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: Claude Cormier who wrote (50619)	1/21/2006 1:17:11 PM
From: UncleBigs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

I do not look at gold as money. Gold is a like any commodity. The price will be determined where supply and demand intersect. Where is gold's demand? It's 70% in jewelry. How will gold jewelry sales perform in a recession? Probably not real good. Will investment demand make up the difference? Maybe. Gold is a speculation. It should not be viewed as a core savings vehicle. I think anymore than a 10% position in gold is a speculative gamble.

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (50619)	1/21/2006 1:49:11 PM
From: Tommaso	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 110194

>>>>Can you transfer me $10K of oil value within 5 minutes? No you can't and you will never be. Not so with gold.<<< If you mean can I personally put $10,000 of oil on your front lawn, you are correct. However, anyone can buy much more oil than that in a few seconds, purchasing futures contracts on crude. These are certainly as truly oil as "goldmoney" is gold. I have owned stocks in many different gold mining companies for many years and have read all their reports as they came out. What I have read convinces me that a gold price of, say, $1,000 an ounce will result in an enormous expansion in gold production with new machinery and new technologies. There is not much point in even talking about the lead time for production of oil if there is less and less oil there to produce. The lead time for exploiting the tar sands of Alberta has not been all that long. Four years ago, almost everyone whom I discussed that resource with told me it would never be economical and it would be many years before it was developed. My only regret is that I paid the slightest attention to these comments. If I had put ALL my money into tar sands then, I would have several million dollars now.

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (50619)	1/21/2006 4:31:43 PM
From: benwood	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

If oil actually hits $300 bbl, then my heating oil tank in the front yard could receive about $4000 of oil in five minutes. That kind of makes it obvious to me that, barring hyperinflation and a breakdown in our society, we won't be seeing $300/bbl oil in the next ten years, nor even $200/bbl. I'd say there's a good chance of $100 and perhaps a spike to $150. However, the deflationary pressure caused by such a spike will serve to reduce demand dramatically, ala the $2-to-$25/bbl oil in the 70s that launched many efficiency efforts that greatly reduced relative demand and succeeded in creating an overcapacity problem which persisted for many years. There's already a shifting of the supertanker caused by $60-70 oil, as can be seen by how ridiculous and out-of-touch Ford & GM suddenly seem. The cultural shift is underway, and the reality of the financial drain of high priced oil will be hard to ignore by consumers who finally realize the long term drain on their financial well being caused by their lazy buying and driving habits.