Commodities Make the QE2 Round-Trip
Remember all those calls for hyperinflation following QE2 and how all that “money printing” was going to wreak havoc on global prices? Well, prices have sure been wrecked, but in the exact opposite direction of a hyperinflation. If you recall the panic following QE, we had widespread fears of hyperinflation even leading Chinese farmers to hoard commodities in their kitchens. And now, 21 months after QE2 first sparked these fears were are again on the precipice of deflation. And commodity prices have made a complete round-trip after having surged in the months following this “money printing”. See the chart below which shows the 20 year compound annual growth rate of 1.5% for commodities!
I only point all this out because I took a great deal of flak for claiming that QE was not “debt monetization” or explaining that QE would be a monetary non-event for the broader economy. And while it’s a stretch to claim the policy has had zero impact on the economy, it’s not a stretch to note that QE did not cause widespread inflation or anything remotely resembling hyperinflation. A few trillion in extra bank reserves hasn’t caused high inflation. How could that be? Well, the fact that it’s a simple asset swap that doesn’t change the net financial assets of the private sector is a good starting point. Understanding the operational realities of the modern monetary system is probably a better starting point though.
Cullen Roche
Mr. Roche is the Founder of Orcam Financial Group, LLC. Orcam is a financial services firm offering research, private advisory, institutional consulting and educational services.
Follow Me:
55 Comments
but, but but, the hyperinflation is coming!
Its likely just around the corner… as well all know.
Hope that guy who was hoarding all that cotton sold! Cotton is a whopping 66% since its high!
That guy holding all that cotton in his house was a pretty awesome picture. Cotton probably goes lower from here as well.
So much for that commodity bull market.
Actually as soon as I picked up on the number of new fund launches aimed at Comms and the vast array of new ETF’s etc I could have told you it was ‘dust’.
Indeed people yet again waiting for the ‘bottom’ to relaunch this story should really consider how it sustains at that part of the cycle when debt and unemployment levels remain high!!!
I’ve posted many links to Chris Cook’s posts 6 months ago) about the coming oil price shock (down !). Remember those dark inventories cospiracy theory ? Have someone follow Cook’s advice ? 20% in 1 month and growing. Good analysis DOES MATTER.
Yes, that was a great analysis.
It also confirmed a conversation I had with a commodity trader in London a few months back. He was shocked and didn’t understand why prices were so high because there were huge stocks piling up at the time and they were not buying at those prices. When he continued and told me that for them it was clear that the banks were pushing prices it all made sense because that was also the time when we first heard about “the London whale” and his enormous derivative positions.
So is it just a coincidence that commodity prices fall like a brick when JPM is in the process of unwinding most of their positions?
It is. But in a few weeks the USA / Israel / Iran issue will be on all the newspapers and on all televion channels again. But, clearly we are living in a democracy and the good boys do always win and the evil will always go back in the darkness. Gandalf rules.
Seems like another possible bit of evidence supporting the idea that QE causes prices spikes, which if continued long enough leads to inflation.
It’s pure speculation based on among others very low interest rates. Take e.g. copper. Production costs are at $ 1 but it’s trading at about $ 3,40. As long as the price is this high companies will continue to mine copper and produce copper. The moment something bad happens prices will implode and copper will come down to earth.
I’ve just read some of Chris Cook’s stuff on oil… very interesting. Thanks!
Also, @Cullen’s other post on inflation ….
As this all sinks in … is gold’s run finally over? I think so …
Government inflation statistics were revised in the 1990′s to always understate inflation so that the fed could allow lower and lower interest rates. The price of goods and services experienced by the consumer in the market place have little to no correlation with the government inflation numbers. If the cost of housing had been included in the government inflation statistics during the “housing boom” it would have forced the fed to raise interest rates and may have averted the financial meltdown. They are just like a bunch of children cheating at a game of monopoly.
Once again I have to point out that between when QE2 was announced and ended commodities shot up by about 40% on average. After it ended their prices tanked. That is wreaking havoc on prices, and showing a very strong correlation between easing and inflation. Seems to run completely contrary to your argument. It was also in large part responsible for lighting a fire in the Middle East, and that fire is still burning.
If QE2 was not responsible please explain the strong correlation (yes I know correlation is not causality).
the explanation is that the markets believed QE would be inflationary… so they speculated. That temporary inflation is now gone because the speculators couldn’t prop up a market forever that was not actually being goosed by anything other than their own speculation.
