For me actually the controversy is not that there is an ALLEGATION that some number of bars have been found to be fake, but rather the lack of VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE that the ALLEGATION is correct.

Allegations of this sort are not new, the entire point of both my article and the ensuing discussing as far as I am concerned is that NO ONE, EVEN AFTER A FEW WEEKS can provide credible sources for the allegations.

If you have some source of information we can verify that no one has provided yet please come forth with it as myself and I am sure everyone else searching for the truth of this story would be pleased to see.

To that I say, some quantity of them DID fail an assay. That is just where this whole controversy originates.

“The HK bankers hoped to have 99% gold yield in their drill program for the resident bars. They found something like 1% instead and 99% tungsten. By the way, tungsten sells for less than $70 per ton, which makes its swaps for gold to be 60x more profitable than silver bar swaps. Another handy usage for the Gold/Silver ratio in calculations. ”

Since the whole scam is supposedly based on the principle that the specific gravities of gold and tungsten are the same, it makes no sense to make the comparison with silver, which has a specific gravity half of the other two!

The tungsten rumors are not new, only on anything like this scale, and the alleged high-up conspiracy. Tungsten, as the most likely element for forgeries, has been known and talked about for years.

From personal dealings with refiners in Pforzheim, Germany (home of an LBMA accredited facility, as well as numerous other refiners), these forgeries are rare. There, apparently about 30 years ago, a few 100gr tungsten-core bars were seen. That is not much for forgeries. (can’t substantiate as conveyed in personal meetings). But it would show not much of a problem historically.

As to the poster above, who correctly points out the difference in density between gold and tungsten of -0.05, that COULD be made up using a denser material such as iridium or osmium, both of which are even denser than platinum, and are priced at 1/3 of gold. Only about 6oz of either would be required, worth it when one is faking $450k.
Doable, but rather farfetched of course.

While no one would “assay” a bar by density, as you point out, the whole idea of LBMA good delivery is that a reassay, especially an invasive one such as the drill method, is not deemed necessary, the proper state being guaranteed by the tracing method you point out. And even a non invasive method would not be very practical with tons worth of delivery, especially as the assay would have to be done at the time transfer at the vault (if subsequent how to prove that a swith did not take outside the vault).

These rumors may have been seeded just to sow discontent…

Regards!

You say that ” Purity is not determined by weight, and I have never heard weighing bars being used as a means of determining the authenticity of an LBMA bar, ever.”

If you have a GoldMoney account you might login and view their “Vault Video”. This is a video of the Via MAT vault operation in either Zurich or London (I’m not sure which one). Upon receiving a pallet of 400 oz. Gold bars, the first thing they do is to log the weight of the pallet and then to log the weight of a random bar.
I believe these are LBMA bars but I have no way to verify this.

You make an excellent point.

LBMA bars however are not exactly 400 oz, they are “about” 400 oz of fine weight – which is why weight alone is not used to determine authenticity of fineness.

Good Delivery Gold

minimum gold content
350 troy ounces (approximately 10.9 kilograms)
maximum gold content
430 troy ounces (approximately 13.4 kilograms)

Recommended dimensions (approximately): Top Surface 255 × 81 mm
Bottom Surface 236 × 57 mm
Thickness 37 mm

The physical settlement of a loco London gold trade is a bar conforming to these specifications.

The gross weight of a bar should be expressed in troy ounces, in multiples of 0.025, rounded down to the nearest 0.025 of a troy ounce.

Fineness: the minimum acceptable fineness is 995.0 parts per thousand fine gold.
Marks

* Serial number
* Assay stamp of refiner
* Fineness (to four significant figures)
* Year of manufacture (expressed in four digits)

Good Delivery Silver Bar

minimum silver content
750 troy ounces (approximately 23 kilograms)
maximum silver content
1100 troy ounces (approximately 34 kilograms)
minimum fineness
999.0 parts per thousand silver

Recommended dimensions Minimum Maximum
Length 250mm 350mm
Width 110mm 150mm
Height 60mm 100mm

The physical settlement of a loco London silver trade is a bar conforming to these specifications:

The gross weight of a bar should be expressed in troy ounces in multiples of 0.10, rounded down to the nearest 0.10 of a troy ounce.
Marks

* Serial number
* Assay stamp of refiner
* Fineness, expressed to either three or four significant figures
* Year of manufacture (expressed in four digits)
* Optionally, the weight, which, if included, may be shown in either troy ounces or kilograms

You can find further information about LBMA “Good Delivery” protocols and standards here: http://www.lbma.org.uk/delivery/definitn