All Majors and Gold

The chess game goes on......it seems Russia is prepared and on the offensive while USA and eu are playing defensive. Who will win this game? Hmmmmmmmmmm



Russia vows to switch to other currencies over US sanctions threat - Glazyev
Photo:the Voice of Russia
Russia can dodge any proposed US sanctions by switching to other currencies and creating its own payment system, Putin’s economic advisor Sergei Glazyev said Tuesday. A senior Kremlin official has denounced Glazyev’s remark on US-Russia economic ties, calling them "a personal opinion" inconsistent with the Kremlin stance.
This comes amid US threats to pile sanctions on Russia over its stand on the Ukrainian coup. US Senate is currently debating possible measures against Moscow.
Senator Christ Murphy, the chairman of the Senate's Europe subcommittee, said lawmakers were considering such options as imposing sanctions on Russia's banks and freezing assets of Russian public institutions and private investors.
Sergei Glazyev told reporters today Russia would have to switch to other currencies to curb its dependence on the United States.
"We have wonderful economic and trade relations with our Southern and Eastern partners," he emphasized. "We will find a way not just to eliminate our dependence on the US but also profit from these sanctions."
Sanctions imposed by the US against the Russian government institutions will force Russia to recognize the impossibility of loans repayment to the US banks, Presidential Aide Sergei Glazyev said.
"If sanctions are applied against state structures, we will be forced to recognize the impossibility of repayment of the loans that the US banks gave to the Russian structures. Indeed, sanctions are a double-edged weapon, and if the US chooses to freeze our assets, then our equities and liabilities in dollars will also be frozen. This means that our banks and businesses will not return the loans to American partners," he said.
Russia urges Ukrainian regime to return to legitimacy
Russia will only engage in a dialog with the ruling Ukrainian regime if it "returns to legitimacy," Putin’s senior advisor Sergei Glazyev has said.
"This regime is illegal, it is profoundly Russophobic. Some people in the Ukrainian government, who have seized power by force, are on terrorist lists. They are criminals," Glazyev underscored.
"I cannot imagine us having any serious dialog with criminals, apart from talks that would bring them back into the legal framework, restore the rule of law and make Yatsenyuk, Klitschko, Tyagnibok and European ministers deliver on their promises [made in connection with the Feb. 21 agreements]," he said.
Putin's advisor Glazyev 'not authorized' to speak on Cabinet behalf – Kremlin
The Kremlin has expressed its surprise over remarks of President Putin’s economic security advisor Sergei Glazyev who claimed today Russia could easily dodge US sanctions. Russian media have learnt this from a senior official in the Putin administration.
Mr. Glazyev said earlier today that Russia would be forced to switch to other currencies and set up its own payment system if US Senate were to sanction it over Ukraine.
The advisor claimed that Moscow would recommend everyone to get rid of their US Treasury bonds if the United States froze the assets of Russian public institutions and private investors. He added that Russia would also have to default on its loans to American banks.
"Mr. Glazyev has not been authorized to talk on behalf of the Russian government and especially to voice such unacceptable measures," the source in the Kremlin said. He stressed it was Glazyev's "personal opinion" that had nothing to do with Russia's official stance.
Voice of Russia, RIA
Russia, Ukraine, US, economy, currency, political crisis, EU, rallies in Ukraine, sanctions, World

Also here's a current fib Retracement to 50%

http://shortsideoflong.com/2014/03/gold-bull-bear/


Gold Bull Or Bear?
March 17, 2014
After a strong start to the year (Gold is up over $200 per ounce or 15% YTD), many investors have already concluded that the Gold’s bear market is now over. How do we know for sure? Well, no one can really say anything for sure, but before we jump on a bandwagon too… let us examine two simple charts.
Chart 1: Gold’s bullish case scenario could play out similar to this…

http://i2.wp.com/shortsideoflong.com...size=625%2C208 Source: FinViz (edited by Short Side of Long)

Without getting too technical about things, let us agree that Gold’s line in the sand is between $1350 and $1400. The price is here right now. This pivot was a support (demand zone) during the crash and eventually it became a resistance (supply zone) as prices broke lower into June of 2013. Assuming you agree with this polarity line, you could agree that this is the most important pivot for the current bear market.
Now… let us assume I am a precious metals bull in the short term. Here are some observations I would be arguing, as seen in Chart 1. For the bullish case to be validated, price would have to see a higher high above $1425 from August 2013. So that means a strong breakout towards $1500, followed by a sound re-test of $1400. If and when that resistance turns into support again, we would have a completed base. That would give Gold a sound bottom, a process that lasted from $1400 level in April 2013 towards $1400 around July 2014. From there, good seasonal period (August 2014 to February 2015) could carry us higher into years end.
Chart 2: …while Gold’s bearish case scenario could play out like this!