If everybody believe QE is inflationary, and acts on such beliefs, then QE is inflationary, even if it’s not directly responsible.
Of course your position is just a theory, and is no more likely to be true than the theory that it is directly inflationary, although now you must explain why everybody believes QE is inflationary when the money actually simply sits and does nothing.
Cullen,
I disagree with your being so conclusive about commodity inflation and QE linkage (none). I could just as easily argue that your graph proves the correlation to QE. Commodities ramped with each announcement and execution of QEx, and now that central banks have had their fill of QE, commodities head back down……but not back down to where they began their ramp I might add. On the flip side, I’d like to hear all the “fundamental reasons” arguers to explain the VERTICAL ramps up and down when our 3-4 year economy has been sideways at best.
You’ve been claiming all along, and I agree, that QE is simply an asset swap. In fact you’ve said its a net NEGATIVE for banks because their LOSE interest income in the swap. Let’s use some common sense…..the fed is NOT going to implement a policy that is intended to stabilize arguably insolvent banks that will HARM those banks! There is clearly more to the story than the simple “asset swap so no net in/re-flationary impact”. Bernanke/Sack have actually told us their intention is to inflate the stock indexes to prices “higher than they otherwise would be”…….a direct refutation of the no-net-impact claim. And if they can inflate stock indexes they can inflate commodity prices as well. Perhaps they increased speculative activity with dollar bucket A because they knew they would meet their capital reserve requirements with QE bucket B……who knows? But to claim NO relationship when the fed itself says they plan to reflate/levitate markets seems like a stretch.
I’d suggest your graph, rather than proving your point, does just the opposite and allows all of us to continue to argue our unsubstantiated points. krb
why is it so hard to believe? if you KNOW that a QE announcement is going to drive up the prices of certain stocks or commodities and you can make a few bucks riding the wave… you do it… and you are part of the waive. Since nothing actually happened, the speculators must sell when there is no greater fool, and they drop back down. If you don’t believe this line of thinking, then please explain where all that supposed money is now? Shouldn’t it be propping up some other market? Or did it never go anywhere other than to Reserves and is still there to this day?
My interpretation, and I’ll let Cullen clarify his thoughts, is that the surge in prices was based as much on the _expectation_ of QE being highly inflationary than it actually being so. Once they realized it wasn’t, the trade unwound.
Torch – Cullen has posted a few alternative inflation gauges over the years, including his own “housing adjusted CPI.”
Good point PN, and to Cullen as well if that was his thinking too. But was it also the “expectation” mechanism that Bernanke/Sack were referring to when they expressed their intent to inflate stock indexes? And if so, then the shell game I described above still applies…..simply because dollars from the QEx bucket weren’t used to inflate markets, but their availability motivated prop desks to speculate with another bucket of dollars, isn’t there a relationship? krb
It’s sad to see that Cullen still comprehends hyperinflation as inflation gone wild, when it is fact merely the political response to deflation.
Give it just a few months and we will see a global political response to the latest deflationary dip.
Those who now mock folk like me who see with some clarity what faces the world will look back after the event and regret their head-in-the-sand approach. Their refusal to investigate global monetary history, or to see monetary developments as they happen is merely a symptom of their submersion in the current paradigm.
I changed from a deflationist view to see the inevitability of currency collapses only 14 months ago, and I am buying physical gold as fast as I can right now. Just watch where the price goes in the next 12 months, and remember, as the gold price rises, the more the dollar’s reign is shortened.
Do yourselves a favour: open your minds, head over to Fofoa’s blog, read and think, then act, before it is too late.
fofoa has been predicting hyperinflation for years and years. Talk about riding a losing trade into the ground….
If he’s acted on his gold recommendations over the same time it’s worked out very well for him.
Lots of people make bets that pay off for them. That doesn’t always make them macro geniuses. There’s a difference between being lucky and being good. Since the entire thesis upon which his gold purchase was based, has utterly failed, it’s pretty clear that he’s more lucky than good.
You talked about “riding a loosing trade into the ground”, but it was a winning trade, regardless of whether he’s right about inflation. And it’s far too early to say whether hyperinflation thesis has failed.
