Showing posts with label LIBOR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LIBOR. Show all posts

Friday, 21 June 2013

The Market


ALL GLOBAL MARKETS GOT SHREDDED: Here's What You Need To Know



20 June, 2013

No one was safe today.
First, the scoreboard:
  • Dow: 14,758.3 -353.8 -2.3%
  • S&P 500: 1,588.1 -40.7 -2.5%
  • NASDAQ: 3,364.6 -78.5 -2.2%
And now, the top stories:
  • Stock, bonds, commodities, and currencies around the world got destroyed today.  Today's drop in the S&P 500 was the worst one since 2011.
  • Today's calamity was really an extension of yesterday's sell-off, which appeared to be triggered by comments made by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. Specifically, he said that the Fed could begin to taper, or gradually reduce, its quantitative easing program as early as later this year.  In other words, they would be scaling back on their monthly purchases of $85 billion dollars worth of mortgage bonds and Treasury securities. 
  • This sparked a sharp sell-off in the worldwide bond markets, which translates into higher interest rates.  Earlier today, we saw the 10-year rate go as high as 2.47%, a level we haven't seen in years. Bonds across the emerging markets did particularly poorly.
  • Another bad headline that crossed was that manufacturing activity in China decelerated more sharply than expected in June.  This is worrisome because  China is the world's second-largest economy and also its most important source of economic growth. "A good deal of the weakness was apparently driven by external developments as the new export orders index plunged 4.9pt to 44.0, the lowest reading since the middle of the Great Recession," said Societe Generale's Klaus Baader.  "This collapse is quite difficult to fully believe, given developments in the region and the global economy, where there are no signs of such a collapse of demand."
  • Some argue that the most devastating news was the surge in an obscure Chinese interest rate called SHIBOR, or the LIBOR of China. In 2008, surging LIBOR rates preceded the global credit crunch, causing the global economy and financial markets to spiral.
  • The breadth of the sell-off was breathtaking. Usually, when one asset class sells off, another rises. And when a lot of asset classes fall, the so-called "safe havens" will rise.  These include things like U.S. Treasuries, gold, and a handful of other currencies like the Swiss Franc or Japanese Yen.
  • But commodities got destroyed across the board. Gold prices fell by 7%. Silver prices fell 9%. Copper fell 3%. WTI oil prices fell by 3%. Natural gas prices fell by 2%. Corn, soybean, and rice prices all fell by over 1%.
  • "Markets will now adjust to a new negative shock to the trio of the liquidity, risk and term premia," said PIMCO's Mohamed El-Erian in a prescient post yesterday. "Heightened volatility will also fuel even greater risk aversion, including lower appetite for inventory buildup among brokers and greater cross-over investor migration back to home base. Expect further market volatility and liquidity dislocations in the immediate period ahead. "

Saturday, 27 April 2013

The Global Ponzi Scheme


Everything Is Rigged: The Biggest Price-Fixing Scandal Ever

The Illuminati were amateurs. The second huge financial scandal of the year reveals the real international conspiracy: There's no price the big banks can't fix





Matt Tabibi

April 27th, 2013


Conspiracy theorists of the world, believers in the hidden hands of the Rothschilds and the Masons and the Illuminati, we skeptics owe you an apology. You were right. The players may be a little different, but your basic premise is correct: The world is a rigged game. We found this out in recent months, when a series of related corruption stories spilled out of the financial sector, suggesting the world’s largest banks may be fixing the prices of, well, just about everything.

You may have heard of the Libor scandal, in which at least three – and perhaps as many as 16 – of the name-brand too-big-to-fail banks have been manipulating global interest rates, in the process messing around with the prices of upward of $500 trillion (that’s trillion, with a “t”) worth of financial instruments. When that sprawling con burst into public view last year, it was easily the biggest financial scandal in history – MIT professor Andrew Lo even said it “dwarfs by orders of magnitude any financial scam in the history of markets.”

That was bad enough, but now Libor may have a twin brother. Word has leaked out that the London-based firm ICAP, the world’s largest broker of interest-rate swaps, is being investigated by American authorities for behavior that sounds eerily reminiscent of the Libor mess. Regulators are looking into whether or not a small group of brokers at ICAP may have worked with up to 15 of the world’s largest banks to manipulate ISDAfix, a benchmark number used around the world to calculate the prices of interest-rate swaps.

Interest-rate swaps are a tool used by big cities, major corporations and sovereign governments to manage their debt, and the scale of their use is almost unimaginably massive. It’s about a $379 trillion market, meaning that any manipulation would affect a pile of assets about 100 times the size of the United States federal budget.

