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 : Precious and Base Metal Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elizabeth Andrews who wrote (6399)	12/26/2002 2:08:59 PM
From: ralfph	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

Ok Liz here is a couple worthy of comment. MAN and XCL . MAN has the goods and there are more targets it could add to its holdings. XCL its got Nevada property and I do not know how much potential. And I am down to my last 5 or 6 grand to invest on some of those thin traders you alluded to. If you feel like sharing......... PM me. Its a nice day out here on the wet coast regards ralfphie

To: Elizabeth Andrews who wrote (6399)	12/26/2002 6:52:56 PM
From: Jon Matz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

Elizabeth? <So at $465 gold we are back to 100:1 if silver doesn't change. Gold only has to go up 32% for this to be true. What's more likely?> What's more likely than what?

To: Elizabeth Andrews who wrote (6399)	12/26/2002 9:12:59 PM
From: Jon Matz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

Elizabeth, here's a 600 year chart showing the Gold/Silver ratio and is corrected for inflation in 1998 dollars. It shows the high ratio reached a peak of 153:1 in 1939. sharelynx.net Note: There are hundreds of historical charts on this site. Jon - Edit: I love the notation showing the price of silver in the year 1477 with an inflation adjusted price of $806. Now if it hits that mark again and gold is 100:1 gold would sell for $80,600 an ounce....that's more like it! <ggg>