Why Silver Investables Are Drying Up

[Sean Rakhimov, editor of SilverStrategies.com, is one of the savviest precious-metals commentators we know – not to mention, an early graduate of the Hidden Pivot Course that we offer each month to traders of stocks, options and commodities. In the article below, he explains why investable quantities of silver are shrinking. Mainly, it’s because some key South American countries have been nationalizing mines more and more aggressively, crimping supplies and scaring away outside investors.  What can we do about it?  With some specific suggestions, Sean advises watching the silver pros and putting our money where they have been putting theirs. RA]

For a while, we’ve had a nagging feeling that we’ve been witnessing something profound that the markets have yet to grasp.  We are not talking about a global smorgasbord of events that has been amply covered elsewhere.  As readers might know, our particular interest is in silver, and that is where we see an elephant in the room that has yet to attract any headlines. No doubt most readers are aware of the recent developments in countries like Argentina, Bolivia, Peru and others, with respect to what can be broadly classified as “resource nationalism.” Our general views on the subject were detailed a few years ago.  As discussed by this writer and others, such developments are not new and certainly not limited to silver or even the mining sector.  However, in our opinion, it is in the silver space that these events are likely to have the most profound effect.

Why? Because the silver sector is so small and the above-mentioned countries collectively make up a big piece of it. According to CPM Group’s 2012 Silver Yearbook, the countries named above are projected to produce some 170 million ounces of silver this year versus anticipated total global silver production of 788 million ounces. While at first glance that only makes up 21.6% of total annual mine supply, which in itself is significant, we submit that it represents an even greater percentage of “investible” silver production.

Let’s take a closer look…

Of the total 788 million ounces of annual world silver production projected for 2012, the part that is accessible without much hassle to you and I, the unsophisticated investor buying in public markets, is largely limited to Mexico, USA, Canada, Australia and Europe. For the purposes of this article, we should note that the rest of the world offers few easy ways to invest in silver. This list of other producers includes China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Chile, Turkey, Morocco, Indonesia and India. Some further details:

– The bulk of Chinese production is dominated by large base-metal producers and/or smelters/refiners. Silvercorp is an exception and is a Canadian company, so we bundle it into North America;

– Russia has several companies listed in New York and London as well as RTS – most of them primarily gold and/or base metal miners;

– Kazakhstan has few larger publicly traded companies (Kazakhmys in London) – none of which make primary silver plays;

– Same for India, Indonesia and Turkey. Morocco may produce a silver play in the near future if efforts of May Gold and Silver (TSX-V: MYA) are successful;

– Chile has no primary silver mines with the exception of Kinross’ La Coipa, which once again, makes a poor silver play; the remainder of silver comes from primary copper and gold mines buried in large companies such as Codelco.

Poland’s Silver

The only destination of significance in Europe in terms of contribution to silver production accessible via public markets is Poland (KGHM is a large silver producer but primarily a copper mine).  The rest of European production is scarcely accessible as a bet on silver because the mines that produce silver are either not primary silver mines, or are private, or otherwise not easily investable. The other European silver play that we know of is Global Minerals (TSX-V: CTG), a Canadian junior advancing a past-producing silver project in Slovakia that is not yet in production but moving in that direction.  There are a few other juniors scattered around Europe with some silver exposure that are not primary silver plays.  That about sums it up, given that the whole of Europe is projected to kick in 56.5 million ounces in 2012 – of which Poland stands for 40.4 million ounces, followed by Sweden at 9.1 million ounces (via Boliden, a conglomerate, not a silver company). Australia has a handful of smaller silver mines (under 3 million ounces annually) to choose from, since the biggies — BHP and Xstrata — do not make good silver plays.

Sounds ominous, doesn’t it? Well, there’s a reason silver is a p-r-e-c-i-o-u-s metal.  That is why Silver Wheaton has a business – it provides a way to unlock the value of silver buried within larger polymetallic mines, which by itself is insignificant to the actual miner but can be substantial when separated. Silver Wheaton’s $12B market cap is proof of that.

