Gold is a Certainty in Uncertain Times

Commodity

Summary:

Gold-backed cryptocurrency is a cost-effective way to invest in gold.

A robust strategy to help investors weather the storm is to diversify their portfolio and invest in assets that tend to do well in times of economic turbulence, such as gold. Offering a measure of stability, gold has been a reliable store of value for centuries, whose price is not dependent on the economy's health. It also has the advantage of high liquidity, so investors can easily trade it for cash at any time.

Buying and storing gold, however, is a challenge for most investors, especially those with limited resources, to safely keep it in their position. A practical and more straightforward way to get invested in gold is through gold-backed cryptocurrency.

Gold-backed cryptocurrency is a cost-effective way to invest in gold as investors do not have to worry about the costly fees associated with buying and storing the physical asset.

The strategic importance of gold-backed cryptocurrency as a potential game changer in global finance gained strength when some of the world's superpowers hinted at a move to create a new digital reserve currency. As the BRICS countries – Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa – recently revealed plans of collectively developing a new basket-based reserve currency, Russia and China are also reportedly moving ahead with separate plans to create a new gold-backed currency that could undermine the US dollar.

These moves may have raised eyebrows, but from an investor's perspective, they reflect gold-backed currency's massive economic and investment potential.

The Zambesi Gold (ZGD), is a gold-backed cryptocurrency that aims to lead the transition of mining assets into fully backed digital assets. ZGD token has continued to increase in value since its launch date despite the market conditions, a significant milestone that underlines investors' strong confidence in a cryptocurrency backed by gold.

ZGD is developed by Zambesi Gold (Pty) Ltd, a mining company run by professionals with over 40 years of experience in the mining industry. The company's expertise in gold mining and its ability to continuously grow its gold reserves through its mining operations are key advantages that set ZGD apart from other gold-backed cryptocurrencies.

Zambesi Gold reinvests 75 per cent of its profits into the business and in acquiring new gold mines, with the remaining gold profits sent to a vault, increasing the amount of gold each token represents. The company's first gold mine is the 50,000-ton-per-month Middelvlei Mine, which has already started operations last month.

ZGD has a high-earning staking system that delivers steady profits to users, offering up to 30 per cent returns on the staked amount in 24 months. In addition, all tokens received from users withdrawing investments are also removed from circulation through a coin-burning mechanism, which effectively ensures the value of ZGD goes higher as more people use it.

Article Source： zawya

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

You understand and acknowledge that there is a high degree of risk involved in trading. Following any strategies or investment methods may lead to potential losses. The content on the site is provided by our contributors and analysts for information purposes only. You are solely responsible for determining whether any trading assets, securities, strategy, or any other product is suitable for investing based on your own investment objectives and financial situation.

Comments

Add to Favorites

Kevin Du

Cryptocurrency

Insurers are denying or limiting coverage to clients with exposure to bankrupt crypto exchange FTX, leaving digital currency traders and exchanges uninsured for any losses from hacks, theft or lawsuits, several market participants said.

Insurers were already reluctant to underwrite asset and directors and officers (D&O) protection policies for crypto companies because of scant market regulation and the volatile prices of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

Now, the collapse of FTX last month has amplified concerns.

Specialists in the Lloyd's of London and Bermuda insurance markets are requiring more transparency from crypto companies about their exposure to FTX. The insurers are also proposing broad policy exclusions for any claims arising from the company's collapse.

Kyle Nichols, president of broker Hugh Wood Canada Ltd, said insurers were requiring clients to fill out a questionnaire asking whether they invested in FTX, or had assets on the exchange.

Lloyd's of London broker Superscript is giving clients that dealt with FTX a mandatory questionnaire to outline the percentage of their exposure, said Ben Davis, lead for digital assets at Superscript.

"Let's say the client has 40% of their total assets at FTX that they can't access, that is either going to be a decline or we're going to put on an exclusion that limits cover for any claims arising out of their funds held on FTX," he said.

The exclusions denying payout for any claims arising out of the FTX bankruptcy are found in insurance policies that cover the protection of digital assets and for personal liabilities of directors and officers of companies that deal in crypto, five insurance sources told Reuters. A couple of insurers have been pushing for a broad exclusion to policies for anything related to FTX, a broker said.

