|
Who
Wants to be a Billionaire?
“Like
gold, U.S. dollars have value only to the extent that they are strictly
limited in supply. But the U.S.
government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its
electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as
it wishes at essentially no cost. By
increasing the number of U.S. dollars in circulation, or even by credibly
threatening to do so, the U.S. government can also reduce the value of a
dollar in terms of goods and services.
We conclude that, under a paper-money system, a determined
government can always generate higher spending and hence positive
inflation.
Of course, the U.S.
government is not going to print money and distribute it
willy-nilly……..”
Ben
S. Bernanke, Federal Reserve Board Governor,
November 21, 2002
When
I originally read this two years ago, I had to read it through twice…I
couldn’t believe it. Like many of you readers I saw all this coming.
Look at my Straight
Talk #3: Applying the Paddles to the US Economy from September 29,
2001. When the economy is in trouble, inflating the money supply is the
path-of-least-resistance. You can toss money around and make everything
seem okay - for the short term anyway. Now that George W. Bush has secured
the presidency for the next four years, we all know that once his term
ends, the problems both domestic and international he has faced will no
longer be his responsibility and will be handed on to the next guy.
Democracy is a great thing, but in the U.S. of A., pending elections can
be enormously distracting, and more and more of a president’s term seems
to be consumed by stumping for votes rather than governing.
When
deflation threatens and you don’t respond by massive inflationary
spending, the voters can and will hand you your head. President Grover
Cleveland, faced with the fallout from the Bank Panic of 1893 stuck to his
guns and refused the reinstatement of the mildly inflationary Sherman
Silver Purchase Act. He believed in the sanctity of the Gold Standard,
though he became enormously unpopular for it. The result of the 1894
mid-term election is unprecedented in history: the Democrats lost 113
seats in Congress. In the northeast, the Democratic congressional
contingent was reduced from 88 to 9, and in 24 states the party no longer
had congressional representation at all. (At the Democratic National
Convention in 1896, Williams Jennings Bryan in an about-face would deliver
his famous “Cross of Gold” speech…more about that in a future
Straight Talk). In the Great Depression election of 1932, incumbent
Herbert Hoover was soundly trounced by Franklin Roosevelt, winning the
electoral votes of only 6 states.
When
Bush took office he was given the near impossible task of forestalling the
unraveling of the Greatest Equity Bubble of All Time. It was done by tax
breaks and lowering the Fed Fund rate to almost zilch to spark a housing
boom. Then, with the housing market running away, first as a safe-haven to
the stock market, and soon thereafter as speculator heaven, those good
little (but tapped-out) consumers took out home equity loans and splurged
on SUV’s and continued the party. Meanwhile, Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan
stuck his head in the sand and stated publicly that there was no housing
bubble and that the surge was “due to immigrant purchases”. George was
also fighting a war on two fronts: one domestic and two in Asia. I
remember walking through Immigration at Miami International Airport and
seeing new computer terminals stacked floor-to-ceiling that would collect
information for the new Office of Homeland Security. Call me a cynic, but
it’s easier to inject cash into the economy in the guise of war-spending
than it is to push tax breaks through Congress.
Sure,
you can’t print money and distribute it willy-nilly…..
“By
coordinating with fiscal policy, the Fed could even implement what is
essentially the classic textbook policy of dropping freshly printed money
from a helicopter. In this case, the Fed would monetize government debt
that had been issued to finance a tax cut”.
Evan
F. Koenig Vice-President, Jim Dolmas, Senior Economist, Research
Department, Federal
Reserve Bank of Dallas
May, 2003
Take
a look at the weblink. I love the graphic of the Chinook helicopter!
The
twin elephants in the room that were not discussed in this election
campaign are the trade imbalance and the budget deficit. Neither can be
reduced to a sound-bite discussion or will fit in the 2 minute response
time of the television debates. No candidate wanted to open that tin of
worms, however, foreigners sure understand what’s going on:
Headlines,
Friday, November 5, 2004:
Dollar
Falls to Record Low Against Euro
NEW
YORK (Reuters) - The euro hit a record high against the dollar above
$1.2927 on Friday as the beleaguered U.S. currency weakened across the
board in technically driven trading.