You’ve talked about deflation for quite a while, yet there’s no deflation yet, does that mean your thesis has also utterly failed?
The reality is that both sides of the debate are in a wait and see mode, and it’s quite a while from the finish line. Once the game is over then we’ll know who was right and who was wrong.
I actually only predicted deflation in 2008/2009. I have since said there would be low inflation in the USA. And I’ve also been long gold, but mainly due to other reasons. The simple fact of the matter is, if you made a bet based on hyperinflation and you won the bet because the asset responded well, it doesn’t mean you were right. It just means you were lucky. It’s like playing roulette and claiming that you’re a genius because you made money. No, you got lucky. Your theory for making money was wrong (gambling), but you got lucky. Big deal.
You said “riding a loosing trade into the ground” and that was clearly incorrect.
I’ve seen much more recent articles from you talking about deflation. From my personal interpretation of your writings you believe deflation is a concern, and you do not seem to think there is anything to worry about from high/hyper inflation, please correct me if I’m wrong.
It’s certainly a valid point that making money by being wrong is different than making money being right, but there’s also a big difference between riding a losing trade into the ground and making a profitable trade.
And like I’ve said before, it’s too early to say if it’s right or wrong, so all you can really say about fofoa is that so far he’s been generally right about gold, and we’ll have to see if he turns out to be right and the end of the game.
I clearly referred to hyperinflation as the losing idea/trade. I never mentioned gold so I have no idea why you’re even bringing it up. You’re just inserting your own ideas into my comments to satisfy an erroneous position and misconstrue things so you appear somehow correct. The fact is, fofoa has been predicting hyperinflation. That’s the matter we’ve been discussing here. Not gold prices. He has been wrong about hyperinflation. If you want to talk about why gold has rallied then let’s talk about that. But gold’s rally has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with his hyperinflation theory so I don’t know why you’re trying to connect the two as if one validates the other.
The trade was gold, hyperinflation is a theory. You said TRADE, so I pointed out the trade he stood behind (gold) was a winner. That’s why I brought it up.
If what you actually meant was that hyperinflation hasn’t happened yet, then I’ll happily agree, but your initial statement was much stronger than that.
If your position is that hyperinflation as a theory is wrong and has been proven so then, as I’ve said repeatedly, it’s far too early to make any determination on high/hyper inflation vs. any other outcome as we are quite a ways from the point where such a determination has been made. Once the economy is back on sound and stable footing, then we can decide who was right and who was wrong.
You now just continued the discussion about gold by stating the rally has nothing to do with his theory, so I’ll respond to that. My understanding of fofoa’s theory is that gold’s current run in price is due to continuing loss of confidence in the dollar as a reserve currency, which will ultimately result in hyperinflation and/or a massive dollar devaluation. It’s too early to say if that theory is wrong at this point. What can be said is that it certainly hasn’t happened to date.
He said this:
“fofoa has been predicting hyperinflation for years and years. Talk about riding a losing trade into the ground…”
And then you start rambling on about gold for no reason in an attempt to change the topic. You hyperinflationists always point to gold as if it validates your thinking. Gold’s rally is meaningless and has nothing to do with the hyperinflation thesis. FOFOA was wrong about hyperinflation. EOM.
I just explained the relationship. In fact any conversation about fofoa’s theories always includes hyperinflation and gold, as they are the core of his theory.
We have made a bet on physical gold being valued as the wealth reserve par excellence that it already is (but whose price is suppressed by various paper/electronic methods).
Part of what will cause that price suppression to come to an end is the collapse of the dollar.
That is our thesis. If you gain comfort from calling this view lucky, then please take all the comfort you like from that fact. We will all see what will happen in due course,Fofoa’s body of work will still be there, and people will say ‘Wow, this guy got it spot on, how lucky’, whereas yoru body of work will no doubt be removed by your good self rather quickly, as time proves what a load of old tosh MMS really is. My only luck was finding Fofoa!
Me, I take comfort from still being able to buy physical gold at bargain basement prices ahead of the next global round of QE by panicking politicians/central bankers. They will never sit by and let things take their course, hence currency collapses are guaranteed. Not rocket science is it!
The difference between someone like hyperinflatinoists and myself is that when I am wrong I say it. When they are wrong they conjure up gold and other nonsense that doesn’t actually validate their theories, but gives the appearance of still being right. If hyperinflation occurs in the USA I will be the first to admit I was wrong. What I won’t do is say things like “well, I own gold as well so I am still right!”. That would be dishonest.