Exclusions may act as a failsafe for insurers, and will make it even more difficult for companies that are seeking coverage, insurers and brokers said.

Bermuda-based crypto insurer Relm, which previously has provided coverage to entities linked to FTX, takes an even stricter approach.

"If we have to include a crypto exclusion or a regulatory exclusion, we're just not going to offer the coverage," said Relm co-founder Joe Ziolkowski.

D&O Question

Now, one of the most pressing questions is whether insurers will cover D&O policies at other companies that had dealings with FTX, given the problems facing exchange's leadership, Ziolkowski said.

U.S. prosecutors say former FTX Chief Executive Officer Sam Bankman-Fried engaged in a scheme to defraud FTX's customers by misappropriating their deposits to pay for expenses and debts and to make investments on behalf of his crypto hedge fund, Alameda Research LLC.

A lawyer for Bankman-Fried said on Tuesday his client is considering all of his legal options.

D&O policies, which are used to pay legal costs, do not always pay out in cases of fraud.

Insurance sources would not name their clients or potential clients that could be affected by policy changes, citing confidentiality. Crypto firms with financial exposure to FTX include Binance, a crypto exchange, and Genesis, a crypto lender, neither of which responded to e-mails seeking comment.

While the least risky parts of the crypto market, such as companies that own cold wallets storing assets on platforms not connected to the internet, may get cover for up to $1 billion, a D&O insurance policyholder's cover may now be limited to tens of millions of dollars for the rest of the market, Ziolkowski said.

The FTX collapse will also likely lead to a rise in insurance rates, especially in the U.S. D&O market, insurers said. The rates are already high because of the perceived risks and lack of historical data on cryptocurrency insurance losses.

A typical crime bond -- used to protect against losses resulting from a criminal act -- would cost $30,000 to $40,000 per $1 million of coverage for a digital assets trader. That compares with a cost of about $5,000 per $1 million for a traditional securities trader, Hugh Wood Canada's Nichols said.

Source: Reuters

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Comments

Add to Favorites

Alex

Central Bank

Despite the pause consideration the case was weak – expect another hike of 25 in February.

The Reserve Bank Board considered three options in its deliberations at the December Board meeting. The options were: 50 basis point increase in the cash rate; 25 basis point increase; or no increase .

This contrasts with recent meetings when only the 50 basis point and 25 basis point options were considered.

Given consistent rhetoric from the Bank about pausing it would come as no surprise that the Board did consider the pause. Indeed, it came as a bigger surprise that 50 basis points was still on the table.

The case for pausing rested on the theme of placing "further emphasis on the lagged effects of a large policy adjustment to date, and the value in proceeding cautiously in an uncertain environment."

But this argument seemed to be quickly dismissed, noting that the Bank's forecasts in the November SOMP were that, despite further increases in interest rates (forecasts are based on market pricing and analysts forecasts), "inflation was expected to take several years to return to the target range." Most importantly, since the forecasts were released in early November "incoming information had not warranted a reassessment of that broad outlook."

It is also interesting that the Board noted that "members noted that no other central bank had yet paused."

As with the October and November meetings, the case for 25 basis points over 50 basis points relied on the lags associated with policy: "There had already been a significant cumulative increase in interest rates and the full effects of this adjustment would take time to occur."

The impact of the policy changes was also likely to be delayed more than normal due to the predominance of fixed rate mortgages savings buffers; and the strong reopening effect that may extend into the summer holidays.

It was also once again noted that there were benefits in acting consistently.

The argument for 50 basis points was quite robust – inflation is too high in an economy operating with excess demand; some other economies had seen wages pick up strongly, risking entrenched inflation; the inflation mind-set was shifting; wages growth potentially building; and the cash rate is not at a high level historically.

Members concluded that the range of options considered would continue to be discussed at future meetings.

In the final paragraph the Board chose, for the first time in any recent final paragraph, to strongly emphasise the dangers of inflation further than we have seen in the Minutes of earlier meetings, "High inflation damages the economy and makes life more difficult for people" and of course the Board repeats the wording in an earlier paragraph that "The Board expects to increase interest rates further over the period ahead, but it is not on a pre set path." That final qualification is consistent with the signal that the Board will continue to consider the three options going forward.