http://i2.wp.com/shortsideoflong.com...size=625%2C203 Source: FinViz (edited by Short Side of Long)

From the other perspective, let us now assume that I am a precious metals bear in the short term. Observations regarding this case scenario are seen in Chart 2. Bears would not believe the downtrend has ended, until $1,425 per ounce its bettered. Most bears could argue that the final low is actually coming sometime later in the year, while the current rally only as a part of consolidation before that breakdown occurs. In other words, all we are doing is working off oversold conditions from 2013.
Many times before, market participants have stated that Gold’s bear market is already extremely aged (September 2011 until December 2013) and overdue to end at anytime. First these guys were comparing Gold to 2008 correction. Eventually, as the downtrend continued, gold bugs realised bear markets can last a long time. I guess that is what happens when PMs sector enjoys a decade long bull market – investors forget the risks of downside.
While I agree that Gold’s bearish correction is extremely long by any count, we could argue that since Gold enjoyed astonishing 12 years of annual gains in the row, prices might be mean reverting with a super long bear market (two to three years of annual losses). I remember when I first told various investors that the price of Gold will correct below $1530, because it was up for 12 years in the row, they called me crazy. I’m sure that even discussing the possibility of going down for two or three years in the row, would do the same. Only time will tell so watch how Gold interacts with that $1,400 per ounce level very closely.
Side note: charts above are only estimates and assumed case scenarios. I am not actually predicting exact price levels nor time periods. Charts are constructed so it is easier to envision a bullish and bearish case scenario from a simple and basic technical price perspective.

Thank you G, very good job ...

more reading

http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot...Am%C3%A9ricain)


17 March 2014
Gold Daily and Silver Weekly Charts - Must Be an FOMC Week

The jitters went by the wayside as the markets took a big snort of economic news this morning and rallied higher, in what was clearly a 'risk on' trade.

The US and its client states condemned the Russia meddling in the Ukraine, and dismissed the vote in Crimea. You may recall that the US and its allies helped to replace the government in the Ukraine 'ex-vote.' Our meddling is the only one that will be tolerated.

The resurgence of the neo-cons, unashamed after their decade of lies and carnage is remarkable. But a general lack of conscience and moral restraint is the hallmark of the culture it seems, from politicians to pundits.

This is an FOMC week, AND a triple witch stock expiration on Friday. So we are seeing some of the usual technical trading that one may have come to expect from this sort of thing.

This too will pass.

Happy St. Patrick's Day.

Have a pleasant evening.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MSwNU_s_2A...golddaily9.PNG

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3JTIsWMBBL...verweekly6.PNG

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UlxDkFTfvN...einventory.PNG


Posted by Jesse at 4:16 PM
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
http://img2.blogblog.com/img/icon18_edit_allbkg.gif

Older Post Home
Happy St. Patrick's Day

G, can you kindly explain to grandfather..., for 3yrs trading I 've never short anything but using inverse etf instead, like TNA/TZA or HGU/HGD(Toronto)..., I'm in disadvantage here or is it the same? should I learn how to? because I never short, I feel uncomfortable to use it... Thank you for your time.

Shorting forex?
very simple just press sell instead of buy
you can always practice on a demo account from any brokers.
I trade only xau/usd pair from admiral or fxcm. But there are others out there.
If I misunderstood you please elaborate

Hi G. We have outside key reversal on D1, Gold. Look like bearish?

Good, should do it long ago, I mean, short on demo account. So, for the same # of pips, are there better profit if I short or it's the same as I use inversed etf? Thanks.

sorry medvic I only trade purely xau/usd pair, therefore I can't comment

its looking like it but this week shall give us a better look at what should most likely be the direction

market movers in order:
china
ukraine
fomc
3 witching expiration on Friday....

PA test 1362 support zone. Lett see, the profit taking happens as 1400 not reach as many expected.

