General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsQueerDuck
(1,757 posts)... is it an accounting and bookkeeping move only?)
I've been wondering that myself. I don't think the logistic are in place to move 129 tons of gold bullion.
QueerDuck
(1,757 posts)QueerDuck
(1,757 posts)bucolic_frolic
(55,273 posts)cloudbase
(6,278 posts)DFW
(60,238 posts)And it's far more boring to look at.
2MuchNoise
(773 posts)DFW
(60,238 posts)"Lingots," which fluctuate between 95% and 96% pure, and Kilos, which are expected to be at least 99.9% pure. The price of the metal is the same, but the kilos are easier to trade on the world market, as they are more widely accepted (i.e. standardized).
The gold can be sold anywhere, of course, but selling bullion sitting in New York on the American market when the ounce price is $5400 an ounce, which it was earlier this year, and replacing it at $4500 an ounce, which it was shortly after, with gold bought in Europe, removes a logistics headache, as well as gives the BdF a huge profit. Sell high, buy back low is not exactly a novel concept that will win you the Nobel Prize in Economics. Not only that, they could sell the unpopular lingots stored in New York, and replace the gold in the form of the more liquid Kilos in Europe. They would have to slightly discount the lingots in NYC to accommodate refining costs for a buyer who will want to melt them down for kilos at some point, but I'm sure that was factored in. The only variable was the fluctuation in the gold price, but watching it jump up nearly $100 a day for a steady climb only made a correction more and more certain. Someone at the BdF obviously said "this is high enough, let's not get greedy and act too late," and that somebody had an excellent instinct. Every central bank with substantial gold holdings has someone to manage them (I have worked with several over the years), so I'm sure the move by the BdF was no random action that happened to luck out.