The
dollar's bounce from strong U.S. employment data earlier in the session
proved fleeting, as dealers, concerned about record U.S. trade and budget
deficits, saw an opportunity to sell it lower again.
This
involved buying euros en masse, taking out options barriers around
$1.2900, and then at the previous all-time high of $1.2927.
The
euro climbed above the high of $1.2927 hit on Feb. 18, touching a record
peak around $1.2935, according to Reuters data.
Global
policy-makers have recently appeared fairly tolerant of the dollar's
decline, and their laissez-faire attitude has encouraged investors to
continue selling the U.S. currency. Some Federal Reserve officials
recently signaled that the dollar would have to fall if the U.S. trade gap
remains wide.
Aye,
there’s the rub. The trade imbalance. Could it be possible that the U.S.
is letting the dollar slide to make U.S. exports cheaper? Hmmmmm. It WAS
discussed in that Dallas Fed paper above. Tricky business this. With the
housing market topped out, and the lowest U.S. interest rates since 1958
failing to spark the Greatest Boom of All Time. What does one do next? Add
in one more ingredient to the mix:
“Today,
despite its recent surge, the average price of crude oil in real terms is
still only three-fifths of the price peak of February 1981. Moreover, the
impact of the current surge in oil prices, though noticeable, is likely to
prove less consequential to economic growth and inflation than in the
1970s”.
Chairman
Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve Board
October 15, 2004
How
many times have you heard this apology – “well it’s not really as
bad as all that”. Isn’t it a little bit disingenuous to believe that
higher oil prices are not going to translate into higher prices – for
everything? With an economy already enormously strained by corporate and
personal debt, spending deficits, and trade imbalances, and continuing to
be pummeled by high fuel and commodity prices (steel, for instance), how
many straws does it take to break this camel’s back? Is it any
coincidence that gold is at a 16-year high against the dollar?
Being
a Billionaire is not all it’s cracked up to be: Lessons from History
I
love studying history. Not only do I find it enormously satisfying and
entertaining, but it can also be enormously instructive, for, as Ambrose
Bierce observed.
"There
is nothing new under the Sun, but there are lots of old things we don't
know."



These
two bank notes were issued during the infamous German Weimar
Hyperinflation. The top is dated November 1, 1923. The bottom is dated
November 5, 1923 (perhaps the plates were changed days later to a new
design to instill confidence? It didn’t work!). The coin is a gold 20
German Mark piece from 1902, slightly smaller than a U.S. Quarter. In
1923, this gold coin was worth ten times the value of these two combined
bank notes. That’s right. By the way, 1000 milliarden =
1,000,000,000,000, and so this little 20 Mark coin was equal to
20,000,000,000,000 of the paper Marks. The Mark was tod by the 20th
November, when 12 zeros were arbitrarily lopped off the end and it became
the Rentenmark. On the day that the Mark was extinguished the above notes
together were equal to just US 46¢. If you want to show your children
what inflation is all about, just print this out and show them the
Exhibits A, B and C above. I know that over 95% of planet Earth it would
take me about 5 minutes to convert that 100-year old coin into local
currency for a steak dinner and a nice bottle of wine. The paper money is
only valuable to a collector of arcana like myself.
Here
are some almost-not-to-be-believed extremes of the German Weimar
Inflation:
“Petty
crime, the crime of desperation, was flourishing. Pilfering had of course
been rife since the war, but now it began to occur on a larger, commercial
scale. Metal plaques on national monuments had to be removed for
safe-keeping. The brass bell plates were stolen from the front doors of
the British Embassy in Berlin, part of a systematic campaign unpreventable
by the police even in the Wilhelmstrasse and Unter den Linden. Over most
of Germany the lead was beginning to disappear from roofs. Petrol was
siphoned from the tanks of motor cars. Barter was already a usual form of
exchange; but now commodities such as brass and fuel were becoming the
currency of ordinary purchase and payment. A cinema seat cost a lump of
coal. With a bottle of paraffin one might buy a shirt; with the shirt, the
potatoes needed by one’s family”.
