, when he left the Kremlin?

If you owned IBM stock, would you be willing to loan it for the short sellers under those terms?

I can see how this falls right into capn R&R's conspiricy theory. "Mining company has the power to bring down every central bank in the world!"

But, let's be practical, here. Just like your IBM never leaves your safe deposit box, the bullion never leaves the vaults of the central banks. Its all paper transactions. Any time they choose, the central banks can slam the door and pass the responsibility for covering the shorts on to Morgan through to the mining company.

An aside: If Barrick can produce $271 of gold for $42, doesn't that suggest that gold may be overvalued, rather than undervalued?

[ 12-19-2002, 12:35 PM: Message edited by: rodcross ]

plimsol
12-19-2002, 11:47 AM
The price of gold has nothing to do with its value as an industrial commodity, the price is a barometer of the perceived political and ecomonic stability in the World.
Remember we have a dual economic system, the oligopolists and the rest of us. We are subject to the forces of the market, they make the market.

Cap'n R an R
12-19-2002, 12:02 PM
It is very probable that no Gold ever left the central bank vaults and all this is strictly paper obligations.....what would be the purpose of all this action??? ...making money by playing the markets???? making money on Gold sitting in the vaults???...is there a desire to keep the price from rising???..why would a central bank engage in activities that would decrease the market value of it's assets or prevent them from increasing in value....what did Barrick want to accomplish??? why would they engage in activities that would depress the price of Gold??? most businesses prefer to see the price of their products rise not fall...most governments today function on debt and paper currency and junk coins...you dont have to be brilliant to know that Gold is the enemy of our current monetary system world wide....and therefor is the enemy ,rightly or wrongly, of all governments that function on irredeemable paper and debt never to be repaid...a little hanky panky while government looks the other way....what the hell ...no harm done...until people wake up world wide....do we see something stirring out there ???? what ho!!! sail yonder??? or is that a ship of Gold setting forth????

ken mcclure
12-19-2002, 12:17 PM
It doesn't bother me that Canadians are scum-sucking, life-stealing, bottom-dwelling, greedy capitalist pigs because they are so unfailingly polite about it.

rodcross
12-19-2002, 12:42 PM
cap'n,

Before you get too carried away, gold has value as a precious metal and as a commodity for the manufacturing of a lot of things. If a company can mine gold at a cost of $50 and sell it for $250, they're going to keep mining it. They will continue to mine it even if the sale price falls to $60. Every additional ounce of new gold diminishes the entire value of all the existing gold in the world. If they keep it up, gold will lose its designation as a 'precious' metal.

Tell me, just how secure do you feel that the gold bars you have in the basement are going to be of any value to you? When the world comes down over our ears, what will you be able to buy with this gold?

Cap'n R an R
12-19-2002, 12:48 PM
Dow jones stocks selling at 6 to 8 times earnings and yielding 6 to 7 % annual dividends...I dont love Gold ..I love honesty...paper is fine if it is managed honestly...it never has been ...Gold reminds us of this every once in a generation or two....

Nicholas Carey
12-19-2002, 12:53 PM
Originally posted by ACB:
Talking of which, is there any truth in this little lot, culled from a UK bulletin board? (MOD = UK Ministry of Defence, DEFRA = UK Defence Procurement Agency)

The Bush family?

The link from the UK might be:

MOD gets a brainwave: "lets flog off 50% of our defence research to this funny little company that nobody's heard of". Quinetiq gets formed from DEFRA and along with 9,000 civil servants, substantial chunks of land (1,000+ hectares) all over the UK especially in the south, the MOD gives preferential status (first refusal) to Carlyle Group.

Who are Carlyle?Up until recently, one of the investors in the Carlyle Group was a Saudi Arabian family who own a large construction/engineering concern -- the bin Laden family of the Saudi binLadin Group...who also whelped their black sheep son, Usama.

http://www.redherring.com/vc/2002/0111/947.html

From the Wall Street Journal (Europe):

http://www.uni-muenster.de/PeaCon/global-texte/g-notes/BinLaden-Carlyle.htm

Cecil Nickerson
12-19-2002, 02:20 PM
Begging your pardon McClure. …and the horse you rode in on. :D

Peter Malcolm Jardine
12-19-2002, 02:30 PM
Yes I always say please before I beat the everliving tar out of someone for a few lousy dollars. and then tie them up and leave them in the garbage dump for the polar bears. :D

ken mcclure
12-19-2002, 02:41 PM
:D :D :D I prefer MISTER horse you rode in on, if you don't mind.

John of Phoenix
12-19-2002, 02:59 PM
I'd be a whole lot more comfortable about the future if the Carlyle Group's business was say, solving world hunger or a cure for the common cold. Really just about anything that wasn't so dependent on the mass sale of weapons of conventional destruction. Does it get any lower than old politicians turned gun runners?

rodcross
12-19-2002, 03:15 PM
This conversation if getting boring. I thought we'd be needling the canadians and watching them get all indignant. shees!

Scott Rosen
12-19-2002, 03:31 PM
Rod, their silence means they agree with our characterization of them as greedy, sleezy, blood and scum sucking capitalist, counter-revolutionary pigs.

Other than that, I think they're a nice group of fellows. ;)

James R
12-19-2002, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by rodcross:
This conversation if getting boring. I thought we'd be needling the canadians and watching them get all indignant. shees!We're too polite! ...but behind the scenes we're plotting our revenge. Be afraid! Be very afraid! :D :D :D

Tonyr
12-20-2002, 04:35 PM
That's right. Behave yourselves, or we will send our winter down, and all your water will go hard.

Tony.

Ron Williamson
12-21-2002, 06:49 AM
Excuse me sir,could you please clarify something?
Whaddyamean 'counter-revolutionary'?
THAT ain't nice.
R