It should surprise no one that among the players implicated in this scheme to fix the prices of interest-rate swaps are the same megabanks – including Barclays, UBS, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and the Royal Bank of Scotland – that serve on the Libor panel that sets global interest rates. In fact, in recent years many of these banks have already paid multimillion-dollar settlements for anti-competitive manipulation of one form or another (in addition to Libor, some were caught up in an anti-competitive scheme, detailed in Rolling Stone last year, to rig municipal-debt service auctions). Though the jumble of financial acronyms sounds like gibberish to the layperson, the fact that there may now be price-fixing scandals involving both Libor and ISDAfix suggests a single, giant mushrooming conspiracy of collusion and price-fixing hovering under the ostensibly competitive veneer of Wall Street culture.

To read the complete article GO HERE

Saturday, 30 March 2013

The judiciary supports the banksters


Should we be surprised! So much for the “independent judiciary”!

Judge Dismisses Most Claims In Libor Lawsuits, Ruling In Favor Of Big Banks
A judge on Friday dismissed a "substantial portion" of claims facing a number of banks in a barrage of lawsuits accusing them of interest-rate rigging.


29 March, 2013





U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald in Manhattan ruled for the banks, which include Bank of America Corp , JPMorgan Chase & Co and others, of allegedly manipulating the London Interbank Offered Rate, commonly known as Libor.


The judge granted the banks' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' federal antitrust claims and partially dismissed their claims of commodities manipulation. She also dismissed racketeering and state-law claims.


The decision is a significant setback for private plaintiffs, whose lawsuits had been consolidated before the New York judge as part of a multidistrict litigation proceeding.


In a 161-page opinion, Buchwald said she recognized her ruling might be "unexpected," since several defendants had paid billions of dollars in penalties to government regulatory agencies.


But she said unlike government agencies, private plaintiffs needed to meet many requirements under the statutes to bring a case.


"Therefore, although we are fully cognizant of the settlements that several of the defendants here have entered into with government regulators, we find that only some of the claims that plaintiffs have asserted may properly proceed," she wrote.




The lead lawyers for the plaintiffs, Bill Carmody of Susman Godfrey and Michael Hausfeld of Hausfeld LLP, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.


More than a dozen banks and brokerages are under investigation by regulators worldwide for manipulating benchmark rates such as Libor, which have been the basis for more than $550 trillion in financial products.


Three banks have reached settlements with authorities to date. Most recently, Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC agreed to pay $612 million to U.S. and British authorities. UBS AG agreed in December to pay $1.5 billion. Barclays agreed to pay $453 million in June.


Other defendants facing private lawsuits included Citigroup Inc , Credit Suisse Group AG , Deutsche Bank AG , HSBC Holdings PLC , Royal Bank of Scotland, WestLB AG, and Royal Bank of Canada , among others.


Representatives for the various banks either did not immediately respond to requests for comment or had no immediate comment.


The cases are In Re: Libor-Based Financial Instruments Antitrust Litigation, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 11-md-2262.

Wednesday, 24 October 2012

The Keiser Report

This relates to THIS story

Thanks to Travellerev

Credit Default Swaps and LIBOR, The Two Make The Biggest Financial Scam Ever Perpetrated!

24 October, 2012

If you are or know a New Zealand Farmer who lost his/her farm as the result of the Derivatives sold to him you might want to watch this and give the link to your farming colleagues!

The first half lays out why the selling of these fraudulent instruments and the subsequent artificial and fraudulent lowering of the LIBOR combined bankrupted many thousands of small and middle sized businesses.


Friday, 7 September 2012

Max Keiser on Gina Reinhart and insanity


I can't find a better headline!!

Keiser Report: Interregnum of Insanity


In this episode, Max Keiser and Stacy Herbert discuss the world's richest woman and how the dingo stole her sanity. They talk about the children of the Crimson, kletographers and the interregnum of insanity. 
In the second half of the show, Max Keiser talks to Catherine Austin Fitts about Libor crimes and item number 17 on the GOP platform and what they mean for the future of the world economy.

Friday, 24 August 2012

More JP Morgan scandal to come


Bill Murphy – JP Morgan Is FINISHED!
Bill Murphy: There’s gonna be a Mega JP Morgan scandal which will rival the LIBOR scandal.
Breaking Update: JPMorgan never recevied mortgage/notes transfered from WaMu.
Bill Murphy: It’s fun to have fun for a change.


