You're browsing: Home » SPDR Gold Trust (ETF) A Safe Haven?

53 Comments »

1. Why does it matter? One assumes they attained it on the open market, and gold is gold is gold. It could have been mined by the Romans and we wouldn’t care. It seems to be a large leap of logic to jump from “I cannot answer” to “they do not know.” Who is Todd? He could be an intern assigned to you hired last week for all you know.

   Comment by RAy — February 23, 2009 @ 6:49 am

2. To RAy:

   Why does it matter? To prove that they actually own the Gold that they claim they do. Obviously the trust that was taken for granted in the financial industry is no longer there. So when people ask questions, it’s best to have good answers. Especially when i’m buying your stock based completely on the fact that you own 45 tons of gold, you had better be able to prove that you actually have it. It should be very easy for them to account for where that much came from. It’s not like they bought it a little bit at a time from cornershops and trade shows.

   Comment by Jay — February 23, 2009 @ 1:09 pm

3. Great questions Bob,
   The earlier comment doesn’t seem to understand the meaning of the very important question: “From whom was it obtained?” (not where / when was it mined - LOL) Since no COMEX drawdowns even remotely this large have been observed or reported over the existance of this fund, it is indeed puzzling. The amount of gold purportedly aquired by the fund is more than most G7 countries have in their reserves. Open market?? Thats a laugh.
   I share your caution as far as investing in this fund is concerned. Worst case scenario might be all paper gold to be used to “DUMP” the spot gold price at some strategic moment, and announce default on redemptions to shareholders. After all, who controls this fund, and all the short positions on COMEX?
   Happy investing!

   Comment by Dennis — February 23, 2009 @ 1:28 pm

4. Ray,

   It does matter where the gold comes from. If it is bought or leased for example matters also.

   A better question to ask here would be; After you established the origin and location of the stored gold, can an investor take actual physical delivery of the metal!?

   With SPD Gold Trust, this wouldn’t be possible. One way or the other…where still holding paper value. But its simply good to know, whether the gold is actually obtained and stored in disclosed SPDR vaults and not at some JP Morgan bank in New York…

   brgds.

   Comment by de Graaf — February 23, 2009 @ 1:32 pm

5. Well done on your questioning. To RAy’s comment : of course it matters. ‘gold is gold is gold’ - but who really owns it? I live in Hong Kong where it now appears Mugabe of Zimbabwe is busy stashing away his treasure. USA authorities are now chasing UBS in Switzerland about ‘hidden accounts’. Who knows of some of the gold in SPDR may be liable to be seized at any time as illgotten gains. Where it was ‘attained’ - who has good title to it, and who truly owns it, is vital.

   Comment by Melville Boase — February 23, 2009 @ 1:35 pm

6. We used to hold GLD fund and one day decided to thoroughly read prospectus. We could really find no protections for investors and all was very vague. There have been many rumors about banks using SLV and GLD to suppress prices which would not be good for the holders of the fund. Also one of our greatest fear was of confiscation by the government as in 1933.

   Comment by rick — February 23, 2009 @ 1:48 pm

7. This is what I have been afraid of, hence never “invested” in any of the Gold ETFs. I would only buy something if I get physical delivery. I have been a buyer of kilo silver bars, but as of late have not been able to get any physical, the bullion dealer did offer grain though! Not much use to anybody as you can’t hallmark each grain!!!
   I hope none of the ETFs that claim to have physical gold actually do have the gold they claim, a piece of paper aint worth much, the ink is probobly worth more these days anyway?

   Comment by G.M. — February 23, 2009 @ 1:51 pm

8. Correction, typo in last comment, please omit “none of” in the line “I hope none of the ETFs that claim to have physical gold actually do have the gold they claim, a piece of paper aint worth much, the ink is probobly worth more these days anyway?”

