25 November 2008

Hommel can be a goose ~ Perth Mint "lies" claim very weak

Well, Jason, the media has not woken up.

"Reportedly, "One European client purchased 30,000 ounces for $33 million." The math is critically important here to show the fraud. That purchase is for gold at $1100/oz.! That's quite a bit above spot! That's $350/oz. above spot!

Either Perth Mint is lying, or there is a very naive investor desperately trying to buy $33 million worth of Perth Mint overpriced gold. Let's assume Perth is telling the truth about this purchase."

Well Jason, last time I looked, the Perth Mint was in Western Australia and it therefore sells Gold in Australian dollars, if such an obivious fact escapes you, how can we credit your analysis.

However, Jason's tirades are having some impact on the Mint's cred and a clear statement of exactly how much leverage/fractional backing is involved in the Perth Mints unallocated certificate program would be timely. The Perth Mint must prove it did not allow itself to be captured by the quants (like everybody else) and demonstrate that a sudden remontisation of Silver defacto or de jure and explosion will not stress its balance sheet. I predict just such an explosion is comming.

Perth Mint Fraud Revealed
At last, the media wakes up.
Silver Stock Report
by Jason Hommel, November 23rd, 2008

Of all the frauds that I work to expose, one of the hardest for people to see is the Perth Mint Fraud. The Perth Mint has issued $1.5 billion in gold and silver certificates, for the express purpose of "working inventory," but it is probably being used for "legacy debt," and so, I believe most of it is totally unbacked, based on customer complaints and reports of how they operate.

Some Perth customers can't see it, because they claim to be able to get silver or gold from Perth on a regular basis. Clearly, banks can continue to operate on a 1% reserve requirement, and continue to pay out depositors, and stay in business, despite not having reserves to back up 99% of depositors. Other customers are clearly able to see the fraud, based on the delays, high costs, and extra fees that the Perth Mint charges.

But a recent press release exposes their fraud even more than I ever did.

Mint suspends orders amid rush to buy bullion

Reportedly, the Perth Mint has suspended orders until January. But, despite having $1.5 billion to be used for working inventory so that they can fill orders, they cannot fill orders.

That should be enough to settle the matter. It shows that if you have any Perth certificates, you should GET OUT.

But there's more evidence:

Reportedly, "One European client purchased 30,000 ounces for $33 million." The math is critically important here to show the fraud. That purchase is for gold at $1100/oz.! That's quite a bit above spot! That's $350/oz. above spot!

Either Perth Mint is lying, or there is a very naive investor desperately trying to buy $33 million worth of Perth Mint overpriced gold. Let's assume Perth is telling the truth about this purchase.

It actually costs the SAME amount to mint gold, as silver. The only difference is that you need more capital costs, more gold, to mint gold, because some gold is always "in flux" in the minting process. But with the Perth Mint having a reported $1.5 billion in silver and gold to be used for that, at zero interest rate, thanks to the certificate holders, this is not a cost for them.

So, if we assume $1/oz. in costs, then Perth has earned, on that one reported gold deal, at least $349 x 30,000, which is $10.4 million dollars. This is important to note, because it's enough to fund the development of from 20 to 40 new mints with all state of the art equipment. Therefore it's telling for me to read that they are working "non stop" to fill orders. Why can't they spend money to expand capacity 20 to 40 fold?

I think it's because $10 million is not enough to pay back a $1.5 billion legacy debt.

What's more revealing is what I exposed in my last report:
Where's the Abundance of Perth Mint Rounds?! September 6, 2008

I noted: "If only 1/10th of the $880 million of gold and silver certificates is in silver (and they don't reveal what percentage it is), then that would be $88 million. Divide by $13 = 6.8 million ounces of silver. If that much were minted monthly, that would come out to 81 million one ounce rounds, which would be 4 times as many coins minted by the U.S. Mint."

Since that report, Perth revealed that their certificates are $1.5 billion, not the $880 million as of last year.

Again, let's run some math. If we assume 1/4 of the $1.5 billion is in silver, that's $375 million, at $10/oz, that's 37.5 million oz. If we assume a minting turn around time of a full one month, that amount of "working inventory" could be used to mint (37.5 x 12) 450 million ounces per year.


The U.S. Mint only makes 20 million oz. per year, since doubling capacity in 2008! Clearly, the Perth Mint is practicing "standard fractional reserve banking" type fraud, since they need to shut down because of too many orders.

This shows that probably 99% of Perth Mint issued certificates are fraudulent, and backed by nothing more than a promise to repay.