Hi G,

How about this AB=CD, buy area between 1341 & 1352 . 1341 is the 78.6 & 1352 is the 61.8 level of AB . If the price goes below 1341 then this ABCD will not be valid.

some interesting reading



-my view last week on who is right in Ukraine or Crimea conflict.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...lications-more


"Putin Did The Right Thing" Says Marc Faber, But Fears China Implications More
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 03/17/2014 22:45 -0400

While Marc Faber is adamant that "there’s lots of funny things that are happening in China. And when the whole thing unwinds it will be a disaster," it is his comments with regard Ukraine (and Russia) that are worth paying significant new attention to. As The Gloom, Boom & Doom Report editor notes in this brief Bloomberg TV interview, if you put yourself in Putin's shoes "he did the right thing from his perspective," given Crimea's strategic importance. However, as Faber concludes, "Crimea moving to Russia gives essentially a signal to China that one day they can also move and seize some territory that they perceive belongs to them."



Faber On Russia, Ukraine and its signaling to China...
Mr. Putin did the right thing from his perspective. We have to look – put ourselves into his shoes. He did absolutely the right thing at the right time.

...By that I mean that there was interference by foreign powers in Ukrainian politics that were unfavorably from the perspective of Russia.

...The Crimea is strategically most important for Russia. It has practically no meaning strategically to the United States or to Europe. But for Russia it’s very important. I don’t think that Russia will move further into Ukraine unless there is serious provocation. But I doubt it will happen. But I think the wider implication is that we have now border lines. In other words, the US would intervene if a foreign power would establish bases in Haiti and in Cuba and so forth and so on, and the Chinese will react if foreign powers threaten Chinese access to resources.

...

This is very important because the occupation or say the referendum (ph) in Crimea and Crimea moving to Russia gives essentially a signal to China that one day they can also move and seize some territory that they perceive that belongs to them.
Faber confirms his perspective on China...
...we had a colossal credit bubble in China and that this credit bubble is now being gradually deflated and will bring about problems in the real estate market and among some major players in the commodity markets as well. So overall, if I look at export figures from China, and they are very closely correlated to overall economic growth, then there is a huge discrepancy between what China reports and what China’s trading partners are reporting.

So if you look at the figures of China, exports are still growing. If you look at the trade figures China exports to Taiwan, so China records exports of so and so much. The Taiwan report imports from China at a much lower level. So which figures are more reliable? I think the figures of the trading partners of China are more reliable. And they would suggest that growth has slown down considerably.

...

Governments will always publish the statistics that they wish to show irrespective whether that is in China or in other countries. Governments control basically the statistical offices, so they can show whatever they want. As Stalin said, it’s not important who votes but who counts the votes. And the government counts the statistics.

...the fact is simply that Chinese stocks have been just about the worst performing stocks since 2006. Now analysts will dismiss that and say everything is prefect in China, but the stock market does not seem to believe everything that the government is saying about the economy. And clearly there are strength signs in the Chinese economy. In particular, as I said, we have this huge explosion of debt. Debt as a percent of GDP has increased in the last five years by more than 50 percent. Total debt is now over 215 percent of GDP, and a lot of it is trade finance that is being rolled over.

In addition to that, there are lots of funny deals. A friend of mine who analyzes China very carefully, Simon Hunt (ph), he pointed out that trade finance between one state-owned enterprise and a private company has amounted to over $5 trillion by continuing to roll over the same collateral several times. There’s lots of funny things that are happening in China. And when the whole thing unwinds it will be a disaster.

...

I think that investors are not sufficiently aware that the Chinese economy is far more important for other emerging economies than the United States because China is a large importer of resources. In other words, iron ore, copper, zinc (inaudible). And at the same time, they are a huge exporter to commodity producers of their own manufactured goods, as well as Korean exports. The commodity producers are much larger than Korean exports to the US or to the U (ph).
So if the Chinese economy slows down, commodity prices – industrial commodity prices are likely to remain under pressure. They already come down a lot. They remain under pressure and the resource producers have less money. In other words, the Brazilian goes into recession. The Middle East does not grow as much as before. Central Asia, Africa and so forth all contract, and then they buy less from China and you have a vicious cycle on the downside.

you are looking at it right if it pans out.....

http://www.harmonictrader.com/price_patternsabcd.htm

The AB=CD Pattern The AB=CD pattern is a price structure where each price leg is equivalent. The Fibonacci numbers in the pattern must occur at specific points. In an ideal AB=CD, the C point must retrace to either a 0.618 or 0.786. This retracement sets up the BC projection that should converge at the completion of the AB=CD and be either a 1.27 or 1.618. It is important to note that a .618 retracement at the C point will result in a 1.618 BC projection. A .786 retracement at the C point will result in a 1.27 projection. The most important consideration to remember is that the BC projection should converge closely with the completion of the AB=CD.