Despite the fact that the Board considered the "pause" option, these Minutes do not paint a dovish picture of the Board.

Having discussed a pause on multiple occasions in recent RBA communications it would be surprising that the pause option was not raised at the meeting.

But the key is that the current forecasts which have rates rising further are still pointing to a number of years where the inflation rate is outside the range. So unless there has been a change in the data since those November forecasts were released, the Board needs to press on.

The monthly inflation print that came after the November meeting was lower than expected but mainly due to supply side effects and the Board noted that they "needed to be interpreted with caution" while key services inflation was only going to be reported later in the quarter.

The key issue for the RBA is around demand and wages growth. The fear is noted in the "50" discussion, "inflation mind set was shifting… wages growth potentially building."

The Minutes point out a number of very recent developments on wages – "around 35% of firms in liaison had reported wage increases of greater than 5% in October and November"; "liaison reported that labour availability remained a key challenge, although there were tentative signs this had started to ease a little."

Since the Board meeting the November employment report highlighted those prospects: 3.4% unemployment; 107,100 jobs being added in October and November; 0.2% fall in the underemployment rate; record high participation and employment-to-population ratio indicating very tight labour markets.

Tighter labour markets than expected even at the November Board and the November forecasts in the SOMP raise the risk to the Board that the scenario we have seen in other countries could repeat in Australia (see the case for "50").

This risk will be even more of a concern if, as the Board notes, resilience to the slowdown through household savings buffers; high fixed rate exposure from mortgages; and an ongoing reopening effect reflect solid spending momentum in the early months of 2023.

Conclusion

Westpac expects the economy to slow through 2023 with "stagnation" in the second half but does see some momentum extending into 2023.

When the Board comes to consider its options at the next meeting in February it will have the December quarter Inflation Report but will also be observing data for the holiday period that may be holding up better than expected.

Based on the analysis in the Minutes, that will set the scene for hikes in both February and March (December quarter Wages Report available for the March meeting) while the May meeting will also be confronted with uncomfortably high inflation for the March quarter and a central bank that is observing tight labour markets and rising wages pressures.

A hike in May will be appropriate following other central banks, who will already be on hold, and the clear evidence of the economic damage builds – time to pause at the June meeting for the rest of the year.

Source: Westpac Banking

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Comments

Add to Favorites

Thomas

Central Bank

South Korea's central bank said on Tuesday the country's consumer inflation would remain around 5% for some time and then gradually ease, but cautioned that domestic and global factors are raising uncertainty about how fast prices will slow.

"Going forward, uncertainty is high with regard to the oil prices, foreign exchange rates, domestic public utility fares and the pace of economic growth," the Bank of Korea (BOK) said in a twice-yearly inflation report.

The assessment was in line with its views disclosed at BOK Governor Rhee Chang-yong's news conference on Nov. 24 about the policy board's decision that day to raise the benchmark interest rate to the highest in a decade.

On Tuesday, Rhee emphasised the huge amount of uncertainty in predicting future inflation, citing such factors as the war in Ukraine and the magnitude of domestic public utility fare raises widely expected in 2023.

Domestic bond prices, which were already pressured by losses in U.S. bond prices overnight, fell as his comments as a whole failed to provide any indication that the tightening cycle that started late last year would reach its peak any time soon.

"His comments were not surprisingly hawkish but were as a whole fell short of giving any boost to bond investors worried about aggressive U.S. rate increases," said Park Sang-hyun, economist at HI Investment and Securities.

The most popular futures on three-year treasury bonds KTBc1 fell as much as 22 ticks to 103.74 after Rhee's news conference, after having traded at around 103.84.

The central bank's latest inflation projections released last month forecast it will slow to 4.2% in the first half of 2023 from an estimated 5.6% in the second half of 2022, and to further ease to 3.1% in the second half of 2023.

Its medium-term inflation target is around 2%.

Source: CNA

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Comments

Add to Favorites

Devin

Energy

Europe faces a much tougher task to rebuild gas stocks next year compared with this winter, meaning energy bills are likely to stay high and governments could have to implement painful rationing measures they have so far avoided.

