The Bundesbank takes back its doughnuts
In repatriating its gold, the German central bank shows it doesn’t trust foreigners
‘Germany’s central bank is planning to shift 54,000 gold bars worth €27bn from Paris and New York to its base in Frankfurt, one of the biggest publicly announced shipments of the precious metal on record.’
Financial Times, January 16
What’s the thinking behind that?
There is no thinking behind that. This is gold we’re talking about, so we’re entering the asylum.
Really? Gold has been a pretty good investment over the past 10 years.
It’s been an excellent investment. But there’s no logic behind the gold bubble.
Bubble? That’s a controversial word to use. How do you know the gold price will collapse?
I don’t mean the gold price will collapse. When I say “bubble”, I’m thinking of a more technical category: gold is a bubble because its investment value isn’t connected to the stream of income it produces. Housing produces rent. Bonds produce interest payments. Shares produce dividends, or at least the prospect. But gold doesn’t produce any income stream, and its value as jewellery or for industrial uses is inconsequential. Gold merely offers the prospect of resale to somebody who also wants to hold gold. Therefore it is a bubble. It may remain an excellent investment: any bubble that has persisted for 4,000 years has to be pretty resilient.
There are plenty of good reasons to expect the gold price to rise – most notably that central banks are printing money by the hundreds of billions.
Whatever. If we actually get some decent inflation – and it has been conspicuous by its absence in much of the developed world – then of course the price of anything denominated in the inflating currency will rise. For example, the price of balloons should rise.
But this is all a distraction. The point is not that Germany is buying up gold but that it’s physically moving the gold it already has. So something else is going on.
Indeed. To change the subject for a moment, did I ever tell you about the Island of Yap?
Yap!
There’s no need to snap. Be polite and you might learn something. Yap is in Micronesia in the West Pacific. Its coins, the rai, look like stone doughnuts. Some are fairly portable, the size of actual doughnuts, but others weigh as much as a couple of cars. The process of producing these things, 250 miles across the sea in the quarries of Palau, used to be a gigantic effort – a Victorian naturalist witnessed a tenth of Yap’s adult male population digging these things out of the ground and sailing them back to Yap.
Gosh. Couldn’t they have been more profitably employed producing something with practical value?
Tell me again that gold isn’t a bubble.
I see your point. But I’m curious – how did the Yap islanders use a 4-tonne coin? It sounds like something dreamed up by Douglas Adams.
You’re thinking of the Triganic pu. In Adams’s fertile imagination, this was worth eight ningis – but as the ningi was a rubber coin 6,800 miles long on each side no one ever got enough together to own a pu.
Couldn’t you just have accumulated credit for the eight ningis in a bank account?
No, the banks didn’t want to bother with small change. But you have the solution to the islanders’ problem here. They didn’t actually move the 4-tonne coins around, they just gave each other credit. If we lived on Yap and you paid me for something – say, land or a dowry – with a huge coin, everyone would simply agree the coin in question had a new owner. It would remain the one leaning against the tree behind the garden shed. But when once it had been yours, now it would be mine. The islanders even used a coin at the bottom of the ocean as money. It sank in a storm on the way back from Palau but everyone knew whose it was.
That’s absolutely insane.
Now you’re thinking like the Bundesbank. Most of the world’s gold is in vaults with labels on it: “That’s Auric Goldfinger’s gold”; “That’s the Bundesbank’s gold”. Usually, when it is bought and sold, we just change the labels. You and the Bundesbank think differently. The Germans are behaving like a Yap islander who actually wants to move the 4-tonne stone doughnut to his own back garden.
Socially awkward.
Quite. The message is simple: the Bundesbank doesn’t really trust foreigners. Diplomatically, that will ruffle some feathers. But it is a sentiment that will reassure many Germans.
Also published at ft.com.





9 Comments
BJörn says:
Really fascinating, and it seems the doughnut money is not completely stupid? They invented a way to naturally limit the rate of money creation? It sounds wasteful, but imagine instead there was a committee deciding on the creation of new money. That would waste a lot of time, too, and would be a lot less stable. Maybe BitCoin is the greatest money invention ever because it solves the money creation rate problem (is it a relevant problem?), without humans having to do the work (unfortunately still some work generating the energy and building ever more powerful computers, but still).
19th of January, 2013Niels says:
I agree. But what if the Bundesbank could store the gold more cheaply than its foreign counterparts? Then it would make sense as a cost reducing measure.
19th of January, 2013Ralph Corderoy says:
More detail on the Yapese stone money can be found on Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_Yap#Stone_money
It reminds me of the entertaining _How an Economy Grows and Why It Crashes: Two Tales of the Economy_ http://goo.gl/bNdVX that explains money and economics from the starting point of an island (in Austria?) where fish were the only resource. Like the Yapese, they also got fed up with moving money around, and fish have an added odour problem. As their society develops, it gives humorous insight into the flaws of our own fiat currencies.
19th of January, 2013Julien Couvreur says:
“Most of the world’s gold is in vaults with labels on it”
So you know for a fact that the gold is still there and the labels have not been changed to “loaned out to China” or “loaned out to bank B”?
More generally, what is the right trade-off between the cost of transport and the perceived value of the getting more direct control over that gold?
19th of January, 2013Given that value and trust are subjective, how would an economist judge that?
Someone says:
Beware, the Germans are preparing for war!
On a more serious term, how do we know that unconventional active central banking will not lead to hyperinflation. The world’s economic and social systems are going through deep structural changes and we are in the fog, we have no idea what holds the future. Though I don’t believe in the warmongering, I give trust to having more strong powers contrary to a super power (+ a few soft powers).
20th of January, 2013Michael says:
German bank vaults are safer than those in France and the USA ????
http://www.thelocal.de/national/20130119-47431.html#.UPwgHSdThro
20th of January, 2013Ken Taylor says:
The clever vault operator will create more labels than gold bars. As long as too many owners don’t take away their bars it’s not a problem and the vault owner can get rich selling labels.
The temptation to be clever is so huge that historically vault owners nearly always become clever eventually.
23rd of January, 2013Paul says:
“In repatriating its gold, the German central bank shows it doesn’t trust foreigners”. Not true – if anything it shows it does trust some of the dodgiest foreigners around as it moved its gold out of Germany just in case the Russians invaded.
23rd of January, 2013Deborah Sacks says:
Clearly it’s time to plan a heist. What sort of ships is it going to be carried in and when?
25th of January, 2013