How many comex TROLLS ON GIM?? WHAT IS A TROLL

[southfork]

Me thinks some protest too much . Good article on them.

http://computer.howstuffworks.com/troll.htm

There's no denying that the Internet is an amazing invention. It allows people to communicate around the world at speeds approaching real time. But this connection can be a double-edged sword. Not only are you able to interact with people you like and respect, but you can also meet people who take pleasure in disrupting the conversations and activities of others. There's a name for this kind of person: troll.


While the word troll might conjure up images of billy goats and hobbits in your mind, the Internet variety doesn't really owe its name to the monsters of fairy tales and fantasy. Originally, the Web version of a troll alluded to a fishing technique. In fishing, to troll is to pull a fishing line behind a moving boat in hopes of coaxing a fish to take the bait. Web trolling is very similar -- trolls try to lure unsuspecting victims into responding to pointless or rude questions or statements. The goal for the Web troll is to get the victim riled up as a joke. But usually the troll is the only one laughing

[voodoo1951]

I thought Trolls only live under bridges...Thanks for the info. (Me thinks?)

[Gcubed]

Trolls ignore reality. They live in a "Fairy Tale" world. They absolutely LOVE Easter Bunnies!!

[Spike]

I'm sure a troll is a person who starts threads about trolls.

[southfork]

Trolls ignore reality. They live in a "Fairy Tale" world. They absolutely LOVE Easter Bunnies!!

Easter is not but weeks away, he is coming.

[southfork]

I thought Trolls only live under bridges...Thanks for the info. (Me thinks?)

From Shakespears Hamlet.

[Rumpelstiltskin]

They absolutely LOVE Easter Bunnies!!

I'm told they taste like chicken

[hoarder]

Of course the bankers, having unlimited access to funds, hire shills to defend their interests:
http://www.thejidf.org/

[Zed]

Me thinks some protest too much . Good article on them.

http://computer.howstuffworks.com/troll.htm

There's no denying that the Internet is an amazing invention. It allows people to communicate around the world at speeds approaching real time. But this connection can be a double-edged sword. Not only are you able to interact with people you like and respect, but you can also meet people who take pleasure in disrupting the conversations and activities of others. There's a name for this kind of person: troll.


While the word troll might conjure up images of billy goats and hobbits in your mind, the Internet variety doesn't really owe its name to the monsters of fairy tales and fantasy. Originally, the Web version of a troll alluded to a fishing technique. In fishing, to troll is to pull a fishing line behind a moving boat in hopes of coaxing a fish to take the bait. Web trolling is very similar -- trolls try to lure unsuspecting victims into responding to pointless or rude questions or statements. The goal for the Web troll is to get the victim riled up as a joke. But usually the troll is the only one laughing

A troll is not a troll just because they disagree with you! You may as well ask how many Anti-comex trolls are here, guys that are just talking their book in the hope of financial gain! In fact that is the more likely case when you think about it. LOL, most of your so called trolls own more metal than you dream about and have been in the market longer than the likes of you! Long enough to know how it all works and to look at it realistically!

HEY MODS, if this isn't a trolling headline I don't know what is!!!!!!!!! Lock it and be done with the pathetic attempt to silence discussion.

[Hasenfuss]

Trolls are everywhere, Ned (rhymes with zed)Schmidt and Dennis G(cubed)artman are some of the more well known. These guys crack me up!



"Silver will experience a growing, and near unstoppable, abundance of supply over demand during the next two years."

"Fantasies over Silver must somehow come to deal with the rising surplus of Silver production."

"The Comex will always deliver"



Need I go on?

[Zed]

Trolls are everywhere, Ned (rhymes with zed)Schmidt and Dennis G(cubed)artman are some of the more well known. These guys crack me up!



"Silver will experience a growing, and near unstoppable, abundance of supply over demand during the next two years."

"Fantasies over Silver must somehow come to deal with the rising surplus of Silver production."

"The Comex will always deliver"



Need I go on?