When Money Dies: The Nightmare of the Weimar Collapse
Adam Fergusson
“In
1923, there were engaged on the production of notes for the Reichsbank…1,783
machines…(E)ven with assistance on so vast a scale the Bank was not in a
position to supply the business world with a sufficiency of notes”.
German
Monetary History in the First Half of the Twentieth Century
Robert L. Hetzel
You
see, the money was depreciating so fast against common goods that entire
print runs of notes were insufficient to satisfy demand for even a few
hours.
I
have another little pamphlet that many readers may be familiar with: Fiat
Money Inflation in France: How it Came, What it Brought, and How it Ended,
by Andrew Dickson White. This discusses the currency experiment by the
revolutionaries of the fledgling French Republic in 1790, which beggared
the nation, fostered the Reign of Terror and ultimately brought Napoleon
to power. The notes, known as Assignats were first printed in large
denominations, but ultimately became the sole currency as all coinage was
hoarded away. It took France 40 years to recover from the Assignat
inflation. The numbers sound pretty small by today’s reckoning, but
clearly horrified White, writing in 1912:
“Notwithstanding
the fact that the paper currency issued was the direct obligation of the
State, that much of it was interest bearing, and that all of it was
secured upon the finest real estate of France, and that penalties in the
way of fines, imprisonments, and death were enacted from time to time to
maintain its circulation in value until it reached zero point and
culminated in repudiation. The aggregate of the issues amounting to no
less than the enormous and unthinkable sum of $9,500,000,000, and in the
middle of 1797 when public repudiation took place, there was no less than
$4,200,000,000 in face value of assignats and mandats outstanding; the
loss, as always, falling upon the poor and the ignorant.”
The
people responsible for putting France on the slippery slope of inflation
– soon to mutate into hyperinflation - were clearly no dummies:
“It
would be a mistake to suppose that the National Assembly, which discussed
this matter [introduction of paper money], was composed of mere wild
revolutionaries; no inference could be more wide of the fact. Whatever may
have been the character of the men who legislated for France afterward, no
thoughtful student of history can deny, despite all the arguments and
sneers of reactionary statesmen and historians, that few more keen-sighted
legislative bodies ever met than this first French Constitutional
Assembly. In it were such men as Sieyès, Bailly, Necker, Mirabeau,
Talleyrand, Dupont de Nemours and a multitude of others who, in various
sciences and in the political world, had already shown and were destined
afterwards to show themselves among the strongest and shrewdest men that
Europe has yet seen.”
The
inflating ended at 9 o’clock in the morning, 18th February,
1796, in the Place Vendome of Paris where the presses and paper to print
Assignats were burned and the engraving plates smashed to bits with
hammers in front of thousands of spectators.
When
Bonaparte took the Consulship, at his first cabinet meeting he stated,
“I will pay cash or pay nothing”. (“cash” meant gold)
It
would be incredibly arrogant for any nation state to suppose itself
permanently inoculated from hyperinflation. To do so would be hubris of
the highest order – each time it has happened it began as a
well-intentioned temporary inflating of the currency. Before saying that,
“It couldn’t happen here”, here’s a partial list of countries that
fell prey to hyperinflation in the last century: Hungary, Romania, Russia,
Iraq, Italy, Yugoslavia, France, Germany, China, Vietnam, Mozambique,
Ecuador, Peru, Croatia, Mexico, Venezuela, Turkey, Uruguay, Argentina,
Brazil, Bolivia, Poland, Zaire, Austria, and Indonesia.
Understanding
Drill Assays: Part 1
Pretty
much every week I get shown some assays and asked on the spot if they are
“any good”. Is there a quickie way of telling? Is there a “Drill
Core Assays for Dummies” Handbook?
The
short answer is “No.” It can be very hard to interpret drill hole
results outside of any context – even for a career geologist.
So,
how would an investor who is not a geologist or a geological engineer be
able to tell if results are any good….is it a “buy” signal? A
“sell”? A “hold”? Suppose it is the only information out there?
