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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Secret_Agent_Man who wrote (270584)	12/12/2003 6:58:41 PM
From: Secret_Agent_Man	Respond to of 436258

Richard Russell has as sound an approach to this gold market as anyone out there. From his last night’s commentary: December 11, 2003 -- I'm starting this report with an e-mail from a subscriber that I received this morning. "You have been dead right on losing your position if you trade these golds. They are not tradeable and they should not be bought on margin. You have to buy them, pay cash for them on huge dips. The golden rule is you are either out or in -- never in between. We are either in a long term bull market in gold or not. There simply is no wishy-washy here. The people that bought stocks in 74 and 82 made huge money. The people that bought the bank stocks when there was blood in the streets made huge money. The people that bought the drugs when the Clintons put blood in the streets made huge money. The people that bought Texaco at 20 when it was paying 10% never saw it there again or Phillips at 9. We are not going to see CDE at 65 cents again or HL at 75. Most serious speculative bull markets go to 20 times the starting price. A twenty bear market is over. Everything is going up in price and in most cases it is 20=25%. So will the golds after this retracement. You are dead right. This will be a long-term gold bull that young people 55-60 can really retire on, and then convert back to income. It may be the only way a lot of people will be able to retire is to buy golds." Russell Comment -- That's the bull's argument, which is "Don't trade 'em." The positive of that stance is that you keep your position. If you're gold position is say 25% of your assets, and your gold stocks decline by a fat one-third, your total assets drop 8%. If you can't stomach that, if it keeps you awake nights, then for the sake of your health -- well, you just have to cut back. Me, I'm sitting. I have my orders. -END-

To: Secret_Agent_Man who wrote (270584)	12/12/2003 8:09:35 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

Who the F is Dan? That analysis sucks IMO. The commercials will be short all the way to 8000 if we get there and it will not hurt them one bit. They produce gold, they sell it via futures. They will always be short. Of far more interest is the holding steady of small spec shorts in the face of this rise. 19,000 contracts. They can be squeezed IMO. There are also close to 34,000 big spec shorts (mufus) they can be squeezed as well but they have bigger pockets. cftc.gov

To: Secret_Agent_Man who wrote (270584)	12/13/2003 12:25:50 AM
From: Bill/WA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

C4T, re:What we also need to keep in mind is no one really knows when Barrick is going to be buying back those hedges or theirs either. They might be in the process of so doing or they might not hoping they could get a swift setback in price and then cover. When Barrick bought Homestake, it included the Eskay mine in British Columbbia. The "Eskay" is one of, if not THE richest ore sites in BC. Homestake was going to take 8 years to mine it...after Barricks purchase, Barrack planned to mine it in 2 years. Refer to; Message 19078536 Could one assume from this that Barrick is, and has been reducing it's hedge book?