UPDATE: Friends, I just received this note from our friend and mortgage fraud expert Vermont Trotter regarding this story: “The trusts are all empty. The master loan doc contractually allows for the hypothecation and re-hypothecation of the assets. Hypothecation is a legal term meaning to pledge, but not deliver an asset. To hypothecate means there is no true sale of the asset. To re-hypothecate means it can be pledged multiple times and, again, never have a true sale. No one owns anything.” – by V. Trotter from Patented Fraud

Wednesday, 25 July 2012

Wednesday, 18 July 2012

LIBOR scandal spreads


UK Libor investigation grips 7 banks
Britain’s financial regulator has said that seven banks are under investigation over suspicion of manipulating interbank offered rates.


17 July, 2012

The manipulation of the London Interbank Offered Rate (Libor), a measure of how much banks charge each other for loans, has cost Barclays record fines of £290 million following an investigation by Britain’s Financial Services Authority (FSA).

Moreover, top executives, including Marcus Agius, the chairman of Barclays and Robert Diamond, Barclays Chief Executive Officer, resigned in the wake of the scandal at the second biggest UK bank.

Nevertheless, the FSA was criticized for not paying attention to warning signs and not reacting fast enough to reports of problems with Libor rates.

This was under-regulated. You were warned about it and warned about it”, Labour MP George Mudie told FSA Chairman Adair Turner.

The FSA acting head of enforcement, Tracey McDermott, said the regulator is now investigating seven banks over suspicion of submitting false interest rates. However, she did not identify any of the lenders.

Furthermore, regulators in Europe, Asia, and the US are investigating Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, UBS AG, Lloyds Banking Group Plc, and Deutsche Bank AG among other banks.

Tuesday, 17 July 2012

Lie-More - "Everyone in on the act"


Libor: They all knew – and no one acted

Regulator’s claim it knew nothing thrown into doubt as documents show authorities were told of rate-rigging in 2008



14 July, 2012

Regulators on both sides of the Atlantic failed to act on clear warnings that the Libor interest rate was being falsely reported by banks during the financial crisis, it emerged last night.

A cache of documents released yesterday by the New York Federal Reserve showed that US officials had evidence from April 2008 that Barclays was knowingly posting false reports about the rate at which it could borrow in order to assuage market concerns about its solvency.

An unnamed Barclays employee told a New York Fed analyst, Fabiola Ravazzolo, on 11 April 2008: "So we know that we're not posting, um, an honest Libor." He said Barclays started under-reporting Libor because graphs showing the relatively high rates at which the bank had to borrow attracted "unwanted attention" and the "share price went down".

The verbatim note of the call released by the Fed represents the starkest evidence yet that Libor-fiddling was discussed in high regulatory circles years before Barclays' recent £290m fine.

The New York Fed said that, immediately after the call, Ms Ravazzolo informed her superiors of the information, who then passed on her concerns to Tim Geithner, who was head of the New York Fed at the time. Mr Geithner investigated and drew up a six-point proposal for ensuring the integrity of Libor which he presented to the British Bankers Association, which is responsible for producing the Libor rate daily.

Mr Geithner, who is now US Treasury Secretary, also forwarded the six-point plan to the Governor of the Bank of England, Sir Mervyn King. The Bank pointed out last night that there was no evidence in the Geithner letter of banks actually making false submissions – although then note did allude to "incentives to misreport".

It was unclear last night whether Mr Geithner informed Sir Mervyn about the testimony of the Barclays employee who said that the bank was being dishonest in its submissions.

If it turned out that he did, that would be highly damaging for the Bank since it has always claimed that it never saw or heard any evidence that private banks were deliberately making false reports about their borrowing costs. Sir Mervyn is due to be questioned by the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee next Tuesday, where MPs are likely to put this question to the Governor.

The Bank's Deputy Governor, Paul Tucker, went before the Treasury committee last week to answer allegations that he had put pressure on Barclays to misreport its borrowing rates in 2008 while attempting to promote financial stability. Mr Tucker denied that he had done so and said he only found out that Barclays had been deliberately submitting dishonest Libor submissions recently.

The New York Fed released its cache of documents in response to a request from the chairman of Congress's Committee on Financial Services on Oversight and Investigation, Randy Neugebauer, who has been investigating how much US regulators knew about the rate-fixing scandal, in which 11 other banks around the world have been implicated.

A separate email released by the Bank of England yesterday shows that Mr Tucker forwarded the Geithner email to Angela Knight, the former chief executive of the British Bankers Association. She responded saying that "changes had been made to incorporate the views of the Fed".

