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: Tommaso who wrote (93593)	8/12/2001 7:50:05 PM
From: Frank Pembleton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95453

Tommaso, isn't there an issue of a 1500 ton gap between supply and demand? Regards Frank P.

To: Tommaso who wrote (93593)	8/12/2001 10:06:10 PM
From: t4texas	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 95453

clearly i have to disagree with you 1. your 50% assumption is not profit. it would be commonly called gross margin (sales price minus the cost of production of the gold) just like the chip biz or what have you. once the gross margin dollars are determined, you need to subtract all kinds of items, e.g., marketing and sales costs, general and administrative costs, lots of other miscellaneous expenses, etc., to get to a profit before taxes dollar amount. 2. i read my gold mining stock quarterly reports (and well as all kinds of other press releases, etc.), and i pay attention to their forecasts of how much gold they are forecasting to mine in the quarter and rest of the year. they have variance to their forecasts for a large number of reasons. it is not like they can just "pop the clutch" and mine a lot more gold as they see fit. even nem, one of the largest, talks freely about mines/fields that they expect to deplete in maybe three years. they just don't talk about having enough gold in the ground that can be extracted quickly if the price jumps much higher. the technology to bring the prices down doesn't seem to be such a factor. it seems to be the concentration of gold per ton of dirt (ore) -- makes sense doesn't it! 3. i have seen lots of your postings, and you seem to have a lot of different types of gold holdings. i believe in free speech and especially yours, but if i thought gold were going to be a bad investment i would sell it. why do you still own the gold stuff you have, yet you say it is a bad investment. it does not sound smart. if i thought the chip stocks (for example) were a bad investment, i would not own them (by the way i do not have any chips right now). i would short them (i am short some of them). i am not saying you are short the gold miners, but i do wonder if you just don't like your old investment and are afraid the moment you sell them they will go up. 4. by the way i own some gold miners, only because i want to play the dollar decline that i have been waiting for since late last year. i am glad i bought the gold miners instead of shorting the dollar futures. i am making money now (on paper) instead of surely losing my butt on the dollar futures. the dollar is going to decline a lot more, and i think you should just sit tight and take some gold profits over the next six months to a year.

To: Tommaso who wrote (93593)	8/13/2001 10:50:14 AM
From: SliderOnTheBlack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95453

Tommy-boy ? re: you comments of - ["That figure of $180 an ounce is my argument for why gold is unlikely to rise very much in price. If you can produce something and sell it for an immediate 50% profit, you produce to the limit. And the technology is there to bring prices of production even lower."] ...surely you didn't really type this & hopefully you don't "really" believe it ? - "an immediate 50% profit ?" ... you think that "Cash Cost" is their total cost ? - that they're profitable at $180 "cash cost" ? Most are not making ANY profit (a few are) let alone 50% profit here ? - have you even looked at a P&L of these co's ? Their costs are going up, not down... this is a major problem in the industry.Technology hasn't created a problem; market intervention/manipulation has. Global Gold production is at a 47 year low Tomas ? - please explain in detail your points about technology once again (VBG)? Miners are shutting down mines as unprofitable left & right. Production & infrastructure are collapsing. Many co's are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. One of the main points on this being an inflection point for Gold - is becuase GOLD production can not & will not be sustained here, let alone at lower prices. - don't you get the most basic facts here ? I'll try to be politically correct & not call your statement - "moronic" - but, it's analogous to someone predicting endless supplies of Crude Oil from the Saudi's at $10 because their quote/unquote "cash cost" is $4 boe and they're obviously making 700% profit here (lol~). C'Mon Tommy-boy... are you so bent on nipping & ankle-biting that you not only have to play both sides of the street via continually poo-pooing all things Gold and any & all positive commentary here, but simultaneous pointing to your XAU leaps & now apparent long term gold holdings anytime the sector rallies, or we post the "scoreboard" charts ? The Saudi's have other "costs" besides their "cash costs" as well as do the Gold Miners... we all wish their breakeven figure was at $180 gold... and I'm sure the Saudi Royals wish they didn't have about $11 boe of social welfare costs etc. C'mon Tomas...if you see so many negatives - why have you been a LT "closet" Gold holder all these years ? Even "we" view Gold as cyclical ? - but, you who "hate" all things Gold - are about the only LT Gold holder here !?!?! and we're wrong ? ...Tomas; MeThinks perhaps we're just seeing some sour grapes ? - "we" are stepping into Gold at a historic cyclical/market intervention inflection point-opportunity. We are not LT gold holders like you... oddly; now at this juncture of opportunity & price - you become Bearish & we become Bullish?!?!?!- whodathunkit ? We made nothing but money since we've become so & you are obviously a longtime money loser since your're about the only one here who has professed to be a LT Gold Bull ? Tomas the parallels in the Gold mining industry to what happened at the end of 1998 in the Oil & Gas industry are rampant. Co's losing money, going under, Consolidation, rising costs, decreasing production, infrastructure destruction , collapse in Cap Ex etc. Oil fortunately didn't have CB's dumping into the market via auctions going to the lowest bidder... The openly acknowledged intervention in the market, the historic ramp in short/derivatives, the systemic crack's in global currencies & economies as well as the basic cyclical trough - all make this an appealing play for a variety of reasons that this thread has discussed here intelligently since last fall/winter. You left this thread for a rather obvious reason, because you disagreed with our negative O&G bias & our positive Gold/Silver bias. Here's the cold stark reality of that arguement. From last fall when the "arguement" started: siliconinvestor.com HUI +74% (whodathunkit ?) XAU +27% (unhedged HUI outperformed by 3 x !) XOI + 7% DOW - 2% XNG - 5% S&P -13% OSX -30% Nasdq - 55% QQQ - 43% So now since O&G has tanked & Gold/Silver ramped - ie: you were wrong & we were right - I'll ask again; - why are you "really" here and what's your "real" point ?