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: Proud Deplorable who wrote (18835)	8/31/2003 9:13:38 AM
From: crustyoldprospector	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

"If Russell says increase your position in gold than you can be sure that Allan Greenspan will do exactly that on Tuesday as he is one of Russells subscribers ..." Careful. The flip-side of that statement is that Greenspan may want to organize a hammer-down on POG early this week, just to show all those important Russell subscribers how wrong Russell is. Nonetheless, there is no disputing Russell's logic over the medium term. Regards, crusty

To: Proud Deplorable who wrote (18835)	8/31/2003 10:06:04 AM
From: russwinter	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 39344

I know I'm stepping on toes here, especially if I'm wrong about this call. PMs are religion for many on this thread. And if I'm right? I'm still stepping on toes. So I'm making this call recognizing that it's a no win situation for me, and I won't win any popularity contests from it. I'm not trying to convince true believers, but, at least everybody can consider the bearish argument right now. And it's true: I have the luxury of some lopsided and large gains in the sector over the three years that I would like to keep. BTW, I'm selling the majority of my holdings, but not all. Do I think the HUI move is over this week at 195? Probably not, a spike is a distinct possibility, but the risks now are high. I have no quarrel with Richard Russell's work either. I do however, find his calling a market that has advanced 500% in less than three years, a "new", or "the beginning of" a bull market, sort of fuzzy thinking. There's nothing new or fresh about this PM bull market. The only question is the next phase of it, as you can lose 30% in the sector in a hurry, even in bull market corrections. That's especially true in the high beta HUI like stocks. On the question of broad public participation, you have to remember that this market suffered from a severe bubble in 96-97 and the Bre-X bust. So you may NEVER see those players back into this market.

To: Proud Deplorable who wrote (18835)	8/31/2003 10:54:37 AM
From: orkrious	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

If Russell says increase your position in gold than you can be sure that Allan Greenspan will do exactly that on Tuesday as he is one of Russells subscribers, really? I haven't seen this anywhere. how do you know that?

To: Proud Deplorable who wrote (18835)	8/31/2003 11:55:58 AM
From: Tommaso	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 39344

If Russell is completely confident that the US government will not confiscate gold coins, I wonder why he recommends "hiding" them instead of putting them in a safe deposit box. If you put them behind a brick in a basement wall and didn't tell anyone, your fortune could be lost to your estate if you were killed or became mentally incompetent. If you tell anyone, there is always some risk that their existence, if not their location, could become known to an armed robber. I think the best compromise is the safe deposit box in a local bank, where their existence can be concealed as long as you are alive (the box will be sealed at your death until your will is probated), and where it is easy to get your hands on them every business day.

To: Proud Deplorable who wrote (18835)	8/31/2003 1:02:08 PM
From: que seria	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 39344

ralph-emerson, et al: I don't see much difference between Russell's new call for a 33% weighting in gold+shares and what the most successful traders here (of those who regularly post their moves) have lately been doing. I refer to valutrader and russ, who have reduced exposure in recent weeks or days (maybe not to exactly that level--and with vt it changes often). Also, vt (like me) usually seems to buy new positions or add to existing ones fairly quickly after taking profitto maintain meaningful (even if lowered) exposure to the gold shares . There's a simple explanation for astute observers approaching the same ground (at least for now) from opposite directions. RR has to be more conservative, given his responsibility as paid advisor, not someone sharing his investing thoughts in an online community. He couldn't advise his subsriber base to be doing what many of us have been doing for years--buying small and microcap Canadian juniors--or even beaten-down mid-tiers. The fiscal, monetary, and economic situation in the U.S. since the tech bubble popped has made gold shares more attractive to fundamental investors despite (because of) the price runup. Conversely, for us contrarians and early birds, gold shares have created such profits over the last two years as to virtually demand some be taken. So it's not RR vs. russ, vt and many others of us. It's just entry timing, position management and risk/reward. Further, RR is invaluable, not infallible. He is primarily talking to non-traders about larger gold stocks (for whom his advice is good), and without pretending to be able to make short term timing predictions. So I differ about this: If Russell tells his subscribers to increase their gold holdings to 1/3rd I will tell you flat out, YOU are likely on the wrong side of this argument at this moment. . . [He] would NOT be recommending a move which would seem outrageous to his subscribers and would NOT bring them in when a market is topping. So using him as an indicator that we are entering into the final phase would be a GROSS mistake. I don't see anyone using RR as a topping indicator for a gold bull market--maybe, though, this stage of it. I infer from his work on the credit bubble thread that russ doesn't have much hope for the US$. It has to depreciate against something. That will be gold . . . until the day the feds again act to nullify competition from the standard they're debasing. Next time they probably won't seize gold, but will seize the advantage of gold via discriminatory levels of taxation. RR is wrong, though, to dismiss the possibility of outright seizure. Monopoly of money and force is the essence of the modern state. The types of people who want political power are happy to seize control, and a scared populace will be clamoring for rescue measures if the economy gets and stays a lot worse, and creditors dump the dollar. Gold, that unwelcome reminder of the realities that voters and gov'ts have been trying to pretend away, will be a convenient target. I do think any action against gold is far off, though, and will only be prompted by much worse economic deterioration, followed by scapegoating and parabolic levels of envy-mongering.