While the BBA is understood to have acted on two of Mr Geithner's proposals, the other four were not adopted.

Before hearing from Sir Mervyn on Tuesday, the Treasury Select Committee is set to take evidence on Monday afternoon from Jerry del Missier, the former chief operating officer at Barclays, who gave the green light for traders to submit false Libor submissions during the crisis. He will be asked about whether he thought the order to do so had come down from the Bank of England.

Last month Barclays was fined £290m for rigging Libor between 2005 and 2008. The regulators found that Barclays traders had initially submitted false reports to make profits for its traders, but subsequently to allay concerns about the bank's health. Barclays' chief executive Bob Diamond resigned on 3 July. The Libor rate is used to fix the cost of borrowing on mortgages, loans and derivatives worth more than $450 trillion (£288 trillion) globally.

The missed warnings: ‘So we know that we’re not posting, um an honest Libor

One document released yesterday by the Fed detailed a conversation between staffer Fabiola Ravazzolo and an unnamed Barclays employee in April 2008, including the following edited extract:

Fabiola Ravazzolo: And, and why do you think that there is this, this discrepancy? Is it because banks maybe they are not reporting what they should or is it um…

Barclays employee: Well, let's, let's put it like this and I'm gonna be really frank and honest with you.

FR: No that's why I am asking you [laughter] you know, yeah [inaudible] [laughter]

BE: You know, you know we, we went through a period where we were putting in where we really thought we would be able to borrow cash in the interbank market and it was above where everyone else was publishing rates.

FR: Mm hmm.

BE: And the next thing we knew, there was um, an article in the Financial Times, charting our LIBOR contributions... and inferring that this meant that we had a problem... and um, our share price went down... So it's never supposed to be the prerogative of a, a money market dealer to affect their company share value.

FR: Okay.

BE: And so we just fit in with the rest of the crowd, if you like... So, we know that we're not posting um, an honest LIBOR. And yet and yet we are doing it, because, um, if we didn't do it it draws, um, unwanted attention on ourselves.

FR: Okay, I got you then.

BE: And at a time when the market is so um, gossipy... it was not a useful thing for us as an organization.



Saturday, 14 July 2012

European Banking Fraud


CrossTalk: Libor or Lie-more?


What will be the implications of the Libor scandal? Will anybody get into prison for the wrongdoing? What message does it send to the authorities? Should there be more regulation, or can banks regulate themselves?

CrossTalking with Richard Wellings and William Black.



Max Keiser: 'European banks are technically bankrupt'

13 July, 2012

A new report by the International Labor Organization (ILO) says the eurozone is in danger of losing 4.5 million jobs over the next four years, unless it changes its current economic policies.


According to the report, if the 17-nation bloc does not prevent the spike by shifting away from austerity, the number of its unemployed workers will reach to 22 million. 

It’s not only the eurozone that’s in trouble, the entire global economy is at risk of contagion,” the report said. 

It also added that young people are to be severely hit by the unwelcome consequences of a longer period of austerity. 

Press TV has conducted an interview with Max Keiser, a journalist and broadcaster in Paris, to shed some light on the issue. 

The video also offers the opinions of two additional guests: Simon Dixon, the CEO of BankToTheFuture.com in London, and Paolo Raffone, secretary general of CIPI Foundation in Brussels. 

What follows is an approximate transcript of the interview. 

Press TV: Max Keiser, looking here at 4 or 5 years of austerity measures have failed to stimulate the European economies. How can economies be stimulated and then create jobs at the same time if there is a global slowdown occurring, if you agree with the fact that there is a global slowdown? 

Keiser: Well, let’s look at the case of Ireland for a second. A few years ago, the Irish public debt was virtually non-existent. Then one of their banks, Anglo Irish, ran up debts that were ten times the country’s GDP. They went bankrupt and the Irish government decided to move those debts or guarantee those debts onto the bound sheet of the citizen and then they started imposing austerity measures to bailout Anglo Irish Bank and their unsecured debtors. 
So this pattern is what we have seen play out all over Europe. You have got these debts that were incurred by banks; they cannot pay the debts and the governments are doing the bidding of the banks by transferring these debts to the public and then imposing austerity measures. We saw it in Argentina. City Bank was in Argentina back in the late 80s or early 90s or 90s to 2000 and they went bust basically and the government forced the citizens to pay off City Bank’s debts.

So that was the model. So this is a common theme now. You do something about this transference of bank debt to the public and you are going to have these problems continue. It is playing out all over the world. 

