Economic Saboteurs and Dullards

Reddit

–Here’s a question you might be able to help out with as we start another week of reckoning: who made Ross Garnaut the Rasputin of Canberra? We’ve been in Australia for five years now and still can’t figure out how an economist has managed to make himself a catch-all advisor on the mining industry and climate change. The common element to both issues: raising taxes in order to redistribute income.

–Back to rent-seeking bureaucrats and economic interventionism in a moment. What about financial markets? Well, despite the best efforts of Mother Nature and Geopolitics, stocks are holding their own. And judging by the volatility index published by the ASX, there is not a lot of “fear” in the market at the moment.

vix_chart.gif

–The trouble with the VIX is that it’s a lagging indicator. It always spikes after a crisis to reflect the increased premiums on put options as hedges/insurance against more losses. Though we’re not a heart surgeon, we imagine using the VIX to predict volatility is like using an EKG during a heart attack to tell a man he’s having a heart attack: by the time it tells you what you need to be worried about, it’s too late.

–Of course the VIX isn’t designed to predict things like tsunamis or revolutions. It tells you how investors react to those events (usually defensively). But investors don’t appear to be defensive at all at the moment. Not only has the VIX receded, but the Aussie dollar—the quintessential “risk” currency—is at a post-float high against the U.S. dollar. “There’s low volatility, a stable VIX index and equities are doing well, so you have to be long on the highest-yielding currency you can find,” ANZ’s Tony Allen tells Bloomberg.

–The low volatility may change, at least for a day. Newswires report another earthquake off Japan’s north-east coast this morning. It was smaller than the 9.0 quake on March 18th. But a tsunami warning was issued.

–The bigger question here is whether you can afford to be reactive to events. The market—backed by bullish fund managers and a steady tide of compulsory money—is not sending any distress signals. Mind you, it doesn’t send out engraved invitations to buy when stocks are cheap either.

–Central bankers are like Terminators (cybernetic organisms). Except, instead of destroying their programmed human targets, they destroy normal prices and undermine values (investment and otherwise). This is why Sarah Connor would have made a good investment advisor with her motto, “No one is ever safe.” Or more to the point, no investment is ever safe.

–Our view this Monday is Jeremy Cooper’s view: avoid complacency.  Cooper warned about Aussie banks that still rely on wholesale funding in an article in last week’s Financial Review. “Its been fashionable for awhile in this country to say the Yanks have blown themselves up and China’s now going to be in the ascendancy. We’ve been patting ourselves on the back about our regulatory system,” he said.

–“Something we did learn out of the [Global Financial] crisis is there is a systemic issue here that hasn’t been fixed. It’s how the banks fund themselves and their reliance on wholesale funding that hasn’t been addressed,” he added. Cooper pointed that Aussie banks have borrowed abroad to fund Australia’s domestic spending and investing (mostly on housing). This borrowing is what permits Australia to run a pretty regular current account deficit.

–Or, if we may put it this way, Australia’s housing bubble is built with borrowed money and if the banks don’t find another source of funds (cheap, preferably) already unaffordable house prices will now become even more unaffordable. They may even fall.

–Enter stage right our hero Covered Bonds. If you recall, covered bonds are a type of security sold by a bank to an investor and collateralised by the depositor’s money. Instead of promising some other security as collateral for investor capital, the bank promises your money.

–Treasurer Wayne Swan’s banking overhaul proposes to let banks sell covered bonds up to a limit of 8% of their total assets. According to APRA, the banking system has just over $1.8 trillion in assets. That means Aussie banks could sell about $145 billion in covered bonds, in aggregate. More money for the housing market, anyone?
–The banks like the deal not because it favours creditors over depositors in a bank failure (although it does), but because it gives them a new pool of cash to lend. Because the bonds are secured by depositors (your money) the interest rates on them (what the bank pays investors) is lower than similar bonds secured by nothing at all.

–So the bank pays less. And this, the bankers assure us, means the banks can continue extending credit to Australian businesses and home buyers. It’s  win-win, which means no one loses.

–It IS a bit problematic that the covered bond limit is a percentage of assets and not deposits. In the unlikely event of the total collapse of the Australian housing market and the wipe-out of banks, the value of bank assets would fall, mostly because residential and commercial mortgages make up such a large percentage of bank assets. That means the covered bonds issued would be a larger percentage of liquid bank assets (deposits) than the 8% suggests.

