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: goldsheet who wrote (89389)	9/8/2002 3:04:55 AM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 116796

I don't see many convincing bottoms as good as gold's bottom of yr 2000 shown in that chart. Everyone has been calling for higher gold prices, for the past two years. Many are cheerleaders. Don't mistake me for a cheerleader. I would like to see a higher price. I believe based on production figures that are real that gold deserves a higher price, because reserve figures are fairly tenuous and SA, Canada and Russia's supply is not assured. In the coming decade the US supply will decline too. I don't see fundamentals to support Brazil or Australia with increased output. Why? Because their mining trade cannot sustain exploration nor get viable mines in production due to lack of domestic interest and prevention of foreign capital repatriation in Brazil's case. They lack money and the will to tacke big capital projects. This goes for a lot of countries. The increased gold mining worldwide is due to a lot of the smaller producers coming on stream with short lived mines since 1980. It is partly due as well to gold giants like Normandy, Barrick, Freeport and Dome. It is probably true that open pit gold in South America and Asia will not replace the deep underground mine sources that used to support the majority of world's production. Canada and SA used to produce 31 million ounces per year from copper mining, and deep narrow veins qtz veins and leads. That is a lot of Yanacochas, Battle Mountains, Pierinas, and Argentina Golds. I believe gold production will decline soon to 1500 tons per year and gradually in the next 20 years, taper off to below 1000 tons per year as it used to be in the 1970's. The huge gold deposits needed to support more production are just not there or tenable to source underground any longer without a sustainable price above 500 dollars for a decade or more. It isn't that they cannot be engineered at 300 dollars per ounce to make money, it is just that you cannot convince the investor that you can do it at low prices. As a further complication, the left-wing-economy governments of the world do not want large scale capital projects in gold. A higher price is the only way to diffuse and defeat that interference. It would be nice if new money projects could make money in tech and retail for the little guy. People oft denigrate the industry of diamonds and gold as cheap baubles and glister. They have no utility so they cannot be a good. So far the politicos have kept their hands off the fashion, music and restaurant industry. Afer all we do not desperately need pate de fois gras, Schumann or Bogner. But I wouldn't want to live in a world without needless luxury for a NY millisecond. EC<:-}