The Meaning of Confiscation

So what is wrong with Argentina, Peru and Bolivia, and why is it a big deal?  Here we would like to refer the reader once more to the article we wrote in 2009 in which we defined nationalization as “not only outright expropriation of private property, but all other forms of “creeping” or indirect nationalization which ultimately leads to increased control of natural resources by governments at the expense of current stakeholders in a non-free market way.  These may include any combination of increased taxation, excessive/retroactive taxation, breach of contracts, delay or revocation of permits and licenses required to exercise legal owner’s rights, support or tolerance of other groups/interests’ illegal activities to the detriment of property owners, and so on”.  It looks as if Argentina, Bolivia and to a lesser extent Peru are trying to hit it on all points, based on the actions of central and, in the case of Argentina, some provincial governments.

Bolivia, of course, was the latest in the news with nationalization of the flagship Malku Khota silver-indium project of South American Silver (TSX: SAC). So much so, that it led to the ultimate resignation of Greg Johnson as its president & CEO. Johnson was largely responsible for putting that company on the map in the first place.  The stock is back where it was when he took over as president in March of 2010.

Peru has had its share of “misfortunes” in this regard, with Bear Creek (TSX-V: BCM) still trying to recover from its fall from grace in public markets – through no fault of its own that we can find.  All the rhetoric notwithstanding, things seem to be far from business as usual.  The good news is that Peru (and Chile) has a rather elaborate domestic mining industry with sizeable publicly traded companies contributing a great deal to its economy, which is not the case in Argentina or Bolivia.  The assumption here is that the government will be hard-pressed to make a move on foreign investors without at the same time squeezing influential domestic companies.

Argentina has been making waves for some time, which the result that the government has taken control of 51% of Spanish oil major Repsol’s oil interests in the country. Here’s a direct quote from a news release dated July 2, 2012 by Geoff Burns, President & CEO of Pan American Silver, commenting on the legislation proposed by the government of Chubut province of Argentina: “This is an incredibly unfortunate development for the mining industry in the province of Chubut and in Argentina.  Having made significant investments over the last two and a half years in work to prepare the world-class Navidad silver project for development, it is extremely disappointing that the government of Chubut would introduce this legislation without meaningful consultation with the mining industry.  Since acquiring Navidad, we established a policy of open and honest communication with all levels of government as to our progress and plans and were surprised that we were not consulted on the economic effects that the proposed legislation would have on Navidad’s development.  I am convinced that it was the provincial government’s intent with the new draft legislation, to define a path for the development of Navidad, not to render the project uneconomic.  However, if the draft law is passed as submitted there can be no other choice currently than to stop investing further in the project“.

Read It and Weep

We encourage you to read that entire news release to learn what else they propose to do. Mind you, Navidad was supposed to be this blockbuster mine that would take Pan American to a whole new level. If memory serves, they paid some $660M to buy it.  Despite the recent acquisition of Extorre by Yamana Gold, which incidentally went for a much lower price than one figures it would in a more mining-friendly jurisdiction, Argentina appears determined to exhaust all other options before doing the right thing.  After all, it’s barely been 20 years since they opened up the resource sector to foreign investment.

We would be remiss not to mention Guatemala, as it is home to the other blockbuster silver project being advanced by Tahoe Resources (TSX: THO).  If you examine its stock chart and check the news from the company, Tahoe appears to have lost about $1 billion in market capitalization due total related to nationalization of Guatemalan resources by that government.  They back-tracked on that, saying they want a bigger stake “only in new projects”, but the market was spooked and seems slow in warming back up.

