Monday, March 26, 2012

Tungsten filled Gold bars

ABC Bullion received the following email from one of our refinery partners this week as a general warning to those in the bullion industry.

Note:

  • ABC Bullion did not purchased this bar, the bar was bought by a dealer in the UK that has no connection to ABC Bullion, the email and photos were sent to us as a general warning.
  • The bar is a "one off"  
  • I xxxx'ed out the city's name to avoid any second guessing as to the name of the dealer.

19/03/2012:

Attached are photographs of a legitimate Metalor 1000gm Au bar that has been drilled out and filled with Tungsten (W).

This bar was purchased by staff of a scrap dealer in xxxxx, UK yesterday. The bar appeared to be perfect other than the fact that it was 2gms underweight. It was checked by hand-held xrf and showed 99.98% Au. Being Tungsten, it would not be ferro-magnetic. The bar was supplied with the original certificate. 

The owner of the business that purchased the bar only became suspicious when he realized the weight discrepancy and had the bar cropped. He estimates between 30-40% of the weight of the bar to be Tungsten. 
 
This is very worrying and reinforces the lengths that people are willing to go to profit from the current high metal prices. Please be careful.
 

Thursday, March 15, 2012

'God's Worker' Respondes to NYT OpEd

Greg Smith's OpEd in today's NYT has forced the man at the top to respond.  That's right, God's Worker himself has chimed in on the opinion of his 'disgruntled' former employee:

March 14, 2012
Our Response to Today’s New York Times Op-Ed:
By now, many of you have read the submission in today’s New York Times by a former employee of the firm.  Needless to say, we were disappointed to read the assertions made by this individual that do not reflect our values, our culture and how the vast majority of people at Goldman Sachs think about the firm and the work it does on behalf of our clients.

In a company of our size, it is not shocking that some people could feel disgruntled.  But that does not and should not represent our firm of more than 30,000 people. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion.  But, it is unfortunate that an individual opinion about Goldman Sachs is amplified in a newspaper and speaks louder than the regular, detailed and intensive feedback you have provided the firm and independent, public surveys of workplace environments.
While I expect you find the words you read today foreign from your own day-to-day experiences, we wanted to remind you what we, as a firm – individually and collectively – think about Goldman Sachs and our client-driven culture.
First, 85 percent of the firm responded to our recent People Survey, which provides the most detailed and comprehensive review to determine how our people feel about Goldman Sachs and the work they do.
And, what do our people think about how we interact with our clients?  Across the firm at all levels, 89 percent of you said that that the firm provides exceptional service to them.  For the group of nearly 12,000 vice presidents, of which the author of today’s commentary was, that number was similarly high.
Anyone who feels otherwise has available to him or her a mechanism for anonymously expressing their concerns.  We are not aware that the writer of the opinion piece expressed misgivings through this avenue, however, if an individual expresses issues, we examine them carefully and we will be doing so in this case.
Our firm has had its share of challenges during and after the financial crisis, but your pride in Goldman Sachs is clear.  You’ve not only told us, you have told external surveys.
Just two weeks ago, Goldman Sachs was named one of the best places to work in the United Kingdom, where this employee resides.  The firm was the highest placed financial services company for the third consecutive year and was the only one in its peer group to make the top 25.
We are far from perfect, but where the firm has seen a problem, we’ve responded to it seriously and substantively.  And we have demonstrated that fact.
It is unfortunate that all of you who worked so hard through a difficult environment over the last few years now have to respond to this. But, our response is best demonstrated in how we really work with and help our clients through our commitment to their long-term interests.  That priority has distinguished us in the past, through the financial crisis and today.
Thank you.
Lloyd C. Blankfein Gary D. Cohn
Via the WSJ

Why I Am Leaving Goldman Sachs

By GREG SMITH
Published: March 14, 2012
TODAY is my last day at Goldman Sachs. After almost 12 years at the firm — first as a summer intern while at Stanford, then in New York for 10 years, and now in London — I believe I have worked here long enough to understand the trajectory of its culture, its people and its identity. And I can honestly say that the environment now is as toxic and destructive as I have ever seen it.
To put the problem in the simplest terms, the interests of the client continue to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money. Goldman Sachs is one of the world’s largest and most important investment banks and it is too integral to global finance to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of college that I can no longer in good conscience say that I identify with what it stands for. 
It might sound surprising to a skeptical public, but culture was always a vital part of Goldman Sachs’s success. It revolved around teamwork, integrity, a spirit of humility, and always doing right by our clients. The culture was the secret sauce that made this place great and allowed us to earn our clients’ trust for 143 years. It wasn’t just about making money; this alone will not sustain a firm for so long. It had something to do with pride and belief in the organization. I am sad to say that I look around today and see virtually no trace of the culture that made me love working for this firm for many years. I no longer have the pride, or the belief.
But this was not always the case. For more than a decade I recruited and mentored candidates through our grueling interview process. I was selected as one of 10 people (out of a firm of more than 30,000) to appear on our recruiting video, which is played on every college campus we visit around the world. In 2006 I managed the summer intern program in sales and trading in New York for the 80 college students who made the cut, out of the thousands who applied. 
I knew it was time to leave when I realized I could no longer look students in the eye and tell them what a great place this was to work. 
When the history books are written about Goldman Sachs, they may reflect that the current chief executive officer, Lloyd C. Blankfein, and the president, Gary D. Cohn, lost hold of the firm’s culture on their watch. I truly believe that this decline in the firm’s moral fiber represents the single most serious threat to its long-run survival. 
Over the course of my career I have had the privilege of advising two of the largest hedge funds on the planet, five of the largest asset managers in the United States, and three of the most prominent sovereign wealth funds in the Middle East and Asia. My clients have a total asset base of more than a trillion dollars. I have always taken a lot of pride in advising my clients to do what I believe is right for them, even if it means less money for the firm. This view is becoming increasingly unpopular at Goldman Sachs. Another sign that it was time to leave.
How did we get here? The firm changed the way it thought about leadership. Leadership used to be about ideas, setting an example and doing the right thing. Today, if you make enough money for the firm (and are not currently an ax murderer) you will be promoted into a position of influence. 
What are three quick ways to become a leader? a) Execute on the firm’s “axes,” which is Goldman-speak for persuading your clients to invest in the stocks or other products that we are trying to get rid of because they are not seen as having a lot of potential profit. b) “Hunt Elephants.” In English: get your clients — some of whom are sophisticated, and some of whom aren’t — to trade whatever will bring the biggest profit to Goldman. Call me old-fashioned, but I don’t like selling my clients a product that is wrong for them. c) Find yourself sitting in a seat where your job is to trade any illiquid, opaque product with a three-letter acronym.
Today, many of these leaders display a Goldman Sachs culture quotient of exactly zero percent. I attend derivatives sales meetings where not one single minute is spent asking questions about how we can help clients. It’s purely about how we can make the most possible money off of them. If you were an alien from Mars and sat in on one of these meetings, you would believe that a client’s success or progress was not part of the thought process at all.
It makes me ill how callously people talk about ripping their clients off. Over the last 12 months I have seen five different managing directors refer to their own clients as “muppets,” sometimes over internal e-mail. Even after the S.E.C., Fabulous Fab, Abacus, God’s work, Carl Levin, Vampire Squids? No humility? I mean, come on. Integrity? It is eroding. I don’t know of any illegal behavior, but will people push the envelope and pitch lucrative and complicated products to clients even if they are not the simplest investments or the ones most directly aligned with the client’s goals? Absolutely. Every day, in fact. 
It astounds me how little senior management gets a basic truth: If clients don’t trust you they will eventually stop doing business with you. It doesn’t matter how smart you are. 
These days, the most common question I get from junior analysts about derivatives is, “How much money did we make off the client?” It bothers me every time I hear it, because it is a clear reflection of what they are observing from their leaders about the way they should behave. Now project 10 years into the future: You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that the junior analyst sitting quietly in the corner of the room hearing about “muppets,” “ripping eyeballs out” and “getting paid” doesn’t exactly turn into a model citizen.
When I was a first-year analyst I didn’t know where the bathroom was, or how to tie my shoelaces. I was taught to be concerned with learning the ropes, finding out what a derivative was, understanding finance, getting to know our clients and what motivated them, learning how they defined success and what we could do to help them get there. 
My proudest moments in life — getting a full scholarship to go from South Africa to Stanford University, being selected as a Rhodes Scholar national finalist, winning a bronze medal for table tennis at the Maccabiah Games in Israel, known as the Jewish Olympics — have all come through hard work, with no shortcuts. Goldman Sachs today has become too much about shortcuts and not enough about achievement. It just doesn’t feel right to me anymore. 
I hope this can be a wake-up call to the board of directors. Make the client the focal point of your business again. Without clients you will not make money. In fact, you will not exist. Weed out the morally bankrupt people, no matter how much money they make for the firm. And get the culture right again, so people want to work here for the right reasons. People who care only about making money will not sustain this firm — or the trust of its clients — for very much longer. 
Greg Smith is resigning today as a Goldman Sachs executive director and head of the firm’s United States equity derivatives business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

www.nytimes.com/2012/03/14/opinion/why-i-am-leaving-goldman-sachs.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2

JP Morgan Whistleblower States JP Morgan Manipulates Silver & Gold Futures

 With today's NYT OpEd by Greg Smith of Goldman Sachs,  a JP Morgan insider has contacted us to release insider information regarding the manipulation of gold and silver futures by JP Morgan that he calls 'damning at best for JP Morgan', states that JPM is fearful of a cascading credit event being triggered in Greece as JPM has hidden derivatives in excess of $1 TRILLION USD, and confirms that JPM is involved with hiding client assets from MF Global.

This is the very first time this insider information has been made public, and the source is also contacting the CFTC with this same statement.


Dear CFTC Staff,

Hello, I am a current JPMorgan Chase employee. This is an open letter to all commissioners and regulators. I am emailing you today b/c I know of insider information that will be damning at best for JPMorgan Chase. I have decided to play the role of whistleblower b/c I no longer have faith and belief that what we are doing for society is bringing value to people. I am now under the opinion that we are actually putting hard working Americans unaware of what lays ahead at extreme market risk. This risk is unnecessary and will lead to wide-scale market collapse if not handled properly. With the release of Mr. Smith’s open letter to Goldman, I too would like to set the record straight for JPM as well.
I have seen the disruptive behavior of superiors and no longer can say that I look up to employees at the ED/MD level here at JPM. Their smug exuberance and arrogance permeates the air just as pungently as rotting vegetables. They all know too well of the backdoor crony connections they share intimately with elected officials and with other institutions. It is apparent in everything they do, from the meager attempts to manipulate LIBOR, therefore controlling how almost all derivatives are priced to the inherit and fraudulent commodities manipulation. They too may have one day stood for something in the past in the client-employee relationship. Does anyone in today’s market really care about the protection of their client? From the ruthless and scandalous treatment of MF Global client asset funds to the excessive bonuses paid by companies with burgeoning liabilities. Yes, we at JPMorgan that are in the know are fearful of a cascading credit event being triggered in Greece as they have hidden derivatives in excess of $1 Trillion USD. We at JPMorgan own enough of these through counterparty risk and outright prop trading that our entire IB EDG space could be annihilated within a few short days. The last ten years has been market by inflexion point after inflexion point with the most notable coming in 2008 after the acquisition of Bear.

I wish to remain anonymous as of now as fear of termination mounts from what I am about to reveal. Robert Gottlieb is not my real name; however he is a trader that is involved in a lawsuit for manipulative trading while working with JPMorgan Chase. He was acquired during our Bear Stearns acquisition and is known to be the notorious person shorting in the silver future market from his trading space, along with Blythe Masters, his IB Global boss. However, with that said, we are manipulating the silver futures market and playing a smaller (but still massively manipulative) role in manipulating the gold futures market. We have a little over a 25% (give or take a percentage) position in the short market for silver futures and by your definition this denotes a larger position than for speculative purposes or for hedging and is beyond the line of manipulation.
On a side note, I do not work directly with accounts that would have been directly impacted by the MF Global fiasco but I have heard through other colleagues that we have involvement in the hiding of client assets from MF Global. This is another fraudulent effort on our part and constitutes theft. I urge you to forward that part of the investigation on to the respective authorities.

There is something else that you may find strange. During month-end December, we were all told by our managers that this was going to be a dismal year in terms of earnings and that we should not expect any bonuses or pay raises. Then come mid-late January it is made known that everyone received a pay raise and/or bonus, which is interesting b/c just a few weeks ago we were told that this was not likely and expected to be paid nothing in addition to base salary. January is right around the time we started increasing our short positions quite significantly again and this most recent crash in gold and silver during Bernanke's speech on February 29th is of notable importance, as we along with 4 other major institutions, orchestrated the violent $100 drop in Gold and subsequent drops in silver.

As regulators of the free people of this country, I ask you to uphold the most important job in the world right now. That job is judge and overseer of all that is justice in the most sensitive of commodity markets. There are many middle-income people that invest in the physical assets of silver, gold, as well as mining stocks that are being financially impacted in a negative way b/c of our unscrupulous shorts in the precious metals commodity sector. If you read the COT with intent you will find that commercials (even though we have no business being in the commercial sector, which should be reserved for companies that truly produce the metal) are net short by a long shot in not only silver, but gold.

It is rather surprising that what should be well known liabilities on our balance sheet have not erupted into wider scale scrutinization. I call all honest and courageous JPMorgan employees to step up and fight the cronyism and wide-scale manipulation by reporting the truth. We are only helping reality come to light therefore allowing a real valuation of our banking industry which will give investors a chance to properly adjust without being totally wiped out. I will be contacting a lawyer shortly about this matter, as I believe no other whistleblower at JPMorgan has come forward yet. Our deepest secrets lie within the hands of honest employees and can be revealed through honest regulators that are willing to take a look inside one of America's best kept secrets. Please do not allow this to turn into another Enron.

Kind Regards,
-The 1st Whistleblower of Many

Below is a snapshot of our assets and liabilities in the trading space.

Friday, March 9, 2012

Perth Mint (Hong Kong) Limited

http://www.pmhk.com.hk/product.php

Anyone bought any products from PMHK? They are one of the distributor of Perth Mint products, the other distributor is HSB.

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Capitalism Is An Alternative For What We Have Now


Maria Bartiromo: "What are the alternatives?"
Jim Grant: "Capitalism is an alternative for what we have now. I highly recommend it."  
Maria: "We all do."  
Grant: "No we don't."  
Maria: "The Federal Reserve may not."
Grant: "We ought to be discussing an intelligent move to a sound currency by which i mean a currency that is based on a standard and not at the whim and the discretion of a bunch of mandarins sitting around Washington D.C."

2009年曹仁超訪問

M:你在1948年出生,又是一個BABY BOOMER(戰後嬰兒潮)的受訪者了。

C: 以中國人來說,我差不多算是最早的BABY BOOMER。在四八、四九年左右,國共內戰已到尾聲,爺爺支持共產黨,將資金搬回上海,而那時候我老竇(爸爸)在香港做生意,她到上海娶了我媽媽便回香 港,我在上海出生的。五○年左右,大陸「抗美援朝」,而當時我們家族主要做煙草代理生意,抗美援朝將我們由「愛國份子」變成「黑五類」;加上當時聯合國宣 佈對中國禁運,煙草到港後未能運去內地,再死兩錢!

此舉對我們是雙重打擊,爺爺覺得勢色唔對,便叫媽媽帶我到香港避難三個月,於是我在三 歲來香港,那才第一次見到爸爸,也不懂叫「老竇」。老竇為了氹我叫他,帶我到告羅士打大酒店(即現在的LANDMARK置地廣場)聽演奏食西餅,那時代食 西餅是很「得人驚」的事情,還有食呂宋芒、上山頂…幾乎所有香港最高級的享受,都由老竇帶我去試過。他最初以為我只在香港留三個月,所以花了很多錢氹我, 第一年大約花了五千港紙,大約是現在五十萬元購買力吧。後來發現我們回不了大陸,加上生意一落千丈,老竇開始酗酒,後來爆血管,再之後便過身了。我懂事 時,家裡便開始變得貧窮,你可以想像我的六十年代,什麼穿膠花、油公仔、剪線頭、跟車送可樂等我都做過。

M:這種貧窮背景對你有很大影響呢。

C:坦白講,我小時不知道自己貧窮的,身邊所有小朋友都一樣,我常以為「冇飯食」先算窮,我有飯開又怎叫做窮呢?其實老竇留下小量積蓄給我們,媽媽亦很小心運用,所以我從未試過冇飯開,真正貧窮的日子不算很長。

M:那麼你從那時開始有窮的感覺?

C: 現在回看,是因為太多朋友話我窮,我才知道自己窮。我認為問題在六三年老竇過身之後,他的朋友一而再地告訴我,其實我很窮。以前我常到茶樓飲茶,去食西 餅,但現在不能,為什麼呢?我發現別人家裡有雪櫃、電視機,為什麼我家冇呢?因為冇錢,爸爸的朋友告訴我,因為我死老竇,很窮。窮的感覺是他們告訴我 的,I WAS TOLD。最令我感受到的,是別人對窮人的歧視眼光,甚至不准許自己的女兒和我玩,怕她愛上我這個窮鬼。

M:那時代找工作容易嗎?

C: 也不容易的,可以講,每個時代都有其艱難。在六十年代,找一份工作要有舖頭擔保,人浮於事,找工作並不容易,不是想做就有工作的。我在六七年中學畢業,暴 動之後更難找工作,那時有工廠便做,冇就去穿膠花釘珠仔,住板間房、有飯食便行。反而我覺得現在要找工作的話一定找到,不過你們較揀擇而已。(M:以前你 們的目標是搵食,現在我們的目標是發達嘛!)對啊!我曾經寫過:我們那時是搵食艱難、發達容易;現在社會是搵食容易、發達艱難。

M:現在越來越多人醉心投機,我不認為那是投資,而越來越少人工作生產,你認為這樣的社會沒有問題嗎?

C: 我認為社會是圓形的,例如美國戰後四九年大衰退,有工做便很開心了;到五十年代開始興旺;到六十年代美國進入所謂繁榮期,有飯食有屋住,有安定的工作,連 汽車都有,但看不到前路,所以到六十年代後期出現胡士托、頹廢派、吸毒問題等,直到八十年代初期,是美國迷失的二十年。(M:那香港的情況呢?)香港的 五、六十甚至七十年代類似美國戰後,是貧窮時期,大陸不斷有廉價勞工湧入搶飯碗,老闆絕不會加你人工,窮人永遠是窮人,只有寄望下一代受教育,能夠成為香 港的中產階級改善生活;(M:現在的香港類似美國的七、八十年代?)對,香港在八、九十年代至現在經歷了三十年的繁榮期,我們受過教育、有學問,而班鬼子 佬(外國人)一步步撤離香港,我們對上沒有CEILING,我們REPLACE了他們的位置兼夾享受了香港的全盛時期,我們由貧窮階級進入中產階級,叻一 點的更能發達!

M:那我們這一代後生的又如何?

C: 但問題是,當這班人坐上中產階級的位置之後,後來的一批如何上位呢?現在你們上來,已經有我們百幾萬中產階級坐晒位,我們不會讓你們上來的!這情況類似七 十年代的美國,而到八十年代後期上位的都不是中產階級,講的是INNOVATION、互聯網,二千年講的是INTERNET世代、X GENERATION。不過香港沒有X GENERATION,香港社群只得幾百萬人,如何建立互聯網呢?美國有數以億計的人口,因此能建立互聯網。

M:對啊!有年輕人投訴上一代霸著位置不讓年輕人上位呢!

C:點解我要讓個位出來?!對不對?我這個位置月入十幾萬,坐得好舒服,點解要我走啫?!我不單只不走,更專登不讓你上來!因為我沒有責任讓你上來的,這個位坐得我好舒服嘛!

M:你們那代人掌握了成功的方程式,上了位後便不斷重複流水作業,結果令到很多產業發展停滯不前呢。

C: 對啊!日本也一樣!九○年代到現在都是,上一代霸著位置,死都唔改,硬係不讓你上來,所以有「望窗一族」,不過我見到日本開始有所改變了。(M:我又看不 到香港年輕人凝聚了什麼力量出來呢。)所以我常說東方人有「奴性」問題,上一代人阻著,為何不反抗呢?另找商機呢?美國新一代找到互聯網、SOFT WARE、3-G、BIO-TECH等我們不懂的產業,打低美國既有的中產。當然,這班人又重複我們所做的,霸著位置,壟斷,不讓後來的上位,KILL YOU WHEN YOU ARE BABY!互聯網開始出現霸主時代,類似美國六、七十年代,我相信下一代又要用十多二十年時間去抗爭了。

M: 如果我們這一代人沒有或者未能去抗爭,你會否認為是因為我們渣斗?

C: 對!為何我們可以隊冧班鬼子佬取代他們,而你們不隊冧我們呢?(M:渣斗之處在那裡?)唔敢隊冧我地囉!我在七二、七三年已經在《明報》寫文章:「鬼子佬 滾回老家去!」因為將來是我們的,JARDINE?WHO ARE YOU?WHEELOCK?WHAT'S YOUR NAME?HUTCHISON?乞人憎呀!我在七十年代已經預言三行時代結束,十大地產商時代來臨,我們要做HERCULES(神話中的大力士),只要讓 我們雙腳著地,連地球都能抬得起!所以我們兩腳著「地」,利用香港的房地產,就可以隊冧班鬼子佬!那年代讀大學的精英,畢業時便曉得「GOOD MORNING!SIR!」、「YOUR MOST OBEDIENT!SIR!」,六十年代大部份精英最大理想是守規矩做公務員,但最後被我們這班反斗星打低晒!我們這班不服從的,有錢便買地、冇錢的買地 產股,最後成為贏家,身家比他們多得很呢!我們憑著香港的房地產撈了一大筆,叻的就像李嘉誠,而這遊戲自七十年代玩到一九九七年,然後再冇新的地產企業出 現,亦不能再以房地產創造明天了。

M:你所講的利用房地產的HERCULES,不單只隊冧班鬼子佬,仲隊冧埋我們這班下一代喎!因為你們碌卡碌埋我們那張啊!

C: 不是你們,是四代人。第一,我們冇樓的上一代;第二,我們這一代冇樓的;第三,下一代冇樓的;還有大陸出來冇樓的。所以有四代人做我們的奴隸嘛!我們一代 人搵了你們四代人的錢嘛!(M:呀~Orz…)做乜你們這代人咁蠢,仲被我們呃!一出身便整個龜殼你孭,爬下爬下,你做乜孭個龜殼呢?(M: 呀~Orz…)「孭個龜殼做蝸牛」是我們SET出來的RULES嘛!點解一定要遵守我們的RULES呢?

M: 即是說我們自小接受你們的教育,要尊師重道、便宜莫貪、沒有不勞而獲、要守規矩,然後一出社會便上了你們的當呢。

C: 對啊!要不是哪裡來四代人養我們一代呢?有些學校提倡什麼知識博大、性格優雅,講出來堂而皇之,但對出來社會做事可能沒什麼幫助。我可以教你的,不是你的 人格會否優雅,而是「如何在不犯法的情況之下發財」,這其實是大學應該提供的教育,但這些都不能公開,說出來便會被責罵為「衰人」。欺負弱小,我每日都 做:回家食飯,食魚、牛、豬…這個世界永遠都是有智慧的動物食冇智慧的,「死蠢」就當然被人吃掉,但是,這些都不能寫進我的投資日記嘛。(M:你們那一代 人講一套做一套,還教我們做隻死蠢的豬呢!我們徹底地被整了!)作為農莊的主人,WHY SHOULD I TEACH THE PIG TO SING?冇理由教隻豬去唱歌㗎!只要你們聽教聽話、乖乖地做豬仔,那我就有豬肉吃了!對不對?聰明的人要THINK OUSIDE THE BOX嘛!要超越上一代,就不要一味聽教聽話,永遠成為上一代的COPY。

M:今時今日在香港可以不買樓不買股票嗎?

C: 你也可以去上海玩嘛~到了大陸的時候,你在社會上層,九七年後在大陸面對的環境,就類似我們在七十年代面對著你們。這個世界一定會有上層與下層,你在上層 便成為既得利益者,唔好運在下層的話,你便是被剝削那班。這世上無論什麼制度都有剝削者和被剝削者,我們這一代人是剝削者,而你們是被剝削者嘛!就算是我 比你勤力工作,我的財富最多比你多一個開,何解現在我的身家比你多十個、一百個開呢?因為我在剝削你嘛!你不知道嗎?我八元買匯豐銀行股票然後一百六十元 賣給了你嘛!我們這一代人的成就建基於你們身上嘛!

M:你對年輕人有什麼建議呢?

C: 年輕人不反叛就冇資格做年輕人,我主張年輕人反叛的,但要知道這世界不是你玩晒,所以要PLAY ACCORDING TO THE LAW,要在法律框框裡面造反,最多被人家話不道德,但要做法律容許之下的事,即是做一個「合法而不道德的人」!你們有兩個方法。第一,就好像我們在六 十、七十年代覺得唔服氣,「點解要去GOOD MORNING!SIR!」?於是我們就去玩一瓣鬼子佬不懂的,去炒地皮,最後會德豐(WHEELOCK)、和記(HUTCHISON)、怡和 (JARDINE)都輸了。你們為何不去玩一瓣我們不懂的?沒理由去葡京搵何鴻燊玩嘛!每一代人都要找突破點去隊冧上一代,你們這一代人連找破綻都不去想 不去做,又如何突破呢?我們很多人的死穴是「恐共」,我們身光頸靚,不夠膽去大陸玩,而你們身無分文就應該去闖,這是第二個方法─將我們成功的方法拿去另 一地方玩。今時今日的香港人一定要學懂兩件事:第一,ASSET ALLOCATION,資產配置;其次是STOCK PICKING,即揀股票。

M:我們在香港一定冇得玩嗎?

