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 : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BigBull who wrote (75350)	10/2/2000 4:50:01 PM
From: The Ox	Respond to of 95453

When we discuss oil/NG as commodities, it's natural, IMO, that gold becomes part of the discussion. I prefer that we take gold talk to gold threads but I don't want to lose the opinions expressed by you, Slider, Roebear, Archie and many of the other folks who enjoy the gold discussion. I've come to view the gold talk on this thread as a very natural by-product of our conversation, since viewing the patch in the proper context of the overall market is critical. That's why I used both phrases in my sentence, stress and hype. One person may feel they are stressing their point of view while another may view this as hype. I hope I didn't offend anyone with my use of the word "hype", as that was not the intention.

To: BigBull who wrote (75350)	10/2/2000 5:07:40 PM
From: kollmhn	Respond to of 95453

BigBull- Thank you for taking the lead to move the "sky is gonna fall, buy gold" gold conversation to the gold thread.

To: BigBull who wrote (75350)	10/2/2000 6:01:59 PM
From: diana g	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 95453

<<<Off Topic>>> Gold Posts --- I find your gold posts, and other non-oil posts, and the off-oil-topic posts of others very valuable. When considering a person's ideas, it helps to learn as much as possible irt what a person is paying attention to, what they see as important, and how they formulate their ideas + thoughts. Your non-oil posts make your way of seeing the world more available to the reader, and thereby make your on-topic posts fuller. ---This is true for everyone, of course. There's more than one poster here and elsewhere whose on-topic value I have privately formed an opinion about based partly on off-topic posts. ---This off-topic stuff could go too far, but I don't think we're approaching that point. Especially with the scrolling feature and posts titled as <<OT>> Heck, how much trouble is it for those who don't want to read <<OT's>> to roll on past? ---Keep on posting about anything that you want, I say. Just mark it <<OT>> and don't call me a Democrat. ---Back to gold: I read the article you linked. I was surprised at the 24% production shortfall. But I notice these gold bulls predict $325 for 2001. whoopee. <<<"...The report, written primarily by Leanne Baker, John Hill and Graeme Newing, contends that gold, on fundamentals of supply and demand, will rise above the current US$275 range. "The equilibrium gold price is well above US$300 per ounce," the report said. "We maintain our estimate of US$325 for 2001." On the supply side, the analysts forecast there will be a 24% supply deficit this year, or a shortfall of 1,000 tonnes ...">>> regards, diana

To: BigBull who wrote (75350)	10/2/2000 10:51:04 PM
From: Bruce L	Respond to of 95453

<<...I do not wish to wear out my welcome...>> Nonsense. Not one person, so far as I recall, has objected to your (or Slider's) gold posts. I find them stimulating and probably prescient and have been building up a small portfolio (albeit more weighted to silver than gold). Besides which we all love your oil posts. Keep spreading the word. And thanks. Bruce

To: BigBull who wrote (75350)	10/3/2000 12:57:49 AM
From: SliderOnTheBlack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 95453

Bullsky: re: Gold's 24% supply deficit... Amazing similarities to the dark days of $8 Oil aren't there ? XAU 50 now, to OSX 50 then ? - same feel, same sentiment, same value, same upside potential... Absolutely no one bullish and the sector & it's supporters are literally openly ridiculed. Oil at the bottom had the market predicting the end of OPEC & $5 eternally cheap Oil - GOLD, has no value, doesn't matter, is irrelevant, will never bounce, has no reason to ever do so etc... re: the 70% collapse in (Gold) exploration spending = deja vu all over again ~ and we know what this caused in the oilpatch. Consolidation occuring - M&A activity rampant. Significant short interest in individual stocks. Alltime low valuation multiples & 2-5yr & alltime lows being put in. Actually; Gold & PM's are even a bit better risk vs. reward play than what the oilpatch was in the fall of 1998 imho... The significant difference; is the derivative positions in Gold - the upside appreciation potential from what could be the "mother of all short squeezes" is immense & Gold and PM's historic speculative upside cycle has allways exceed that of Oil. I've got tight, tight, tight stops on all Oilpatch stocks. I'm hoping that tech rallies (for the last time imho) here in late October-early Nov - stabilizing the market & we get an end of the year OSX rally thru 165ish - as I'll be cashing in lots of Oilpatch chips at that level & will be rotating the proceeds to un-hedged Gold & PM mining stocks as long as the XAU is 50ish, or under. I'd love to see what I would view as a leverageable XAU 40-43 final capitulation blow off... that will be "leverage & call city" for me personally. Amazingly; Gold can have huge - near dot.com-esque returns on near clock-work perfect 7 year cycles and as every cycle aged, by year 5,or 6; Gold's demise was once again predicted and those numerous former heady performances & returns were either forgotten, held in disbelief - or explained away by yet another "new paradigm" and Gold no longer mattered.... Of few things in this world I am 110% sure; one of them is this: GOLD MATTERS ! - IT ALLWAYS HAS & IT ALLWAYS WILL...