My question is two fold: if companies starting ETF's in metals, say Silver for example and say JP Morgan for example, and they stockpile silver bullion prior to offering their ETF as an investment, could this be simply a way to control the price of silver? And whether that is true or not of their intentions, doesn't this artificially raise the price of silver such that buyers/users of the metal must temporarily pay more, thus raising the price of their goods? On the scale of JP Morgan's recent purchases, does the government have any method to police such a large purchase (1.5B) and isn't this very disruptive to the free market pricing system?

Good question(s) Mykiemon.

Especially with the silver market, any "stockpiling", "hoarding" or whatever we want to label it can have a "manipulative" impact on prices, simply because inventories have dwindled to such a critical level.

Regarding the "policing" of such behavior, this presumes some observance of the Rule of Law. In fact U.S. markets are essentially totally lawless. The rules on the books are enforced in a PURELY arbitrary manner, specifically those who are "well-connected" are immune from any meaningful prosecution. It's only those without such clout who must observe the rules.

In addition, as I demonstrated in a previous commentary, it is SHORTING which is the more damaging act in commodity markets, not "hoarding". Excessive shorting causes TWO major disruptions in markets: artificially low prices/high demand - followed by a major implosion when inventories collapse. The "squeeze" that can occur when someone tries to "corner the market" is a relatively benign act in comparison.

Yet, the "shorts" are allowed to wreak havoc (because they're primarily bankers). It's ONLY the longs - the "speculators" - who are ever punished...at least up until now. Maybe this latest copper-grab by JP Morgan is a sign that NOTHING is going to be "regulated" in the U.S. any longer?