You are somehow suggesting those are my words? Now we are just making stuff up! I love it when things get this desperate... hell lets just make chit up, why not, all that counts is you win ---> right?

[rodzm]

Some live in high tech security facilities with their copper hoards. Credit Card Joe where are you????

[Scorpio]

Zed, relax man,

we all know there are trolls on the boards, it has happened over time, and only accelerated as web forums have increased their presence.

any close community reacts to outsiders in much the same fashion. Why should a community put up with troublemakers and those in it for kicks?
There is no reason to. It is one thing to have a dissenting opinion, but quite another to have no opinion at all other than the opposite of whatever whomever is speaking to. Meaning taking the other side of the argument for max effect, rather than a sound reason.

S

[nergal]

Trolls are everywhere, Ned (rhymes with zed)Schmidt and Dennis G(cubed)artman are some of the more well known. These guys crack me up!



"Silver will experience a growing, and near unstoppable, abundance of supply over demand during the next two years."

"Fantasies over Silver must somehow come to deal with the rising surplus of Silver production."

"The Comex will always deliver"



Need I go on?

Sounds like your definition of "troll" is someone that disagrees with you. Lemme guess, someone that disagrees with you politically is a socialist.

[Northeastbullion]

what is fascinating to me is that many people believe so strongly that the "Crimex" is about to default and the world is manipulated by "JP Morgue", that anybody who disagrees with them is doing it solely to piss them off, and thus are "trolls". They can't fathom that someone would rationally believe otherwise.

What makes GIM great is that there is a core group of people here that haven't been brainwashed by the daily propaganda from the likes of Harvey, Ted Butler and Zero Hedge. As such, these issues can finally be debated. Those that call such disbelievers trolls should instead welcome the discussion as only after considering opposing views can one really be confident in his own position.

But if you prefer groupthink and cheerleading, you could also go to Kitco.

[Gcubed]

what is fascinating to me is that many people believe so strongly that the "Crimex" is about to default and the world is manipulated by "JP Morgue", that anybody who disagrees with them is doing it solely to piss them off, and thus are "trolls". They can't fathom that someone would rationally believe otherwise.

What makes GIM great is that there is a core group of people here that haven't been brainwashed by the daily propaganda from the likes of Harvey, Ted Butler and Zero Hedge. As such, these issues can finally be debated. Those that call such disbelievers trolls should instead welcome the discussion as only after considering opposing views can one really be confident in his own position.

But if you prefer groupthink and cheerleading, you could also go to Kitco.

I've sadly begun to accept the possible fact that those who ridicule "sheeple" are in actuality, "sheeple".

[monomanic]

NE... I'd just like to point out that this site is called "Gold is Money".

[<===Foolsgold]

A Troll

[hoarder]

What makes GIM great is that there is a core group of people here that haven't been brainwashed by the daily propaganda from the likes of Harvey, Ted Butler and Zero Hedge.

Anyone who disagrees with NEB is "brainwashed".

It's easy to dismiss anything contrary to our long held beliefs as "brainwash", but brainwashing is a tactic.
Study this tactic and you will discover that the banking establishment owns/controls most of the mass media in the world for obvious reasons (obvious if you have studied the Federal Reserve), and uses this influence to divert focus elsewhere, disinform, omit and myriad other tricks and have done so for a century or more.

That said, don't you think that those who rely on mass media are most deserving to be characterized as "brainwashed"?

[Gcubed]

The "Internet Mass Media" are preaching COMEX default. From my perspective, the sheeple are buying the sermon. JMHO.

[Northeastbullion]

Anyone who disagrees with NEB is "brainwashed".

It's easy to dismiss anything contrary to our long held beliefs as "brainwash", but brainwashing is a tactic.
Study this tactic and you will discover that the banking establishment owns/controls most of the mass media in the world for obvious reasons (obvious if you have studied the Federal Reserve), and uses this influence to divert focus elsewhere, disinform, omit and myriad other tricks and have done so for a century or more.

That said, don't you think that those who rely on mass media are most deserving to be characterized as "brainwashed"?