   Comment by G.M. — February 23, 2009 @ 1:53 pm

9. It’s been stated by a number of analysts (e.g. Ed Steer, Ted Butler) that SLV likely has the same issues. Care to comment?

   Comment by Mike Gettman — February 23, 2009 @ 2:32 pm

10. Nice post. Congrats gold-prices.biz.

    

    Comment by Chimera — February 23, 2009 @ 2:35 pm

11. Confirms what I have been hearing from others about the SPDR Gold Trust…John Embry at Sprott Resources, etc., has been questioning this very point.
    For an establishment handling this amount of bullion they should, at the very least, be able to demonstrate who they attained the gold from.

    Comment by Mark — February 23, 2009 @ 4:15 pm

12. Ok, so now the trumpets are sounding and interest/healthy curiosity is building about a very, very serious situation.

    Just ponder for a minute about how easy it is with just a click of the mouse, anyone can unload their holdings in these ETF’s.

    I have questioned knowledgeable writers about what would happen if a run occurred, and most have serious concerns. For example, what would happen to the price and, specifically, what will happen to the gold when all the paper is sold back to the Fund and goes into the scrap heap.

    Personally, for what it is worth, I stay away from funds and ETF’s.

    Thank you, Bob, for your persistence in trying to get to the truth.

    Regards,
    John

    Comment by John Ell — February 23, 2009 @ 6:00 pm

13. The fact that GLD cannot prove it has the physical gold it says it has is the reason I choose the smaller CEF which is a gold/silver combo which DOES have physical gold and silver. Also since CEF is technically a stock it is a 15% capitol gain ,rather than GLDs 28% capitol gain because it is a collectible. CEF is the only way to own gold/silver without actually having it in your hands or atleast the next best thing .

    Comment by GORDON — February 23, 2009 @ 6:06 pm

14. What is in your opinion of CEF,Central Fund Of Canada Limited, in this regard?

    Rich

    Comment by Rich — February 23, 2009 @ 7:09 pm

15. Not all ETFs are equal. In the UK there are stricter regulations & audits on ETFs. My investments (PHAG and PHAU) are covered by the FSA compensation scheme. I can also arrange for physical delivery of the bullion.

    Comment by tim — February 23, 2009 @ 7:44 pm

16. Mike Gettman - I don’t know how Gold-prices.biz feels about it but here is my thought:

    “Sure, I would say so. All the ETF’s that are substantial in size would be faced
    with the same situation in the event of a big sell-off. The paper holders may
    not want to hold all the physical during declining prices. Makes sense to me.”

    Comment by John Ell — February 23, 2009 @ 8:06 pm

17. Am I right about this? Wasn’t CEF recommended by Howard Ruff?
    John

    Comment by John Ell — February 23, 2009 @ 8:08 pm

18. Bob, just look at those replies.

    Gold is hot and so is your excellent topic.
    If the reply from SPDR remains inadequate, you can bet this topic is going to get the headlines soon.

    Full disclosure is at hand.

    

    Comment by de Graaf — February 23, 2009 @ 8:21 pm

19. Mark,

    You mentioned John Embrey so we had a look on BNN and found this clip that might be of interest as John likes ETFs but not this one!

    Commodities : February 19, 2009 : Mailbag [02-19-09 11:40 AM]

    BNN speaks to John Embry, chief investment strategist, Sprott Asset Management, about the rally in precious metals, and the agricultural products market as well as oil, gas, uranium, and more.

    http://watch.bnn.ca/thursday/#clip141495

    Comment by Gold Prices — February 23, 2009 @ 8:21 pm

20. So, if in fact the SPDR GLD ETF does not actually have the bullion to back the shares it holds then they would not have the gold to actually sell back into the market? How would the redemption of their shares impact the price of gold then? Perhaps someone should call the ‘thought’ police on this one. Or maybe the SEC gives a $#