–But don’t worry. Even if the banks’ creditors had access to your deposits ahead of you, the government is the ultimate guarantor of bank deposits via the new Financial Claims Scheme. And even though that scheme isn’t funded yet, we imagine the government can always sell its own bonds to the Reserve Bank in order to raise the cash to pay the depositors of the failed Aussie bank.

–What’s that? What happens if the Reserve Bank doesn’t have the cash? Not a problem! It will just print more. And yes, that will reduce the value of everyone else’s savings. But at least the banks will have been able to keep the housing boom going just a little bit longer, even if has the potential to wipe out risk-averse savers.

–Someone has to pay for a credit boom, you know. And it’s not going to be the bankers or the regulators who make them possible. Speaking of regulators, will someone please explain to us the exalted status Ross Garnaut seems to have in Australian public life?

–Mind you, we have nothing against the guy. He’s probably amiable and well-intentioned enough. But it’s the well-intentioned do-gooding so-called “public servants” you have to worry about the most. In the name of the “public good,” they tend to be the most willing to trash economic and personal liberty.

–In Garnaut’s case, he keeps popping up with “expert” papers on climate change. He’s an economist by training and a climate scientist by self-belief. Of course you don’t have to have a Ph.D to know what you’re talking about. Our modern society is too respectful of credentials and not respectful enough of common sense.  We won’t hold it against Dr. Garnaut that he’s an economist holding forth on the climate.

–After all, we’re a financial scribe with a degree in liberal arts holding forth on the nonsense of Dr. Garnaut’s views. But as a literature major, we also object to his torturous use of the English language. Take this example where he explains why power companies are not entitled to compensation as a result of the carbon tax that he hopes will come into effect next July:

Any fall in asset value stemming from the internalisation of the carbon externality (through pricing carbon) creates no greater case for compensation than other government reforms to reduce other externalities, such as the introduction of measures to discourage smoking, control the use of asbestos or phase out lead in petrol.

–That is prose only an economist could love. And it’s thinking only a dullard or an economic saboteur could embrace. It is revealing, though. Garnaut is saying that when the government decides to intervene and arbitrarily raise prices in a market, it gets to decide who is eligible for compensation.

–This is not sound thinking. But it is, in its own way, logical. When the leader of a gang robs a bank, he gets to decide how the loot is distributed amongst the gang. Garnaut is predicting dire climate consequences without a carbon tax. He recently said, “I would now be tempted to say that views that temperatures and damage from a specified level of emissions over time will be larger than is suggested by the mainstream science are much more likely to be proven correct than those that embody the opposite expectations.”

–What he really means, we think, is this, “Me and the gang that has hired me to make this tax look urgent and respectable to you (mostly by snowing you under with how accomplished and important I am) are now certain that if we don’t tax carbon now the seas will rise and you’ll all drown. So shut up and pay up.”

–You do have to give the climate con gang credit where it’s due. They’ve correctly understood that the demographic challenge facing the Western world probably means a declining tax base from which to finance their Welfare Statist dreams. With that honey-pot tapped out, they need to find a new one, and right quick.

Dan Denning
Dan Denning examines the geopolitical and economic events that can affect your investments domestically. He raises the questions you need to answer, in order to survive financially in these turbulent times.
Reddit

Leave a Reply

72 Comments on "Economic Saboteurs and Dullards"

Notify of
avatar
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Gavin R. Putland
Guest

Australian banks won’t need covered bonds if their domestic customers simply stop borrowing. Speaking of which, a first home buyers’ “strike” launched on March 15 has risen to the top of the Campaign Ideas Forum at GetUp! – http://is.gd/FNiegF .

Biker
Guest

Jeez, Gav… That should help bring rates down, too!~ :D

trested
Guest

Does anyone know just how much Dr Garnaut gets paid by us to promote his thoughts of view?

I still cannot see how his wild theory will work. Who will pay, who will benefit. I suspect that it will be me paying! And a group of over remunerated bureaucrats will benefit. Business will be hit for a six in trying to manage this with a heap of new costs to be paid and little prospect of recovery in the local market.