Previously dominant, gas supplies from Russia have since late August been greatly reduced, meaning the task of refilling storage will be much harder when levels are depleted by early next year.

The expense of buying gas on the open market rather than through contracts negotiated at favourable prices will also be harder to bear for governments weakened by months of steep energy costs that have driven inflation to multi-decade highs.

This year, the European Union successfully filled reserves to a peak of 96%-full in November to try to ensure sufficient winter supplies.

Countries also managed to restrain use during unusually mild weather but a prolonged cold snap this month has focused minds on the scale of the task ahead.

"Many of the circumstances that allowed EU countries to fill their storage sites ahead of this winter may well not be repeated in 2023," Fatih Birol, Executive Director of Paris-based International Energy Agency (IEA) said last week.

The IEA said Europe could face a shortfall of almost 30 billion cubic metres (bcm) next winter, equivalent to nearly 7% of 2021 demand.

Pipelines Versus LNG

Before Russia invaded Ukraine in February, prompting Western sanctions, Russia provided around 40% of Europe's gas.

Of this, around 65% of Europe's pipeline deliveries came via the Nord Stream pipeline to Germany and the rest through pipelines via Ukraine.

Shipments via Ukraine continue, but are at risk as the war with Russia shows no sign of ending, while gas deliveries through Nord Stream have stopped since the end of August.

Suspected sabotage has since damaged the link, which is not expected to return to service in the near future.

Analysts at Wood Mackenzie forecast up to 25 bcm less Russian gas will reach Europe for the 2023 filling season from April to end September when summer temperatures reduce heating demand.

That means the levels left in storage at the end of this winter will determine the scale of the challenge for the following winter.

Energy Aspects analyst Leon Izbicki expects Europe's stocks to be around 55 bcm, or just over half full by the end of March compared with levels around 84% now.

The European Commission has said these stores must be 90% full by Nov. 1 2023.

Based on an average gas price forecast of 95 euros per megawatt hour (MWh) for 2023, Izbicki said it will cost around 58 billion euros for Europe to meet the target, similar to the filling costs analysts calculated for this year.

Weather And Price Determine Demand

The cost of energy has focused minds on reducing gas consumption, which fell by around a quarter in October and November year-on-year, analysts said, through a wide range of measures such as fuel switching, efficiency, and curtailing production.

"The focus will continue to be on demand-side reductions next year, with the scale of the challenge dependent in part on where stocks sit coming out of winter," Luke Cottell, senior analyst at Timera Energy, said.

German automotive giant Mercedes-Benz for instance said it could cut gas use by up to 50% this year by using more renewable electricity while retailers across Europe have dimmed lights and turned off advertising screens.

A large dent has also come from industrial sectors forced to curb output as high gas prices make production uneconomic with some firms shifting production to regions with cheaper energy.

"We still see the reduction in industrial gas demand owing to lower economic activity as mostly reversible in 2023 if prices drop, but the longer prices stay elevated the more likely it is that businesses will permanently offshore their gas-intensive production," Energy Aspects' Izbicki said.

How much demand can be reduced is heavily dependent on the weather as well as on price.

As temperatures plunged in Europe earlier this month, the German energy regulator, the Federal Network Agency said Europe's largest gas consumer had fallen short of its gas saving targets for the first time.

Fight For Supplies

The obvious way to boost supplies is through liquefied natural gas (LNG).

Countries such as Germany, Poland and the Netherlands built or expanded LNG regasification terminals that receive seaborne cargoes of LNG from around the world, and reheat it to pump into domestic gas networks.

Europe and Britain's LNG import capacity will increase around 25% by the end of 2023 compared with 2021 levels, data compiled by the U.S. Energy Information Administration showed.

But having capacity is no guarantee of supplies.

This year, lower demand and high prices meant Chinese buyers largely shunned the spot LNG market and some cargoes destined for Asian buyers were diverted to Europe.

That may not happen next year, meaning Europe would face fierce competition for LNG that would drive up the cost.

"Asia consumption could shift from a tailwind to Europe to a major headwind for European buying," said Sean Morgan, director at U.S. banking firm Evercore ISI.

