Member Info for mattlilly

Sorry don't know who Rob H-S is...maybe I'm being thick...

I remember that very well sipp...

There were over 20 advisers in the room...they all said 'don't sell'...he ignored them...

https://www.bullionbypost.co.uk/gold-news/2019/may/07/worst-deal-uk-history-20-years-brown-sold-britains-gold/

Jezzoo...I apologise but as I've stated, I will call out dangerous rubbish posted on here...

And guess who always fits that bill...

For anyone who continues to read his 'authoritative' posts, remember the warning 'Caveat Emptor'

The sad thing is...as you just implied...I don't have to 'phone a friend' because I've been there seen it done it and got the tee shirt for a total of over 30 years...

You on the other hand....

And it would help if you ACTUALLY read and understood what I post.

The two authorities I quoted in that post were:

The Corporate Finance Institute...the professional body for Corporate Finance in the UK...

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI0djk9Iyh7wIVxe3tCh1tEgHvEAAYASAAEgK2rvD_BwE

Oh and BTW I was Head for Corporate Finance for a leading firm of Chartered Accountants...and

Moodys....which of course you wouldn't know is the Number One Credit Rating Agency in the world...but of course Credit ratings have nothing to do with lending and capital adequacy...

https://www.moodys.com

Oh and BTW I've worked closely with ALL the major Credit Rating Agencies, i.e. Moodys Standard & Pooers and Fitch...

On credit ratings and capital adequacy issues, inter alia...

What you fail to notice is the difference between what I say and what is fact from a website, as evidenced by the quotation marks you failed to spot...

It may not have an immediately discernible effect on the share price but as things move forward, ESG will become an increasingly relevant factor in the market evaluation of Solgold.

Major fund managers are divesting themselves of 'non ESG' companies and pursuing a 100% ESG policy.

ESG has already had a discernible effect on share price performance in general, despite the fact that some journalists are still cynical of it...but when the BBC runs an article saying Local Authority Pension Funds still have £10 billion of shares in fossil fuel companies you know it is having an effect...

I applaud that SOLG has ESG in general and Community specifically front and central and give Nick appropriate credit for that.

Furthermore the appointments of Elodie Grant Goodey and Maria Amparo add hugely to the company's credibility...

At a time of real challenge, as BHP is divesting all its coal mining assets, the Alpala Committee is building 'green' processes into the proposed Alpala project.

I look forward to further developments as Solgold seeks to be a 'major miner' because in ESG terms they are already acting and taking like one...

AIMO as usual...

Well said sipptrader!

You absolute fool...

"Of course the amount of money savers have in accounts of one form or other, adds to a banks liquidity, and is used in calculating it's level of lending."

I was CEO of a Major Building Society...this was my CORE business...

I was also Treasurer of a major Financial Services company managing £4.5 Billion of LIQUIDITY day after day, including trading Gilts abank and commercial paper

The biggest single Gilt swap I ever did was £1.6 BILLION in one transaction...

I prepared a £860 million stock market flotation of a Building Society, including working with the Nomad, and Citibank, Goldman Sachs and J P Morgan

I pioneered securitisation for Building Societies and the use of Derivatives for Balance Sheet management...

I've written hundreds of articles on this stuff...

But I bow to your superior knowledge as a 'Trainee Actuary'...

Do you actually realise how stupid you are with your increasingly desperate posts...

No I'm not arguing about commercial banks sipp...it is the "Trading banks" and manipulating banks that control the US gold and silver futures markets that will have to replace paper gold with physical gold or get out of the game...

THATS where the price effect is, but because he doesn't know what he is talking about, Quday is citing and posting outstate stuff about Basel that has nothing to do with the paradigm shift about to take place with gold...

And ironically,if it happens, it should HELP Solgold...doesn't he get that...? Especially as he is citing the PEA as being out of date at $1300 gold...

Bonkers!

This is hysterical...