Too bad.. so sad

Ned S
Guest
“I would now be tempted to say that views that temperatures and damage from a specified level of emissions over time will be larger than is suggested by the mainstream science are much more likely to be proven correct than those that embody the opposite expectations.” I’m happy to do my bit – I’ll let the lawn grow really long thereby promoting more photosynthesis and using less fossil fuel – But I want a bonus rebate from the Greens for creating a nice environment for rats and brown snakes round the place. PS: Do I still get the full rebate… Read more »
Biker
Guest
Yes, a FHB Strike is timely, considering the rental situation: Sydney’s vacancy rate 1.4%, Canberra’s 0.6% and Melbourne 2.8%. Brisbane was 3%, but the floods have tightened the market somewhat. The suburb in which we have rentals is tighter than Sydney, where rents have “…grown on a compounded basis by 8.8% per annum for the last five years…” (AFR March 26 – 27, 2011, p.5.) It’s claimed that a fall in FHBs “…put more pressure on the rental market. ” If that’s true (and it seems likely) a FHB Strike, if well supported, is likely to increase rents; a case… Read more »
Matt Farmer
Guest

Wonderful stuff keep up the good work. Garnaut is wrong. Unfortunately he represents the politicised climate change faction who either have no idea or are set to profit from “green policies.

Stillgotshoeson
Guest

Comment by Gavin R. Putland on 28 March 2011:

Australian banks won’t need covered bonds if their domestic customers simply stop borrowing. Speaking of which, a first home buyers’ “strike” launched on March 15 has risen to the top of the Campaign Ideas Forum at GetUp! – http://is.gd/FNiegF .

Steven Keen is promoting the link on his forum and has supported it.

Rental rates are approaching peak affordability as well so I would not be too concerned about any significant rises in rental rates.
House prices do fall when people stop buying them.. There is some merit in “buyers” strike so to speak.

Biker
Guest

Soes: “I would not be too concerned about any significant rises in rental rates…” Nothing like mates’ rates, Shoes!~ :D

http://www.perthnow.com.au/business/news/rba-may-start-cutting-rates-if-economy-outside-mining-doesnt-improve/story-e6frg2qu-1226029918965?from=public_rss

Ross
Guest

What did that yen intervention do for us? AUD is back to pre-intervention levels and USD is at record highs and QE hot money is running as never before.

Ross
Guest

Shoes, here is the value differential that eventually had me sign on (and stay away) to your “fully valued” line on Tap Oil.

“Apache Energy and Tap Oil have been hit with a $158 million lawsuit by Alcoa, which claims a gas supply contract was breached when services were disrupted by the Varanus Island gas explosion in 2008.”

Elsewhere the XEJ is the leading index recently but it is now time for me to blow off what’s left there.

Stillgotshoeson
Guest
Comment by Ross on 29 March 2011: Shoes, here is the value differential that eventually had me sign on (and stay away) to your “fully valued” line on Tap Oil. “Apache Energy and Tap Oil have been hit with a $158 million lawsuit by Alcoa, which claims a gas supply contract was breached when services were disrupted by the Varanus Island gas explosion in 2008.” Elsewhere the XEJ is the leading index recently but it is now time for me to blow off what’s left there. EEG (former IMP) and BOW are the only energy stocks I will retain. TAP… Read more »
Ross
Guest
@shoes, on the TAP, that was your advice to me some time ago I was feeding back and I ran with it after getting wind of the downstream compensation effects likely after the explosion. On the book, the publisher response is zilch. 4 down to date. I have been advised that I should look beyond Sydney based publishers if I am promoting a book that heralds a corporatist styled redundancy for the city of Sydney, even if it is sympathetically rendered. An undercurrent of universal Deism is also a handicap. Melbourne based publishers or agents may be my next turn.… Read more »
Biker
Guest

“Steven Keen is promoting the link on his forum and has supported it.”

