I have never traded futures so I don't know who has the hammer, the buyer or seller? I suck @ curling as well. But it seems whoever closes out the contract first can dictate the terms as long as they jive with the open market. Or the open market dictates the terms would be more appropriate.

"On Tuesday, Barrick, now headed by CEO Aaron Regent, announced it had entered into an agreement with a syndicate of underwriters, led by RBC Capital Markets, Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan and Scotia Capital, for a bought deal public offering of gross proceeds of US$3 billion representing 81.2 million common shares of Barrick at a price of $36.95 per share."

So, Barrick is agreeing to sell X amount of gold to satisfy a futures contract(assuming they want to settle it that way)or by cash. Anyone of the above bankers could be anticipating a huge short squeeze coming(oops, wrong side of the trade). Assuming(lots of assumptions) they are short legitimately(not naked) could they not take the cash to cover their position since it is cash market and Barrick would have to pay the difference B/t what the banks bought in @ and what it has risen too ?

I am threading lightly here.