Why is this important? Because $1.5 million worth of investment demand was siphoned away from gold and silver and into Perth Mint gold and silver certifiate fraud instead. If $1.5 million went into silver, instead, the silver price would probably be more than $25/oz. That, according to Ted Butler, could have added about $10 billion worth to the existing stock of real silver, and another $10 billion in market cap to the silver stocks. Fruad hurts more than just the people defrauded, it hurts the entire industry. It also hurts the entire world.

I'm surprised that more people are not outraged by this fraud.

To see more of my reports on the Perth fraud, see here:

Where's the Abundance of Perth Mint Rounds?! September 6, 2008
Nadler, Kitco, Perth, Matthey; Sold Out! September 3, 2008
Perth Mint Crisis Watch 5 June 6, 2008
Perth Mint Crisis Watch May 23, 2008
Perth Mint Crisis: Solutions and Ramifications May 23, 2008
To the largest newspapers in Australia May 22, 2008
To the government of Western Australia May 21, 2008
Poor Prospects for Kitco/Perth/Matthey May 19, 2008
Kitco / Perth Mint / AGR Matthey / Bullion Bank Connections May 17, 2008
Will Kitco Sue me?! May 16, 2008
Silver Shortage Drives Men Nuts March 31, 2008
Perth Mint and Kitco Scheme Exposed March 26, 2008


Jason Hommel


Matt said...

Hi Jason, have you considered that the amount paid for the 30,000 oz could have been in AUD?

kevin said...

Exactly the point I made in the post, Matt. Fundamentalists miss fundamentals often.

kevin said...

The whole piece launches off that flawed premise, don't it.
I really need to research this myself, I have enormous confidence in the Perth Mint as an institution, but as a person who recommends them, I need to ramp up my confidence level in the light of "things falling apart".

Unknown said...

On contacting the Mint, they advised that the suspension was only only for minted coins, no problem getting the metals themselves. Another flawed premise in his argument.

His whole piece has the tones of a highschool essay!

kevin said...

Thx Ken. Calvin Bear I have posted here, he hails from Perth and always expresses great confidence and seems well informed. Thx For that, Ken.

Bron Suchecki said...

Kevin, what do you mean exactly by fractional backing? The Mint's website http://www.perthmint.com.au/investment_invest_in_gold_storage_options.aspx has a pretty clear statement about unallocated: "The Mint purchases an ounce of precious metal from the spot market for every unallocated ounce it sells to clients. Accordingly every unallocated ounce is 100% backed."

kevin said...


I hadn't seen that. I guess my point was that the Perth Mint would not really need to back *every* unallocated silver certificate with real silver at a 100% ratio to be totally sound.
I guess I was making excuses for a problem that doesn't even arise and operating on a mistaken presumption that the backing was less than 100%.

I refute the prior assertion. The Perth Mint hopefully retains a pre modern banking probity and I withdraw the claim.

kevin said...

Hommel was a early bull and for the record once sent a free silver oz to anyone who asked. Like a GP with a reps pen, maybe it gave Jas some undeserved cred. I have never regarded his tirades about the Perth Mint as accurate by any means, but in the light of appalling practices in the US at some institutions, metal accounts with no metal, really funny relationships with Bullion Banks....a little mud stuck, alas.

Here for the record is the Perth Mint FAQ. Its seems clear an unambigious.

"What is the difference between allocated and unallocated storage?

The key difference is one of segregation of the physical metal behind the deposit.


Allocated storage is the traditional way of holding precious metals. Clients purchase specific physical coins or bars from the Mint. The Mint removes these from its operating inventory and places them in the Perth Mint Depository vault under the client's account number (to preserve client's privacy from vault staff).

Allocated precious metal is therefore segregated from the Mint's operating inventory and is held under a custody arrangement. Allocated metal does not appear on The Perth Mint's balance sheet.

At purchase, clients pay for the precious metal in the bar or coin, the relevant fabrication charges, and one year's storage fees.


With unallocated storage, also known as a metal account, clients purchase an interest in a pool of precious metal held by The Perth Mint. The Mint purchases an ounce of precious metal from the spot market for every unallocated ounce it sells to clients. Accordingly every unallocated ounce is 100% backed.

The precious metal purchased by the Mint is recorded on its balance sheet as an asset and the unallocated amounts sold to clients are recorded as a liability.

At purchase, clients only pay for the precious metal. There are no fabrication charges or storage fees, until clients elect to convert their unallocated into a specific coin or bar, which they can do at any time.


How can unallocated be 100% backed, yet there is no storage fee?

