To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (1834 ) 3/12/2004 12:12:21 PM From: mishedlo Respond to of 116555 More from Heinz Date: Fri Mar 12 2004 11:58 trotsky (frustrated@oil) ID#377387: Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved well, it's already 2 bucks off the very recent high..and today's move DOES look pretty scary and determined on a 10 minute chart. i remain very bullish on crude LT btw., but this could become a significant correction, after all it seemingly double-topped. and that in turn would be good for the gold miners. Date: Fri Mar 12 2004 11:38 trotsky (frustrated) ID#377387: Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved like i said, just a handful...GFI, MDG... don't forget, GFI has the third largest reserves, and fourth or fifth largest production of the majors. iow, it's a very significant stock. in any case, the point remains that this behavior ( i.e. a few stocks making new lows or highs in advance of the sector indices ) is characterizing bull/bear phases respectively. Date: Fri Mar 12 2004 11:31 trotsky (crude oil plunges) ID#377387: Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved on strategic reserve news - that should lend a little support to the gold stocks ( energy is their second highest input cost after labor ) . Date: Fri Mar 12 2004 11:06 trotsky (Elliott@US growth projections) ID#377387: Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved there are few areas of economic confusion more pronounced than the 'comparisons' between US and Euro-zone 'growth'. both the financial and non-financial media tend to compare the economic data as if they were comparing apples to apples - that is however not the case. in order to make US data comparable to any other set of economic data, a series of complex mathematical operations is necessary. in fact, the math behind it is so complex as to make it a very difficult endeavor, and as far as i'm aware, there's not a single economist actually willing to do the work - instead they just treat the data in the same way as the press. the first step is simple: divide US GDP growth by 4 - they publish an annualized figure. NO-ONE is doing that however, with exception i believe of the Economist magazine ( in its statistics section ) . then you have to remove software expenses, which have been reclassified as 'investments' for purposes of the GDP a few years ago. then remove the effect of hedonic indexing ( as soon as you do that, US 'growth' disappears altogether ) and chainweighting...in the context of chainweighting, compare the so-called 'deflators' of GDP - the deflator ITSELF is already based on another statistical lie, which likewise stems from hedonic indexing, and thus has to be recalculated. in fact, by the time a 'final' figure of 'real' US GDP growth is arrived at, the data has been massaged to death, and thus become utterly meaningless. this is also why there are no jobs created in the face of a 'recovery' , and why interest rates continue to plunge ( according to the government, it's actually a 'vigorous' recovery ) - simply put, there isn't much of a recovery. it's largely a statistical mirage. no doubt euro-zone statistics are also not entirely trustworthy - but they contain far fewer distortions and biases. most importantly, they CAN NOT BE COMPARED with the US data 'as is'. Date: Fri Mar 12 2004 10:43 trotsky (frustrated@XAU) ID#377387: Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved what the XAU doesn't tell you however is that a handful of mid tiers and majors are already at new lows for the move - which is exactly the opposite of what one sees during the bull phases, where a handful of stocks usually makes new highs in advance of the indices. anyway, i think a shake-out is a good thing, but only if it manages to damage the bullish complacency. no evidence of that so far unfortunately. Date: Fri Mar 12 2004 10:35 trotsky (Todd@why do pm stocks lead the metals?) ID#377387: Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved i think that can be easily explained - the same hedge funds that play the COMEX gold contracts also play the pm stocks, and buy and sell pm stocks before they buy and sell positions at the COMEX. then there are OTHER market participants closer to the action than we are, who also know about this, and when they see certain interests buying or selling pm stocks, they follow their lead and do the same. this is imo why the pm stocks always lead the metals. Date: Fri Mar 12 2004 10:27 trotsky (PoG) ID#377387: Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved a fall towards say the low 380's would actually be a good thing...it might shatter the complacency here a bit, plus it would serve to wash out the weak hand speculator long positions at the COMEX...as an aside, the pm stocks are already discounting such a fall imo.