Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Starfirenv (< 20)

Silver IS $50/oz. COMEX gets pantsed.

Recs

11

March 14, 2011 – Comments (10)

I was hoping our Strongman would run with this but he has been conspicuously absent in these times of rapid revelations, so it is now "recent" news. This is good.

This is for Kstarich, a fellow metalhead of the lunar variety. Any Fool who follows PM's is surely familiar with Harvey. I have long suspected that "paper" SILver has been a drag on the real thing. This may be the beginning of a disconnect between paper and physical, but is that a good thing for those who do not hold Physical?  Last I saw the deriv mkt was 1.4 Quadrillion $ (only partly PM's). Do we really want that House of Cards to fall?

"Physical Silver is Really $50 per Oz (80% premium on COMEX Silver Non-Delivery)"

 " It was reported by SGS that he heard that on Friday Blythe was offering 30-50 percent premium and that at least 4500 hundred contracts will stand for delivery. I am here to give you a more accurate update (and a first hand account of what happened on Friday Feb 25). Our group was determined to stand for delivery going into Monday because we were not going to take a 30 percent premium on a price of $33.50. It was reported that Blythe offered 50 percent premium. That was not even close in our case. We got over 80 percent premium. That's right...."

The rest is here-
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/462/380/Physical_Silver_is_Really_50_per_Ounce_80_Premium_on_COMEX_Silver_Non-Delivery.html

Harvey's blog is here- a daily read-
http://harveyorgan.blogspot.com/

H/T Harvey. Best.

10 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On March 14, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Valyooo (99.81) wrote:

I can just go to apmex.com and buy it for the "Fake" price of 35.90"...so Harvey is just being dramatic as per usual.

Report this comment
#2) On March 14, 2011 at 9:21 PM, ChrisGraley (31.45) wrote:

If they are willing to pay $50, what is it really worth? :)

Report this comment
#3) On March 14, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Starfirenv (< 20) wrote:

Chris- I'm not sure. Whatever someone will pay. All of a sudden the premiums paid make sense. It looks like a confirmed discount window. I think the paper/physical disconnect is on. I'm liking your plan more and more. Best from the Silver State!

Report this comment
#4) On March 14, 2011 at 11:58 PM, silverminer (37.03) wrote:

Conspicuously absent? That's hardly fair.

Report this comment
#5) On March 15, 2011 at 12:14 AM, Starfirenv (< 20) wrote:

#4- C'mon, this is huge. I will never try to out- scoop you. I waited what, a week?. This is huge. Anxiously awaiting your "take". And no rec. I'm going to remember that.

Report this comment
#6) On March 15, 2011 at 4:45 AM, silverminer (37.03) wrote:

Starfirenv,

I can't tell if you're joking around with me, or attempting to call me out. I'm hopeful it's the former. If it's the latter, you'll want to do your homework before calling me out.

We already knew the COMEX had no physical backing that could withstand any concerted effort to call their paper bluff. That some determined investors would likely stand for delivery to press this issue was also discussed in my article on The Presidents Day Silver Short Squeeze.

I spent some time searching for the original posting at Harvey's blog that you referenced, with little luck. In the future, if you want my take on something, please to provide a more specific link or an actual date of its appearence. Here is what I did find in Harvey's archive dated March 5:

I would like to comment a bit on the Wynter B affair.  I will get to the bottom of this.I strongly believe that this group is out there as they are asking for and receiving some cash settlements.  I find the 50 dollar plus payment a little to difficult to believe.I also find that the comment that JPMorgan warning  that if they not cash settle upon these guys  then this group would become an unsecured creditor is wrong.

So, unless you can show me otherwise, it looks as though Harvey is not standing behind the content of the post cited in the "Before It's News" piece that appears to have been posted by Louis Cypher.

If I have been "conspicuously absent" on this "huge" development, perhaps it is with good reason. When something moves from the realm of unsubstantiated heresay to one of confirmed fact, it will cross my radar and I will discuss the ramifications as required. Lines of communication between myself, Harvey, and the folks at GATA are open. I am tracking multiple developments of interest, including the very interesting dynamics of the silver COT lately:

http://news.silverseek.com/SilverSeek/1299509764.php

I do think an emergency situation of insufficient physical supply and increasing differentiation among investors between paper and physical silver (and gold) is preparing to rock the COMEX and the leveraged derivative market. I will report on that process as it unfolds through successive and verifiable major events like the Presidents Day squeeze.

