--- Begin Message ---
All That Glitters Is Not Gold
By Kelly Patricia O'Meara
Insight Magazine
March 4, 2002, edition
Posted February 8, 2002
http://www.insightmag.com/media/paper441/template/templatemedia/subscr
iption.html

Even though Enron employees and the company's 
accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, have destroyed 
mountains of documents, enough information 
remains in the ruins of the nation's largest corporate 
bankruptcy to provide a clear picture of what happened 
to wreck what once was the seventh-largest U.S. 
corporation.

Obfuscation, secrecy, and accounting tricks appear 
to have catapulted the Houston-based trader of oil 
and gas to the top of the Fortune 100, only to be 
brought down by the same corporate chicanery. 
Meanwhile, Wall Street analysts and the federal 
government's top bean counters struggle to 
convince the nation that the Enron crash is an 
isolated case, not in the least reflective of how 
business is done in corporate America. 

But there are many in the world of high finance 
who aren't buying the official line and warn that 
Enron is just the first to fall from a shaky house 
of cards.

Many analysts believe that this problem is 
nowhere more evident than at the nation's bullion 
banks, and particularly at the House of Morgan 
(J.P. Morgan Chase). One of the world's leading 
banking institutions and a major international 
bullion bank, Morgan Chase has received heavy 
media attention in recent weeks both for its 
financial relationships with bankrupts Enron and 
Global Crossing Ltd. as well as the financial 
collapse of Argentina.

It is no secret that Morgan Chase was one of 
Enron's biggest lenders, reportedly losing at 
least $600 million and, perhaps, billions. The 
banking giant's stock has gone south, and 
management has been called before its 
shareholders to explain substantial investments 
in highly speculative derivatives — hidden 
speculation of the sort that overheated and 
blew up on Enron.

In recent years Morgan Chase has invested 
much of its capital in derivatives, including 
gold and interest-rate derivatives, about which 
very little information is provided to 
shareholders. Among the information that has 
been made available, however, is that as of 
June 2000, J.P. Morgan reported nearly $30 
billion of gold derivatives and Chase Manhattan 
Corp., although merged with J.P. Morgan, still 
reported separately in 2000 that it had $35 
billion in gold derivatives. Analysts agree that 
the derivatives have exploded at this bank and 
that both positions are enormous relative to the 
capital of the bank and the size of the gold 
market.

It gets worse. J.P. Morgan's total derivatives 
position reportedly now stands at nearly $29 
trillion, or three times the U.S. annual gross 
domestic product.

Wall Street insiders speculate that if the gold 
market were to rise, Morgan Chase could be in 
serious financial difficulty because of its "short 
positions" in gold. In other words, if the price of 
gold were to increase substantially, Morgan 
Chase and other bullion banks that are highly 
leveraged in gold would have trouble covering 
their liabilities. One financial analyst, who 
asked not to be identified, explained the 
situation this way: "Gold is borrowed by Morgan 
Chase from the Bank of England at 1 percent 
interest and then Morgan Chase sells the gold 
on the open market, then reinvests the proceeds 
into interest-bearing vehicles at maybe 6 percent. 
At some point, though, Morgan Chase must return 
the borrowed gold to the Bank of England, and if 
the price of gold were significantly to increase 
during any point in this process, it would make 
it prohibitive and potentially ruinous to repay the 
gold."

Bill Murphy, chairman of the Gold Anti-Trust 
Action Committee, a nonprofit organization that 
researches and studies what he calls the "gold 
cartel" (J.P. Morgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, 
Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Bank for International
Settlements (BIS), the U.S. Treasury, and the 
Federal Reserve), and owner of 
www.LeMetropoleCafe.com, tells Insight that 
"Morgan Chase and other bullion banks are 
another Enron waiting to happen." Murphy 
says, "Enron occurred because the nature of 
their business was obscured, there was no 
oversight and someone was cooking the books. 
Enron was deceiving everyone about their 
business operations — and the same thing is 
happening with the gold and bullion banks."

According to Murphy, "The price of gold always 
has been a barometer used by many to determine 
the financial health of the United States. A steady 
gold price usually is associated by the public and 
economic analysts as an indication or a reflection 
of the stability of the financial system. Steady gold; 
steady dollar. Enron structured a financial system 
that put the company at risk and eventually took it 
down. The same structure now exists at Morgan 
Chase with their own interest-rate/gold-derivatives 
position. There is very little information available 
about its position in the gold market and, as with 
the case of Enron, it could easily bring them down."