Well, it’s going to be a great success, then!~ :D :D :D

(Isn’t anyone, apart from me, going to give Gavin’s comment a Thumbs Up and five Gold Stars??!~ )

joe
Guest
Fully reinvesting in the Australian public, by way of 100% tax offsets is the only politically and economically sensible thing to do. A carbon tax thats revenue is completely used to offset income tax, is the cheapest and most effective way to reduce carbon emissions. THE CARBON TAX NEED NOT COST 1c. Imagine if the average Australian was slugged an extra $300/yr in energy costs by way of a carbon tax. Unacceptable right? But what if the same average Australian received a reduction in personal income tax of $300/yr? Cost to the average Australian or Australian business $0; Benefit to… Read more »
Stillgotshoeson
Guest

Comment by Ross on 29 March 2011:

@shoes, on the TAP, that was your advice to me some time ago I was feeding back and I ran with it after getting wind of the downstream compensation effects likely after the explosion

About a year or so ago I think… Feb/March last year

trested
Guest
Joe, I don’t follow. The electricity producer pays an extra $300 to produce power for me. They will pass this cost on to me plus a small margin. The government kindly gives me an extra $300 in tax savings. Am I missing something? 1. How will this help reduce the carbon footprint? I really cannot see this changing the behavior or attitude of the end user to any significant extent. 2. Who is going to pay for the cost of administering this – more rules and red tape and penalties and …… 3. Will this be like the GST.. we… Read more »
joe
Guest
@trested >>1. How will this help reduce [my] carbon footprint? Because you have a financial incentive do so. Instead of the average Australian, think of the big carbon footprint Australian. He’s energy costs go up by say $500/yr but he still only gets $300/yr in reduced income tax. He has a $200/yr incentive to reduce his emissions. Pretty significant. >>2. Who is going to pay for the cost of administering this? The administration cost is tiny. A flat tax is applied at the earliest possible point. There are not too many electricty plants to be a burden and petrol excises… Read more »
trested
Guest
Joe, I have an incentive now regarding electricity costs. Why do I need a carbon tax and a tax reduction to make me change? Administration costs will be large. Look what has happened to the cost of water in SE Qld. There will be more than just power plants involved. AND there will be the internal costs – audits, record keeping etc. Do you wanta make a bet that all the revenue will go into the pay packets of the Australian Public. Define revenue! Gross or net. What will be creamed off the the government. What will the salary package… Read more »
Tom Jones
Guest
Joe, Although we dont have any concrete figures yet, It is very dangerous to assume anything. I am going to use myself as an example. I use between 16-18t of CO2 on power/year. With a Carbon price of between $25-$40 that is $400 to $720. Now fracture in petrol/gas/water/food because everything generates CO2, so maybe add 5% to cost of everything. For me that’s an extra $1200. Now add a interest rate hikes because this will flow through to inflation. Say 0.25%. That’s another $1000. OK so now we are at nearly $3,000+ GST which is $3300. For me to… Read more »
Tom Jones
Guest

Sorry made a little mistake.
My $1B cost should have been $8B

joe
Guest

@Tom.
I don’t want to dispute your figures because you have a lot of them and the calculations aren’t all that clear (probably my fault).

However, let’s look at you personally. Australian’s on average produce 18t of CO2/yr. You’re using that just on heating/cooling/lighting your house!? $1200 on petrol/gas/water/food everything else @ $30/tn is an additional 40tn!

You use (18+40) 58/tn of carbon and Australia’s per capita usage is 18!! If any policy to reduce carbon is to be effective you need to pay. If you choose to get a second job instead of reducing your emmissions that’s your choice.

Tom Jones
Guest
@joe Your actually not far off. I used an online calculator, and with air travel (6 flights/y) come in at 57. (Sure if U live inner city, grow veges, bike to work, and live in the dark and dont fly anywhere, it will be less) House ones were right at 18t, but the others I think I was a little out.(But U cant work backwards from the increase to work out the CO2, because not all the increases will be because of a CT, there will be added costs involved). But it doesnt negate the fact if U add $25/t… Read more »
mark
Guest
Now, now Mr. Denning. I think you’re being a bit hard on Ross Garnaut. His statements, when I hear them, seem reasoned and measured. He’s taken quite a long time to understand climate science, which is not his field of expertise. I think he’s done well. What this debate boils down to is whether we should charge a fee for pollution. It’s the old tragedy of the commons on a global scale. Should it be free of cost to emit into the air, or dump into the ocean, particulary as it becomes clear that the dumping causes problems for, and… Read more »
Pete
Guest

@mark

“What this debate boils down to is whether we should charge a fee for pollution.”

Actually, I think the dispute most have is really whether CO2 is pollution or not. And then the next dispute is whether we should be taxed on it, especially if it is unproven. And the final debate is, why should we tax these emissions (‘pollution’) when countries that emit vastly more total emissions are not doing the same.