    Comment by Steve — February 23, 2009 @ 8:29 pm

21. Great q and follow up, Bob.

    The fact that they don’t have a straight and simple answer means that … there isn’t one. And that’s not just a cause for concern, it’s a warning sign to STAY AWAY. TOXIC - DO NOT TOUCH. Any company traded on the exchange should have official, transparent auto-answers ready for the public, released by an official spokesperson of the company. If Todd is indeed an intern, that puts the last nail into he coffin w/regard to GLD’s integrity. I don’t think Todd’s an intern, but I don’t think there’s real gold bars in GLD either. It’s all an illusion, and step 2 is next. We’ve all seen Wizard of Oz, when Toto pulled the curtain aside to reveal the truth.

    I knew from reading the prospectus myself that there were no audits. It says so. Can you believe that? No audits, for how many tons of gold? Insane.

    I agree that GLD can be thought of as a short term trading vehicle, but never as an investment vehicle. But that said, things have now become too critical to even put any money in GLD, haven’t they? We could wake up some Monday morning, and find a new world, and our 50% trade in GLD is now just … paper. For me, real gold and silver are found in CEF and GTU. These are solid companies, with vaults, audits, procedures, insurance, official communications, etc. Another is goldmoney.com, with the legendary James Turk.

    Comment by Bill — February 23, 2009 @ 8:40 pm

22. Team,

    Many thanks indeed for all the feedback it is very much appreciated.

    Today we have sent a message to the SEC (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) regarding this matter and will post their response as soon we get it.

    Comment by Gold Prices — February 23, 2009 @ 10:30 pm

23. Finally,

    President Obama’s speech today showed some serious confessioning about Bush’s budget planning shortages. Zero budget planned for the Iraq war. Zero budget planned for natural disasters…unbelievable. Obama ‘fully’ discloses the US governments deceptionary policies of recent years.

    And wit the SEC under severe pressure because of Madoff, I think our SPDR gold issue may get some serious attention this time.

    I’m getting excited. This sounds like the end of the ‘manipulation’ era.

    Comment by de Graaf — February 23, 2009 @ 11:41 pm

24. Remember Folks…

    All new gold must -first come out of the ground.- Buying the major mining stocks such as Newmont, Goldcorp, Barrick, Agnico Eagle, Freeport McMoran, Kinross, etc. is the ticket to success in my opinion. Right here, right now. This is truly a once in a lifetime opportunity, and I have been trading stocks and commodities for over thirty years.

    The “majors” such as the ones I just mentioned, have the capital in these difficult times to be able to purchase and acquire the “junior” mining companies. The majors are always working to build reserves. As we speak, this is exactly what is happening. The small “junior” companies have proven reserves, but they often lack the ability to raise the capital to actually build a mine and go into production. So in these difficult times, the majors are able to buy up the juniors at a deep discount.

    Now the most important thing on gold I could ever teach you is this….
    Physical vs. mining shares, which is the way to go? I am often asked this very question.

    The correct answer is to have some physical -in hand- such as gold coins. This does -not- mean in a safety deposit box at the bank. Google the “Patriot Act” that was passed just a couple years ago. The idea of holding some physical gold and silver is just to protect against the worst. The very things we hope never come about. Having a bag of the old “junk silver” is a good idea too for small purchases. The old Mercury dimes and Washington quarters are a good example. You can have all the 100oz. silver bars in the world, but for a couple bags of groceries, they would be tough to use in a barter society. The 100s are however the best price per ounce, a couple -in hand- are a very good idea, but only buy the Johnson Matthey and Englehard.

    But here is why the bulk of your money should be in the major mining companies. If you have a one ounce gold coin, and the gold price goes up one dollar, your coin is now worth one dollar more. No more, no less.

    However with mining shares, lets use Freeport McMoran as an example. They produce about 1,200,000 ounces of gold annually. Now if gold goes up one dollar (and we assume it stays up) FCX will have an extra $1,200,000 flow right down to the proverbial “bottom line.” Remember, they will be expending the same in labor, fuel, equipment expenses, etc. They will be going after the same gold, but now -each and every ounce- has gone up an additional dollar! Now there is your –leverage to the price of gold–!

