"the probelm has nothing to do with big planes, it is getting it to the plane." I really think the USA would have enough fork lifts and BIG (tank transporter) trucks to get the bars anywhere they like. They have a bit of a reputation for tackling logistics problems, and 1000 tons of anything is NOTHING to them. The US Army etc has been doing that for 100s of years. Like in the ACW maybe? And in fact they could take the bars downstairs one at a time if they so decide. Not very efficient, but they could do it! Security is no problem just surround the convoy with 100+ men with M16s etc should do it. No need to read your works, IMO a waste of time. OC
SS The Yanks excel at logistics, they always have, and never failed yet I believe. They throw enough men and material, and money, and even blood at the problem and solve it! Having a small amount of experience in moving stuff in the OZ Army, I know there is little that cannot be moved, if the need is great enough. It can be done TODAY if needs be! I spent 2 days once moving 5.5" ammo from A to B when ordered to! They threw enough men and trucks to do the job! 1000 tons of gold? No worries. CAN'T is not in the American vocab! WON'T is! OC
No don't read my post OC because then you wouldn't have to admit you are wrong. Anyone here who has read it can see you are making a fool of yourself - the issue has nothing to do with how many or size of forklifts. Just keep digging a hole
BS, "the issue has nothing to do with how many or size of forklifts." "the probelm has nothing to do with big planes, it is getting it to the plane." Could you please just tell me which one of YOUR quotes you wish me to work with to answer your invalid claims? As I have pointed out the Yanks can solve ANY logistical problem with sheer force of effort and equipment. They have done that countless times. Your posts and claims etc are not worth responding to! OC
"No don't read my post OC because then you wouldn't have to admit you are wrong. Anyone here who has read it can see you are making a fool of yourself - the issue has nothing to do with how many or size of forklifts. Just keep digging a hole" And try to refrain from the childish and smart arsed remarks, they only weaken your case, you may know a lot about gold, but you know nothing of logistics. OC
meh. the 5 tons is probably just a test run of their procedures. If they only manage 5 tons this year then there's something to talk about.
For clarity, 5 metric tonnes of gold = 0.25 m3, which in the scheme of things is dimensionally quite small. Essentially a cube of 63 cm x 63 cm x 63 cm. Can someone check my calculations?
Yes Phiber, maybe I do know it all about VAULTS given I work in a mint. The issue is more to do with the vault than the logisitics. Unless you will watch the NY Fed video I can't have a conversation about it. FYI vaults are specifically designed to make it hard to get metal out to prevent and slow down crooks. When you have space constrained area where you will have problems even getting a forklift in, a vault door less than 1.5m wide, tens of thousands of bar loose stacked that each need to be checked off etc etc throwing men and machines at it doesn't make a difference. I give up moving ammo tins in the army is the same as gold in a vault.
Would be nice if gold came in such little cubes, but it is packed as 1 tonne as 80 x 400oz bars on a pallet approx 1.2m wide height depending on how they are stacked.
But the failure of the USA to deliver German gold is very suspicious, and claiming it isn't with a self reference doesn't really help. Bron's blog post begins by explaining that the Bundesbanke wouldn't bring all the gold "home" in one or more large shipments to avoid the appearance of urgency so as not to startle the market or undermine the trust in the Central Bank club (cartel?) controlling world currencies. Which is a sensible observation, as it is reasonable to expect the Central Banks to well consider the impacts on confidence in their regime, as it relies almost completely on the preservation of confidence. So, their action to repatriate the gold over 7 years is reasonably explained. However, why would they then startle the market and undermine confidence in the omnipotence of the Central Banks by not receiving and delivering as per expectation? This just leads to further suspicion, and achieves what they tried so hard to avoid. And given they wanted to avoid this very speculation we are engaged in, one can reasonably conclude that something isn't right. The logistical issues of rapid and large scale transportation of their gold out of New York is also considered in Bron's blog post and are really quiet reasonable as well, if considering a rapid and large scale repatriation effort. But we already are informed that it was their intention to avoid this scenario, so the Forbe's magazine die-hard reference is unnecessary, except to presumably illustrate the stupidity of the movie watching masses expecting a massive airlift of gold out of New York. So, without massive airlifts or Die Hard scenarios, the question is: How then should a Central Bank, wary of unsettling the public, ensure their gold is delivered on time with the minimum of fuss? Given the Perth Mint transports between 300 to 400 tonnes of gold about the world annually without the need of Bruce Willis, it is obvious that it is possible to do so, while avoiding the logistic issues and achieving objectives. In fact, it could be achieved with 11 (x10.9kg) bars a day. If the large scale is impractical, then surely the omnipotent bankers would consider the small scale to ensure they didn't unsettle a public already suspicious of the gold position of the USA, wouldn't you think? The fact that the Bundesbanke received only 5 tonnes instead of the necessary annual delivery of 42 tonnes from New York under these conditions should be expected to raise the interest of an already suspicious public. So, either they wanted people to be questioning their confidence in the bankers and the significance of their rehypothication of sovereign gold reserves, or they didn't. If they didn't, as Bron posits in his blog post, then it is completely reasonable to assume that there was or still is a significant problem with the position of gold reserves stored in the USA, for no other reason than people are concerned and asking the questions that the Bundesbanke so desperately wanted to avoid. Of course, when you add in all the other reasons to suspect problems exist, then it should be completely understandable why some people are convinced that this is a real default.
I work at a sea freight depot and am responsible for cataloging everything in and out, ~200t of freight a day in and about the same out. We've had mint stamped pallets delivered for export, no special treatment, certainly not a logistical nightmare (cannot speak for the forwarder though). - Starts with an interim with a vague item description from the forwarder - Mint stamped pallets delivered on a semi - Unmarked, black stretch-wrapped pallets packed in a 20GP - Sent to the wharf on a last day timeslot. bada bing, bada boom, done. Bet the forwarders insurance bill sucks though Certainly isn't gold, but the fact is, logistically, it isn't hard to move metal - I watch it happen. to minimize attention you could run it in to the wharf on a 40 degree day, the pansy's literally shut shop completely when it gets too hot for them! Obviously the US government could just sort that out if they wanted to without a need to wait. I just think if they really wanted to move the gold they'd find a way. Get the pallets ready, run the pallets into the container as it's on the waiting truck, armored escort to a waiting ship. rinse and repeat. Just upscale the the current transport operation.
Perhaps all those "investors" with certificates showing they are proud owners of a chunk of a serialised bar have not been informed that the bar(s) has/have been sold many times over ? Now that the original owner wants his bars returned, the Fed is scrambling around with new IOUs and other delaying tactics before letting the bars leave the vault ?
The London Market moves more gold in a morning than they did last year.[1] It's not logistics. What's interesting to me is the apparent nonchalance shown by the Bundesbank. Maybe they want the gold but don't want the whole house of cards to come down by showing the world it isn't there? [1] http://www.lbma.org.uk/pages/index.cfm?page_id=50&title=clearing_-_statistical_table In November last year, for example, 24.2 million ounces were transferred through the LBMA. I calculate that averages about 15 tons per working day. I accept not all this metal actually moves relative to the earth, mind.
JB3, "What's interesting to me is the apparent nonchalance shown by the Bundesbank. Maybe they want the gold but don't want the whole house of cards to come down by showing the world it isn't there?" Of course! To declare a US default would trigger SHTF day right there. OC