http://www.harmonictrader.com/abcdbullre.jpg http://www.harmonictrader.com/abcdbearre.jpg
Bullish Bearish

hmmmmmmm is this ext usa disaster brewing ...........



http://www.acting-man.com/?p=29348&u...8Acting+Man%29





Freddie and Fannie Reform – Disaster Awaits
March 17, 2014 | Author Ramsey Su

http://ads.investingchannel.com/adta...pe=ps&ptype=pg

No Opportunity Necessary, No Experience Needed
Freddie and Fannie are back in the limelight. This time, the plan is coming from Senate Banking Committee leaders Tim Johnson (D., S.D) and Mike Crapo (R., Idaho).
Here are the bios of Johnson and Crapo, two lawyers with not a trace of experience in real estate finance and housing matters. They represent Idaho (pop 1.6 million) and South Dakota (pop 0.8 million) with a combined population of about half a Phoenix (pop 4.3 million). Neither State played any role in the subprime bubble. Johnson/Crapo simply do not possess even the most basic qualifications for the job.
It is not my intention to belittle Johnson and Crapo but here are the circumstances. At issue is the failure of the two mortgage giants that resulted in placing them under conservatorship for over five years so far. On one side are all the lobbyists, trying their utmost to mold political decisions to their clients' best interest. Hedge funds are salivating and suing the government to give them more money for reasons that I cannot understand. On the other side of the table are these two Senators who are supposed to look out for the public good and somehow come up with a system that can replace the agencies. Judging by their resumes, would you hire these two men to fix the agencies? Do you think they possess the knowledge and skills to comprehend the complexity of the mortgage industry and the secondary market for securitized products?


Inner Contradictions
Giving the Senators the benefit of the doubt, I read the proposed plan. It is full of political jargon with objectives that are mutually exclusive. On the one hand, they want to protect taxpayers but they also want to provide financing with downpayments as low as 3.5% while making sound loans at low cost only to qualified buyers using the CFPB qualified mortgage guidelines, blah blah blah …….. For a second there, I thought Franklin Raines (long the mouth piece/CEO who took down Fannie) had returned.

• Protect taxpayers from bearing the cost of a housing downturn.
• Promote stable, liquid, and efficient mortgage markets for single-family and multifamily housing.
• Ensure that affordable, 30-year, fixed-rate, prepayable mortgages continue to be available, and that affordability remains an important consideration.
• Provide equal access for lenders of all sizes to the secondary market.
• Facilitate broad availability of mortgage credit for all eligible borrowers in all areas and for single family and multifamily housing types.
What exactly are Freddie and Fannie today?
They are two duplicating agencies that package real estate mortgages under a set of underwriting guidelines. These packages are resold on Wall Street as agency MBS (mortgage backed securities). For a fee, the agencies guarantee these securities. Since the agencies are under the conservatorship of the US Treasury, this guarantee is practically as good as any other Treasury debt.

Are Freddie and Fannie profitable?
If you read the headlines, they are supposedly making money hand over fist. They are returning hundreds of billions of "profits" to the Treasury. But how can anyone determine what is "profit"? The agencies are essentially insurance companies, collecting a premium to guarantee about $4.5 trillion of debt. However, there are no insurance commissioners nor guidelines as to what they need to reserve against potential claims.

Then what should be the amount of reserves?
Well, that is a question with no answer. If you treat the agencies as insurance companies, which they are, then it is possible to calculate the needed reserves, bigger ones for the subprime and high LTV loans, smaller ones for low LTV and prime borrowers, etc. However, how can an insurance company reserve for government intervention, especially the retroactive type? For example, the administration is touting that about 2 million mortgages have been modified through various fixes under the Making Home Affordable Program. Who paid for this? Furthermore, the agencies are now holding these modified loans that actually do not meet present underwriting guidelines. This is a high risk portfolio with high LTV and most likely subprime borrowers. One hiccup in the economy and they will all return to the delinquency pool. What if FHFA, under Mel Watt, decides to launch principal reduction programs, who will pay for those?

A Great Business Model
Back to the "profits", as long as real estate prices appreciate, default risk will remain low and the agencies are home free. If real estate prices stall, or decline, then the agencies simply ask the Treasury to fund their losses. What a great business model! No wonder hedge funds who bought the agency stocks at bankrupt prices are clamoring for the return of these "profits".
The agencies have monopolized the mortgage market, commanding a 90% market share during the last few years. The remaining 10% are going to jumbo loans and non-mainstream programs that have little effect on the overall market.