Unlike other depositories, which are merely warehouses, The Perth Mint is a manufacturer of precious metal products and through its interest in AGR Matthey, one of the world's largest refiners. Accordingly, the Mint has a substantial requirement for physical metal to support these operations.

To fund this work-in-progress inventory, the Mint traditionally borrowed metal from bullion banks, at cost. At the same time, there were investors storing metal with bullion banks and others, at cost.

The Mint realised that if it took deposits directly from investors, it could cut out the intermediary and create a win-win situation: the Mint wins by obtaining free funding for its inventory and investors win by getting free 100% backed storage.

In order for The Perth Mint to utilise a client's unallocated metal, the PMDS and PMCP client agreements are structured so that a client permits The Perth Mint to use the client's unallocated metal "for its own account as if it were the owner". As this usage provides a small commercial benefit to the Mint, it is able to offer a fee-free storage and provide simpler transaction procedures that many clients find attractive.


"As if it were the owner" is very wide, what is the Mint's policy on use of unallocated metal?

The Western Australian Government imposes strict guidelines on The Perth Mint's management. The Perth Mint is not a bullion bank and does not provide project financing or bullion lending/derivative services to mining companies or other entities. It does not lend client's unallocated metal to support short selling transactions or other derivative activities. The unallocated metal is utilised solely to fund the Mint's operations.

The Perth Mint's business mission is to provide investors with one of the world's safest locations for precious metal storage, especially in an environment of increasing global financial and corporate risk. Use of unallocated metal outside of The Perth Mint's operations is not consistent with this mission. It would introduce an unacceptable level of risk and compromise the Mint's growing international reputation as a safe haven depository.


Does usage of the metal by the Mint affect my ability to collect physical metal?

Any use by the Mint of unallocated metal does not affect a client's right at any time to sell or request delivery of metal in a physical form. The Mint has a legal obligation to ensure client precious metal is available for collection within a specified period from the date of receiving a client's instructions.
The Perth Mint maintains finished goods inventory of its coins and bars at all times to meet normal demand from its distributors and Depository clients. Accordingly, unallocated clients will usually be able to convert their metal within a few days of giving notice.

However, it is important to note that if you request a physical product that is not in stock, or a very large quantity, the Mint may need to manufacture it. The lead times for manufacture will depend upon the size of the order, current demand and production capacity. It is because of this uncertainty that some clients choose allocated storage - as their metal has already been fabricated it is ready for collection at short notice.

Clients worried about potential delays in collecting metal in extreme circumstances, but with concerns about the cost of allocated storage, usually take a staged approach:
While the world environment is benign, they hold unallocated. They do not incur ongoing storage costs and fabrication charges.
When the environment becomes uncertain and risky, they convert to allocated.
When the world is at a crisis point, they take delivery of their physical metal.

This approach can save clients significant amounts of money as it may be some time between stage 1 and 2. Clients who do not feel they can judge the shift from stage 1 to 2, or feel it may be sudden and unpredictable, opt for allocated as they are using precious metals as "insurance" and see the storage fees as the cost of that insurance.


If unallocated is on the balance sheet, doesn't that mean I am exposed if the Mint becomes insolvent?

Correct. However, as The Perth Mint is wholly owned by the Government of Western Australia and operates under an explicit Government Guarantee, your exposure is actually to the Government's solvency. Perth Mint Depository clients ultimately accept a sovereign risk exposure to the State of Western Australia.

The Government Guarantee section of this website provides further information on the relationship between the Mint and the Government and the strength of the Government's balance sheet. Given that Governments have the power to tax, most investors view the possibility of a Government becoming insolvent as highly unlikely."

Anonymous said...

To find an honest answer as to what this often touted guarantee actually is, it is necessary to refer to the enabling WA State legislation under which the Gold Corporation (and The Perth Mint) were incorporated; the GOLD CORPORATION ACT 1987.

Here is a link to the act:

Here is a link to the specific reference to the Guarantee in the GOLD CORPORATION ACT 1987:

It only guarantees to pay you back the purchase price of any gold or silver which falls into default - which means that should metals go to the moon and the mint defaults, you will miss out on ALL of the profit in the rise!

kevin said...

As a matter of pragmatism, moving accounts to the allocated category when we reach the old highs, and off the balance sheet of the mint might be an idea.

Bron Suchecki said...

I'm not sure how you read "the cash equivalent of gold due" to mean the purchase price. Unallocated is an ounce denominated debt to the client hence the reference to "gold due" not money due or intitial money paid.

The situation in which default will arise will be because the Mint does not have physical gold when clients request collection or sale.

