Demand for physical gold is soaring so much that it is almost impossible to get hold of right now. And gold production is lower than in 2000. Andrew says all this means it will soon be gold’s time to shine…

More from Investor’s Daily Edge:

Gold dropped from $915 to $859 on Friday. That’s not supposed to happen while the market is crashing. What’s going on?

It’s not that gold has lost its luster. But institutional investors were forced to sell gold on Friday to meet margin calls.

If equity and hard assets continue to lose value anywhere near the rate of last week, margin liquidation will continue. And gold could go down even more.

But make no mistake about it. With the market crashing and dozens of governments printing money like there’s no tomorrow, investors want to be in gold.

Before the sell-off on Friday, the price of gold was up more than 20 percent following Lehman’s collapse.

The demand for physical gold this month has surged to what one trader calls “unprecedented” levels. The US Mint has doubled its gold-coin production but it hasn’t been enough.

Gold dealers have had to turn away customers wanting to buy coins and bars.

But it’s the physical demand (for jewelry) that ultimately decides the price of gold. Jewelry demand accounts for 60 percent of total gold demand and it’s down so far this year.

Will it pick up? The world’s biggest gold consumer is India and Diwali – the festival of lights –begins October 28th. Gold sales usually surge with the approach of this festival.

Then there’s this: Gold production today is lower than it was in 2000.

Gold is rarer than ever. The markets are going to hell. It’s gold’s time.

Source: Has Gold Lost its Luster?

One of the ominous signs that sends me running to the safety of the closet under the stairs and slamming the door shut, where I hide in the dark sobbing and wailing about the inflationary horror that is descending upon us, is contained in the Bloomberg.com headline, “Auction-Rate Collapse Costs Taxpayers $1.65 Billion”.

This looks like bad news for underwriters of auction-rate bonds, whatever in the hell they are, as evidenced by Bloomberg reporting that “By mid-February, Citigroup Inc., the largest underwriter of auction-rate bonds, held $11 billion of them, up from $8.1 billion at the end of 2007.”

As a result, the bank’s “investment professionals” were able to report “a $5.1 billion loss for the quarter ended March 31.”

Even worse, “Thousands of auctions failed, forcing issuers such as the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey to pay interest rates as high as 20 percent. The investors were left with securities they couldn’t sell.”

And if you want a quick course in “determination of market value”, plug the phrase “securities they couldn’t sell” into the famous supply/demand dynamic and see what happens to the price of the securities.

But this is not about any of that fundamental stuff or how prices are falling or how losses are being booked or how tax revenues to governments are falling, but about how I laughed and spilled coffee into my lap when the article said, “Holders with no immediate need to unload their auction debt have benefited from the rise in yields.” What? Hahahaha!

Naturally, I jump up and say, “This embarrassing wet stain on the front of my pants notwithstanding, you are wrong! Hahaha! You Bloomberg guys have made a mistake, and yet when you tell people that you work for the famous Bloomberg, everybody goes ‘Oooh!’ and ‘Ahhh!’ and you get a table right away, but when I say that I work for Mogambo Inter-Galactic News Service, they all go ‘What? Who? Go away, irritating little man!’, and I have to go around to the back door of the restaurant and eat in the alley, mostly with dogs like in the movie Lady and the Tramp, which brings up the point that, in real life, those dogs are a lot uglier and meaner, and for some reason you always end up with spaghetti sauce and greasy crap all over your clothes!”

Instead of applauding and saying, “Well, said, Mogambo!” or, “Hooray for The Mogambo!”, they all ignored me, like they ignore me whenever I go to the bank and I have to stand in line, and while I am there I helpfully try to educate all the other people in line about what idiots they are for trusting this bank, or any bank, because all bankers all greedy, crooked, lying, thieving little rats who are part of the Federal Reserve System that is stealing us blind and ruining our economy with their stupid, and wrong, constant-Keynesian econometric theory crap.