Lachlan
Guest
According to Australian scientist Dr Evans the big money is in supporting AGW. “I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia’s compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector. FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology and satellite data. I’ve been following the global warming debate closely for years. When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions… Read more »
Lachlan
Guest

Greenhouse lies go back to the very beginning. The greenhouse (structure preventing heat loss via convection) analogy is not even applicable as i said once before.

Then money just corrupted science. And apparently still is.

http://www.climategate.com/top-climatologist-openly-breaks-with-climategate-conspirators

http://www.climategate.com/glaciergate-another-scientist-rats-on-the-ipcc-fraudulent-ways

Stillgotshoeson
Guest

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/bleak-houses-debt-welfare-crisis-in-the-suburbs-20110402-1csmn.html

Better get this carbon tax in so these people will be better of financially due to the governments financial compensation package that will be linked to the carbon price/ETS……..

Dan
Guest
In a way the carbon tax will do to Australia what the European Union did for Germany. That is to create a reason for an unelected and undemocratic beurocracy to siphon off funds from the economy and channel it who-knows-where and who-knows-why. In the confusion everybody will just pay up, being forced to trust the unknown people handling the money to do so honestly and in the best interests of the nation. And just like the European Union, a mass breach of national sovereignty which was neither spontaneous nor a natural progression driven by free markets, the carbon tax will… Read more »
Biker
Guest

Shoes: “I would not be too concerned about any significant rises in rental rates…”

…but…. from your link….

“…Michael Perusco said there had been an alarming rise in the number of low to middle-income women getting pushed out of the rental market due to rent increases…”

Ross
Guest
Would anyone here on the pro side of man made carbon dioxide causation for climate change have any data based refutation of the Evans contention that the ice core data points to historical climate change occuring well before carbon dioxide build up (climate change causation not being from carbon dioxide build up but the latter being a consequence of it)? Scientists do have a poor record, with prognoses more likely to be 100% wrong than 100% right when hypothesising theory on complex systems without first being able to accurately model measured and controlled systemic outcomes. For mine this validates that… Read more »
Don
Guest

They talk about using the money from a carbon tax to bring tax relief for low and middle class taxpayers. All fine and dandy whilst you have a job…..

Biker
Guest

How else can Gold (note cap) reach its zenith unless we bring the economy to its knees, Don?! Unemployment, a crashed sharemarket, zero interest rates, paper money scorched, property down the gurgler… it’s all necessary for PMs to achieve a Splendid New Age. :D

Astonishing how many goldbugs seem to vociferously oppose this new tax… .
It may herald the Armageddon for which we strive and spruik!~ ;)

Stillgotshoeson
Guest

Comment by Ross on 3 April 2011:

Scientists do have a poor record, with prognoses more likely to be 100% wrong than 100% right when hypothesising theory on complex systems without first being able to accurately model measured and controlled systemic outcomes.

For mine this validates that the scepticism of consensus scientific opinion remains more empirically valid than belief.

100% Agree Ross

Steve
Guest
Lachlan
Guest
BP I think it’s possible that if the PMs do help anyone maintain or increase their wealth then (a) Very few average Joes will get involved…they still aren’t in fact the public are selling into the bubble highs they perceive. I still cannot find anyone who goes along with my whacky gold ideas outside of internet venues. and (b) even after the fact the same people will not even know it happened. Because I believe the changes will occur in real terms which people won’t generally perceive and nominal values will be transformed greatly through inflation between now and then.… Read more »
Biker
Guest
It’s curious, though, Lachlan. I was reading a post recently which stated that if one had purchased an ounce of Gold back in early 2009, one would have made just $35 per year (less tax, of course.) With inflation at around 3% per annum, Gold doesn’t look all that shiny in the last two years… . Carbon taxes? I’m more-and-more into conspiracy theories. How likely might it be that DRA and MMA are conspiring with Julia and Bob, to bring Australia to its knees, crash the economy and force a Gold bubble to $6K?!! Investment tip: Baked beans, tissues and… Read more »
Dan
Guest

Not about conspiracy theories but, coming from Labour/Greens the tax would be used as a step towards their ultimate Troskyite/Socialist agenda with its single/united world government, currency and nanny-state social agenda, by whatever means necessary. These ideologies are not dead, as much as they are unmentioned. But if you still want to go on thinking this is all about saving the planet from soot, then go ahead.