Europe's efforts to introduce a cap on gas prices in the European Union could further hamper EU attempts to secure cargoes, countries, such as Germany, which have opposed the plan, say.

Record high prices in Europe, however painful, helped the region to secure record volumes of LNG imports this year.

Benchmark European gas prices hit a peak in August of more than 300 euros/MWh.

Unless Europe can agree on a price cap, most analysts forecast prices will remain elevated, in a 90-200 euros/MWh range in 2023 compared with prices below 20 euros/MWh in 2020.

"Next year will be a constant headache for prices rather than the pain of the being punched in the face, migraine attack we saw this August," Henning Gloystein, a director at consultancy Eurasia, said.

Source: U.S.News

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Comments

Add to Favorites

Damon

Cryptocurrency

I recently saw an article that cited the level of leverage and debt of the world's leading Bitcoin mining companies. Since they are listed companies, it is easy to find their financial statements and prove the obvious: this is a counter-cyclical business that requires a lot of efficiency and professional management.

For those who are still wondering what mining is, let me quickly explain: the term mining makes an analogy to the process of extracting gold and metals, since bitcoin miners are the "producers" of this digital commodity. In practice, mining consists of allocating computing power and electricity to ensure the bitcoin network functions, validating transactions and serving as the backbone of this decentralized system.

Investing in bitcoin mining is different from buying the asset directly. On the one hand, when investing in mining you have constant and predictable cash flow and physical assets that can be liquidated in the event of market stress, making the investment more attractive to more cautious investors accustomed to investing in cash flow generating businesses. On the other hand, besides the risk related to the asset, there are also risks of the operation itself.

Currently, bitcoin is down more than 65% from its November 2021 peak. Moments like this generate apprehension and make the investors ask themselves: is it an opportunity to increase my investments or a risk?

For bitcoin mining operations with structured cash, the moment represents a great opportunity! To quote Warren Buffet: “It’s only when the tide goes out do you learn who was swimming naked.”

The Impact Of Bitcoin Price On Mining

In general, bitcoin miners have their cash flow reduced as the price of bitcoin falls, so at first glance it is counterintuitive that lower prices are beneficial to a mining company.

However, since we are talking about an industry, more important than the market price is the cost of production.

Within the production costs, the biggest cost is the cost of electricity, which is the main input for this data processing activity. Therefore, those who can get a good price for energy and efficiency can remain profitable even in unfavorable market conditions.

Since not all miners can achieve this same level of efficiency, in scenarios like this one many end up having their production cost very close to the market price of the asset, leading them to liquidate their assets and exit the market.

Because of this, as in most commodity markets, this market is also counter-cyclical, and these down times are the best times to expand operations. There is a positive correlation of the price of mining computers with the price of Bitcoin, where the price ends up being adjusted in a greater variation than the asset itself.

While the price of bitcoin fell about 47% from April to August of this year, the price of computers used in mining fell about 60% in the same period.

The Bitcoin Mining Companies

Particularly, I understand the mining industry in much the same way as the network infrastructure (cable) industry of the 1990s, where there were basically three major cycles of expansion and consolidation.

The first cycle was marked by geeks and technology enthusiasts, who started internet businesses and literally cabled and set up the first network infrastructures. This has also happened with bitcoin miners since 2009.

In the second cycle, we had the entry of players interested in maximizing capital quickly, ignoring the importance of efficiency by focusing only on the accelerated expansion of their structures and on short-term results.

In the third cycle, we had the consolidation of the industry, with the entry of players focused on efficiency and long-term vision, encouraging the entry of venture capital and the professionalization of the market. In the United States, the 50 largest cable companies of the late 1990s were consolidated into four by the end of 2010.

Most of today's large mining companies entered the second cycle, with too much focus on the short term and not enough efficiency. This results in businesses that are not very robust and are very vulnerable to times of stress.

During bitcoin's big up cycle between 2020 and 2021, many mining companies took advantage of rising margins to leverage themselves and expand their operations. This is very common in many industries, but in this case in addition to leveraging in dollars, a good portion of the listed miners ended up keeping their cash in bitcoin in an attempt to maximize their results.