Looking Forward

Why not look where the pros are going?  While we were mulling these matters over in the last few months, the event that drove it home for us was the unsuccessful bid by Hecla for U.S. Silver.  Incidentally, Hecla is our “favorite company to criticize” in the sector. Why? Because coming into this cycle (say, ten years ago), Hecla was the “It” company in the silver space.  They had it all: the 100-year history, the NYSE listing, the name recognition, the size relative to peers, the following (by resource investors and funds), the technical expertise and reputation of a top underground mine operator.  And they have successfully squandered that early-leader advantage.  We are aware of several due diligence undertakings by Hecla that ultimately resulted in their shying from pulling the trigger on an acquisition.  The best thing they did in the last ten years was acquire the balance of Greens Creek that they didn’t already own.  It is about the only thing of note they accomplished in that period — that and the settlement with the EPA, which didn’t come cheap.  That same Hecla, whose execs all but swore on a stack of Bibles to never “cross onto the wrong side of the highway” (referring to highway I-90, which cuts through the Silver Valley separating operations of Hecla from the other big three mines – Sunshine, Bunker Hill and Galena/Coeur —  made a bid for US Silver, which now owns the assets previously owned by Coeur D’Alene Mines in the Silver Valley.

The question is, where else could they have gone?  There aren’t many options. And that brings us full circle to the start of this article.  There was news on August 21   that Hecla made a “strategic investment” in Dolly Varden Silver Corp.   This re-affirms the point we are trying to make:  If you want to be a player in the silver space right now you’re virtually limited to Mexico, USA and Canada.  Hecla’s actions suggest that they “get it.”  In a forthcoming article, we will determine who else gets it.

Not a Complete Write-Off

In summary, we don’t suggest that countries presently stepping up resource nationalism are a complete write-off, or that the situation couldn’t change in the future. Companies neck-deep in operations in such places will try to make the best of it, and rightfully so: they owe it to their shareholders.  Even when projects are nationalized, they usually continue to operate , although history suggests that government-run industries eventually work themselves into the ground (no pun intended).  At that point, they start to look to private business to right the ship and the cycle starts over.  In the meantime, as Jim Dines puts it, the overall trend is “southward” – toward more government control – and capital will flow where it is treated best.  Jindal Steel exit from a $2.1 Billion iron or project in Bolivia is a manifestation of that.

***

Trading stocks, options and commodities in these treacherous times calls for great patience and skill. Click here if you’d like to see how Rick’s Picks approaches the challenge.

  • Brian s. Galpin September 2, 2012, 2:26 pm

    To each investor his own strategies. I was just out of scool in the 80’s when the Hunt Brothers. Tried to corner the market but argue over the cost of a watermelon at a stand in Texas. Different world and different thought. America does not and should not run to the rescue of these companies, governments and mines. However, you think the electronic boom could be possible without precious metals? A free market is just that not a bunch of freewheeling thugs that dominate those governments. It will have an impact on the world economy again. Gold has been bought by the big banks since no more bail outs.We have more oil in our country but for another hundred years but the Robber Barons want to keep up on gouging the former middle class. Slavery is alive and well in the third world as was workers rights in the industrial revolution. america willl never see a revolution again. Big companies will see it squashed. Personally to end my jibbersish I buy small amounts like my grandady did and keep it from the banks. We are in a depression and no war is going to pull us out. the rat race is over and the rats one. Not the America we should be. I feel for the youngr generations. They will need true discipline to do better than their parents.The worst is yet to come and I have beeen an optimist my life. Thank you for reading and if curent events haven’t scared you then wait till you see what is going to happen to an over priced wall street. God Bless america and our men and men who serve. They are now are diplomacy!

    • Mike September 4, 2012, 9:10 am

      Brian,

      Thank you for your condolences…I am am that generation. I trace everything now to Nixon going off the Gold standard. The events playout like a timeline. Although I hadn’t been conceived yet, besidesDaisy Dukes and the music, the 70s look life it waz pretty much just kne big awful cluster….. The 80s were based on corp greed and much of the expansion due to jink bonds wasn’t real, and while much of the growth in the 90s was due to the manufacturing of something real, tech, most of them went bust and the 2 decade long bubble poppe