Such things can be tough to decide, but I’ve boiled it down to a few
guidelines.
Firstly,
something that may sound rather obvious - if you aren’t already fully
comfortable with the metric system, take time to learn it. If you don’t
know what a metre is you’re setting yourself up for disaster. Any
dictionary or encyclopedia should be able to give you conversion tables
for weights and measures. The overwhelming majority of mining and
exploration companies listed on the ASX, JSE, TSX, or AIM give assay
values in grams per tonne and measure drill core lengths in metres.
Continuity
and Geological Models
To
make sense of press releases you have to navigate your way around the
jargon we geologists use. Before any drilling takes place the geologist
should always have an idea of which way the mineralization is trending.
Geologists will often refer to the “strike” of the mineralized rock
(you can think of it as “direction trend”), and the “dip” (which
way the mineralization is tilted or inclined). As important as the metal
content or “grade”; is demonstrating continuity – does the
mineralization extend to depth and along the strike? You can’t “build
tonnage” (incrementally increase the size of the mineralization through
discovery) if you don’t have continuity. So the geologist will try to
hit the buried mineralization with drill holes both along the trend, and
at increasingly deeper levels. Sometimes geologists will use early
information to drill “step out” holes, to test for continuity some
distance away from earlier drill holes. They’re called step-out holes
because they step away or jump some distance from the known to the unknown
(sometimes these step-outs are a very real “leap of faith”!). A
positive result from a step out hole will often make the share price
rapidly move because it’s a way to quickly demonstrate size potential.
If a step-out hole is successful, the geologist might want to track back
in the opposite direction with “in-fill” holes. The geologist will
also want to know how thick the mineralization is, and the best way to do
that is to try to intersect it underground at right angles in drilling. A
perfect right angle intersection will give you a “true thickness”. If
you hit it at any other angle the mineralization will appear wider in the
drill hole than it actually is in nature. This is a function of geometry.
With a couple of drill holes at different inclinations you can use
trigonometry and figure out the thickness (yes, High School Trig is
important…tell your kids!) What any competent geologist will try to
avoid is “drilling down the dip”. You can think of it this way: take
any hardbound book and pretend that the closed book is an ore-bearing
geological unit. Prop up one end so that the cover is inclined. Now take a
pencil and rest the tip on the inclined cover. Orient the pencil so that
it sticks straight up out of the cover at an angle of 90 degrees. That’s
the best angle you should use if you were going to “drill” your book.
A hole at this orientation is going to give you an accurate representation
of the book thickness. However if you drilled through and down the spine
of the book between the covers that’s like drilling down dip and will
give you a false impression of thickness. Sometimes it can be tricky to
figure the dip of mineralization, and it can often take a couple of cracks
at it, drilling from different angles, to begin to sort it out. If a
Company has been drilling narrow high grade veins and suddenly comes up
with an extremely wide vein intersection, always be a bit skeptical and
ask yourself if they may have drilled “down the dip.”
The
geologist should also have a fair idea of a geological model. He may not
have it completely understood at first pass but he or she should have it
down to a few possibilities. This is one of the most important
considerations in whether or not mineralization has the potential to
eventually be “proved up” into an economic orebody. Let’s say that
we’re drilling a gold-bearing quartz vein, which is “shallow” (near
the surface). It might be possible to eventually mine that vein with a
small open pit from surface. If it’s rich enough, it might pay you to
afterwards go underground and sink a shaft to mine it from the subsurface.
But if the vein is narrow and low grade, and only starts a couple of
hundred metres down and not from surface, mining it will probably never be
a paying proposition. Some quartz veins however can be very rich, and will
support economic mining to very great depths. Let’s say you have a
second orebody which is a vuggy silica unit (vuggy silica is very hard and
porous quartz which has formed by replacing pre-existing rock, often by
very acidic hotspring waters). The vuggy silica may be low grade, say 1 or
2 grams/tonne in gold and possibly 50 or even a hundred metres thick.
