SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: 4figureau who wrote (27404)1/13/2003 9:26:06 AM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74559
 
I would say we have discovered another part of the reason for gold now sitting at USD 350/oz. Thanks for the heads-up. Chugs, Jay



To: 4figureau who wrote (27404)1/13/2003 9:52:42 AM
From: Moominoid  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74559
 
90 tons more? I guess if they keep that up on annual basis it would have a big impact. I was just looking at the data on Croesus (CRS.AX) again last night. Has a P/E of about 12 but that is based on last year's profits when their production averaged about 2/3 of current and gold prices were lower and production costs higher. It is just so undervalued....

moom



To: 4figureau who wrote (27404)1/13/2003 2:08:59 PM
From: Maurice Winn  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74559
 
<>>China had gold reserves of 19.29 million ounces at the end of 2002, up from 16.08 million ounces at the end of November, the central bank said on Monday.<< >

3 million ounces = $1 billion = 80c per Chinese = yawn...

20 million ounces = $7 billion = $7 per Chinese. Not enough to fill their children's bank accounts let alone form a money supply.

Mqurice


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News