We say there will be hyperinflation. You say there won’t. Ergo, neither of us is currently right or wrong, but one of us will be right eventually, and the other will be wrong. You make a mistake in saying we are wrong because it hasn’t happened yet, a somewhat basic mistake most would say.
These things don’t happen quickly, but I’m expecting matters to be resolved within 3-5 years from now. We’ll all know when matters are resolved, as kicking the can has failed miserably since 2000.
Actually, many of you who have been predicting hyperinflation have given specific timeframes. Shadow stats called for it in 2010, 11 and 12. These were specific predictions that were wrong. Granted, you only started calling for it about a year ago and you’ve given yourself an out by giving us no timeframe so it’s not precisely accurate to say you’ve been wrong. But many have walked this plank before you giving precise predictions that have in fact been wrong. fofoa’s been writing that blog for years and his earliest posts from 2008 are about hyperinflation. I only perused the blog briefly, but one quote from the 2008 section says we “we may only be a few months away from hyperinflation.”
If you want to keep defending these people then fine. But they have no been right no matter how much you try to keep claiming their time frame is not specific. Many of them have been quite specific and entirely wrong. Now they’re just moving the goalposts.
I’ve stated a number of times on this blog that when the economy is on sound footing based on sound principles (i.e. a couple years of reasonable growth with proper accounting practices and no massive government intervention) and hyperinflation has not happened then the hyperinflationists will have been wrong. That’s my criteria for determining who’s right, and who’s wrong.
Cullen I posted some links about what drives gold prices up/down in the short and long term. In the short term speculation is the main force. Stop, you’re right and FOFOA is wrong. In the long term is the physical market that matters that is the indian and chinese market. Now the private indians own at least 1 trillion USD in gold jewelry, coins and bars, 2 times what’s in the Fort Knox vaults. Outside the government eyes. It’s used for any kind of transaction (a huge black market, is si stupid to measure those countries with our own metrics !!!). Chinese government is building up their reserves and don’t tell to anyone how much gold they have. Any time the gold is weakening, buyers in Dehli and Shangai fix the price on the paper market and slowly buy their physical. WHY ? Because THERE IS STRONG INFLATION IN INDIA, CHINA, BRASIL AND IN ALL THE EMERGING MARKETS. And that inflation will slow down a little bit because of euro-crisis etc… but not so much because the economical drivers are completely different than in the west. And in all those countrie there is a huge financial repression with banks paying up to 400 points LESS than the official inflation rate. So if people instead of masturbating about gold price today or tomorrow would study the most likely evolution of those economies this would help them a lot. No I don’t think it’s possibile to trade this, I’m not doing it despite I know thos countrie better than you. US is just 20% of the world economy, it was 40%, it will be 10% in 10 to 15 years. I don’t know if gold will go to 10.000 or 10 dollars, but it will not be decided here.
And why are the economic drivers different do you think?
Because the US exports its inflation in the form of more and more dollars to the rest of the world.
But the rest of the world is gradually stopping absorbing those excess dollars, so trouble lies ahead.
Chickens do come home to roost, and when they do, the US will need around a million bucks to buy a dozen eggs!
reading Fofoa’s blog I felt myself getting dumber by the moment.
Cullen’s thesis is pretty simple… and my version even simpler… deficit spending adds dollars to the economy. Debt deleveraging removes money from the economy. When these off-set each other, there is no net new money in the economy, thus no inflation.
QE dollars do not enter the economy… that money sits inside banks who don’t need it because they don’t base their lending on Reserves. They base it on qualified borrowers and investments. With QE they had bonds, now they have cash. How is that inflationary? It isn’t, except when speculators such as yourselves think that it is, and you run out and buy gold “knowing” that gold is going up in value… thus driving it up in value. How’s that trade been working for you these past 10 months?????
Show me massive gov deficits during high employment and private sector debt growth, and I’ll show you inflation. Oh wait… I just described China… and guess who has been driving commodity prices other than speculators? It isn’t the US, or QE, it is the Chinese. And as they slow… commodities slow. Pretty simple aye Gary? Deficits can be inflationary…. QE, not!
It’s easy to cast aspersions, if you think fofoa is full of it please point out how.