I didn't say that anybody who disagreed with me was brainwashed. Just anybody who refuses to even acknowledge that there is another side of the story or alternative point of view is brainwashed.

I read Harvey Organ everyday and although I disagree with him, I respect the arguments he makes. It's certainly better that we have people like him out there and it has made me consider the possibility of default or a short squeeze. Thanks to hearing those alternative views, I adjusted my positions accordingly.

The Crimex and JP Morgue crowd should likewise consider alternative views, as they may find ways to benefit from it.

[Shortstack]

It's not only Harvey Organ who claims the that something is wrong with the comex. Ben Davies from Hinde Capital goes as far as calling the comex "criminal". Ben runs serious money, so has a "real world" reputation to worry about. Why would someone who runs that much money (and who gives his investors monthly redemption rights) risk his reputation "spouting" nonsense? Unless all his clients are also "sheeple"? I mean, Ben's clients are accredited investors - high net worth folk, who have the money to retain top flight tax and investment (there cannot be one without the other at that level of net worth) expertise. Not to mention that Jim Rickards has said the same thing. And for those ready to discount Jim Rickards, know this. Rickards lives and dies by his reputation. He is a legend in the hedge fund community. I just can't see how these two would risk their livelihoods spreading baseless rumors and outright lies about the comex.

[monomanic]

according to the logic prevailing in this thread davies, rickards and sprott are "just pumping their books"

[Gcubed]

The true "trolls" are promoting absurd claims of 70 and 80 percent premiums being paid for cash settlement of COMEX deliveries.

[Northeastbullion]

It's not only Harvey Organ who claims the that something is wrong with the comex. Ben Davies from Hinde Capital goes as far as calling the comex "criminal". Ben runs serious money, so has a "real world" reputation to worry about. Why would someone who runs that much money (and who gives his investors monthly redemption rights) risk his reputation "spouting" nonsense? Unless all his clients are also "sheeple"? I mean, Ben's clients are accredited investors - high net worth folk, who have the money to retain top flight tax and investment (there cannot be one without the other at that level of net worth) expertise. Not to mention that Jim Rickards has said the same thing. And for those ready to discount Jim Rickards, know this. Rickards lives and dies by his reputation. He is a legend in the hedge fund community. I just can't see how these two would risk their livelihoods spreading baseless rumors and outright lies about the comex.

"appeal to authority" is a fallacious argument. Neither you nor I should believe something just because somebody else, no matter how reputable, says it is so. It's not what this guy or that guy says, it's about looking at the argument and the facts and deciding for yourself.

If Davies thinks Comex is criminal, he should clearly lay out the argument point by point and let us all decide for ourselves.

[Work]

.


For a TRUE description and or definition of TROLL, Google the name Got Goldies.



lol

[budfox]

In Norse mythology, a troll is a generally negative synonym for jötunn. Later, in Scandinavian folklore, trolls became beings in their own right. In modern times trolls are depicted in a variety of media.

In Norse mythology, troll, like thurs is a term applied to jötnar. In Old Norse sources, trolls are said to dwell in isolated mountains, rocks, and caves, sometimes live together (usually as father-and-daughter or mother-and-son), and are rarely described as helpful or friendly.[1]There is much confusion and overlap in the use of Old Norse terms jötunn, troll, þurs and risi. Lotte Motz theorized that these were originally four distinct classes of beings; lords of nature (jötunn), mythical magicians (troll), hostile monsters (þurs) and heroic and courtly beings (risi) - the last class being the youngest addition. �rmann Jakobsson calls this theory "unsupported by any convincing evidence" and argues that since the sources disagree, it may be most fruitful to investigate each text separately.[2]

Later, in Scandinavian folklore, trolls become defined as a particular type of being, generally held to be larger than humans and notably ugly.[3] Numerous tales about trolls are recorded, in which they are frequently described as being extremely old, very strong, but retarded. They are sometimes described as man-eaters and as turning to stone upon contact with sunlight. Into the 20th century, the origins of particular Scandinavian landmarks, such as particular stones, are ascribed to trolls.[4]

A Scandinavian folk belief that lightning frightens away trolls and jötnar appears in numerous Scandinavian folktales, and may be a late reflection of the god Thor's role in fighting such beings. In connection, the lack of trolls and jötnar in modern Scandinavia is explained as a result of the "accuracy and efficiency of the lightning strokes".

