Is Iran playing the markets?

democrates

Iranian insiders who knew when the announcement of nuclear research resumption would be made could theoretically make a fortune in the markets knowing how they react to that kind of news.

Conspiracy theory hogwash or plausible possibility?

mike65

Well if they were set-up to exploit the market indicies they certainly could. All you need is cash and enough of it, they have oil so a ready supply of liquidity to 'invest'.

Mike.

Victor

democrates wrote:

Iranian insiders who knew when the announcement of nuclear research resumption would be made could theoretically make a fortune in the markets knowing how they react to that kind of news.

Whereas Whitehouse insiders have actually made fortunes (Cheney - Halliburton et al). Of course, the Americans were the major importer of Iraqi oil before the invasion. And few enough people would have known the exact date of the invasion.

On what model are you suggesting they could do insider trading? You can't really sell options above expected market price, so they would have to buy options below expected market price, which may not be very useful, unless you have a ready buyer and lots of money.

Possibility, not probability.

democrates

Victor wrote:

Whereas Whitehouse insiders have actually made fortunes (Cheney - Halliburton et al). Of course, the Americans were the major importer of Iraqi oil before the invasion. And few enough people would have known the exact date of the invasion.

On what model are you suggesting they could do insider trading? You can't really sell options above expected market price, so they would have to buy options below expected market price, which may not be very useful, unless you have a ready buyer and lots of money.

Possibility, not probability.

Go long on oil, rattle sabre, price rises = big profit, short oil, make conciliatary noises, price falls = big profit. Keep repeating.

With the volume of money leveraged hedge funds are throwing about, finding buyers and sellers is not a problem once you're ahead of the curve, which isn't too difficult when you can trigger the turn.

Sponge Bob

democrates wrote:

Go long on oil, rattle sabre, price rises = big profit, short oil, make conciliatary noises, price falls = big profit. Keep repeating.

so its not a real nuclear program at all by that logic but a ploy to repeatedly rattle the markets for short term gain , someone should tell George before he presses the button on the place !

Victor

democrates wrote:

Go long on oil, rattle sabre, price rises = big profit, short oil, make conciliatary noises, price falls = big profit. Keep repeating.

With the volume of money leveraged hedge funds are throwing about, finding buyers and sellers is not a problem once you're ahead of the curve, which isn't too difficult when you can trigger the turn.

But Iran is a fair bit down the list of oil producers and has even less nuclear pull. How about George's sabre rattling? Or Saudi manipulation of the market?

Hobbes

Such a thing would be insider trading though? no?

Sponge Bob

Hobbes wrote:

Such a thing would be insider trading though? no?

yes but the traders have diplomatic immunity

democrates

Fair points, I was merely looking at one possible angle of Irans motives, the realities of their nuclear and islamic ambitions are another question, albeit linked.

Any concerns over Iran don't equal an endorsement of anyone elses policy or record btw.

But looking ahead, has the WMD intelligence debacle, and the record in Iraq, reduced the capacity of the west to act, and made Iran believe that they can do as they please? Are we now facing a risk of nuclear proliferation to terrorist groups, or can we relax that the president of iran has no such ambitions?

Victor

Sponge Bob wrote:

yes but the traders have diplomatic immunity

Why do you say this?

knightofround

Insider trading is not a part of international law.

There's nothing bad or illegal in engaging in insider trading in Iranian stocks.

democrates

knightofround wrote:

Insider trading is not a part of international law.

There's nothing bad or illegal in engaging in insider trading in Iranian stocks.

International law in the form of treaties applies to international transactions, so that national laws effectively apply, be it sec regulations or what not. I'm not aware of any market where insider trading is allowed, hardly makes for investor confidence.

Iranian stocks are unlikely to be the investment vehicle, commodities, bonds, currency markets all vacillate in response to these political shocks.

If monies raised are funnelled to al quaeda, I'd call that bad.

Victor

democrates wrote:

International law in the form of treaties applies to international transactions, so that national laws effectively apply, be it sec regulations or what not. I'm not aware of any market where insider trading is allowed, hardly makes for investor confidence. Iranian stocks are unlikely to be the investment vehicle, commodities, bonds, currency markets all vacillate in response to these political shocks.

I'm not sure what Iranian law on insider tading is, but you and Sponge Bob seem to be confusing a nation state and its political and diplomatic officials with any of its 68 million citizens. Would you blame the British government for Gerry Adams' speeches?

If monies raised are funnelled to al quaeda, I'd call that bad.

But wasn't it Iraq & Saddam Hussein were supporting Al Qaeda? Or was that Saudi Arabia?

Iran (Shia) condemned the Taliban (Sunni) long before anyone else did.

I suggest you retract your statements.

democrates

Victor wrote:

I'm not sure what Iranian law on insider tading is, but you and Sponge Bob seem to be confusing a nation state and its political and diplomatic officials with any of its 68 million citizens. Would you blame the British government for Gerry Adams' speeches?