    I highly recommend the purchase of all the major miners at the current prices. If you look at the stock prices of these companies now verses the last time gold hit a grand, you will see the stock prices are -substantially lower.- I would guess because of a general distrust of stocks.

    Good Luck and God Bless,
    RedGold

    Comment by RedGold — February 24, 2009 @ 1:27 am

25. These are great questions and I do hope that you follow up with GLD! The response is troubling on a number of levels. Had I seen something along the lines of “I don’t know where the gold was purchased, but I will check and get back to you…” that would be something. But simply not being able to account for the source of a 45T purchase is quite disturbing in the best of times. In the current investment climate, I’d say that transparency and clarity are paramount, but GLD has exposed its failure in both through just three brief emails! I hold GLD in my Roth IRA acount, but must consider the wisdom of this holding after witnessing this exchange.

    Thank you for your information service and please keep up all the good work you are doing!

    Regards,

    Comment by N — February 24, 2009 @ 1:33 am

26. The sister company to CEF is GTU,(only gold). Great company for people that want the security investment of bullion without the security expense and possible risk of owning your own. Both companies have I believe only 5% paper or less.CEF in particular carries enough cash 40 million or so whose interest covers all expenses for the fund. This is possibly the safest overall investment in the world right now on any stock exchange and is superior to GLD or SLV in many ways with one exception ,EXPOSURE

    Comment by GORDON — February 24, 2009 @ 2:01 am

27. Not sure what you folks don’t understand: Obviously the authorized participants are buying the gold or already have it in their inventory and are exchanging it to create the shares of GLD. why would you ask the folks at SPDRs where they purchased the gold and not the authorized participants? According to Todd they’re listed in the prospectus and they do the purchasing of gold. also, do you really think an institutions such as hsbc would agree to be involved if this was a scam? you all sound like paranoid conspiracy theorists. they list the gold bars by number on their site and have pictures of the gold. I haven’t seen the gold owned by Newmont, does that mean they’re lying too? Come on people!

    Comment by dave — February 24, 2009 @ 2:31 am

28. Hey Dave, good point on not being too parenoid. That said, the reason to buy gold is because of fear, fear that currencies will collapse, and that our hard earned money (after tax mind you) will all go to zero. So a good bit of parenoia is warranted, you have to admit. Also, if we take your above-the-board approach, why is it that folks like goldmoney.com, CEF and GTU have no problem communicating that they have audits, secure vaults, accountability, transparency, etc., while GLD clearly does not (from Bob’s mails, that started this thread). So while you’re right that we can’t question everything, I think this is warranteed, given the risks (our live savings going to ZERO). My 2 yen from Japan…

    Comment by Bill — February 24, 2009 @ 3:16 am

29. OK, below is the list of Authorized Participants taken from the GLD prospectus. why don’t we ask them where they got the all this gold? i just find it hard to believe that this many mainstream institutions would be involved in such a scam. why can’t we trust that the below companies actually DID deliver this aforementioned gold? looking at these firms it doesn’t seem that unreasonable at all. maybe they went out and bought it on the market or maybe they had the bullion stored in their own vaults or maybe a combo of both. anyway, here is the list i copied from the prospectus….

    Bear
    Hunter Structured Products LLC, Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc., BMO Capital Markets Corp., CIBC World
    Markets Corp., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, Deutsche Bank Securities
    Inc., EWT, LLC, Goldman, Sachs & Co., Goldman Sachs Execution & Clearing L.P., HSBC Securities (USA)
    Inc., J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., Lehman Brothers Inc., Merrill Lynch Professional Clearing Corp., Morgan
    Stanley & Co. Incorporated, Newedge USA LLC, RBC Capital Markets Corporation, Scotia Capital (USA)
    Inc., UBS Securities LLC and Wedbush Morgan Securities Inc.

