Archive for August, 2009


August 30, 2009


Inception Date: Dec 01, 2008   –   Inception Capital: 10,000 $

Net Assets Value (August 28, 2009): 21,759$   (monthly return +8.35%)

Realized gain on Speculative Equity Holdings:   +1,775 $

Current gain on Speculative Equity Holdings:   +1,592 $

Realized gain on Core Equity Holding:   +1,888 $

Current gain on Core Equity Holdings:   +2,124 $

Realized gain on Protection Hedges:   +520 $

Current Loss on Protection Hedges: -4,893 $

Net Income Premium:    +8,358 $

Dividends:   395 $

All time return: 11,759 $ (+117,59%)



Inception Date: Dec 01, 2008   –   Inception Capital: 30,000 euro

Net Assets Value (August 28, 2009): 38,462 euro   (monthly return +3.05%)

Cash                                                             40,921

Market value options sold                              (3,721)

Market value options bought                           1,262

Mark to Market Futures                                 0 

All time return: 8,462 euro (+28,21%)


August 28, 2009


Dear Dr Ekwurzel, [of the environmental group Union of Concerned Scientists.]

According to the American Bar Association, the purpose of any “trial by legal authority” is to “establish the truth.”

I note with interest your skepticism over US Chamber of Commerce’s petition of the EPA to carry out a “trial” to examine the facts behind EPA’s interest in regulation of greenhouse gases as “a danger to the public.”

What, if anything, do you and your organization have to fear about Chamber of Commerce’s proposed trial idea?

Do you fear exposure of the idea of “man-made” global warming for the abject fraud that the idea is?

You know yourself – exactly none of the predictions related to AGW [anthropogenic global warming] made over the past 20 years by AGW advocates have actualized. You also know there is exactly zero evidence to support any claims that “humans” have influenced the natural global climate in the least – and that means, since the dawn of Human Civilization.

If the US Public were to be made aware of these facts – at the testimony of a trial involving the EPA – then only those with religious convictions of the idea would continue to hold any support for AGW. That is in fact a very small number of people.
Falsehood cannot be sustained indefinitely – and the EPA might as well get it over with and let the facts come to light before all eyes.

I’d be interested in your response to me.
As well as quite surprised. In general, people seem to find themselves “too good” to bother to respond to me when I call AGW the fraud that it is.
Brian G Valentine PhD PE
US Department of Energy
Washington, DC


August 27, 2009

It is said that one should not speak poorly of the dead. But it is also said that one should not discuss politics or religion in polite company, and we regularly violate that dictum. Thus, committing another faux pas gives us no real pause.

I am, of course, warming up to say a few unkind words about the just deceased Sen. Kennedy.

In reviewing his life, his fans will hold him up as a flawed but still shining beacon for the common man. Quoting one mostly favorable article today…

“Kennedy entered Harvard College in 1950, but was suspended the following year for allowing another student to take a Spanish test for him.”

And people claim there is such a thing as media bias! Pshaw!

I’m sure that the student Kennedy so kindly “allowed” to take his Spanish test – no doubt because the poor fellow needed to hone his test-taking skills – virtually begged Ted to let him stand in.

But his cheating ways, which extended to drunkenly chasing the girlfriends of younger clan members around family compounds, are not the source of my gripe about the all-too-human Kennedy.

My issue emanates from a stop some years ago by the side of the road in Martha’s Vineyard. On the island for a vacation, I took the short detour to see the site of Kennedy’s infamous accident at the bridge to Chappaquiddick. Getting out of the car, I vividly remember my first impression.

“This is it? That’s where Kennedy’s car went in?”

The thing is that the canal is narrow and shallow. I’ll give Kennedy the benefit of the doubt that he was disoriented – massive quantities of alcohol will do that to a guy – but I won’t give him anything toward his contention that he couldn’t have taken more active measures to save Mary Jo Kopechne’s life.

Any reasonably strong swimmer – which I assume he was, having grown up on the water – could have made the shallow dive necessary to get her out. But even if he was too drunk or scared to pull that off, he could have quickly found the help needed to get her out before the air bubble in the car was exhausted and she drowned. Instead, walking by a fire station and a private house, stopping at neither to request help, he trod a circuitous path to his hotel, where, after changing into dry clothes and lamely trying to establish an alibi by visiting the front desk to complain of a loud party, he turned in.

