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: russwinter who wrote (74238)	7/31/2001 1:17:58 PM
From: goldsheet	Respond to of 116816

> 265 is unsustainable There's the problem, $265ish has been sustainable much longer than anyone expected, and we may well stay around the fair market range I mentioned ($275 +/-$25) for a lot longer than anyone wishes. Whatever it takes to frustrate the most people, the gold markets will probably do.

To: russwinter who wrote (74238)	8/2/2001 1:14:26 AM
From: IngotWeTrust	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116816

Hello, again, Russ. Life has slowed down to a crawl for a few moments, and yours is the last response to which I wish to grant some of my time. Thank you for your thoughtful and sincere apology. Accepted. One is either spouting opinions or speaking facts in my books. I try to discern which when I read black squiggles on white monitor backgrounds. Since visual neurolinquistic clues are missing in written exchange as well as audio clues, I just proceed and do the best I can. I assume you are as well. However, I'll most always have a response when I see opinion trotted out as fact when I know the difference between the two. That's what you got, and you handled it well. Kudos. KRY is not in politically friendly territory in my opinion, so I do not give KRY much additional thought other than to mention it and see if it was on your radar screen. In the old board game of Battle ship, that was a hit, and you have to now tell me if that was a destroyer, a gunboat or an aircraft carrier in your list of 6 or so to which you referred earlier. And I'm still waiting for you to state why you do or do not see them being a candidate of interest for a multi-ounce deposit that would be enticing to ravenous, vulturous ABX's Munk. I note in the intervening 48 hours, you have still failed to do so. It was your challenge. Please come forward at this time with your postulate, at least where KRY is concerned if you want to whittle it down to just one issue. As far as your iceberg allegory thingy is concerned: I've lived in the heady days of melting iceberg of low gold prices. I was around when it was $35 an ounce and was selling it AND silver, hand over fist, shipping out by private plane from private grassy runways when POG was $775+ and Silver was $35 going on $50 per. I stepped aside at the $775 level and the $35 level and let other, greater fools as the trade knows them, take it the rest of the way. My point: The iceberg melts faster when the POG is hotter. I've been there, I've seen the demand, I've feed the frenzy, I've helped melt icebergs. Killing the price has made the iceberg bigger, i.e., melt slower. So, sorry, Russ, but I don't buy that either. People are wont to quote this source or that statistic about demand drying up as prices go up, but I'm here to tell you that is a TEMP phenom. Only when you've helped feed a frenzy of accelerating POG/POSilver will you understand. Selah and good night. gold_tutor