Not Charging Enough
What should be the cost for the agencies to insure the mortgage industry?
Whatever the agencies are charging, they are not charging enough. This is evidenced by the fact that no one in the private sector is willing to step up and compete. There is not a single mortgage program that offers financing to the masses that is not agency conforming, not from the too-big-to-fail banks, not from the small regional banks. Why bother when you can originate loans and collect fees, while letting let the agencies rubber stamp them with an iron clad guarantee backed by the US taxpayers.

The Fed
Let us not forget the Federal Reserve. Under QE3, the Feds purchased $788 billion of agency MBS last year and $105 billion so far this year ending March 8. As of March 12, the Fed holds $1.57 trillion of agency MBS on its balance sheet.
If the agencies are privatized, are the Feds still authorized to hold these loans on their balance sheet? Can the Feds continue to purchase originations? Would the Senators' plan neutralize the Fed and render one of its favorite manipulation tools useless? How much higher would mortgage rates be if the Fed were out of the picture?
Chris Whalen provided an excellent analysis on Zero Hedge that may be a little too technical but it highlights some of the screw-ups that have led to the agencies' demise. It is about to get worse.

Details
In closing, I am attaching the "Details of the Agreement on Housing Finance Reform" below. What I see is at least 2,000 pages of regulations, expecting a miracle fix that even Moses may have trouble performing.

Details of the Agreement on Housing Finance Reform
Outlined below are some of the details of the agreement that Chairman Johnson and Ranking Member Crapo have reached that will form the basis of a bipartisan housing finance reform text:
• Start with S.1217 as the base text and generally maintain its overall architecture.
• Wind down and eliminate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
• Promote a smooth and stable transition from the old system to the new system by providing specific benchmarks and timelines to guide Federal Mortgage Insurance Corporation (FMIC) and market participants.
• Transfer appropriate functions to the modernized, streamlined and accountable FMIC, modeled in part after the FDIC including its regulatory authority.
• Mandate 10 percent private capital, up front, and create a mortgage insurance fund for the system to protect taxpayers against future bailouts.
• Create a member-owned securitization platform that will issue a single, standardized FMIC-wrapped security, and permit private label securities to be issued in a manner that encourages standardization and improved market liquidity.
• Establish a mutual cooperative jointly owned by small lenders to ensure institutions of all sizes have direct access to the secondary market so community banks and credit unions are not at the mercy of their larger competitors when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are dissolved. The small lender mutual cooperative would provide a cash window for individual eligible loans, and small lenders could retain servicing rights.
• Provide clear rules of the road for servicers that choose to participate in the FMIC system.
• Maintain a vibrant multifamily market by building upon successful risk-sharing mechanisms and products and providing access to a broad range of markets.
• Require strong underwriting standards that mirror the definition of “qualified mortgage”, and set down payment requirement at 5 percent (with a short phase-in) except for first-time homebuyers at 3.5 percent.
• Facilitate the broad availability of credit for eligible single-family and multifamily borrowers, monitor consumer and market access to credit, and provide market based incentives and transparency to serve underserved areas.
• Eliminate affordable housing goals and establish transparent and accountable housing-related funds that would focus on ensuring there is sufficient decent housing available. The funds are NOT paid for with tax dollars, but through a small FMIC user fee (10 basis points) that only those who choose to use the system pay.
• Allow current conforming loan limits to be maintained so that mortgage credit continues to be available in high cost areas.
• Maintain broad liquidity in the To-Be-Announced (TBA) market and direct FMIC to take into account the impact of new products on the TBA market.


Addendum: The Bill Has Been Published

this one is quite nice read....believe or not
-also read down on the comments as it's quite interesting conversation..


http://www.ingoldwetrust.ch/new-york...t-gold-storage

let's go back to Ukraine and its presidential election.....

what country will vote in a person who made his living getting his head bashed in....
On 24 October 2013, the leader[5] of UDAR, Vitali Klitschko, announced he intended to take part in the election.[6] Experts and lawyers have argued that it is unclear if Klitschko can take part.[6] Under Ukrainian law a presidential candidate must have had his residence in Ukraine for the past ten years prior to election day. Klitschko has lived for many years in both Ukraine and Germany, where, according to media reports, he has a residence permit.[6] Klitschko confirmed on 28 February 2014 that he will take part in the 2014 Ukrainian presidential election.[7]

this is reasoning that this country is screwed....might as well vote a wrestler or actor for governor then vote them for president also....

lots of reading as the day should be boring and ranging waiting for fomc meetings