Vuggy silica is usually a shallow mineralization type, and at those
grades, if there is a considerable thickness, it can be very lucrative to
mine it using open pit methods.
High
grade has always moved markets, but today, in 2004, many mining people
have noticed a trend in North America towards rewarding companies that
come up with high grade numbers and paying less attention to anything
else. My own personal “take” on this is that investors have been
spoiled by the grades that have come out of Goldcorp’s Red Lake Mine.
Many of the investors who were around in the early 1990’s during the
last junior mining boom were permanently shaken out by the triple whammy
of the Bre-X scandal, low gold prices, and expansion of the internet
bubble which siphoned away venture capital (much of which historically
went into junior mining). Over the last several years Bob McEwen has done
a splendid job of promotion, giving the Red Lake Mine a high profile (even
advertising on the radio!) so that many of the new crop of investors
around today may falsely believe that all profitable gold mines have to
have super high grade. The Red Lake mine has so much gold in some areas
that visible gold can actually be mapped underground! You can draw a chalk
line around the visible gold and enclose a sizable area. Proven and
probable resources as of Dec 31, 2003 were 3.178 million tons at a grade
of 1.23 oz/ton [42.17 g/t] gold for 4.939 million contained ounces. I was
underground in 1987 when the mine was called the Dickinson, and was
privileged to see such extreme high grade, which the miners explained to
me they got into only twice or so a year. The miners call such places
“jewel boxes”. I saw a drill bit clogged with gold, and two muckers
horsing around trying to kick a piece of high grade down the drift
(tunnel) with their steel-toed boots that was so heavy with gold it was
reluctant to easily budge. Unless I get invited to go underground there
again I don’t expect to see such high grade gold soon, if ever. I want
to stress again, grades like these are pretty rare and the new discoveries
over the next few years are not going to look like this.
You
have to realize that the majority of highly profitable mining operations
mine much lower average grades, and that many operating mines don’t have
any “bonanza” grades like the example above. In fact, there are a
number of senior mining companies that shy away altogether from high grade
vein deposits. They may represent highly profitable low cost ounces but
they typically represent a small number of contained ounces, say less than
1 million gold ounces – Red Lake is highly unusual. Many of the big
Senior Gold Producers are trying to grow their reserves and want to do it
in one foul swoop through finding a low grade but high tonnage and high
number contained ounces deposit – like Barrick Gold has done with Pascua
Lama (almost 300 million tons containing 16.862 million proven &
probable gold ounces at a grade of 0.057 oz/ton [1.95 g/t], as of December
31, 2003). Exploration success doesn’t come easily and so most Senior
Companies can only grow or even keep their reserve numbers level through
mergers and acquisitions – witness the Harmony – Norilsk - Gold Fields
- IAMGOLD bun fight currently in progress. High grade vein deposits are
also very drill intensive (need to be very intensively [and expensively]
drilled to accurately forecast the grade and tonnage), and the grade in
veins can be erratic and veins themselves difficult to follow underground.
Many Senior Miners want deposits that their engineers can plan for 5, 10
or even 20 years production, and they want to boast to fund managers that
their reserve profile has been boosted by 3 or 5 million ounces. These big
senior producers are looking to grow their ounces and are looking 5 or 10
years outboard. Meridian Gold took it on the chin recently from investors
who didn’t like how much money was being spent on exploration, but if
you’re going to find those low cost ounces, as Meridian has a
track-record of doing – it gets pretty spendy.
Low
grade big tonnage versus high grade low tonnage – both are important and
both potentially highly valuable. As a rule-of-thumb many geos look at
gram-metres as to whether or not a drill result is interesting. Simply
put, this is the grade multiplied by the width. A vein that is 5 metres
wide and averages 60 g/t will represent 300 gram-metres, but so will a
zone that is of lower grade, say 100 metres wide, grading 3 g/t. It of
course would depend on the geological context as to which is the more
interesting drill hole, but any exploration manager would be ecstatic to
receive either result! An intersection of 10 gram-metres may or may not
make it. An intersection of 50 gram-metres is pretty good; of 100 or 200
gram-metres is pretty gosh darn good, and anything higher becomes
exceptional.