[Shortstack]

"appeal to authority" is a fallacious argument. Neither you nor I should believe something just because somebody else, no matter how reputable, says it is so. It's not what this guy or that guy says, it's about looking at the argument and the facts and deciding for yourself.

If Davies thinks Comex is criminal, he should clearly lay out the argument point by point and let us all decide for ourselves.

Don't use concepts that don't apply here North. Davies runs money and could loose his whole investor base if he is proven to be a tin hatter. Davies would be risking too much, just to spread rumors for the benefit of the internet "tin hat" crowd. Your "appeal to authority" argument falls flat on its face when you look at who these people are, and what they have to loose if they were "called out" and shown to be rumor mongers. You have to consider the kind of money these two pull down to understand the risk they would be taking if they were indeed spreading tin hat rumors. How does it benefit Davies to risk a 10 million plus a year job? He already has his clients - why endanger that? Oh yes, these High Net Worth clients pay his firm 1% management fees and 20% performance fees ("1 and 20"). Fantastic work if you can get it, and if you don't believe me, ask anyone on the street who does not run money for "1 and 20" if they would...

So if you agree to pay Davies firm 1 and 20 - he will explain to you exactly what he means. That nobody has called him out on CNBC Europe means, to me, that nobody dares to "call him out". That's the way the money management business works, managers always are working to keep their existing investors, and get new one's. Because if someone calls Davies out and destroys him on CNBC, you can bet some (or many) of Davies clients will be heading for the exits - perhaps even to the firm of the person that sheds Davies on CNBC....

Sometimes you actually have to give a person the benefit of their "street cred", else everyone would have the same weight as anon. internet posters, even anon internet trolls...

[Gcubed]

Didn't Madoff run money too? There was some Texan named Stanford also, IIRC. Just askin'

[Strawboss]

In fairness though - a part of examining the "argument" is to identify the "experts" and to evaluate what they are saying. Not that their opinions alone should form the decision - but, their conclusions can (and perhaps should) be considered as "data points".

"appeal to authority" is a fallacious argument. Neither you nor I should believe something just because somebody else, no matter how reputable, says it is so. It's not what this guy or that guy says, it's about looking at the argument and the facts and deciding for yourself.

If Davies thinks Comex is criminal, he should clearly lay out the argument point by point and let us all decide for ourselves.

[spathatos]

01) Only trust yourself
02) Assume all are lies until proven otherwise
03) Think for yourself
04) Everybody will lie to make a dollar (just what side do they lie for)

So what that said, everybody is a troll. I just like to gauge what many trolls are thinking at the moment before I make up this trolls mind.

[Northeastbullion]

Don't use concepts that don't apply here North. Davies runs money and could loose his whole investor base if he is proven to be a tin hatter. Davies would be risking too much, just to spread rumors for the benefit of the internet "tin hat" crowd. Your "appeal to authority" argument falls flat on its face when you look at who these people are, and what they have to loose if they were "called out" and shown to be rumor mongers. You have to consider the kind of money these two pull down to understand the risk they would be taking if they were indeed spreading tin hat rumors. How does it benefit Davies to risk a 10 million plus a year job? He already has his clients - why endanger that? Oh yes, these High Net Worth clients pay his firm 1% management fees and 20% performance fees ("1 and 20"). Fantastic work if you can get it, and if you don't believe me, ask anyone on the street who does not run money for "1 and 20" if they would...

So if you agree to pay Davies firm 1 and 20 - he will explain to you exactly what he means. That nobody has called him out on CNBC Europe means, to me, that nobody dares to "call him out". That's the way the money management business works, managers always are working to keep their existing investors, and get new one's. Because if someone calls Davies out and destroys him on CNBC, you can bet some (or many) of Davies clients will be heading for the exits - perhaps even to the firm of the person that sheds Davies on CNBC....