      Bush tried a war stimulus plan and as that wasn’t working Greenspan went against his own idealogy (remember some quoute of his from ’66) and played around with rates. People took the easy oney, everyone made money on spreads, and when we went off the painklliers for a while in looked what happened. We have now been on them for almost four years and still have not had surgery after 12 years for what I am going to call to global economic arthritis. Manufacturing countries…such as the oils, Pms, and developing countries will be better off, but our only hope is that tech pulls us out of it….ironically enough most likely through cloud technology which is virtual by essence. The housing mkt finally bottoming out sometime in the next 6-15 months should help with growth a little bit, but I dont see how more expensive residential costs will better my quality of life…I dont own any distressed debt physical properties or securities. I cant fix the government, its policy, the tax code, the bi-partisan system we are in…all I can do is buy precious metals, and know at some point they will be worth more than I paid for with Federal Reserve Notes because in 2018, they will be dispenced from little metal boxes in stalls at ballgames…..

  • mava August 30, 2012, 9:44 pm

    Chris T,

    It is assumed that after a mine is being Nationalized, it’s output will drop, because there is no longer any process of economic calculation. So, Nationalizations result in shortages.

    On the other hand, I think Nationalizations will result in lack of investment, due to discouragement of a stockholder.

    This is all for a paper market only. Physical buyer would not invest in a mine to begin with, as there is no ownership, only a promise. And if he believed some promises, then he would not be a physical buyer.

  • Chris T. August 30, 2012, 4:30 am

    The article is strange, because (as in Rick’s intro) it focuses at first on the “lock up” of a portion of world silver production p.a. , seeming to suggest that it’s investment in PHYSICAL silver that is being constrained.

    But then, the comments all revolve about the shrinking supply of investable silver PRODUCERS (their shares).

    So, this article is of little value to those who only invest in the physical stuff in a non-promised fashion, ie only in real, self-stored or controlled silver, and really only for those doing the equities route.

    The HUI shows the problems with that, and its all paper anyway. Morales shows the value of that stuff, and it can happen here too (Roosevelt and Truman just to name 2).

    At the very least I would like to see how the nationalization of producers would correlate with keeping their production off the market. If it does, by export-bans, what’s the point of producing it?
    Unless they got smart, and want to stockpile for a future remonetization.
    And then there’s China:
    look up what Dr. Fekete has to say about its silver policy.

  • Pathfinder August 30, 2012, 12:33 am

    As we all wait for our favorite subject to explode in price as (I for one) continue to read about, does it occure that ALL the reasons that will make silver rocket in price will ALSO motivate governments to nationalize the mines that mine it?
    Case in point; Food prices soar due to drought and currency printing run amok, people get angry they’re hungry and the shelves are empty and begin to riot. Gov’ment’s income (taxes) drops while their costs (social welfare and riot control) increase. How do they pay the bills?? As metals rocket in price (as we’re told over and over again), wouldn’t a heavy tax or nationalization seem like an “easy out”? I realize class warfare isn’t tollerated these days /sarc/ but isn’t it an option to consider?

  • mac August 29, 2012, 9:25 am

    well, Sprott say the “gamers” are selling sometimes one billion oz of silver in a day!!! Paper Silver. Much more than the yearly new supply of silver. There is the real big obstacle – jp morgan and gang.
    Sure Argentina has a crazy gov’t, but they have not attacked mines, sought to do anything like nationalization. They nationalized part of a former gov’t oil company, but that’s it. They do demand foreign operators buy local equipment as much as possible, and they make you keep money made from operations in their banks for a short period (maybe need currency). But no mine attack. I see McEwen Mining, after first freaking about the Arg govt’s moves, is working on another property there, making his one producing mine there (San Jose -silver) not the only investment in Argentina.

  • BrutlStrudl August 29, 2012, 3:52 am

    …or a .45

  • Jeff August 28, 2012, 9:38 pm

    Supply issues are an important aspect in any commodity. But it is the investment demand driven by the lack of alternative investments to protect ones wealth that will be the real driver going forward….. Robert, trading your silver for a piece of paper back by nothing more than unpayable debt may be a hard thing to do.

    • Robert August 29, 2012, 12:26 am

      I would never trade any asset for debt. The only rational trade for any asset is another asset that you consider to be of greater personal value to you…

      You know, like a Yacht.

