SI
SI
discoversearch

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: goldsheet who wrote (72401)6/26/2001 12:51:16 PM
From: Ken Benes  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 116814
 
Bob:

I have a question. What does a 10 million ounce producer do for the price of gold and what will effects be on the share price of the gold stocks. Throw into the equation, barrick as the big producer, and I think that the chances of gold surpassing 300.00 ounce becomes less of a reality. Ten million ounces controls an awful lot of production and with the leverage that kind of production has relative to its reserve base, it is not a question if they will continue hedging, but at what price. I suspect the spot price that forward sales resume will not be above 300.00, ie: there is the enormous pressure of pushing gold down as it approaches that magic mark. Great for the bankers, great for the cb's, terrible for shareholders.

Ken



To: goldsheet who wrote (72401)6/26/2001 1:36:35 PM
From: long-gone  Respond to of 116814
 
As I said before, when this is all done there may be only 3 mining companies in the world.



To: goldsheet who wrote (72401)6/26/2001 2:03:27 PM
From: geo in vancouver  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 116814
 
Bob
we must read the same newsletters. Normandy would make the most sense to further strengthen the Australian properties plus get the MIDAS mine.

Geo in denver