Dan
Guest

Steve, looks like we got out of the bank’s grasp with perfect timing. Not a big problem for people with no debts who collect rent, except selling for profit will be next to impossible for a while.

Lachlan
Guest

Agreed the AUD has kept our gold quiet BP. In a portfolio of currencies I viewed recently it was the best performer. I see pullbacks in AUDUSD only within an up-trending market there such as for eg sometime over next 1-9 months a sharp dip to 89 before a stronger run-up. It doesn’t matter how bad it gets here I’m sure most will be worse off. We have a small pop. and lots of resources.
On the bright side of gold I think its a good buy now with the AUD so strong.

Biker
Guest

HaHa…! You weren’t sucked-in, were you, Dan?
Article written by Lirpa Loof, you’ll notice?!~ :D

Biker Pete
Guest

Dan / Lachlan, you may have noticed how quietly Kris and Dan have gone along with Jools’ tax…. no real dissent at all. My theory? Either they’re Closet Greens or actually in bed with the tax. May even have given Gillard the blueprint… or ‘incepted’ it. Really good doco about that recently by that Italian fella, Deek-something… .

Now, think about it. This damned economy has been almost bullet-proof for six years our heroes have been calling crash.

The Master Plan calls for a masterly intervention to ruin Oz.
The Carbon Tax is the answer!
I’m buying GOLD!!~ ;)

Dan
Guest

Nice one. Every day is a fools day for some.

Dan
Guest

The so-called bullet-proofness of our economy more recently has come at enormous cost (yet to be realised), from being debt free to… how many hundred billion is our sovereign debt now? Basically they bailed the banks here too through housing, the difference being that here it was more or less successful in the short/medium term.

But is the sovereign debt sustainable? I don’t know, but maybe it was okay because we have the ability as a nation to pay it back by basically giving away our rocks, and in the near future, taxing our farts,

Stillgotshoeson
Guest
Comment by Lachlan on 3 April 2011: Agreed the AUD has kept our gold quiet BP. In a portfolio of currencies I viewed recently it was the best performer. I see pullbacks in AUDUSD only within an up-trending market there such as for eg sometime over next 1-9 months a sharp dip to 89 before a stronger run-up. It doesn’t matter how bad it gets here I’m sure most will be worse off. We have a small pop. and lots of resources. On the bright side of gold I think its a good buy now with the AUD so strong.… Read more »
Biker
Guest

Don’t feel too badly about being taken in by Lirpa Loof, Dan.
Look how excited poor Steve was… .

Even funnier AFJ over at MMA, apparently.
Some pesky prograndma apparently fed them the Alchemist’s Wirus,
which transforms grey dross stars into Gold Stars… and vice-versa.
This means that if you hit a Thumbs-Up, within a few minutes it goes Thumbs
Down. Worse still, Gold Stars are transformed into dross! O the Horrorscope!

All kinds of theories about how this has happened, but, like most realities,
the editors have refrained from comment… .

Dan
Guest

I ignore the ratings and just read the comments.

Biker
Guest

Actually the COMMENTS are the funniest part!~
(Especially today’s…! :D )

Stillgotshoeson
Guest

@Lachlan Maximus are doing a Share Purchase Plan @.017 Going to buy $5000 worth under the SPP.. Options are $2500, $5000 or $15000. Figured I would take the middle option. Expecting drill results from one of their tenements soon.

HAW had a big move on Friday..50% Might be worth a look for you. (Still under 2 cents) may pull back a little.

Lachlan
Guest

Good one Shoes I’ll look into both….looking for metal and paper next few weeks.
Checked FMLs other night and still looking good for a shot higher imo .
I think the markets will resolve themselves to the upside here rather than lower after last weeks moves. Silver poised and aud already leading up but maybe worst case short term a continued grind sideways.
I’ve been pleased with some drill results from a number of my smaller punts recently..who said all the gold was gone ;)

Lachlan
Guest

was hoping for some some NCM at 33.50 last month or so but not so lucky there….will wait, its a good one to accumulate on dips.

wpDiscuz
Letters will be edited for clarity, punctuation, spelling and length. Abusive or off-topic comments will not be posted. We will not post all comments.
If you would prefer to email the editor, you can do so by sending an email to letters@dailyreckoning.com.au