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 : Barrick Gold (ABX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: nickel61 who wrote (2891)	5/18/2002 4:57:24 PM
From: goldsheet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3558

> But you don't see the gold carry trade or the massive hedging of gold producers as a significant factor Factor, yes, but one of many. > By your own numbers the level of production has remained flat for the last six years Sorry, but my numbers (GFMS) are: 1995 - 2250 1996 - 2328 1997 - 2472 1998 - 2555 1999 - 2569 2000 - 2573 2001 - 2604mt That is UP every year, and we are running 15.7% over 1995 I use 1995 a my baseline because that's when gold hit $400 and millions were invested in exploration. The "natural deficit", which I consider total demand minus primary mine production minus scrap has been as high as 1000mt in that period, but mostly closer to 500-600mt, and has gone all the way down to 173mt in 2001 due to weak demand. > gold carry trade? THat that didn't exist? OR that it was over estimated? Exists, probably corrected estimated by Veneroso, was an important factor in the 1995-1999 timeframe, less so post Washington agreement, less so now that the "deficit gap" is down to 173mt and we need miners to cover hedges to suck up the continues central bank sales.