You received no rec from me because you rushed to judgement with your "conspicuously absent" comment. I wasn't aware one was expected to rec when they feel unjustly disrespected.

Report this comment
#7) On March 15, 2011 at 4:48 AM, silverminer (37.03) wrote:

Starfirenv,

I can't tell if you're joking around with me, or attempting to call me out. I'm hopeful it's the former. If it's the latter, you'll want to do your homework before calling me out.

We already knew the COMEX had no physical backing that could withstand any concerted effort to call their paper bluff. That some determined investors would likely stand for delivery to press this issue was also discussed in my article on The Presidents Day Silver Short Squeeze.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2011/02/22/the-presidents-day-silver-short-squeeze.aspx

I spent some time searching for the original posting at Harvey's blog that you referenced, with little luck. In the future, if you want my take on something, please to provide a more specific link or an actual date of its appearence. Here is what I did find in Harvey's archive dated March 5:

http://harveyorgan.blogspot.com/2011_02_27_archive.html

I would like to comment a bit on the Wynter B affair.  I will get to the bottom of this.I strongly believe that this group is out there as they are asking for and receiving some cash settlements.  I find the 50 dollar plus payment a little to difficult to believe.I also find that the comment that JPMorgan warning  that if they not cash settle upon these guys  then this group would become an unsecured creditor is wrong.

So, unless you can show me otherwise, it looks as though Harvey is not standing behind the content of the post cited in the "Before It's News" piece that appears to have been posted by Louis Cypher.

If I have been "conspicuously absent" on this "huge" development, perhaps it is with good reason. When something moves from the realm of unsubstantiated heresay to one of confirmed fact, it will cross my radar and I will discuss the ramifications as required. Lines of communication between myself, Harvey, and the folks at GATA are open. I am tracking multiple developments of interest, including the very interesting dynamics of the silver COT lately:

http://news.silverseek.com/SilverSeek/1299509764.php

I do think an emergency situation of insufficient physical supply and increasing differentiation among investors between paper and physical silver (and gold) is preparing to rock the COMEX and the leveraged derivative market. I will report on that process as it unfolds through successive and verifiable major events like the Presidents Day squeeze.

You received no rec from me because you rushed to judgement with your "conspicuously absent" comment. I wasn't aware one was expected to rec when they feel unjustly disrespected.

Report this comment
#8) On March 15, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Starfirenv (< 20) wrote:

Sinchi- Yes the former and also the latter- but only for your thoughts. With so much happening, I figured it was a case of journalistic discretion, as with the Wow, just wow thing. Nothing but love and respect from here sir.
  Sorry for the weak link. When I went to look for it, I had no luck either but found it this morning-

http://harveyorgan.blogspot.com/2011/03/part-comex-tradingsilver-scandal-goes.html

It's about an inch down on the scroll bar and prefaced with:  

"As many know there are a group of ex Morgan traders who decided to take on Blythe Masters and JPMorgan by standing for delivery but then asking for a huge fiat premium.  We have now heard from one trader who also is a reader of my blog. The name given to the ex traders is "Wynter_Benton:

  To me this implied some familiarity and cred, not just with his source but also the "group of ex Morgan traders". apologies for that. I have always seen Harvey as a stand-up guy. Thanks for the link of 3/5 on his semi retraction- I missed that.
  Thank again for your thoughts as they are ALWAYS appreciated. Kidding about the rec as I care zero about that.
      Best regards.
 

Also, still scratching my head on the spike in shorts of late.

Report this comment
#9) On May 18, 2011 at 8:16 PM, kstarich (33.22) wrote:

Somehow I missed this blog.  I guess this is what I saw in the astrology....the turning point of the manipulation.  If I am right there could be a big jump in price Friday and into next week.  It will be amazing what happens with the price once Jupiter is in Taurus first week of June...watch June silver!  $50.00 will look cheap....I think we are going to $220 by Fall.

We'll just have to wait and see

Report this comment
#10) On May 18, 2011 at 10:15 PM, kstarich (33.22) wrote:

Sinch

Jeepers...that was a little over the top harsh, someone kick your dog the other day?

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement