Delos, First Central Bank

QUESTION: Dear Martin

Wonder if you have any insights as to the history of the bank clearing process.
Was the clearing process created mainly so banks could play games and earn interest with peoples’ money
with the reasoning that it was to prevent money laundering?

With technological advances today, one can accept an hour or two for automatic name and account number checks to happen
but 3-7 days seems ridiculous.

Any insights to the creation of the clearing process would be enlightening.

Thank you again

KW

ANSWER: The function of bank clearing began with giro-banking, which originated in the Temple of Delos in Greece. The term refers to the circulation of money. It originated where you could write a check to one person and transfer the payment to their account at the same bank. Effectively, in ancient Greece, you would have an account at the Temple in Delos and instruct a transfer to their account in the Temple. The Romans adopted this concept and thus Roman banking was born.

A central bank emerged after the Dark Ages in the early modern history as a government or state-owned banks. The Dutch were pioneers and financial innovators who not only created this state banking concept, but they also invented insurance. The Wisselbank was the first such bank in Amsterdam which was founded in the Dutch Republic during 1609. The Wisselbank became the model of the central banking system and it spread throughout Europe; first in 1668 in Sweden known as the Sveriges Riksbank and then the Bank of England in 1694.

When smaller private banks began to pop up, the state-owned banks emerged as clearing banks where transfers between the accounts at the central bank took place the same as they did between accounts in ancient Delos.

The Wisselbank actually collapsed in 1790 after it was revealed that the deposits have been used secretly to fund the Dutch East India Company. The manipulation was that they represented themselves as just holding money for safe-keeping. They did not lend money out. So when the bank failed and they had been using the money to fund the Dutch East India Company, the city had to bail out the bank and stand behind the losses.

To eliminate cash, the ECB has a secret project to provide instantaneous transfers for each transaction. Therefore, the central bank was simply a state-owned bank whereas a clearing bank was one where all banks must clear transactions

QUESTION: I read that the Heritage auction of the penny they said would bring $1.7 million was a flop. Any indication as to why? Or is it just the firm trying to pawn something for big bucks?

HK

ANSWER: I have no idea why Heritage would have claimed the coin would bring $1.7 million. It is not that rare. There are about 40 to 45 known 1943 copper cents from the Philadelphia Mint. The general assumption is that they were struck by accident when there were some copper blank planchets still remaining in the press hopper when production began on the new steel pennies.

Now as far as sales go, there was a 1943 copper cent which was first offered for sale back in 1958, which sold for more than $40,000, or so it was claimed. Subsequently, there was one sold for only $10,000 at an ANA convention in 1981. The highest amount ever paid for this error previously was $82,500 back in 1996.

There was only one copper 1943 penny known from the Denver Mint which did sell they claim for $1.7 million by Legend Numismatics of Lincroft, New Jersey. I would not guarantee that price personally. US coins tend to get really hyped. This unique coin, not publicly known to exist until 1979, was certified PCGS MS64BN. If Heritage was claiming their penny should bring $1.7 million which was from the far more common hoard of Philadelphia, I really question such expertise. The Heritage example sold for only $204,000, which is a modest advance over the last sale of $82,500 back in 1996.

The culture in American coins is strikingly different. American collectors seem to prize errors. A brockage is an error coin where one side is normal, but the other side instead of the reverse displays the obverse again, but incuse or in a negative mirror-like form. Brockage errors are caused when an already minted coin sticks to the coin die and impresses onto another blank pressing a mirror image of the other coin into the blank.

Brockage errors coins are rare. However, they do not bring significant premiums. A nice Augustus(27BC-14AD) denarius may bring $1,000+ whereas the Brokage will bring about $500 as illustrated above. Here is an extremely rare official Roman die of Emperor Tiberius (14-37AD) with precisely this problem of a silver denarius stuck to the reverse die.

This die of Tiberius is UNIQUE and was discarded because of the brokage error coins it would have produced which would have appeared like the Augustus denarius illustrated above. There are only about 12 official Roman dies that have survived.

Here is Another genuine Roman die of an extremely rare Emperor Gordian I (238AD) who reigned for only 21 days. Obviously, this die was discarded because he did not last in office very long.

There is a completely different culture outside of American coins. Such an error would never bring such premiums. In ancient coins, the premiums attained are for high quality.

QUESTION: Marty,
Back in 2015 when they closed the Chicago MERC after 167 years, you did a piece about how flashing screens do not provide the same “feel” as tape watching and floor trading. You also mentioned in that piece that “after Socrates, you will recreate something you always wanted to do” in relation to bringing “feel” back into trading.
My question is; given all the directions you are being pulled- is this still something you aspire to undertake?
I grew up tape watching, and despise blinking screens…it’s a lost art and would welcome anything you might undertake in this area.
Rw

ANSWER: Absolutely. We are getting ready for the first launch very soon. The intention is to expand the system to intraday. We are in negotiations with a data-provider to make the system live intraday with reversals and timing on an hourly basis. Trust me. It has been this initial launch that has been delayed by banks changing rules causing us to have to re-write the payment systems three times. Then we have completely different rules for outside North America so it required then setting up another whole new payment system. Then we have been having to set up yet a third for China. This has all been driven by this Hunt for Taxes.

It will be that intraday version that will be sound. Also in Phase-Two of our launch, we will be looking at providing a download version that will link back into our system so you can just talk to it and it will answer. We just cannot do that level of sophistication over the internet.

QUESTION: What about what China did by buying stocks a few years ago to stop the hang sang from dropping

ANSWER: Do not confuse attempts to support a market from actually being able to do so. This is the same as Keynesian economics that government could prevent recessions. Larry Summers admitted the government cannot even forecast such events. Not only during the Great Depression did companies jump in to buy their shares during the crash to try to prevent the decline. Most of the companies that took that action actually failed for they bought the stock back trying to hold the price and lost needed cash reserves. They could not sell stock again nor could the borrow.

During the collapse of the Nikkei after 1989, companies held believing that the government would support the market. When they realized the government could not then the government encouraged us to bail out the Japanese corporations. We helped well over 300 public companies issuing a note to buy their portfolios at their cost with 10-year payouts and each note had to be approved by the Japanese government individually. If the governments were able to actually prevent declines, then they would. But nobody can do that for the size of the public at large far outweighs any institution, group of institutions, or banks.

People would rather believe in conspiracy theories than simply look at the reality. Attempts to manipulate markets ALWAYS fail because the majority is far greater than any minority. The trend is made by the MAJORITY. A panic sell-off like the Crash of 1987 took place BECAUSE there was no bid – not that there was a massive short position. Scare the MAJORITY and they then try to sell, you find no bid and that is how a flash crash unfolds. This is why outlawing short positions is destructive for the only person with the courage to try to catch a falling knife is the one who is taking profit – not initiating a long position.

COMMENT: It looks like the Plunge Protection Team had a field day with the 1,000 rally in the Dow. Back in the 70s I read a small article near the back page of the WSJ that said that the CIA was using two small obscure banks in the Midwest to trade futures. The way they do it is to buy the futures and force the floor traders to stop selling. Then they pile it on and force the shorts to cover.

CM

ANSWER: That is really impossible. I have NEVER found a market that has EVER defied our model. The market bottomed precisely when it should have. Our Cyclical Array pinpointed the day well in advance. That proves there was nothing unusual. Last Friday the 21st, I wrote on the Private Blog: “We do have another Weekly Bearish Reversal at 22739 and a closing below that could warn of a Cycle Inversion meaning down into new week bottoming perhaps on the 26th and then rally into the following week for year-end and then turn back down into January.”

If what you are saying is true, then the government would never collapse and they are 100% in control of everything. That is just not the case. You are attributing power to them that they believe they have. However, if they had such power, then taxes would never rise for they are 100% in control and nothing would happen. Larry Summers, the father of negative interest rates, admitted in a Bloomberg interview that those in power can NEVER forecast a decline because it is a complex system.

I wrote on the Private Blog on December 24th: “The likelihood of lower lows into the 26th are good. But this week remains as a Panic Cycle so we can then see a whipsaw back up into the end of the week. Primary support still lies at the 21600 and 21450 level followed by 20002.”

Then on the day of the low, 26th of December, I posted on the Private Blog at 3AM for the European Open: “Often the bulk of a decline will unfold the day BEFORE the market closes. This is typically as natural human response of the fear of the unknown after the market reopens.”

I just do not see ANYTHING in the market behavior or patterns that would indicate something abnormal. The real explanation is just that all the selling took place on Monday as people feared it would collapse further on the 26th after the market opened. That has been the pattern for more than 100 years – panic before a close of the market for fear of the unknown. Sorry, great story about the Plunge Protection Team. A similar theory prevailed in Japan that the government would NEVERallow the Nikkei to fall. It did, and that belief led to a 19-year depression in share market price, but 26-year economic depression which did not begin to shift trend until 2015.75.

There have been attempts to create a Plunge Protection Team before. The banks got together to try to save the market back in October 1929. Here is the Los Angeles Times from October 26th, 1929 talking about the Stabilizing Forces to save the market. They failed to prevent the Great Depression.

Nobody can step in front of a falling market and survive. Nevertheless, despite the continued failure of such efforts, this myth is always spun. Anyone who believes that such a Plunge Protection Team can even survive never bothers to look at history.