"the paper stuff, is asset backed"

"A precious metals futures contract is a legally binding agreement for delivery of gold or silver at an agreed-upon price in the future. A futures exchange standardizes the contracts as to the quantity, quality, time, and place of delivery. Only the price is variable.

Hedgers use these contracts as a way to manage price risk on an expected purchase or sale of the physical metal. Futures also provide speculators with an opportunity to participate in the markets without any physical backing."

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/optioninvestor/06/goldsilverfutures.asp

"

At last a correct statement sipptrader...breath of fresh air...

Why does everyone argue with his opinions...just keep checking and posting the facts as I am...

He desperately picks up on an incomplete element of something I posted verbatim...

Do you have the first idea how stupid this statement is?

"It will be the paper money held by savers ETC that will provide the Capital tier 1 resources"

First, gold is NOT a Tier 1 Capital item...it is a Tier 1 asset...

Second, 'Paper Gold' has to be discounted by 50% as a Basel Asset...Physical gold is doscounted 0% so even with the mark to market risk it is immeasurably more attractive...

Oh and BTW...implicitly you are trying to dissuade people from buying physical gold or gold mining shares with your dumb statements...

Sorry sipptrader...you are absolutely right, but as one who has managed assets that are marked to market and prepared Accounts to Basel 1 and 2 standards, why wouldn't you want to buy physical gold?

yes you have to mark to market, but if the price goes up that INCREASES your Tier 1 Assets...furthermore, while gold was in Tier 2 it had to be reduced by 50% and a qualifying asset...wouldn't you rather risk marking gold to market down by a smaller amount than 50%...when did the price of gold last fall 50% in one accounting year...

And if you and Quady are right, why have banks and especially the big manipulators been moving physical gold through the LBMA to get round the fact that COMEX is only backed by 2% gold and physical gold is in increasing shortage to deliver in the US...

The price to buy retail gold is $71 higher than the price for 'paper' gold...

"an investor can expect to pay a premium of $71 over the gold price to buy the one-ounce American Gold Eagle..."

https://fisherpreciousmetals.com/resources/gold-articles/premiums-on-gold-coins-2/

THIS is the core evidence of manipulation of the Paper Gold market an d why it will substantially migrate to Shanghai after June...

The live price to buy secondhand gold bars in London is £1282/ounce...that's $1773 compared to the live price of $1687...
https://www.gold.co.uk/gold-bars/1-ounce-gold-bars/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIvJC5uICh7wIVnIBQBh1ZWQWcEAAYASABEgL3VPD_BwE

Currently, paper gold is not a 1st tier asset. Only fully allocated physical bullion that has no counterparty risk attached that qualifies as a first-tier asset.

The new rules will require a provable 1:1 ratio of fully allocated gold reserves, with no counterparty risk. Under Basel III rules, every central bank will be able to revalue its physical reserves higher, from a current 50% haircut into a fully cash exchangeable asset.

Since 1944, there's only been one tier 1 asset, and that has been United States Treasuries or fully funded dollar deposits. Gold was considered a tier 3 asset where only 50% of its value was allowed to be calculated on a balance sheet. Therefore, there would be four reasons that central banks would be de-incentivized to own gold. It wouldn't pay interest, costs money to store, it was unpredictable in its movements, but the tier 3 status meant that a 50% denigration on the balance sheet would limit a central bank's ability to sell bonds or transact international business.

So the Bank of International Settlements, which is the central bankers' central bank in Basel, Switzerland, reclassified gold in April of 2019, as the only other tier 1 asset in the world next to U.S. dollars in Treasuries.

Basel III (and Basel II) divides bank assets into three risk categories (credit, market and liquidity risk) and weights its risk depending on its attributes. Gold is “zero percent risk-weighted” in terms of credit risk. This is a huge upgrade for the metal.

And from one of the acknowledged global experts in gold and precious metals...Eric Sprott...

"If the Basel Committee decides to grant gold a favourable liquidity profile under its proposed Basel III framework, it will open the door for gold to compete with cash and government bonds on bank balance sheets – and provide banks with an asset that actually has the chance to appreciate. Given that US Treasury bonds pay little to no yield today, if offered the choice between the “liquidity trifecta” of cash, government bonds or gold to meet Basel III liquidity requirements, why wouldn’t a bank choose gold? From a purely ‘opportunity cost’ perspective, it makes much more sense for a bank to improve its balance sheet liquidity profile through the addition of gold than it does by holding more cash or government bonds."

Apologies...fat thumbs...

"Or instead you could either filter him or move to adorn instead where he is absent...

So why don't I alter him?"

Should say

"Or instead you could either filter him or move to ADVFN instead where he is absent...

So why don't I filter him?"

Don't bother ohwhatanight...he doesn't believe it and therefore he will shout down your arguments while providing no actual or factual information to support it...

What seriously worries me about Quady is that he poses as an authority all the time...

He vehemently attacks others' reasoned statements and arguments without providing his own factual validation...

And because people believe him, what worries me is that people may make investment decisions as a result...

He is not a banker, treasurer, chartered accountant, corporate finance expert; he has never served on a corporate Board of Directors, has never been a CEO, has never worked at a senior executive even in quoted companies...

But he posts statements that come across as facts and virtually never says "In my opinion" or similar.

It is clear from responses that some people believe and/or follow what he says.

When he is called out he either attacks the person rather than the argument, fires back stuff which is often rubbish and when this is shown up, changes the subject, like on Friday when he suddenly change the subject to EVs...

By all means believe him if you want to, or you can read the informed factual posts of others.

Or instead you could either filter him or move to adorn instead where he is absent...

So why don't I alter him?

Because you have to stand up to bullies, call them out and correct them to safeguard the interests of those who don't have the time to do the necessary research or who take as gospel what some apparent 'experts' say...

Remember he is an expert on nothing and not even actuarial work where he admits he was only a traineee

But I find him both sad and amusing becuassde like Trump, he truly believes some of the rubbish he posts...

I don't need to...

You've never posted anything to support your statements about Basel 3, so here goes, starting with the Number One Rating Agency in the world:

"The most recent iteration of Basel regulation, Basel III, thus introduced liquidity ratios. With this enhancement, the BCBS’ objective is to ensure that banks hold a sufficient amount of assets that can be easily and quickly converted to cash to meet liabilities over both short- and longer-term periods.

At the individual firm level, Basel III seeks to improve the quality of capital that banks hold and make definitions of types of capital more transparent.

https://www.moodysanalytics.com/-/media/whitepaper/2011/11-01-03-regulation-guide-introduction.pdf

"The Basel III accord raised the minimum capital requirements for banks from 2% in Basel II to 4.5% of common equity, as a percentage of the bank’s risk-weighted assets. There is also an additional 2.5% buffer capital requirement that brings the total minimum requirement to 7%. Banks can use the buffer when faced with financial stress, but doing so can lead to even more financial constraints when paying dividends."

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/finance/basel-iii/

While the value of gold may fluctuate, $1 of gold is $1...

For banks and similar institutions that trade in or hold gold roiutinely, the attraction is that there no longer has to be a 50% reduction in the value of PHYSICAL gold for BIS purposes...so there is every incentive to switch from PAPER gold (COMEX) to PHYSICAL Gold...

For those that don't hold gold routinely it makes little difference...

However...for the five banks manipulation gold it makes a huge difference and I believe they are shorting paper gold while secretly buying physical gold...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2019/05/20/yes-gold-is-being-manipulated-but-to-what-extent/

Agreed Max

50 day average daily volume is 5.23 million shares...thats £1.15 million...

We've had much higher volume since Nick was unseated...7.7m one January 28 and 39.5m on Feb 5...

But its hardly surprising given the 'shock and awe' buildup and the disappointments since...

We need a measured flow of solid Regional Exploration news...I'm sure the Board is on it...

But ironically we should be grateful ATMO because the relatively low volume of the last fortnight is a sign the SP has settled...