It was only nine hours after driving off the bridge, and after a local fisherman had discovered the car, that Kennedy finally reported the accident.

This is, of course, all part of the historical record – an interesting part of which you can read by following the link below to the FBI files on the accident, made available thanks to a Freedom of Information Act request.

But I will never forget my visceral reaction to the sight of that small and shallow channel, the certain knowledge that Ted Kennedy was a sociopath, a coward, and a cretin, who made every possible move to rescue his political career and almost none to save the life of a young woman.

That he wasn’t properly prosecuted but received a slap on the wrist with a two-month suspended sentence speaks volumes about the nature of political power and our justice system.

And that he subsequently went on to become a political icon, idolized as a champion of the downtrodden, says everything there is to say about human gullibility.

David Galland


August 24, 2009

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:


August 21, 2009

Here is a regulatory development update. Yesterday, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission issued a statement that it was pulling the exemption from position limits from two entities trading wheat, corn and soybean futures. The exemptions were previously granted back in 2006, via “no-action” letters.

 One of the entities denied a continuing exemption was DB Commodity Services LLC, the trading arm for the Deutsche Bank-sponsored DBA agricultural commodity ETF. The fund will now have to reduce its positions in those markets to no more than the Federally-mandated maximum speculative position limits. Thus, the CFTC appears on its way to fulfilling what it had said it was going to do in official statements and during the recent public hearings on position limits. Talking the talk has now become walking the walk.

 Bravo to Chairman Gary Gensler, who had this to say in the announcement:

 “I believe that position limits should be consistently applied and vigorously enforced,” CFTC Chairman Gary Gensler said. “Position limits promote market integrity by guarding against concentrated positions.”

 I believe Chairman Gensler “gets it” when it comes to this issue. I believe he will do what he says he will do about position limits. If he will take on Deutsche Bank, a financial powerhouse and no pushover, I believe he will let no one stand above the law. All that remains to be seen is if he will apply the principles he articulates to the short side of the silver market. I hope and believe that he will.

Ted Butler

I think that Mr. Butler is overly optimistic about that outcome. Until now the new CFTC Chairman has still to emit a breath about the elephant in the room, the blatant manipulation occurring in commodities trading, the real and clear crime, i.e. the incredible concentration of short contracts in the silver future market, where just two banks hold almost 80% of all the short positions, where not more than 3-4 banks have the permission to sell (naked) silver that match the whole annual world supply (it’s happened!).

Until now all the noise from him has targeted political sensitive energy and food commodities, with the emphasis exclusively on the long side of the question. So it looks more like an attempt for an indirect and innovative price control than a real will to level the playing field for the commodities futures market.

Therefore I’m not holding my breath: I’ll believe it when I’ll see it!

If I’ll be proved wrong, that will the most bullish event possible for the silver price.


August 19, 2009

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:


August 12, 2009

Since 2003 this buffoon has called a dozen tops for gold (and silver), while preaching deflation since 1994.


August 7, 2009

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:


August 5, 2009

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:


August 3, 2009


Inception Date: Dec 01, 2008   –   Inception Capital: 10,000 $

Net Assets Value (July 31, 2009): 20,082$   (monthly return +16.42%)

Realized gain on Speculative Equity Holdings:   +1,085 $

Current gain on Speculative Equity Holdings:   +1,010 $

Current gain on Core Equity Holdings:   +3,349 $

Current Loss on Protection Hedges: -3,053 $

Net Income Premium:    +7,371 $

Dividends:   320 $

All time return: 10,082 $ (+100.82%)



Inception Date: Dec 01, 2008   –   Inception Capital: 30,000 euro

Net Assets Value (July 31, 2009): 37,325 euro   (monthly return -0.17%)

Cash                                                             35,517

Market value options sold                              (2,844)

Market value options bought                           3,983

Mark to Market Futures                                 669 

All time return: 7,325 euro (+24.42%)