WEEKLY COMMENTARY
March 14, 2006
TED BUTLER INTERVIEW
Cook: At this moment the Exchanged Traded Fund or ETF in silver has not been approved by the SEC. Do you think it will be approved soon?
Butler: I donât think anyone knows when, or if, the ETF will be approved. But the more I think about it, this silver ETF issue is the most important issue in all the years Iâve followed silver.
Cook: Thatâs a pretty powerful statement. Why?
Butler: When Barclays filed the preliminary prospectus last June they did the silver world a great favor. By proposing this ETF, the issue of how much real silver is available for purchase should be resolved.
Cook: How?
Butler: If approved, the money funneled into silver will impact the price to the upside, far more than is widely assumed. My head actually starts to hurt when I think of the impact. And if the SEC rejects the ETF, it wonât be long until people realize that is the clearest confirmation we could get on how little silver is available for purchase. It would validate everything Iâve ever written. I think Barclays was clueless to propose this issue without further thought, but Iâm glad they were so reckless.
Cook: Anything you do not like about the silver ETF?
Butler: Two things. One, as my friend Izzy mentioned, it bothers me a bit that the silver is to be stored in London. Whatâs wrong with the US, which is more transparent? Two, Iâm not sure if Barclays intends to list the serial numbers and weights of each bar that they store. As you know, thatâs an important issue for me. Thereâs no good reason not to get the serial numbers and weights.
Cook: How do they do it with the gold ETFs?
Butler: The big one, GLD from State Street, lists the serial numbers, hallmarks and weights of each gold bar they hold. The Barclays I-Shares version doesnât. Or at least, I canât find such a list. I hope Barclays intends to publish a list of the silver bars they buy and store. If the SEC rejects the ETF, of course, my concerns donât matter.
Cook: Might the current volatility cause the SEC. to disapprove the ETF?
Butler: Well, at a minimum it should give them pause for concern.
Cook: Isnât the current price volatility a consequence of people buying because they think the ETF will be approved?
Butler: Thatâs got to be a good part of the reason. Letâs face it â weâre up more than $3 since the ETF was filed.
Cook: What happens if the ETF gets rejected?
Butler: In the current market structure, we could sell-off sharply until folks assimilate the reason for the rejection. But thatâs just guess work on my part.
Cook: Frankly, if the ETF gets rejected, I think weâre going to take a pretty sharp drop. What should folks do if that happens?
Butler: Thatâs easy. If that occurs, you buy like thereâs no tomorrow. That could be the last great low-risk buy point.
Cook: Do you think the ETF should be rejected by the SEC?
Butler: Part of me wants to see it approved and silver to explode in price, as that would bring immediate profit to everyone who followed my advice on silver.
Cook: Whatâs the other part?
Butler: ETFs that buy physical commodities are dumb from a regulatory and orderly pricing perspective. In the case of silver, it will cause shortages and artificially influence the price. Any regulator who sanctioned that would be crazy.
Cook: What about the gold one?
Butler: Iâve come to believe that the regulators made a very serious mistake by approving the gold ETFs. There is no doubt that the real gold purchased by the ETFs has resulted in the $100 price rise in gold over the past year or so. The regulators should not be sanctioning securities that cause imbalances and significant price moves in commodities.
Cook: As far as I know, youâre the only one who has raised the regulatory angle on these commodity ETFs. Doesnât that bother you?
Butler: It doesnât bother me as much as surprise me. I find it hard to believe that neither the SEC, nor the CFTC, nor any industry official has questioned how these ETFs are an end-run around existing commodity regulation. And thatâs especially true of the gold ETFs which have been trading now for a while. I think everyone overlooked the issue of no limits or reporting of large positions in the commodity ETFs. Thatâs a shock to me.
Cook: Are you saying the authorities never should have allowed the gold ETFs to come into existence?
Butler: Thatâs exactly what Iâm saying. I think there is a chance that someday the regulators will have to rescind, or somehow restrict, the gold ETFs. The absurdity, from a regulatory perspective, of buying a physical commodity for an ETF applies to gold as well.
Cook: Everyone seems convinced the silver ETF is coming and the bullish comments on gold and silver lately seems a bit overheated. Do you agree?
Butler: Yes, on a short term basis, but as you know, I think silver is still extremely undervalued on a long term basis. I get concerned when I see extremes in market sentiment, especially when the market structure, as defined by the dealer/tech fund composition, suggests risk to the downside.
Cook: Doesnât that usually mean a decline could be ahead?
Butler: Usually, but you canât say for sure and you never know when.
Cook: However, youâve been worrying about a decline for a while and it hasnât happened. Some people would say youâve been wrong. Agree?
Butler: Agreed, as much as one can be wrong about avoiding risk in the short term. But wrong in this case must be put into perspective â no one should have disposed of long term silver positions based upon anything Iâve said or written. But itâs true, I have been holding some dry powder for a sell-off that has yet to appear.
Cook: So, are the big dealers who are short so much silver getting hurt with silver at $10.00?
Butler: There is no doubt that the dealers have significant unrealized losses on their open silver short positions, on the order of several hundreds of millions of dollars. These are the largest open losses they have experienced in 25 years.
Cook: Does this mean they have finally been overrun and defeated?
Butler: Perhaps, but I still think it is premature to make that call. Not that it wouldnât warm my heart to see these manipulators get crushed, but we should await more confirmation in the way of closed out losses. One sharp sell-off and they could basically eliminate the damage.
Cook: Letâs say a big dealer is short 50 million ounces. If theyâre shorted 20 million ounces above $10.00 and cover at lower prices, say $9.00 or $9.50. They are making money. This price volatility in silver may be good for them. Is it possible they will never experience a short squeeze that kills them?
Butler: While itâs true that the dealers have done well in recent trading, which reduces their open losses, the only practical way for them to side-step a short squeeze is the way theyâve always done it â by engineering the technical funds into selling at lower prices so that the dealers can buy back as many of their shorts as possible. They canât do it as prices are rising, only falling Thatâs what creates the possibility of a sell-off.
Cook: Engineered by them?
Butler: Yes.