But I seem to have strayed from the subject because I enjoy insulting banks and bankers (which I will gratuitously note sounds like “banks and wankers”, which is so much more descriptive), in that the point is that an increase in a bond’s yield means, mathematically, a decrease in the bond’s market value, as the two move inversely to each other.

So lower prices for bonds is only good if you are buying them, because if you are, indeed, holding them, you will not only suffer a paper capital loss as you helplessly watch the prices of the securities go down as interest rates go up, but you will also suffer the humiliation and career-ending poor performance of investing your money at a yield lower than the guys who bought later than you! Hahahaha! Nice job, investment professionals!

And, in the worst-case scenario, if the holders had margined the purchase of the bonds (putting up a small amount of capital and borrowing the rest), then whoever is so unlucky as to have these “investment professionals” managing their money are Really Getting Screwed (RGS); locking in a low rate, suffering a capital loss and having to pay more money to meet the margin call, too! Hahahaha!

But maybe bondholders are so used to being screwed out of buying power that they don’t even notice anymore. Or they are all taking drugs and don’t realize that they are being screwed out of buying power. Or they are masochists who enjoyed being screwed out of buying power. Or they are, as I have said so many times, just childishly-trusting morons who are so busy trying to raise a family in such a wildly inflationary environment that they don’t notice, but will one day wish they had.

Or maybe they are just stupid, as these are probably the same guys who are buying the stocks of the Dow Jones Industrial Average, which is now sporting the eye-popping, totally unbelievable, totally unprecedented price-to-earnings ratio of 87, which shows real stupidity! Hahahaha!

Now you see the mistake of letting the SAT scores of America’s high school graduates fall. And they are fat, too, so they tell me. Fat and stupid. How wonderful for us.

P.S. To get The Daily Reckoning sent directly to your inbox, sign up for our free email newsletter, or if you prefer to use RSS, subscribe to the Daily Reckoning RSS feed.

Source: Screwed Out of Buying Power

“There is this overwhelming reluctance to admit that we’re simply in a new paradigm for prices and short of a wholesale collapse of the global economy, prices just aren’t going to pull back to a $75 level for oil,” wrote Neal Ryan, of Ryan Oil & Gas Partners.

Crude demand is “outstripping supply at a drastic rate in the global picture, so despite a few weeks of positive reports via the U.S. EIA data, there is a general shift in attitudes.

“A year or two down the road, we’re staring at a supply/demand paradigm that is just ugly, no matter how it gets spun by pundits and policy wonks,” in Ryan’s grim assessment.

“Too little drilling, too many restrictions, too little conservation and alternative energy efforts combined with skyrocketing global demand are going to make things look bleak 1-2 years out on the price curve,” he concluded.

Lord William Rees-Mogg says that this is just the tip of the iceburg… “I do not believe that the world is on the edge of another Great Slump, but the combination of the deflationary effect of the collapse of a widespread housing bubble with the inflationary effect of higher prices for oil and food does present Governments with the most difficult economic problems since the 1970s. It was then called “stagflation,” to reflect stagnant inflation. Both horns of the stagflation dilemma now look sharp and threatening.”

Financial stocks were among the big winners after Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and Switzerland’s UBS AG issued new stock to help bolster their balance sheets. With that upbeat news and a fresh quarter ahead of them, investors appear quite willing to make some bets that the worst of the damage from the nation’s credit struggles has been felt. Moreover, the moves buttressed the view that financial services companies are taking aggressive action to improve their capital bases and stave off the potential of a collapse similar to Bear Stearns Cos. Analysts believe there must be a recovery in bank and brokerage stocks to lead major stock indexes higher. Some of the biggest financial players had their biggest moves of the year Tuesday — Citigroup Inc. shot up 10 percent, JPMorgan Chase & Co. rose 7 percent, and Lehman surged 11 percent.

Read on at Yahoo! Finance.