The idea that the QE money doesn’t get into the economy seems quite ridiculous to me. If the banks don’t use it, then there was no point. And the idea that it was intended for loans is naive.
As krb said above “the fed is NOT going to implement a policy that is intended to stabilize arguably insolvent banks that will HARM those banks!”
Giving banks non-performing cash instead of performing bonds would only have hurt banks if that’s all that was going on.
The much more plausible story is that they used it to speculate in stocks, commodities, and other similar vehicles, which also was seen by other speculators who piled in, not wanting to miss out. Higher stock prices lead to higher spending amongst those who own them, higher commodities lead to higher prices of goods that are made from them, both of those are inflationary.
I’m not sure why you are asking about 10 months, the speculating opportunity created by QE2 ended a year ago, and both stocks and commodities tanked shortly after it ended. Maybe not proof, but pretty strong evidence towards the relationship between QE2 and inflationary inputs.
If you believe China is responsible for the price changes of commodities please explain the correlation of commodities to QE, and explain how commodities have dropped by so much when China’s imports have remained roughly flat to slightly above where they were when QE2 ended.
I tell you what:
Why don’t YOU POINT OUT why FOFOA IS NOT wrong?
You are the one threading in-and-out-of-context reasoning with very selective copy-and-paste of borrowed semantics as shown on this thread.
There is NO INFLATION, NO CRAZY pricing spikes, GOLD Is going down and nations tied to gold **ARE GOING TO LOSE BIG-TIME**, in a global environment like the one we are witnessing.
He’s not wrong for many reasons, but you folk here aren’t willing (or able) to think outside of the limited knowledge you have of the global monetary system.
You assume that when Nixon defaulted on the US’s gold obligations in 1971, that suddenly gold became worthless, whereas in fact it was the other way round: the dollar became worthless, and those with real wealth )notably oil producers) still sought and got gold as payment.
You fail to see what is happening around the world, as other productive countries remove their structural support for the dollar. Items appear in the news every week, but you probably wouldn’t even spot them as you do not grasp the background at all. You think gold is just a commodity.
Fofoa bases his predictions on the work of Another/FOA, and their predictions were made in 1998, so yes, they were early. But gold has done rather well in that period!
You guys have insufficient knowledge to debate with, I just hope one or two of you will be bright enough to consider another idea/thesis, as if you do, like me, you will see more clearly what is headed your way.
Finally, gold is not a trade, you have to buy the real physical bullion to benefit from what is coming, as the 10,000 tonnes of paper gold that is traded EVERY DAY will eventually become worthless, with the value reflected back into the price of the real stuff.
Rest assured, we only need to be correct on our thesis, timing is irrelevant, and no Mr Roche, it will nothing to do with luck at all.
Banks don’t USE QE money. If you had been reading Cullen for a while you’d understand how this all works rather than making stupid comments that prove you have no idea what you’re talking about.
As I understand it, the justification for QE has been that it will encourage bank lending – and as CR and others have argued, it hasn’t, because such lending is not ‘reserve constrained’ but rather contingent on credit-worthy demand.
On the other hand, I find it credible that QE has induced banks to invest in equities and commodities as an alternative to Treasuries or commercial loans. If anyone can refute this as a mechanism behind such asset price increases, I would like to hear the argument.
AS to the argument over deflation and/or hyperinflation, this seems largely a matter of assumed constraints. The argument against hyperinflation seems clearly predicated on the global system basically continuing to function, and, with this premise, seems highly plausible.
The other side seems predicated on a breakdown of the current system, which, given that it apparently came fairly close in late 2008, and major underlying issues seem unresolved, is hard to rule out. If such a breakdown were to occur, I have little or no idea how it would play out, but it seems plausible that significant deflation and/or inflation would be part of the picture. And I’m not sure CR and others would argue with that. However, such an extreme case might not warrant putting more faith in gold than in anything else.
This is an excellent explanation of the premise behind hyperinflation as I see it: systemic collapse. I have one difference here, a deflation / depression without hyperinflation would not be in the collapse scenario. If all we see is a depression, then it’s likely the dollar would stay as the reserve currency once things settle down, while under hyperinflation the dollar would be replaced with something else.
The reasons I believe a systemic collapse is coming are many:
1) Nothing has been done to fix the causes of the recent collapse, and in many ways things have been made worse.