    Comment by dave — February 24, 2009 @ 3:51 am

30. Hi Dave,

    1 year ago I would have felt as you do. Now, look at the names and the CEO’s of over 1/2 the companies above, and all’s I can say is shame, shame, shame, for scamming the public into buying all those mortgages, for repackaging them and selling them as good to trusting banks in Europe and Asia, knowing that they were rotten to the core. A tree limb and a bit of rope is what they all deserve. On the surface, I like you want to believe that gold in GLD is safe. But human nature teaches us over and over that, given the chance (and the SEC did just that), people in position/control will often times secum to their darker side of greed and power, and then lie about it.

    Also, full circle back to Bob’s original mail, if everything was straight up and ethical with GLD, why didn’t Todd offical comment back to Bob say that, just like one would expect? So assuming you’re right Dave that GLD is safe/secure etc, how does one explain Todd’s reply? That’s the nut of this thread. Me and my money think “where there’s smoke there’s fire.” So while I hope you’re right (as the public are trusting that GLD is legit), I’m not counting on it, not when the stakes are this high. At the age of 50, I wouldn’t be able to go back to zero and start over again, not easily anyway. I’d rather shave my head and join a temple over here.

    But to each his/her own for sure.

    Comment by Bill — February 24, 2009 @ 4:10 am

31. Well, how about this quote from from Jim Sinclair:

    We certainly can forget about that gold coming from the Comex. Twelve deliveries would stand out like a sore thumb.

    Record keeping eliminates all exchanges around the globe as the source of bullion in any size to all the gold ETFs.

    The physical market is so tight that coin minting has all but closed down compared to what it was one year ago. It is hard to accept that the gold EFTs can buy what the mints can’t.

    Comment by Gold Prices — February 24, 2009 @ 4:14 am

32. who is this TODD in SPDR trust ? bob u need to ask this question to james burton or james lowe.

    Comment by Ramkumar — February 24, 2009 @ 9:16 am

33. Bob, have you ever carried out a similar excercise with Bullion Vault? They appear to be expanding rather rapidly themselves. I know we cannot taint everyone with the same brush and hopefully these companies are legit but when a company cannot answer basic, simple questions as in your case with SPDR the alarm bells should start ringing somewhere! I look forward to see whether Bullion Vault comes under your watchful eye.

    Comment by Alan — February 24, 2009 @ 10:05 am

34. Bill-

    I totally see your point. Nonetheless, I have been in (and out) of this fund since inception. Its easily been the most criticized fund I have ever been involved in, yet it hasn’t disappointed and has done exactly what it said it would do. Track gold to 1/10th of an ounce minus the expense ratio. And why is that reply so troubling? How would anyone other than the authorized participants know where the gold came from? I just do not think it’s to far-fetched to believe these authorized participants had/have/stored/can attain the gold.

    Comment by dave — February 24, 2009 @ 11:50 am

35. Despite all those big names, a con is a con, is a con, whether intentional or accidental.

    Think of Madoff, and check his list to see who were deceived. Remember, folks, the first hundred years are the worst, or is it wurst, like barackwurst. Not personal, just policy and political.

    J

    Comment by John Ell — February 24, 2009 @ 4:39 pm

36. Thank you, RedGold, for the explanation of some things forgotten about, Gold Investing 101. Really appreciate it.

    John E.

    Comment by John Ell — February 24, 2009 @ 4:47 pm

37. Gold-Prices Guys,
    Great find…the John Embry interview on BNN!
    You guys are well informed and connected.
    He is just one of many who is looking for transparency in this market and with this ETF.
    I guess it depends on your time horizon and whether you are a long-term holder or a short-term trader?
    Personally, I like to know everything I can about a stock prior to “pulling the trigger”…so, this ETF has never qualified for consideration.
    Keep up the good work!

