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.

Politics : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alan Whirlwind who wrote (16682)	12/27/2002 12:18:25 AM
From: ubetcha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82019

Alan, Just what I have been trying to tell you. No one will buy gold at these onerous prices. If you want some gold, just go out and mine some. I understand it is really cheap to do that, and of course if it only costs you $175 to mine---how dare anyone sell it at $350. Why they should be put in jail. How dare they make that much money. Downright criminal!! We have to be quiet and allow stealth buying. That is the way to go. What is one to believe? Terry

To: Alan Whirlwind who wrote (16682)	12/27/2002 1:21:12 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82019

Al >Gold? Why bother... An article near and dear to Terry's heart. I was especially attracted to these paragraphs: >>>The gold market remains flooded with physical supply now and for the foreseeable future. Miners have been increasing production, national banks and other institutions are selling many tons of gold without sufficient demand. There has been a genuine rush to market. The gold price has not been able to sustain any rally for well over a year - each rally has sellers waiting to meet any rise in the price. How low can the price go? Easily to between $150 and $200, an area where it traded for about 5 years in the 1970's and closer to the real cost of production. It was reported that the average cost of production of an ounce of gold in the year 2001 was about $176, far below its present price.<<< Amazing how wrong apparently intelligent people can be. Or perhaps I should say there are none so blind as those who will not see.

To: Alan Whirlwind who wrote (16682)	12/28/2002 12:13:39 AM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82019

Anyone who tells you that the US dollar is an attractive investment and gold has weak fundamentals understands no economy of interest rates, and less about gold. They call themselves technical indicators dot com, but all they can talk about are the fundamentals. Sort of lets you down about their underlying philosophy. Bottom line? Another CNBC-type new-age gold bashing group. In fact, physical demand for gold is rising. They disparage the fact that futures buying is driving the price up. Who cares? Industry is short? When are they not, when selling forward? It is a hedge anyway. Another thing they miss is the chiefest long term technical indicator is gold's tendency to rise in long 7 year cycles one of which it is undeniably on at present. A fundamental they fail to come to grips with is the all time low of interest rates, which cannot go any lower. In addition they omit the fact that war has always driven up interest rates to double digits for up to 4 years at a a time resulting in a surge in inflation and gold. This has only happened about ten times in the last 500 years, so it is a "weak" fundamental,<sarcasm> but its still there. A third fundamental relationship they fail to come to terms with is the weakness in the Dow, which although hardly front page news anymore, has been a long term worry of about every speculator. What anti-gold bugs fail to see is gold's traditional inelasticity and the fact that gold climbs a wall of equity and dollar worry, and not that it is in itself anything to worry about. Physical supply has not as much to do with price as physical as was amply demonstrated in the early 1970's and early 1980's. The "true" trade in gold is all paper. 6 to 7 times the physical trade. In this kind of atmosphere, it is hardly the physical demand by itself that is, or will be, changing gold, but the paper demand. As hedge books unwind, as they must as gold rises, the paper goes to the demand side and price rises still more. The increase in physical demand in the 1970's might have had something to do with Nixon de-outlawing ownership of gold. On the other hand, just as much was sold as bought :) Was it supply increase met by demand, or vice versa? The only way you know is by which way the price goes. Right now it's up. EC<:-}