Sometimes you actually have to give a person the benefit of their "street cred", else everyone would have the same weight as anon. internet posters, even anon internet trolls...

Shortstack, I am sorry that you do not understand basic logic, but whatever.

If you are unable to think for yourself and base all your decisions and beliefs on what other "authorities" say, let me suggest you find some other authorities to listen to. For every Davies and Sprott out there, there are hundreds of hedge fund managers with far more assets under management and far more "street cred" that have no problems with Comex. So if that what you base your decisions on, you should be Comex's biggest supporter.

[Shortstack]

Shortstack, I am sorry that you do not understand basic logic, but whatever.

If you are unable to think for yourself and base all your decisions and beliefs on what other "authorities" say, let me suggest you find some other authorities to listen to. For every Davies and Sprott out there, there are hundreds of hedge fund managers with far more assets under management and far more "street cred" that have no problems with Comex. So if that what you base your decisions on, you should be Comex's biggest supporter.

Sorry you don't understand basic logic either, though I am not surprised. Speaking of logic, how is it that you know what 100's of hedge funds are thinking. It's likely you don't work in this business, else you would know the respect Richards gets from most of the big players out there. Which is why Rickards is so well received at hedge fund conferences, and why he is so often a guest on CNBC

[monomanic]

Backwardation across the entire strip in evidence of the shortage; the metal does not exist for delivery.

[Scorpio]

In fairness though - a part of examining the "argument" is to identify the "experts" and to evaluate what they are saying. Not that their opinions alone should form the decision - but, their conclusions can (and perhaps should) be considered as "data points".

absolutely! who is saying what, and what is their history.

I will interject though, that no matter who it is, and what kind of street cred they have, they may have a motive/plan/or reason to look you right in the eye with a bogus story, while doing the exact opposite.

We see it all the time. Very very common. As for risking dough, Madoff couldn't get people to leave him alone, they kept dropping dough on him no matter what he did. It has to be realized, money is stupid in most hands.

Most people making serious dough, also have no idea what to do with it. They are no different than Joe down at the local crab shack when it comes to these things. They want someone else to do it, while they play.

'Fellas' who run money know this, they aren't stupid, and they are real good at prying loose more of it as needed.

S

[HistoryStudent]

In all due respect sometimes things are not what they seem.

Number one for one thing if you are able to print the money this doesn't apply when the ones short are the FED & friends: He who sells what isn't his'n / Must buy it back or go to pris'n.

Number two we all troll what we believe one way or another. Some of the trolls have good sense of humors too. (God Bless them)

Number three it really doesn't matter for in the long term everything comes to light: and sadly, things change in the meantime.

Number four things are changing really fast now just think ABOUT the last few months.

Number five TPTB have added 1,500 trillion in derivatives over the last 15 years - to a money supply that they increased, well let this guy say it:

http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials...een031211.html

http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials...een031611.html

Now that might an a small effect on the price someday....

Those are really big fish to fry and the nuclear stove is getting really hot now...

[Work]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response[1] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[2] In addition to the offending poster, the noun troll can also refer to the provocative message itself, as in "that was an excellent troll you posted". While the term troll and its associated action trolling are primarily associated with Internet discourse, media attention in recent years has made such labels highly subjective, with trolling being used to describe intentionally provocative actions outside of an online context. For example, recent media accounts have used the term troll to describe "a person who defaces internet tribute sites with the aim of causing grief to families."[

[Zed]

Backwardation across the entire strip in evidence of the shortage; the metal does not exist for delivery.

At the moment we are in slight contango in the liquid contracts. I have looked every time I see this claim, I have seen no more than a slight backwardation in the liquid contracts. Essentially you'd describe it as flat, a bullish sign but no sign of metal shortage.

