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 (43255)	10/11/2005 1:29:43 PM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

too bearish on world's growth prospects to be bullish on $65 oil. i prefer the stocks now to the commodity. i would not be buying $65 futures. i think many stocks can do very well with $50 oil over the long term. check out the NPVs calculated at mcdep, where he uses $50 oil and discounts to 7% real return. i am not familiar with many other market sectors where one can find NPVs above current quotes assuming a 7% real discount rate and a 20% decline in their product's price. personally, i would be quite happy with a 7% real return over the next couple decades as i think the market as a whole has no chance of doing that. if oil stays at $50, that is fine too--less wars, starvation, etc. this is another reason i prefer energy stocks--i do not need to believe the commodity will go up in price (or even stay at its current price) to make a case for long-term hold. i think by contrast one must bank on higher gold prices with most gold miners. in any case, i have no interest in buying a NEM with 46x PE. btw, Grant has been positive on NEM, and earlier Franco-Nevada, for many years. i believe Lassonde has spoken at his conferences. also positive on FCX back under $20. i owned both for a good while.