Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bilow who wrote (43100)	10/16/1999 5:10:00 AM
From: d:oug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116764

O49r helpppppppppp & slap this boy around good and then soap out his mouth <<gold production... ... changes in production have less of an effect in the gold market than in the oil market. This is why the gold producers can't drive the price up much.>> <<So if the miners were going to do anything, what they would do is reduce sales of gold, not production. This would have the effect of making their balance sheets very dependent on the price of gold, which is exactly what they don't want to have. What they want is predictability, which is why all those hedging programs were in place.>> <<If the miners wanted to run the price of gold up, they might as well buy it on the futures market. "Texas hedge">> <<I really doubt that the miners are going to reduce production. In fact, with the recent price rise, they are, without doubt, increasing production as fast as they can. But all that production increase will hardly make much of a dent in the total amount of gold held above ground -- Carl>>

To: Bilow who wrote (43100)	10/16/1999 8:42:00 AM
From: Mark Bartlett	Respond to of 116764

Bilow, <<Consequently, changes in production have less of an effect in the gold market than in the oil market. This is why the gold producers can't drive the price up much.>> I think you may be missing one of the key points - this game is very much about psychology .... the "CB sales" that have driven the price lower, have been (from historical standards)very small - yet it has been enough (along with the leasing) to drive the price down. Time will tell. MB

To: Bilow who wrote (43100)	10/16/1999 9:31:00 AM
From: Rarebird	Respond to of 116764

We are in a Classic Bear Market Now. The worst is yet to come. It's good and healthy for the Bear that the Polyannas have not lost their faith yet. When the Polyannas capitulate, it will be time to buy. The bear markets of history were not the "new era" lightning-like affairs today's investors have come to expect where you lose between 10 and 20 percent in a quarter and then get on with the bull market again. Beginning with the crash of '87, investors have been trained to expect their pain to occur in short, violent spurts. Recent bear markets have been brief interludes in an ongoing, unstoppable bull market. This idea was cemented with the one-quarter bear market of 1990. And though 1994 shook the faith, 1998's blowout brought the lapsed back into the fold. It was not always this way. In the post WWII era bear markets ran on average a bit more than a year and a half. Indeed, prior to 1987 declines were the rule approximately 40% of the time. Now, we are supposed to believe that it is different this time, but somehow history continues to nag. For example, there were 11 bear markets between 1945 and 1987. The average decline was 26%. These bears took a leisurely six and a half quarters on average to inflict their damage. In contrast, lasts year's debacle--hardly a bear market by any standard--lasted barely more than a quarter while clocking an 18% decline. We would guess that the most unexpected event at present is a long and drawn-out bear market. Indeed, many think this is simply an impossibility--exactly why you should have a strategy ready for just such an eventuality. decisionpoint.com