Current Volatility in PMs

[SpacePete]

True... once price started running. But any participant "contributes" once price breaks and is running.
As far as normal volatility in normal trading ranges are concerned, they have a stabilising effect.

As I said, it all works well until it doesn't.

When everything is normal, everything is fine. Then, when things are perturbed, the amplification effect kicks in.

Agree.
As for recent volatility... that doesn't fit into the aforementioned scenario.

Not yet. The moves haven't been large enough and there has been no runaway move in a single direction. Complexity theory 101: "... an arbitrarily small perturbation of the current trajectory may lead to significantly different future behavior."

 

[Miloman]

Nah, don't need to take a shot, I gave my reasons and logic.
Your response says it all:

"...no real evidence for that argument"
"...you must be joking and living in a delusion."
Translation: "I don't really know, but I believe.... with near cetaintly"

Same old vague lines the permabulls use.

Smart move. But pointing to colorful quotes in a rather poor attempt to discredit is funny.

Markets are more likely rigged just like every other market they've been found guilty in and allowed to continue. Arranging the deck chair and taking turns is part of the same game.

It's an open secret when the rabbit wants something to be know in the market.

But if you want to continue to play the apologist, by all means just don't expect not to have opposition.

Yeah... OK?
But, while ever you use non-committal assumptions, hypothetical clichs, and baseless beliefs, you are discrediting yourself, and there is nothing rational to discuss.
Guess we will leave it there?

Not a chance.

Far from baseless. It's called deductive reasoning. Problem is your pushing an agenda.

Banks are known for rigging markets, question is why would you assume the PM markets would be any different?

(Also suggest you get off the drugs before answering the question).

EDIT:
Throw into the mix that they get to create fiat currency and have virtually exclusive rights to do so.

Here have some George... maybe some detox via comedy.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsL6mKxtOlQ[/youtube]

 

[wrcmad]

Smart move. But pointing to colorful quotes in a rather poor attempt to discredit is funny.

Markets are more likely rigged just like every other market they've been found guilty in and allowed to continue. Arranging the deck chair and taking turns is part of the same game.

It's an open secret when the rabbit wants something to be know in the market.

But if you want to continue to play the apologist, by all means just don't expect not to have opposition.

Yeah... OK?
But, while ever you use non-committal assumptions, hypothetical clichs, and baseless beliefs, you are discrediting yourself, and there is nothing rational to discuss.
Guess we will leave it there?

Problem is your pushing an agenda.

Nope.
Wrong assumption.
I just have a different opinion to you, based on what I see, rather than what I hear.

Banks are known for rigging markets, question is why would you assume the PM markets would be any different?

Why would banks want to rig PM markets?

(Also suggest you get off the drugs before answering the question).

Yep.
Classy.
Have no rational argument... resort to false personal accusations. You fit well with the pumpers.

 

[trew]

If there is now increased trading due to increased participation and more fast "algos", then logic says that should stabilise price, not make it more volatile, as they are all competing for the same spread, and competing against each other.

This study examines the effect of high-frequency trading on stock price volatility and price discovery. I find that high-frequency trading is positively correlated with stock price volatility ... The positive correlation is also stronger during periods of high market uncertainty

http://mitsloan.mit.edu/groups/template/pdf/Zhang.pdf


perhaps there is also the logic that if all the algos are programmed to hunt and exploit the same trading patterns then they will amplify those patterns

 

[wrcmad]

If there is now increased trading due to increased participation and more fast "algos", then logic says that should stabilise price, not make it more volatile, as they are all competing for the same spread, and competing against each other.

This study examines the effect of high-frequency trading on stock price volatility and price discovery. I find that high-frequency trading is positively correlated with stock price volatility ... The positive correlation is also stronger during periods of high market uncertainty

http://mitsloan.mit.edu/groups/template/pdf/Zhang.pdf


perhaps there is also the logic that if all the algos are programmed to hunt and exploit the same trading patterns then they will amplify those patterns

Yup.

 

[systematic]

Banks are known for rigging markets, question is why would you assume the PM markets would be any different?

Why would banks want to rig PM markets?

Why???? .... so they can buy PMs cheap ... central banks stack gold not cash ....

 

[alor]

CBs sell their shredded paper by the packs

they always print new notes.

 

[Gatito Bandito]

What I can't understand is the whipsaw. My best guess is that they wish to frighten buyers in waiting for lower prices and flush weak hands. What better way to freak people out of position then to whipsaw violently, you get to flush out more hands.

That's just a secondary effect.


Bottom line: You can make a hell of a lot more money a lot more quickly the more volatile a market is.

 

[Monsta]

It seems quite strange that in the last few days that the AUD seems to have hard support at 72c and silver has massive resistance at AUD$22/oz....