    Comment by Mark — February 24, 2009 @ 4:51 pm

38. Shorting GOLD,

    guys there a lot of reasons why, read this:
    http://benbittrolff.blogspot.com/2009/02/short-gold-and-silver.html

    nevertheless, nice work G-P people penetrating the GLD issue.

    Comment by Chimera — February 24, 2009 @ 5:09 pm

39. Alan,

    No we have not looked at Bullion Vault, it was the sheer size and speed of acquisition by GLD that caught our attention.

    Ramkumar,

    Todd replied to our emails, if he is not the authorized person to do so then our confidence drops even further.

    Comment by Gold Prices — February 24, 2009 @ 7:46 pm

40. Bob:

    I have been a reader for a long time, but have not offered any comments/suggestions before. So… here’s a suggestion that I think would be VERY useful to your readers:

    I wonder if you can try the same question with the (what I call “unencumbered”) Canadian Gold Trusts?

    (1) Unemcumbered Gold/CEF: Central fund of Canada
    (2) Unemcumbered Gold/GTU: Central GoldTrust

    Supposedly, their charters call for them to be 90-ish to 95-ish percent invested in physical metal?

    And, if you get real answers from them, while all you get is smoke & mirrors from GLD, I know where I will be making my investments.

    Best regards,

    – Daniel Cunningham
    Private Investor

    Disclosures: Speculate w/ GLD. Hold physical bullion.

    Comment by Daniel — February 25, 2009 @ 12:17 am

41. They should have the guys in charge take a Polaroid in front of the gold with a big thumbs up handsign! That wouldn’t be the only thing, but it’s at least a start. Put a face on it!

    Comment by Kenny — February 25, 2009 @ 2:40 pm

42. Daniel,

    We favour holding the precious metals or investing in the stocks. Any investment has its own unique set of risks that need to be taken into account when you do your own due diligence. The funds may well be a safe and sound investment, however at this point in time they are not for us. We will post the reply that we get from the SEC as soon as it arrives regarding GLD. But for now we are uncomfortable with this type of investment vehicle and therefore will not be spending time investigating other funds.

    Somewhere down the line we may change our view and find a suitable investment fund and at that time we will bring it to your attention.

    Please don’t be put off by us, if you have done the work and are comfortable with your chosen investment vehicle then tally ho!

    If you could give us an update from time to time regarding your satisfaction or otherwise with your chosen fund it would be very much appreciated.

    Comment by Gold Prices — February 25, 2009 @ 7:49 pm

43. Kenny,

    You are joking I hope – if not then we will send you a few photos of gold bars and you can invest with us!

    Comment by Gold Prices — February 25, 2009 @ 7:52 pm

44. Hold it Kenny,

    before you buy with Gold-Prices crew, I have a better proposition for you… 25 percent discount of spotprice

    Pictures included.

    Thumbs up

    Comment by de Graaf — February 25, 2009 @ 8:13 pm

45. Possible explanation for SPDR’s increase in gold…
    http://seekingalpha.com/article/122785-strange-action-in-gold-etf-chart?source=email

    India is not buying, but taking profit of recent highs. 30 percent market share open to the marketplace.

    Comment by de Graaf — February 26, 2009 @ 1:11 pm

46. de Graaf,

    The article also says:

    It looks more like ETFs and other funds buying futures and rolling them over every month.

    Referring to the NYMEX.

    Comment by Gold Prices — February 26, 2009 @ 8:41 pm

47. Indeed, thanks for adding that.

    Comment by de Graaf — February 26, 2009 @ 8:49 pm

48. To change the subject, here is something on HL that may be of interest:

    Hecla management delayed in getting the bridge loan taken out by permanent financing when the debt markets were friendly; then got backed into a corner by the bankers, and as the deadline of Feb 16th approached, took a huge haircut in the process. Basically, to win approval for a loan amendment which rescheduled all term debt payments to 2010 and 2011, HL agreed to do a stock sale at $2.05 a share so that it could repay the $40 million it still owed on the bridge loan.