[Zed]

Zed, relax man,

we all know there are trolls on the boards, it has happened over time, and only accelerated as web forums have increased their presence.

any close community reacts to outsiders in much the same fashion. Why should a community put up with troublemakers and those in it for kicks?
There is no reason to. It is one thing to have a dissenting opinion, but quite another to have no opinion at all other than the opposite of whatever whomever is speaking to. Meaning taking the other side of the argument for max effect, rather than a sound reason.

S

Relax? The guy is just making stuff up.... LOL I suppose its OK so long as its on the rah rah side.

I seek the truth, I'm a silver bull, have been for a long time but some fundies are changing and the rah rah crowd do their level best to deny any serious conversation surrounding that. The site is called gold is money not gold is religion. Bring up a fact here, or discuss an alternate and likely theory and you somehow become a troll!

Anyway.... yeah, yeah guys! Sprott is on the airwaves because he is concerned about your financial health! I mean how could he possible benefit from promoting silver? Jeeezzzzz.... look at it rationally, follow the money, be selective in what you choose to believe these guys are not handing out free lunches they all have a dog in this fight so best you work out what benefits each and every one of them.

I notice JS is still selling TRE!

[Concours14]

Trolls ignore reality. They live in a "Fairy Tale" world. They absolutely LOVE Easter Bunnies!!

And copper pennies. And Cape Cod tree houses..

[anywoundedduck]

Sorry you don't understand basic logic either, though I am not surprised. Speaking of logic, how is it that you know what 100's of hedge funds are thinking. It's likely you don't work in this business, else you would know the respect Richards gets from most of the big players out there. Which is why Rickards is so well received at hedge fund conferences, and why he is so often a guest on CNBC

Isn't it funny how all the trolls jumped on this thread and began calling everyone else trolls. Hilarious!
So remember folks. Your favorite Troll at GIM wants you to know that:

1. There is no shortage of silver.
2. Silver is not in backwardization
3. The COMEX does not have to deliver 4,445,000 oz of silver to the Longs in the next 9 trading days. Nor do they have to pay out a huge premium in order to satisfy these contracts. Nor are they going to be in default, for defaulting.

Did that about cover it?

[Spike]

Isn't it funny how all the trolls jumped on this thread and began calling everyone else trolls. Hilarious!
So remember folks. Your favorite Troll at GIM wants you to know that:

1. There is no shortage of silver.
2. Silver is not in backwardization
3. The COMEX does not have to deliver 4,445,000 oz of silver to the Longs in the next 9 trading days. Nor do they have to pay out a huge premium in order to satisfy these contracts. Nor are they going to be in default, for defaulting.

Did that about cover it?

Another post by da Duck...where you've added nothing...What a waste of good air.

[AgShaman]

Isn't it funny how all the trolls jumped on this thread and began calling everyone else trolls. Hilarious!
So remember folks. Your favorite Troll at GIM wants you to know that:

1. There is no shortage of silver.
2. Silver is not in backwardization
3. The COMEX does not have to deliver 4,445,000 oz of silver to the Longs in the next 9 trading days. Nor do they have to pay out a huge premium in order to satisfy these contracts. Nor are they going to be in default, for defaulting.

Did that about cover it?

I wonder if # 3 is a statistical record...or at least a recent anomaly. It does kinda look like they'll be needing the bulk of the month to settle the contracts and deliver...or whatever else they have in mind for servicing.

If they manage to escape March and dodge the silver bullet....the primary months of May or July could very well expose their weakness. These traders seem to be planning to tighten the vise jaws on the parties hoping to keep the "flaw" blanketed.

[Zed]

Isn't it funny how all the trolls jumped on this thread and began calling everyone else trolls. Hilarious!
So remember folks. Your favorite Troll at GIM wants you to know that:

1. There is no shortage of silver.
2. Silver is not in backwardization
3. The COMEX does not have to deliver 4,445,000 oz of silver to the Longs in the next 9 trading days. Nor do they have to pay out a huge premium in order to satisfy these contracts. Nor are they going to be in default, for defaulting.