Minimum
Mining Widths – Stretching the Interval
Fourteen
years ago I received a spectacular assay of 800 g/t gold for a quartz vein
I examined in Kirkland Lake, Ontario. The Vice-President of the company I
worked for got busy the day the results were in, working out “if we
average the grade out over 2 metres, we get x, and if we average over 3
metres we get y, and if we average it to 5 metres we get z”. Us guys in
the field kind of rolled our eyes at this, because we knew that the vein
was only 28 centimetres wide and that there was no gold in the wallrock
(walls of the vein). He was “stretching the interval”. Now, there’s
nothing wrong with someone “in house” making a few idle calculations.
If you were to average the grade over 3 metres, assuming the wallrocks
contained zero gold, you’d get 75 g/t gold over 3 metres, which is a
pretty respectable number. However you’d be honour bound if not legally
obligated to disclose in a press release that the gold occurs only over
0.28 metres width.
There’s
a lot of gray area here, and there are a couple of things to consider.
Firstly, a minimum mining width. This is the minimum width in which miners
and machinery can safely work and is often legally mandated in a lot of
jurisdictions by government Occupational Health and Safety folks, or by
unions. Narrow mine workings can be difficult to get around which makes
them unsafe in an emergency situation. In the old days, “rat holing”
on the vein was a common practice. In a modern mining scenario it is not
possible now, though it is common in places like South America, Mexico and
China in artesanal mines. The thing to note here is dilution of grade from
wall rock. In a modern mining scenario you have to take the minimum mining
width - guts feathers and all, and can’t selectively mine narrow veins.
Taking the barren wallrock is what is called “dilution”. In the above
scenario it might be justifiable to stretch the interval to a minimum
mining width of say 2 metres or so – but never to 5 metres.
The
general industry practice is that assay intervals have to carry their own
weight. This means that when you are calculating a weighted average amount
of gold over a certain width you shouldn’t be including long sections of
rock that is very low grade or barren in your calculation. It is however
totally appropriate to include small sections in the width if the width
represents one geological unit – say one big wide quartz vein with a
couple of short sections here and there containing no or very low gold
content. In a mining scenario you’d never leave these short sections
behind as waste rock in any case, and you’d take the whole vein. This
sounds a bit complicated and there is considerable latitude given to
mining professionals when reporting grades and widths, but you should also
be aware that this reporting can be open to abuse. When reporting drill
intersections it’s good practice for a company to also report their
highest individual assay alongside. Some companies even publish all the
assays in table format - that way investors get the whole picture.
In
Part 2, I’ll discuss the Nugget Effect, Cutting Assays and Stripping
Ratios – more geo jargon you need to understand.

©
2004 Keith M. Barron Ph.D.
Editorial
Archive
Straight
Talk on Mining is provided for information purposes only. Nothing herein
is to be construed as a recommendation to buy or to sell any particular
security or financial instrument. Nothing herein is to be construed as a
recommendation to engage in any particular investment strategy or trading
strategy.
The
investments discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on
their specific investment objectives, financial situation, and risk
tolerance. Private investors should obtain the advice of a qualified
financial advisor before entering into any transaction.
Straight
Talk on Mining is based on information that is generally available to the
public. The sources used are believed to be reliable, but because the
information and data that they provide are beyond our control, no
representation is made that it is complete or accurate. Staff of Straight
Talk on Mining may or may not be invested in the equities mentioned.
References
to other publications and direct links to external Internet sites are
sometimes given. The inclusion of any publication, organization or
Internet site herein does not imply any endorsement. Straight Talk on
Mining has no control over the content of any Internet site that you may
reach through links that are provided, nor can their truth, accuracy, or
completeness be vouched for.
Straight
Talk on Mining Ltd. is not a financial services company nor is it
affiliated with any financial service company in any jurisdiction.
The
author/publisher, Dr. Keith M. Barron, is not a qualified financial
advisor and is not acting as such in this publication. The accuracy of any
legal term or definitions used herein should be verified with your legal
advisor or the appropriate government agency.
|