In December 2000, attorney Reginald H. Howe, a 
private investor and proprietor of the Website 
www.goldensextant.com, which reports on gold, 
filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Boston. 
Named as defendants were J.P. Morgan & Co., 
Chase Manhattan Corp., Citigroup Inc., Goldman 
Sachs Group Inc., Deutsche Bank, Lawrence 
Summers (former secretary of the Treasury), 
William McDonough (president of the Federal 
Reserve Bank of New York), Alan Greenspan 
(chairman of the Board of Governors of the 
Federal Reserve System), and the BIS.

Howe's claim contends that the price of gold 
has been manipulated since 1994 "by conspiracy 
of public officials and major bullion banks, with 
three objectives: 1) to prevent rising gold prices 
from sounding a warning on U.S. inflation; 2) to 
prevent rising gold prices from signaling weakness 
in the international value of the dollar; and 
3) to prevent banks and others who have funded 
themselves through borrowing gold at low 
interest rates and are thus short physical gold 
from suffering huge losses as a consequence 
of rising gold prices."

While all the defendants flatly deny participation 
in such a scheme, Howe's case is being heard. 
Howe tells Insight he has provided the court with 
very compelling evidence to support his claim, 
including sworn testimony by Greenspan before 
the House Banking Committee in July 1998. 
Greenspan assured the committee, "Nor can 
private counterparties restrict supply of gold, 
another commodity whose derivatives are often 
traded over the counter, where central banks 
stand ready to lease gold in increasing quantities 
should the price rise." Howe and other "gold 
bugs" cite this as a virtual public announcement 
"that the price of gold had been and would 
continue to be controlled if necessary."

According to Howe, "There is a great deal of 
evidence, but this is a very complicated issue. 
The key, though, is the short position of the 
banks and their gold derivatives. The central 
banks have 'leased' gold for low returns to the 
bullion banks for the purpose of keeping the 
price of gold low. Greenspan's remarks in 1998 
explain how the price of gold has been 
suppressed at times when it looked like the 
price of gold was increasing."

Furthermore, Howe's complaint also cites 
remarks made privately by Edward George, 
governor of the Bank of England and a 
director of the BIS, to Nicholas J. Morrell, 
chief executive of Lonmin Plc: "We looked 
into the abyss if the gold price rose further. 
A further rise would have taken down one or 
several trading houses, which might have 
taken down all the rest in their wake. Therefore, 
at any price, at any cost, the central banks 
had to quell the gold price, manage it. It was 
very difficult to get the gold price under control, 
but we have now succeeded. The U.S. Fed was 
very active in getting the gold price down. So 
was the U.K. [United Kingdom]."

Whether the Fed and others in the alleged "gold 
cartel" have conspired to suppress the price of 
gold may, in the end, be secondary to the 
growing need for financial transparency. Wall 
Street insiders agree that as long as regulators, 
analysts, accountants, and politicians can be 
lobbied and "corrupted" to permit special 
privileges, there will be more Enron-size failures. 
Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman 
Harvey L. Pitt, well aware of the seriousness of 
these problems, recently testified before the 
House Financial Services Committee that "it is 
my hope there are not other Enrons out there, 
but I'm not willing to rely on hope."

Robert Maltbie, chief executive officer of 
www.stockjock.com and an independent analyst, 
long has followed Morgan Chase. He tells Insight 
that "there are a lot of things going on in these 
companies, but we don't know for sure because 
much of what they're doing is off the balance 
sheet. The market is scared and crying out to 
see what's under the hood. Like Enron, much of 
what the banks are doing is off the balance sheet, 
and it's a time bomb ticking as we speak." 

Just what would happen if a bank the size of 
Morgan Chase were unable to meet its financial 
obligations? "It's tough to go there," Maltbie says, 
"because it could shake the financial markets to 
the core."

-------------------------------------------------

Kelly Patricia O'Meara is an investigative reporter 
for Insight.



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
<FONT COLOR="#000099">Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck
Monitoring Service trial
</FONT><A HREF="http://us.click.yahoo.com/ACHqaB/bQ8CAA/ySSFAA/WfTolB/TM";><B>Click 
Here!</B></A>
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 


--- End Message ---

Reply via email to