2) There has been no attempt to punish those responsible, nor to punish for things like the massive level of fraud that appeared to be institutionalized in mortgage processing.
3) The tools that were used to end the collapse are going to be less effective this time around, meaning they will have to be much larger in scale
4) at the same time our debt load has increased significantly
5) Our leadership does not appear to be competent enough, or interested enough, in fixing the fundamental problems.
6) They are very worried about deflation, but seem to have no concern about hyperinflation (i.e. they are overconfident)
7) The rule of law and respect for the constitution seems to have collapsed, I cite NDAA, indefinite detention, PATRIOT act, Citizen’s United, warrantless wiretaps, etc. as examples
There’s more, but I think that’s enough for now.
Lastly, our leadership does not seem at all interested in understanding or fixing the core problems, this video provides an example of the behavior of our government in these issues:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/dr-michael-big-short-burrys-brutal-hangover-inevitable-state-world-ucla-commencement-speech
particularly the portion between minuts 14 – 16 point out the problems. When the government is taking these types of measures against critique, it doesn’t give me much faith in the outcome.
Like.
‘reading Fofoa’s blog I felt myself getting dumber by the moment.’
Indeed, not something perhaps to shout about.
Fortunately, I experienced the opposite.
The fate of the current monetary system is determined by what’s going to happen in the Treasury markets. If US interest rates go through the roof then the current monetary system is toast as well. Because, the USD is the world’s reserve currency. And that’s precisely why Greenspan & Benny B. are so worried. That’s why the FED buys 30 year bonds and sells T-bills a.k.a. Operation Twist part 2. In an attempt to surpress the long bond. Excellent opportunity to get of the long bond.
The worries over the stability of the USD centered monetary system is IMO the reason why foreign central banks are buying gold. They see the writing on the wall.
Made a number of error. I need to repost my reply.
The fate of the current monetary system is determined by what’s going to happen in the Treasury markets. If US interest rates go through the roof then the current monetary system is toast as well. Because, the USD is the world’s reserve currency. And that’s precisely why Greenspan & Benny B. are so worried. That’s why the FED buys 30 year bonds and sells T-bills a.k.a. Operation Twist part 2. In an attempt to surpress the yield of the long bond. Excellent opportunity to get rid of the long bond.
The worries over the stability of the USD centered monetary system is IMO the reason why foreign central banks are buying gold (instead of T-bonds ?). They see the writing on the wall.
One has to keep in mind that the bulk of T-bonds are held by central banks (as a result of the US Trade Deficit), not by individual foreign investors. And here’s one of those “”exogenous”" events that prepare the ground for Hyper-inflation.
Cullen, I think it’s fair to say we all change over time, and we make mistakes. Fofoa no loner makes timing predictions. You no longer support MMT, having evolved.
As you’re a bright fellow, and clearly out to help people here, you really should dive into the Fofoa archives, with an open mind, starting in early 2009. You should make the effort to read them all, even though currently you have a different view. You and Fofoa are very alike, except you have different perspectives.
It is said that it is the sign of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. You may be surprised at what you read, some will make you cringe initially (knowing your current views), but for the sake of your prosperity and your readers, and just to see if you can do it: I hope you will.
Gary, I have read much of the content there. I just don’t agree with what I’ve read. I am not closed off to the potential that I am wrong. And I’ve often written about being wrong, being able to evolve and improve. That’s part of life. I am not immune to mistakes. So perhaps I have made a mistake.
Do you have some recommended reading from that site? Perhaps I have overlooked something that you feel is essential? Thanks.
If you page down to the comments section in this post, you will find a ‘recommended list’:
http://fofoa.blogspot.com/2011/12/unambiguous-wealth.html
Good luck.
Thanks Gary.
You’re welcome.
However, I have reconsidered. I think you need to avoid Fofoa’s pages initially, because of your current thinking.
I think however you would enjoy reading more on the historical perspective, going back to Bretton Woods and the 70s and 80s and onwards. Even if you don’t change your views, you’ll find most of it fascinating stuff I am sure. So dive into this lot, ideally in the order posted:
http://www.usagold.com/goldtrail/archives/another1.html
http://www.usagold.com/goldtrail/archives/goldtrailone.html
http://www.usagold.com/halloffame.html
Regards.