C: 你們在香港一定唔夠我們玩,第一,遊戲規則是我們SET的;第二,我們在香港搵老襯搵了幾十年,財雄勢大;還有,「喂~阿曾、阿任,點睇呀?搞搞佢啦~整 個勾地政策啦~」阿曾與我們是同一輩的,大家碌地沙玩大,我一個講唔掂,十個如何,我們是一群人,不單只這一群,連官都是自己人,都是同一代,都有共同語 言的嘛!WE ACT THE SAME,WE THINK THE SAME!有默契的,我們信奉同樣的價值,「嘩~冒牌BEATLES來港!」便一窩蜂湧去聽了,我們都是聽THE BEATLES長大的一代嘛。

M:房地產一日在你們手中,一日都仍然由你們話事呢。

C: 沒錯,房地產不跌,你們又如何上位呢?你們賺埋賺埋的錢只得三個選擇:第一個選擇─買樓,一炮過,供一世,條命賣給我們;第二個選擇─租樓,凌遲,每個月 割一塊肉;第三個選擇─瞓街。你們跑不掉的,甫進入這個系統,就不斷被我們吸水,我們是SUCKER,大概由十個傻佬供養我們一個,所以我們必定很肥的, 所以我們飲得起十多萬一瓶的紅酒,因為PAID BY YOU,NOT PAID BY US嘛!香港被我們DOMINATE,不單只房地產,是所有的都被我們控制了。

M:你們這班人的價值觀是「錢就是一切」,你覺得這是正確的。

C: 炒樓炒股票有什麼問題呢?(M:全港市民都炒樓炒股票也沒有問題?)你們不炒樓炒股票,誰來接我們的貴價貨呢?我們的貨大部份在七、八十年代建立,在九十 年代派給你們嘛!所以見你們在九七年接樓的時候,我覺得你們是傻佬,我們從每呎一百元炒至一萬元,炒了一百個開還接貨?!就算每呎四千元去接貨都是傻佬, 每呎四千元都賺你四十個開!我太太說,我什麼都沒有,只是有錢;而你們什麼都有,只是沒有錢!我一直相信「錢就是一切」,但這一兩年開始覺得不是了。 (M:為什麼呢?)有時都唔知賺咁多做乜,以我太太的理論講:第一粒鑽石就話嚇親我;第二粒鑽石,略有驚喜;第三粒,你應酬我嗎?第四粒,我覺得討厭;到 第五粒鑽石,喂,搞搞新意思吧。現在班有錢已經多錢到癲癲地亂花錢了。(M:那就不要賺太多,漏一兩粒鑽石可給我們吧!)幹嗎要給你?而且這可不是我一個 人決定,是一組人的決定。

《milk》雜誌 #406 2009年4月30日

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Counterfeit Silver Lunar Dragons

Some photos of the fake Lunar Dragon (assuming the origin was China) were posted online recently. I've cut them out and posted them next to images of the real coin so you can see the differences. The images on the left are the counterfeit Silver Lunar Dragon coin and the images on the right are a real coin.



Major Differences.

Dragon Side:
- Swirls in clouds not as visible on the fake coin
- Smooth (instead of scaled) claws on the fake coin
- "Year of the Dragon" text on the real coin is thicker
- Detail in general (scales/edges) is more defined on the real coin

Queen Side:
- Queen looks to be smiling on the fake coin (not so on the real one)
- Queen has a sharper looking nose on the fake coin
- Wrinkle lines on forehead missing on fake coin
- Much more detail in the hair and crown on the real coin

These fakes even came in coin capsules which replicated the look of those from the Perth Mint.

This is only one version of a fake 2012 Silver Lunar Dragon, there may be others out there which look closer to the real item or have other differences to watch out for.

http://www.silverlunar.com/2012/03/silver-lunar-dragons-fake-vs-real.html