According to estimates from Luxor Technologies, estimates indicate that listed mining companies have between $3 and $4 billion in loan agreements used to finance infrastructure expansion and computer purchases.

Produce On The Uptrend, Sell On The Downtrend

Mistakenly, these players did not consider that, as in any commodity producer, if you are able to increase your production capacity, it makes sense to sell the stock you produce and reinvest it, rather than keeping the asset you produce on your balance sheet.

In order to be able to honor these commitments, mining companies began to liquidate their liquid assets first, in this case the bitcoins held on the balance sheet. This move further increased the selling pressure during June and July, pushing prices to new lows.

Basically, the result of the cash management strategy adopted by these mining companies was to mine high and sell low, resulting in further financial losses in addition to the operational losses caused by the bitcoin price declines.

After selling the bitcoin from the balance sheet, the less efficient mining companies will need to sell computers to honor payments and maintain the operation, opening up space for more efficient mining companies to incorporate these assets and operations.

Time To Expand

As with other commodities, bitcoin mining is an anti-cyclical business. As a result, the best time to grow is during periods of low prices, when inefficient miners face problems and exit the market.

At the current moment the equipment is at a great discount and the investments made now will bring returns faster. So, despite the negative news and the last few months of falling prices, this is a moment of great asymmetry, with reduced risk and high potential returns to make investments in bitcoin mining.

We are in a moment of great opportunities and those who invest now will be winners in the long run. In short, for businesses that are well structured and have strategic advantages that ensure efficiency, all the turbulence of this harsh winter points in the direction of a very favorable spring for growth.

This is a guest post by Ruda Pellini. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.

Article Source： CRYPTONEWS

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Comments

Add to Favorites

Samantha Luan

Commodity

Investors sold petroleum for a fifth consecutive week but the pace of selling slowed as the balance of risks began to shift to the upside and beaten-down prices provided a more attractive re-entry point.

Hedge funds and other money managers sold the equivalent of 15 million barrels in the six most important petroleum-related futures and options contracts over the seven days ending on Dec. 13.

Fund managers sold a total of 236 million barrels over five weeks starting on Nov. 8, according to position records published by ICE Futures Europe and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

The combined position had been reduced to 343 million barrels (11th percentile for all weeks since 2013), down from 579 million barrels (47th percentile) five weeks earlier.

The bout of long liquidation in the three weeks from Nov. 8 to Nov. 29, when long positions were slashed by 147 million barrels, has been completed, with longs increasing by 5 million in the last two weeks.

In the most recent week, there were continued sales of Brent (-6 million barrels), U.S. diesel (-7 million) and U.S. gasoline (-5 million) and no change in European gas oil.

For the first time in five weeks, however, there was small buying in NYMEX and ICE WTI (+2 million barrels), marking an important shift in sentiment.

Hedge Fund Oil Sales Slow as Balance of Risks Shifts_1

Hedge Fund Oil Sales Slow as Balance of Risks Shifts_2

Hedge Fund Oil Sales Slow as Balance of Risks Shifts_3

Hedge Fund Oil Sales Slow as Balance of Risks Shifts_4

Hedge Fund Oil Sales Slow as Balance of Risks Shifts_5

Hedge Fund Oil Sales Slow as Balance of Risks Shifts_6

Hedge Fund Oil Sales Slow as Balance of Risks Shifts_7

Hedge Fund Oil Sales Slow as Balance of Risks Shifts_8

Hedge Fund Oil Sales Slow as Balance of Risks Shifts_9

From a fundamental perspective, the outlook for oil prices remains mixed.

Production cuts by OPEC+, sluggish output growth from U.S. shale, and the eventual reopening of China's economy are bullish for oil prices.

But the current business cycle slowdown across North America and Europe plus disruption from China's exit wave of coronavirus infections are bearish in the short term.

From a positioning perspective, however, the balance of risks has clearly tilted towards the upside, especially in crude oil.

The net position in Brent is just 89 million barrels (4th percentile for all weeks since 2013) and bullish long positions outnumber bearish shorts by a ratio of just 1.95:1 (6th percentile).

With positions already so bearish, there is considerable scope for investors to rebuild bullish long positions if and when the news flow becomes more positive or at least less negative, which would likely lift prices in the short term.