Press TV: The root cause of the problem is something that it seems that is not being tackled because it seems like just by buying time and getting these loans, of course some are wondering where these all the money is actually coming from; maybe it is the citizens of each country; like in the case of Greece you have 20 banks that have lent Greece money. 

Ultimately, are they going to be able to pay back, in Greece’s case for example, the money? I mean that is the fundamental question that is faced in some of these debt-ridden countries, isn’t it? 

Keiser: To follow up on what was just said about finding new markets for debt, to find too not a little bit, they are finding new innovative ways for the banks to sell debt back and forth to each other without having to increase their reserve requirement in any way, in fact reduce their reserve requirement. 

So you have a bank like Deutsche Bank with three trillion in debt that is supported by less than one and a half percent of tier one capital. So you have less than a one or two percent fluctuation in the value of those assets and the bank is technically bankrupt. 

These banks in Europe are technically bankrupt. Their balance sheets, if you were to freeze-frame them and forensically look at them, you would find that they are without any collateral whatsoever. They are only supported by the illusion of whipping these debts around in the washing machine that is the euro money laundering system to keep themselves going and like for example they introduce the European stability mechanism. 
This just means that the same debts that were swapped amongst banks six months ago are being swapped again into a new lending facility that is collateralized by the same banks. This is the very definition of a Ponzi game; this is what put Bernie Madoff in jail and this can continue on additionally because what will happen is that once they establish a European-wide Central Bank in Brussels to mimic what is happening in Washington DC or the Federal Reserve Bank and then once that game was out, then the Federal Reserve Bank and this new European Central Bank in Brussels will create a new global Central Bank and then they will do the whole thing over again and then everyone who is suffering austerity today will have to pay additional tax to this new global Central Bank.

So the people suffering austerity are going to continue to suffer austerity except their tax burden is going to go up substantially and the bankers who make money created this Ponzi game will continue to suck wealth out of this system and load it over in this neo-feudal model, as they have been doing now for the past 5-10-20 years. 

Press TV: Reading between the lines here, it would be positive to see what actually are on the books of these different banks. Are there hidden costs? Because it seems like for example with Bankia, when we hear about the bailout that they need, do these countries know how much their banks have on paper in terms of assets, in terms of funds before they can reach out and bail them out? Or are these debts going to all of a sudden surface in the news that they owe this much more? If you can elaborate on that more for us and give us some examples, please. 

Keiser: No, they do not know how much debt these banks have. It is part of what is called the shadow banking system. The shadow banking system in America is estimated to be over 16 trillion dollars. So it is in excess of the entire GDP of the United States and this is true throughout the world. There is 800 trillion dollars in derivatives that are part of the shadow banking system. The entire globe GDP has called 50 trillion dollars. 

What happens is that when banks want to get more laws passed to deregulate the system, to make it easier for them to continue this Ponzi game, they suddenly flash huge debt that they say they just found; they just discovered it. Hank Pualson did this in 2008; [Richard] Fuld did this in Lehman Brothers; the troika did this when they were talking about Greece. 
They have trillions of dollars worth of debt that they can use as a scare tactic to get the citizens and the government to sign off as was the memo of understanding with Greece with the troika and then when they sign it off, they suddenly say, ‘OK, while this new lending facility is going to take care of this debt, we are going to lower interest rates again toward zero percent.’ Of course so the debt service is down to as low as possible it can be but I want to follow up on Simon Dickson about the nature of money itself. Most people assume that a bank takes on a deposit and then they loan that deposit out and this creates liquidity in the system. That is false.

In today’s banking system, banks first lend money into existence. That is where money comes from: it is loaned into existence as debt. A small fraction of that ends up on another bank’s balance sheet that they then call collateral. But it is just debt. There is no hard collateral. 

That is why, at this time around the world, there is a mad scramble to try to reclassify gold as a tier one asset because that is the only unimpingeable collateral that you can have at this point to solve the fact that none of these banks have any collateral that is worth anything in a resell market. 

They are all technically bankrupt and this is what they discovered in Iceland which is why they had to let the three major banks collapse; the currency collapsed; the economy collapsed but now they are growing again because they went through that moment; they realized that they had this huge problem. 
These banks in Europe have to understand that they must allow the banks to crash and let happen what is going to happen. But until that happens, there is going to be more debt servitude, more problems like we are seeing; more austerity and more social unrest. There is a real risk now that some of these bankers are going to be rounded up.