      🙂

    • Robert August 29, 2012, 12:26 am

      or a Ferrari…

    • Brian s. Galpin September 2, 2012, 2:33 pm

      But it in and hang onto it, forget the paper. Thats like buying a car and getting maybe, possibly after it’s paid for it. A good safe, a closed mouth and a shot gun is the best protection.

  • Robert August 28, 2012, 6:08 pm

    “According to CPM Group’s 2012 Silver Yearbook, the countries named above are projected to produce some 170 million ounces of silver this year versus anticipated total global silver production of 788 million ounces. While at first glance that only makes up 21.6% of total annual mine supply, which in itself is significant, we submit that it represents an even greater percentage of “investible” silver production.”

    The key to understanding the Silver market does not come from understanding production and supply.

    It comes from understanding destruction from demand and usage.

    There was an interesting factoid circulating in the PM community about a year ago that every US Tomahawk cruise missile fired into the Middle East vaporizes about 50 pounds of Silver when they explode.

    My own background in semiconductor wafer fab processing exposed me to some very fascinating math- our fab utilized about 50 pounds of silver per year. Not so much, until you realize that we were a very average size production facility, and that there were about 1500 semiconductor fabs world-wide at the time.

    The silver market “pros” on Wall street work ONLY to ensure that the price of silver is correlated to new mine production and output, and that this output can meet the rate of destruction/consumption by industry.

    They leverage the amount of silver going into investment vaults as “available inventory” in their reports, even though the rate of silver being “hoarded” to “dishoarded” is currently heavily biased toward “hoarding”.

    What this portends for the future of the silver market could indeed end up looking very much like 1980 all over again.

    The amount of silver in investment vaults is not really “available” until the magical price that opens the dishoarding floodgates is discovered/met.

    The current silver market does not know what this price is, and the “pros” are doing everything in their power to make sure that mine production meets industrial demand, and that this buyer/seller meeting is the only “price” that is reflected in futures and spot market quotes.

    I have no doubt that the amount of “freely liquid” exchange vault supplies of silver are dwindling; and that the industrial consumption rate is increasing. This suggests that there is presently a pretty solid floor under the spot price.

    But, if you look only at flows, and ignore stocks, then you are only doing half of the necessary analysis.

    My personal rule of thumb is that when/if I see the silver price run 200% or more within a 12 month time frame, I will treat that as a short opportunity for the ages.

    • Mike September 4, 2012, 8:26 am

      Robert,

      Great analysis btw. I left the street six months ago to move into MDM sales…Sell side US taxables+Sovs. After four months out when I saw Gold hit 1450 range in July, I regained about the demise of the doll aand figured wasnt going to get a better opportunity than this, so loaded up on silver coins, rounds, bars etc…with equal $ gold. I want to say i saw an intraday price of 1350 on Platinum before the South African coffee brewed i, and bought there.

      Always had same mentality as you…profit is profit, and by all means I am bullish on all three, but I would like to see what you think about swapping Silver profits for Platinum. The site is a crude, half joking pseudonym in case I rejoin industry, but the analysis is real. Have you seen the Platinum/Silver ratio versus its historical the last 30 years. If you don’t mind take a like at it and let me know what you think (about the trade…not the site).

  • Jeff August 28, 2012, 6:00 pm

    Martial law and nationalization of resources in the good ‘ol USA will be the next shocker.

  • BDTR August 28, 2012, 4:37 pm

    ‘If you want to be a player in the silver space right now you’re virtually limited to Mexico, USA and Canada.’

    Virtual is the key word here, since actual ownership is indeed just that.

    I’ll submit that the only actual ‘players’ are those in physical possession of their assets.

    It would make a fascinating read to see a probable, unfolding scenario of a much anticipated/denied global, ‘big one’ market collapse replete with knock on nationalization effects of ALL natural resources and means of production.

    That, and the MFG like evaporation of electronic system re-re-hypothicated held paper wealth. I wonder what the ‘players’ will be holding to play with then. (No obscene imagery intended;)