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: nickel61 who wrote (84017)	3/31/2002 9:25:35 AM
From: Richnorth	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116764

Good and appropriate post! Makes a lot of sense. I already have the stocks you mentioned.

To: nickel61 who wrote (84017)	3/31/2002 10:51:27 AM
From: IngotWeTrust	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116764

How funny. You had to change your SI name to quote Smurphy at this Gata immune thread? Wonder how long it will be before the rest of the clan out you...So, the GATA defeat was too much fer ya, huh<g> Hoppy Easter 2 you, too, "Buck"<g>

To: nickel61 who wrote (84017)	3/31/2002 1:18:07 PM
From: long-gone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116764

<<AngloGold in this gold bull market?>> AU said they were in the process of reducing their hedged position.

To: nickel61 who wrote (84017)	3/31/2002 1:34:57 PM
From: Zardoz	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 116764

The production to demand shortfall is 600-1,000 tonnes a year -and that is without investment demand. Mine supply will drop in the years ahead and producers are not capable of major increases in production. Says who? You? Before this is all over, all three of these stocks will be selling at over $400 a share. Just think what these three would do if Barrick, Placer Dome and AngloGold became the next Enrons. What the Fuck... where do you guys get this crap from. These producers sell from production, but forward in years. You'd have to assume that they are suddenly going to be unable to produce gold and thus default on delivery for such an event to occur. Enron was gambling in energy futures, in the same way as Nick Leeson gambled then pushed the copper prices higher. Attempts at positive feedback markets are destined to get destroyed. That's why the markets refuse to be pushed beyond their fare economical valuations. Any idea can be manipulated to create a trend that thus becomes unstable. And the smart people make the money... ALL markets are a zero sum game; even when you play in the derivatives markets. You may think that people lost billions in Enron, yet others I'm sure made just as much: The short sellers made money, the people who sold near the top made money. It's the people that held onto a dream that lost. For every person that bought a stock, someone had to sell it. Even in the distribution of stock options; the people who get them must execute them, or loose the value of said option. Zero is the name of the game. You buy an index option on an exchange, someone must be willing to assume the liability, and do you care who. Why should you care? Regardless of the reserve assets of a mine, the price of the equity moves under buyer and seller coming together. Unfulfilled contracts on production lower said valuations. Profit drives earnings which drives equity valuations. Show me ANYWAY a person can make money without occurring some form of risk, and I'll show you a liar. That is your simple task for the day. You buy Gold, silver or any PM you enter into a market that is frothy with risk. Too few people here or anywhere in the public understand what risk is. Bonds, treasuries, art, equities, and life; all have risk attributed to them. Understanding the rewards risk analysis is key. Some times companies become to powerful and they think they can control the market. But under the efficient market hypothesis, the markets always win. As Bill Murphy says, the Bundesbank is pathetic. They are attempting to drive gold and gold share prices down and drive the market up. Billy Murphy says a lot off things, most of which are untrue. He has a personal axe to grind, and he vents his hostility onto the FED, Treasury, and gold hedgers. Yet NONE of those mention has a vested interest in making gold go lower. The US Fed actions under Greenspan where wrong during the Asian Crisis, and are also wrong now. Inflation in the USA is a lie, growth in USA is miscalculated, and earnings are misrepresented. You've all been playing the equity game in a daze. THERE IS more RISK now in the equities then on the 2 weeks around Sept 11. Your thrust into understanding the economical cycles of money and money flow are minute. Even economist makes the same mistakes day in/day out. And cycles are what the markets are all about. Ever industry has it's time, its place {until they either become obsolete or replace with better technology or intruments}. But GOLD is not where it's at now. You might think that what was {Gold valuation} is now undervalued. But the concept of valuation is flawed in many people's ideas here. Gold is a catalyst; it performs in the exchange of money. Its valuation is based on principles. And those principles are dictating a lower valuation. You suggested that insiders of the above company are jumping ship cause of fear. Maybe they {closest to understanding the PM} are selling to limit risk going forward. Maybe they understand the market better then yourself. If you look under enough rocks, you'll find moss. Doesn't mean that moss grows under all rocks.