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: Claude Cormier who wrote (67919)	4/19/2001 5:27:11 PM
From: goldsheet	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116762

<<You do not believe the demand supply numbers that are published by those who know this market (Veneroso and all) to be true?>> Even if 100% accurate, the numbers have not resulted in any positive impact on gold prices, yet. I am still waiting for "Any Econ 101 course book provides the unassailable logic that whenever demand is growing faster than supply, causing production deficits to expand, THE PRICE OF THE COMMODITY MUST INEVITABLY RISE AS A RESULT" to come true from an essay in early 1997 that ignored "less significant supply factors" such as scrap, central banks sales, and forward sales. REF: gold-eagle.com <<If not, even the GFMS numbers are showing a annual deficit that is filled in part by CB's. It is a matter of time before this turns into an explosive situation.>> This is the trap Bill Murphy got himself into in 1998. Having worked for Veneroso, he believed the gap was going to result in an immediate price rise. There is even a SI subject he started predicting big gains in gold in the summer of 1998 based on the Veneroso studies. Things did not work out that way (I know it was manipulation, one could not have just simply made a bad prediction), and three years later we are still waiting for the big rally. I agree with you the gap will "eventually" result in "higher" gold prices, but eventually is 4-5 years (IMHO) and higher might be $350-400. <<Soon mine production will start declining big time, while demand will continue to grow on a steady basis.>> Mine production has just gone flat to slightly down, and demand is also relatively flat. If the economies (and paper currencies) get as bad as many folks think, it is mathematically possible that demand could decline faster than mine production and the gap remain fixed or even get smaller. <<Now is the time to accumulate. Cause this stuff is going to new highs in terms of all paper currencies. Count the years on the fingers of your left hand.>> Probably true, but it may take all of the fingers plus your thumb - five years ???