    The terms were onerous – Hecla sold 32 million shares to Canaccord (CCDPF.PK), plus threw in 16 million warrants with a $2.50 strike, exercisable until August 2014! That means potential dilution is as much as 48 million shares, and at bargain prices, effectively killing a lot of the upside in HL. Before this one-sided “deal” Hecla had just 136MM shares outstanding (end of Q3) and a book value of $5.00.

    Silver is on the rebound, and the U.S. dollar is threatened with a serious collapse, which could send silver soaring in price. Hecla has two very productive major mines, but got caught in the grip of lower silver prices in Q4, as well as a real collapse in lead and zinc, two important byproducts at the mines that help to offset rising costs. It also paid a lot for diesel, but that has dropped sharply in price over the past three months, so going forward HL will save some money. But there is no excuse for giving away that much equity at less than half the Q3-08 book price – this is a huge blunder, and seems to have been done at the worst terms money could buy.

    To ice the cake, HL announced a very poor fourth quarter update, saying it would lose over $40 million, and it is squandering some deferred tax assets to boot. Part of the reason for owning HL was the quality of the mines, and the fact that if it MADE money it would have a nice tax shield – totaling $47 million in taxes as of Q3 - for years for most of the income. This resulted from losses many years ago that created tax loss carryforwards (CFs). However, these are beginning to expire, and with the outlook now not clear for profits that would utilize the CFs, the accounting rules force a writedown of those assets. Nice, eh?

    The only saving grace to me is the very strong outlook for silver, plus the hope of a rebound in lead and zinc, and possibly a benign diesel price for a year or two – this would return HL to the profit column, and begin to suck up those tax CFs. I still like the outlook for the company, despite the bungling of this finance deal, and I will buy more next week, especially if it dips lower. I see very little BK risk, and some considerable upside with rising silver. I’m glad this was put on as only a 2.4% position – I knew a deal was coming, but didn’t expect a debacle. Oh well, you can’t always trust managements to get the best end of a deal – especially in difficult markets like this.

    Comment by John Ell — March 1, 2009 @ 9:08 pm

49. Regarding the Hecla, HL, report which originated from a story in “Seeking Alpha” last week, I overlooked mentioning the source. I am not the author, just the messenger.

    John

    Comment by John Ell — March 2, 2009 @ 8:47 pm

50. Thanks John.

    Comment by Gold Prices — March 3, 2009 @ 2:43 am

51. It is important to know where they keep the gold. There is a risk of expropriation of gold if everyone starts to hoard it.

    Comment by Stan — March 19, 2009 @ 2:09 pm

52. Just because they say “I cannot answer” doesn’t mean that he does not know! Maybe it is policy not to disclose this, or maybe they purchased it under the caveat that it not be disclosed, or maybe they bought it from some unsavory individuals… an answer in the middle of the spectrum (speculation), say they bought it from the government of Dubai, who is cash strapped in a big way right now. Maybe Dubai dumped their gold holdings but don’t want to cause a panic in domestic RE prices etc. Just one of may possible scenarios.

    Comment by George — March 22, 2009 @ 9:21 am

53. Just a thought - looks like whatever e-mail address you sent this into chose some guy, I’m guessing a marketing/media affairs guy (generally not the brightest bulbs), and assigned him to respond to your e-mail. Maybe your readership numbers didn’t impress him or his company, and they thought you were too much of a pissant to spend any of there time responding to. Maybe sending repeated niggling e-mails isn’t the best way to unwrap the mechanisms behind this ETF’s purchases. Just a thought.

    Comment by Nick — April 26, 2009 @ 4:44 pm

Leave a comment

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Receive an email if someone else comments on this post?

  

Search Gold-Prices.biz
 

Gold Price Banner: