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: paul ross who wrote (81734)	2/7/2002 10:37:53 PM
From: Real Man	Respond to of 116758

I think it's the other way around - high lease rates meant it was short covering, not true buying ...

To: paul ross who wrote (81734)	2/8/2002 12:51:02 AM
From: Elizabeth Andrews	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116758

Well, all I can say Paul is let's have the "several" on the thread show the thread the evidence that high lease rates predict a rise in gold prices. My view is that lease rates will fall or narrow here as gold rises. The rate is not the issue. The currency is the issue. The lenders of gold only want to be repaid in gold. So, the price to the lender, the lease rate, only has to be over the prime rate and as long as they get the same commodity returned. It doesn't matter which mine produced the gold the lease rate is irrelevant as long as it provides a positive return. That's what fungible means. Inflation, which is a currency issue, is out of the lending equation. The lender gets back exactly what he lent at any time in the future. It's a cool idea. It has been practiced for centuries. Even the greatest wines can't claim this as oxidation ultimately prevails.