But wasn't it Iraq & Saddam Hussein were supporting Al Qaeda? Or was that Saudi Arabia?

Iran (Shia) condemned the Taliban (Sunni) long before anyone else did.

I suggest you retract your statements.

I must wonder what level of care you took to comprehend accurately what you read, there may be confusion on this thread but I don't see it on my posts...:rolleyes:

Iranian law is unlikely to be relevant to the original posit, the majority of hedge funds are incorporated offshore to avail of lax regulation for the body corporate itself, and often cloaking the identity of beneficiaries. The markets in which they trade can be anywhere, seperate legal jurisdictions with their own rules. The door is open to covertly profit from having prior knowledge of political developmets that affect markets anywhere.

I made no reference to Irans entire citizenry, rather to Iranian insiders, meaning political insiders.

Again, any concerns about Iran do not amount to an endorsement of anyone elses policy or record, ie, I'm concerned with the potential for nuclear proliferation and/or funding to terrorist groups, it doesn't follow that I agree with everything George Bush or anyone else says and does just because they have raised similar concerns.

And I have been speculative all along, deliberately inviting alternative views in the spirit of discussion. I see no justification for a retraction call.

bonkey

democrates wrote:

Iranian insiders who knew when the announcement of nuclear research resumption would be made could theoretically make a fortune in the markets knowing how they react to that kind of news.

Conspiracy theory hogwash or plausible possibility?

Depends.

If you mean have they done this, then I would tend to believe that its more likely to be the former rather then the latter, as one would imagine that market analysts would be quick to notice any such unusual patterns.

If you mean could they do this (but haven't done so yet), then I would say that they could - albeit to a limited degree - but the resultant "fortune" being referred to would be rather insignificant. I'd also point out how nebulous the "they" are here. Without any sort of clear identification, as opposed to the shadowy "some of the Iranians in power", then it really begins to smack of good ol' conspiracy-ness again.

If monies raised are funnelled to al quaeda, I'd call that bad.

So would I, but I'm not sure where this links to the original idea. Are you suggesting that they might do this? That they have done this? That there's any reason to believe there is a real likelihood this could come about if your fortune-making theory held up?

I mean, we could equally say that if the monies were pumped into violent anti-abortion groups, that would also be bad. Its as relevant a comment, from whats been presented here thus far, no?

jc

Hobbes

I wonder how Iran could play the markets considering they are under an embargo by the US. Unless you mean thier markets.

Sponge Bob

Victor wrote:

you and Sponge Bob seem to be confusing a nation state and its political and diplomatic officials with any of its 68 million citizens.

Ehh No

I suggest you retract your statements.

Ahh No!

Lets see, short the Japanese Stock exchange, buy options short, announce a new missile with the 'range to hit Japan' cash in the option

Go long on oil futures and conduct a missile test where a missile with no warhead or payload accidentally lands in Saudi desert, no damage , apologise profusely . Oil leps $5 a barrel in one day , cash in .

It could be done quite easily as long as you had swing stocks of oi l/ liquid cash / a missile program and a nuclear program and nobody would get physically hurt . Use your diplomats to place the bets ...... sorry , buy the options . They cannot be done for insider trading because they have diplomatic immunity like I said .

Hobbes

Sponge Bob wrote:

It could be done quite easily

Thats why stock exchanges have thier own kind of police and you get arrested for doing stuff like you said.

Sponge Bob

Not if you have diplomatic immunity my dear Hobbes !

bonkey

Sponge Bob wrote:

Not if you have diplomatic immunity my dear Hobbes !

You can have that immunity revoked. So, that really puts a limit on how much of this type of stuff you can do.

For a one-off sting ....sure.... you'd more than likely get away with it. But for a 10% return (based on your numbers and the current oil price), this isn't gonna make anyone ultra-rich, unless they're ultra-rich to begin with. If they're ultra-rich to begin with, then the profits from this financial-market transaction is already the least of your worries, so I wouldn't

Similarly, if you look at your own "how easy it would be" ideas....I would suggest the military capability that drives it all is whats of far greater concern.

Also, I believe that pretty-much all international banks have agreements to freeze any and all funds related to illegal activity. The diplomat may be free from prosecution, but could stand to lose not only the ensuing profit, but the cash which generated the profit as well.

jc

Sponge Bob

bonkey wrote:

You can have that immunity revoked.

By your own government , yes. If you are trading on their behalf its unlikely they would do so.

Anyway the OP posited a hypothetical question to which I posited a hypothetical answer , thats all. Its not a view or even an opinion of mine.

Hobbes

Sponge Bob wrote:

Not if you have diplomatic immunity my dear Hobbes !

Diplomatic immunity would not cover you in this instance. Despite what you see on TV it is not a carte blanche to do what you like.