Did that about cover it?

#2 Is easily checked.... but I doubt you have ever actually done that!

[AgShaman]

Isn't it funny how all the trolls jumped on this thread and began calling everyone else trolls. Hilarious!
So remember folks. Your favorite Troll at GIM wants you to know that:

1. There is no shortage of silver.
2. Silver is not in backwardization
3. The COMEX does not have to deliver 4,445,000 oz of silver to the Longs in the next 9 trading days. Nor do they have to pay out a huge premium in order to satisfy these contracts. Nor are they going to be in default, for defaulting.

Did that about cover it?

If # 1 was true....then why haven't the shorts closed out the contracts by now. I mean, they're supposed to have access to 50 mil ounces. Is it possible that they mispoke and that they are trading many months of fwd mining supply? They will need to find it somewhere....oh well, there's always the SLV.

[Zed]

If # 1 was true....then why haven't the shorts closed out the contracts by now. I mean, they're supposed to have access to 50 mil ounces. Is it possible that they mispoke and that they are trading many months of fwd mining supply? They will need to find it somewhere....oh well, there's always the SLV.

If they are active hedges why would they close the contracts out? Given that 1% of Comex contracts settle in metal and 99% settle in cash it is not very likely that they will have to deliver metal, so no its not likely they will need to find metal to settle a Comex obligation. For the umpteenth time the Comex is primarily about trading price risk on metal NOT the metal itself.

[AgShaman]

If they are active hedges why would they close the contracts out? Given that 1% of Comex contracts settle in metal and 99% settle in cash it is not very likely that they will have to deliver metal, so no its not likely they will need to find metal to settle a Comex obligation. For the umpteenth time the Comex is primarily about trading price risk on metal NOT the metal itself.

I've never disputed that...it's been my contention all along that the goal was a cash settlement with premium. Many from your camp are foolish in the belief that longs would gamble by ponying up the cash and just 'roll' into the next non-primary month.

It does seem odd that out of the 4400 original contracts standing for March...less than half have taken delivery. The settlement must be a mutual agreement....and if the longs are "playing the bluff" correctly...and know it...then perhaps Blythe and her minions are not offering a deal that is lucrative enough for the "long's" troubles.

[Zed]

I've never disputed that...

You kinda did.

it's been my contention all along that the goal was a cash settlement with premium.

Goal? No cash settle is normal 99% of the time and there will be no premium.

Many from your camp are foolish in the belief that longs would gamble by ponying up the cash and just 'roll' into the next non-primary month.

Most will, do and always have done. 99% of the time their goal is a cash profit not getting metal. It is a well known Comex stat.

It does seem odd that out of the 4400 original contracts standing for March...less than half have taken delivery.

It has happened before, it is a game of bluff.

The settlement must be a mutual agreement....

No it can be enforced by the exchange, there need be no agreement, its in the contract.

and if the longs are "playing the bluff" correctly...and know it...then perhaps Blythe and her minions are not offering a deal that is lucrative enough for the "longs" troubles.

The notion of a premium is ludicrous. If you did actually get one you turn right around and hit that button again. Can't you understand that it is self defeating so therefore would not be offered. Why would you anyway, London has metal, it is a phone call away.

[AgShaman]

You kinda did.



Goal? No cash settle is normal 99% of the time and there will be no premium.



Most will, do and always have done. 99% of the time their goal is a cash profit not getting metal. It is a well known Comex stat.



It has happened before, it is a game of bluff.



No it can be enforced by the exchange, there need be no agreement, its in the contract.



The notion of a premium is ludicrous. If you did actually get one you turn right around and hit that button again. Can't you understand that it is self defeating so therefore would not be offered. Why would you anyway, London has metal, it is a phone call away.

Then it is a good game of bluff. The comex does not brief me of the workings of the Short OI. It is merely the pointing out of these oddities...it is in fact late in the month to still have unsettled contracts in significant numbers...at least that is the perception. If this is a normal occurrence for a primary delivery month...then maybe you should just say so?

[prophet]