SP Cryptozone

💥 警告：明天壓力加大 🛑🌪️
🚨 發生了一件重大事件——幾乎沒有人討論它。

在大約六十年後的第一次，中央銀行的黃金儲備超過了美國國債。

這一發展並非偶然。
他們利用了市場的弱點——時機至關重要。

如果您目前持有任何投資，這是一件您需要完全關注的事情。

這與信仰無關。
這與政治無關。
而且這當然不僅僅是關於投資組合的多樣化。

Silver has just undergone its most significant single-day decline since 1980, plummeting over 32% in one session. Within a span of 48 hours, approximately $2.5 trillion in market capitalization vanished. Such drastic moves do not occur without reason, prompting a question that many investors thought had been resolved.

Is JPMorgan once again at the heart of the controversy?

This inquiry is based on solid ground. JPMorgan Chase has a well-documented history of manipulating precious metals. Between 2008 and 2016, U. S. regulators, including the DOJ and CFTC, imposed fines totaling $920 million on the bank for systematic spoofing in gold and silver markets. They employed hundreds of thousands of false orders to sway prices, which were later canceled. Several traders faced criminal charges. These details are indisputable.

Given this context, the rapidity and nature of the recent decline in silver are concerning for market participants.

To grasp the situation, it's essential to know how silver is traded today.

A minimal amount of trading involves physical metal. The majority takes place via futures contracts. For every ounce of tangible silver, there are numerous paper claims linked to it. This discrepancy allows for drastic price fluctuations without any substantial change in physical supply or demand.

JPMorgan holds a distinctive position within this framework. It is among the largest bullion banks on COMEX and one of the most significant holders of both registered and eligible physical silver. This grants them exposure to the paper market along with control over actual delivery. Few entities possess this dual leverage.

Now consider the vital question:

Who gains the most when a highly leveraged market crashes abruptly?

Certainly not retail investors.
Not funds that are close to their margin limits.

The advantage goes to the institution with a robust balance sheet capable of enduring margin calls—along with the liquidity necessary to purchase when others have to sell off.

Before the crash, silver had been experiencing a steep upward trajectory. Long positions became crowded, many utilizing leverage. As prices began to decline, those exits weren’t voluntary. Increased margin requirements and collateral requests led to forced sell-offs.

Simultaneously, exchanges significantly raised margin requirements, demanding additional capital merely to maintain open positions. Many traders couldn’t meet these demands. This resulted in automatic liquidations, which hastened the downturn.

This is where JPMorgan’s scale becomes significant.

In scenarios like this, a well-funded institution can engage in various strategies:
• Buy futures at considerably reduced prices
• Acquire physical silver while prices are down
• Utilize margin increases to diminish competition by forcing out leveraged traders
During the decline, COMEX data indicates that JPMorgan sold 633 February silver contracts, which positioned them on the short side at the time of delivery. Traders are circulating a straightforward theory: short positions were established near the high point and then closed at significantly lower prices, while other positions were liquidated.

Now, let’s take a broader view.

In the U. S. paper markets, the value of silver plummeted. In contrast, physical silver in Shanghai remained significantly higher, at times nearing $136. This difference in pricing is crucial. It indicates that physical demand did not disappear; instead, it was the paper price that fell.

What occurred wasn’t a surge of actual silver entering the market. It was a liquidation driven by paper transactions under the stress of leverage.

This situation—characterized by the dominance of paper, increased margin requirements, forced selling, and a lack of clarity—is precisely where the largest market players have historically excelled.

There’s no need to assert that JPMorgan “caused” the crash to identify the issue. The structure of the market inherently favors those with significant resources, capital, and access during times of heightened volatility.

When this framework intersects with an institution that has faced consequences for manipulating silver previously, it’s not a matter of conspiracy—it’s a logical skepticism.

History doesn’t need to repeat itself to resonate.

This is especially true in a market founded on leverage, lack of transparency, and paper guarantees.

Stay connected with Wendy for further updates.

#Binance #wendy #XAG
$XAG

關於黃金在一天內暴跌9%的討論非常多。雖然這種波動似乎很顯著，但它僅僅是一個轉移注意力的手段。這只是表面上的噪音。

更令人擔憂的現實要深得多。

黃金實際上已經減少了99.9%。
$XAU
這可能看起來荒謬——直到你重新考慮這個視角。

想象一下：如果人類在公元500年停止黃金開採會怎樣？再也沒有額外的供應。永遠不會。一個完全受限的貨幣基礎。在這種情況下，一盎司黃金今天不會被交換成幾千美元。