In respect of a request to sell, that will create a money debt at the current market price, which will be covered by s22(1)(b) "all moneys due and payable".

In the case of a collection, the most likely reason for default would be theft of the Mint's metal. On that event occuring, the Mint would not wait for insurance to be worked out or the government guarantee but immediately buy the replacement metal on the market so that it can meet its obligations. This would create a loss in the Mint's books, which if not made good by the insurer, would have to be worn by the Government anyway as it is the sole shareholder.

Only in the situation where the Mint does not purchase replacement metal, does not meet is delivery obligations, would you then need to invoke the Government guarantee. Because the default by the Mint was for a gold ounce denominated debt then that is the claim on the Government and the "cash" paid to you must be "equivalent" enough to allow you to buy the gold to make good the debt.

kevin said...

This is a thread of great significance in the light of all the misinformation going around, especially for our american cousins who's lack of faith in all institutions leaves only the dangers of taking delivery, as well as my family and friends who have taken my advice and made this investment. Thx to all for this...

Bron Suchecki said...

I would like to note that I'm no apologist for unallocated or allocated versus personal possession. In this blog http://goldchat.blogspot.com/2008/10/unallocated-vs-allocated.html I suggest a staged approach:

1. While the world environment is benign, hold unallocated as you won't incur ongoing storage costs and fabrication charges.
2. When the environment becomes uncertain and risky, convert to allocated.
3. When the world is at a crisis point, take delivery of their physical metal.

This approach can save you significant amounts of money as it may be some time between stage 1 and 2. The important point is that each person will have a different assessment of what stage we are at, so there is no right or wrong answer.

Anonymous said...


“However, Jason's tirades are having some impact on the Mint's cred and a clear statement of exactly how much leverage/fractional backing is involved in the Perth Mints unallocated certificate program would be timely.”

this could be useful:


Anonymous said...

There are some real clowns in the world. Hommel is one of them. He has no qualification to speak of in this matter and is just a lay person with a questionable background and religious beliefs. I wipe my ass with psychology degrees. If he were in Australia, he would probably be asked to politely and publicly apologise or lose the last $10 in his bank account to a defamation suit. Western Australia has better per capita wealth, literacy, standard of living etc. than any state of the united states and accordingly ownership by the state's government ensures good corporate governance and complete financial backing.

Australia's numerous gold mines give the gold to the AGR Matthey Refinery which the Western Australian Government has a large stake in and they in turn provide this to the mint for its operations. Australia is a first class country in terms of corporate governance and it has been less affected by the financial melt down than any other OECD nation. If anything, Australia should be the first place American's should be investing in right now as it will be the strongest western economy for the next 40 years (see IMF/ World Bank projections). To be anything in Australia you generally need to work hard and have several degres/ post graduate qualifications. People like this have no say in the country. In addition to the compulsory annual financial audits, the firm has engaged internal independent auditors from the world's leading accounting firms over the years to review all of its operations. These firms are the custodians for about half the world's equity wealth. According to information I found on the web, AGR Matthey is similarly audited to a similar level. Believe it or not that America might be large in terms of population and finance, but there are other countries that are doing a better job economically and socially with fewer people or land resources.

If you believe this little guy's web rant over these trusted institutions, then you should probably question your sanity and whether you deserve to have the privelege of owning precious metals. Perhaps he just wants you to give the cash to his acme investment co/cult. Has he ever had a tour of the mint to see all of the bars of metal? The mint has been going for a century or so and has had generations of different management which would all have literally been involved in the scam of the century if this has been occurring for such a long time. A fraud of the size reported would require maximum collusion and anyone involved in fraud analysis would know that this is least likely to occur. In addition, there is an entire elite police division in Western Australia charged with the sole purpose of catching anyone involved in gold theft. If you seriously believe you are a hero Hummel, you would come to Australia and provide a full list of your accusations to the police, but I warn you that you could potentially be charged for wasting police time.

I have performed a scientific examination of Hummel's features when smiling per his web page and the closest match I could find from a pool of 2500 faces was David Koresh. Go on gullible people - drink the Kool Aid :)

Anonymous said...

I am not sure if Hommel is aware of this, but Western Australia is a renegade state to the extent that they follow Christianity during the day, but practice voodoo at night as 70% of their ancestry is from the Carribean. The grand shamen of Western Australia has placed a curse on Hommel to instantly combust on the 6/6 of this year. One of the major tests of becomming a shamen is to cause the death of your enemy via this method, so I suggest that he fly to WA to kiss the ring of the shamen before the gates of hell are opened and demons violently take his soul.

He may wake up blind before then.