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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ild who wrote (22749)	12/2/2004 12:45:29 PM
From: ild	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 110194

Date: Thu Dec 02 2004 12:35 trotsky (Aurum@China aviation) ID#248269: Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved this sounds actually quite reasonable. i say this because speculators actually were not net long crude anymore, so a liquidation of spec longs ( as suggested on the ever helpful CNBS ) is not really a credible explanation for the drop. that said, the relatively mild weather certainly has helped with distillate inventories, plus we have an inventory build in crude related to the tax treatment of such inventories ( i.e. it should disappear come January ) . Saudi Arabia's actual output appears to have been well below the promised volumes over the past quarter ( plus it's mostly heavy sour that no-one wants anyway ) , and some have suggested that they're actually unable to boost output, but have instead been selling crude from their own storage. if that's true, then this drop is likely a fake-out. of course, eventually the coming global slowdown should crimp demand growth. Date: Thu Dec 02 2004 12:18 trotsky (goldfish, 11:32) ID#248269: Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved " Now........ IF the fed stops raising rates....... then you can get worried....... cause then gold will go down. " this statement is utterly devoid of logic. since interest rates are THE most important component of the opportunity cost of holding gold, the lower rates go the better ( as the past three or four years have shown quite clearly by the by - but why let facts confuse a swell theory ) . you're on a roll today... Date: Thu Dec 02 2004 11:36 trotsky (@stock market) ID#248269: Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved sure enough, they keep piling into the kinkiest tech stocks, the ones with little or no earnings and stratospheric valuations. the lessons of '00 - '02 will have to be re-learned all over again. Date: Thu Dec 02 2004 11:31 trotsky (frustrated@gold contract) ID#248269: Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved uggh...sorry, i've posted irrelevant data of an expired contract by mistake. the relevant contract is of course February now, but the call and put OI resistance and support levels are actually almost the same ( i.e., the biggest call OI rests at the 420, 440 and 450 strikes, the biggest put OI at 430 , 420 and 410; with the exception of the 'century' strikes that is - i.e. call OI at 500 and put OI at 400 are even bigger, in fact are exceptionally large, but the nearer strikes are probably more important ) . calls: 420 - 6,151 440 - 5,636 450 - 8,505 500 - 14,103 puts: 430 - 5,074 420 - 3,354 410 - 4,296 400 - 13,038 thanks for catching the mistake. overall, this looks actually slightly less supportive than December OI did.