In the mainstream media in American, noble price winning economists and people like Nouriel Roubini are suggesting that bankers should be hung. I said that in this show three years ago and people thought I was being exaggerating but now Nouriel Roubini is calling for the bankers to be hung. So this is a very interesting sea change. 

Friday, 13 July 2012

Market manipulation


Given the source this seems like confirmation of what has been said for some time now

The price of gold has been manipulated. This is more scandalous than Libor


11 July, 2012

The new media and the 24-hour news cycle have a great deal to answer for, not least encouraging a political class which would otherwise be happily engaged expensing duck houses into the belief that it should demonstrate perpetual action on our behalf – hence the endless stream of badly drafted legislation from the corridors of Whitehall.
It does, however, reveal things that would otherwise be ignored. The issue of manipulation in the gold market which I wrote about last week is a case in point. The ball of half-truths and downright lies which have surrounded the issue for a long time is beginning to unspool in an issue internet activists kept alive long before it was acknowledged by the mainstream media.
People ask why the issue is important at a time of naked market manipulation of the Libor rate. The answer is simple: the Libor manipulation scandal can be seen as the thin end of the wedge in terms of government market manipulation.
Although Libor manipulation affects the interest rates we pay on all number of credit products, gold market manipulation is more serious still.
The price of gold is traditionally a proxy for the value of money. A soaring bullion price is indicative of a lack of faith in fiat currency.
Our financial system is predicated on the notion that money stands as a proxy for the factors of production – capital, labour, land and enterprise.
In short, the abundance of money in the economy should be related to the abundance of those factors. The harder we work, for instance, the more we create. There is more labour in the economy, therefore a rise in the money supply is legitimate in order to mirror this. There is nothing wrong with printing money per se so long as the printing reflects an expansion in the real economy.
Twentieth and Twenty-First century economics appears to have done away with this. Money is now created ex nihilo to feed both the top and bottom ends of society.
Money printing or Quantitative Easing is mainly of benefit to two parties. Firstly, the Government, which is able to borrow more and borrow cheaper than it otherwise would have done. This is because QE money is used to buy bonds, forcing down yields.
The Government uses this money to finance both existing debt and an expansive welfare state which bribes large portions of the population to accept a life of hellish boredom and dribbling docility in exchange for £70 a week in dole money. Such payments are not a genuine transfer of the fruits of existing production within an economy; they are borrowed. They help governments electorally at the cost of the vigour of society.
At the top end, Quantitative Easing money goes directly to banks, who are able to sell their government bonds at a profit. In theory they may use this to even up their balance sheet. In reality they frequently use it as stake money at riskier tables.
In both cases, paper money has been stripped of meaning. It is no longer a reflection of production nor any of its components. It now simply exists of its own right – but it can survive as a measure only for so long as the government keeps such printing in small enough doses that the de-leveraging does not become apparent to workers.
As with everything in economics, there is a correctional market mechanism for this scenario – the flight to commodities, particularly precious metals like gold. Gold holds its value when paper money loses value, because it is beyond the gift of the government to simply will gold into being and give it to friends in high places or voters in low ones.
If gold has been manipulated downwards and if that process continues, then all recourse to a store of value (other than land and property) has been taken from the individual.
The value of our money is falling thanks to Quantitative Easing. Fixing in the gold market takes away one of the key hedges for those with cash assets but no property.
The true fall in the value of money is probably better seen through the rise in house prices since the 1980s – a much better reflection of the market mechanism thanks to the suppliers being so large and because of the lack of a two-way interplay between house prices on the street and derivative products for traders.
In any case, it would appear that the Libor scandal at Barclays has acted to draw out more market figures willing to claim openly that organised price fixing has occurred in gold.
Ned Naylor-Leyland, investment director at Cheviot, a British investment firm, had the following to say on CNBC the other day (H/Tt Chris Powell):

In the aftermath of the Libor scandal, the Bank of England complained that it had received no forewarning from the marketplace.
Gold price manipulation may well be the next big scandal to break – if it does, this time nobody can say that they were not warned.
Finally, a mea culpa – the tonnage figure quoted in the original article certainly undershot the true extent of the short position held by the US bank in question. It was very difficult to get accurate tonnage figures from anyone I spoke to for the article, and I took a pithy aside relating to a “couple of tonnes” rather too literally in a desire to include some. The true extent would have been far greater as many of you pointed out in the discussion board below the article.

Thomas Pascoe worked in both the Lloyd's of London insurance market and in corporate finance before joining the Telegraph. He writes about the financial markets. His email is thomas.pascoe@telegraph.co.uk