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: rubbersoul who wrote (33323)	12/12/2004 12:41:41 PM
From: russwinter	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

The fear of these technicians is that the channel and 50 MA gets smashed. If so then you have targets down to the 200 MA, and support levels shown here: jessel.100megsfree3.com That's what's happened in oil: jessel.100megsfree3.com If Veneroso's theory is that this is caused by intervention (), then you have another in a series of bogus declines and what I call Ministry of Propaganda (MoP) ramp jobs. The only way to truly break gold for more than a brief corrective phase is through meaningfully higher interest rates, and that doesn't now appear to be in the cards. Message 20848460 Therefore I'm very inclined to treat a POG price break as an opportunity and false breakdown. I still see the HUI at 210-220 as eventually signalling a false breakdown, and lean towards believing it will hold (and was buying my favorites early on Wed morning, not selling as Woods suggests* , and possibly start rallying almost in tandem with the hard bottom 200 MA in POG. If we suddenly saw a munch by year end in something like a CLG or GBU, or MFN, then you have a whole new dynamic, as whether POG priced at 410 or 430 won't be as relevant. (*) Veneroso: But even if the dollar is overdue for a bounce, what would precipitate it? The European and Japanese policy makers, fearful that dollar weakness will throw their weak economies back into recession, have been pushing the U.S. to engage in coordinated intervention to reverse the speculative positions of the dollar bears. The U.S. has refused. As a consequence anger is rising among these policy makers and it is spreading to encompass the likes of China and other emerging economies. We are hearing strong and angry language on this issue from the U.S.’s trading partners like we have not heard for many many years. Efforts are now being made by these countries toward a very broad coordinated intervention that may exclude the U.S. but may encompass China and many others. Will such intervention work? The speculators who are short the dollar say no. But the historical record says otherwise. When speculation and the dollar are at extremes intervention works. It turned the dollar down on March 1st, 1985 – the day of the dollar high. It turned the yen down against the dollar on the yen high in 1995. It set in motion the big dollar rally in 1996. Why does intervention sometimes work? Because speculative bandwagons displace currencies from their short run economically determined equilibria. Speculators are trend followers. If their positions are extreme, intervention, by changing the price trend, can cause speculators to unwind positions en masse. Speculators in today’s markets are more short term momentum oriented than in the past. Hedge funds are judged by monthly returns. That is why we see so many charts in which prices follow a trend in a very narrow channel. But, once that trend is broken a crash ensues. Look back at those charts of silver, copper, and oil. If intervention in the currency markets comes and it is successful, even for a while, the odds are that gold, which is itself in such a narrow channel, will break hard. This should not be hard to imagine, as it happened a mere eight months ago.

To: rubbersoul who wrote (33323)	12/12/2004 2:30:16 PM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

Tulips are always higher price than potatoes. EC<:-}

To: rubbersoul who wrote (33323)	12/12/2004 3:03:23 PM
From: newfoundland1	Respond to of 39344

An article by Tim Wood saying that Gold has topped will only confirm the view of those that think this is an expected part of the present campaign to push Gold down again and send the over exuberant longs away wounded. (He has often struck me as part of the "increase fear contingent" and he is "right on cue"). I know that Venoroso could not be put in this camp. The Wood advice that this is a good time to take your gold profits will bring wry smiles to many who have read over long periods of time his ever so subtle and not so subtle negative sentiment. Having said all that, short term I do expect the metal at least will go lower. It will be a question of trying to read the signs of when the present "assault" is over.

To: rubbersoul who wrote (33323)	12/12/2004 10:24:51 PM
From: Louis V. Lambrecht	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

You still have many readings of longwaves. One would be that we are not speaking of cycles: top-bottom and bottom-top not necessarely are equal. Starting with 1980, we had longer trend (5 years down, with the trend) and corrections of 3 years up (against the trend). If we buy that 2001 was a bottom, we could expect: - an uptrend, 5 years up, 3 years corrective down (in this case we have one year more to go) - first a neutral cycle - marking the reversal - of 4 years up, 4 years down (in this case we topped) - a continuation of the old cycle, 5 years down, 3 years up (in this case the top is past due). As we only have less than 30 years of price history to prove the existence of 4 cycles, this isn't really what I could call statistical evidence <vbg>. Sharelynx gold cycle here sharelynx.com can't find a non protected link, but has to be on many a gold forum. Here is one: news.goldseek.com