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 : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (56100)	10/8/2009 8:04:00 PM
From: Snowshoe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217557

I like paper gold (mainly GLD/GDX), but the liquidity is a two-edged sword. I unloaded 1/5 recently and missed my low-ball buy back bid by $0.20. Oh well. I don't feel safe holding physical in my disaster-prone city.

To: carranza2 who wrote (56100)	10/9/2009 2:12:04 AM
From: Gib Bogle	Respond to of 217557

Gold paper may be OK, but gold miners are better.

To: carranza2 who wrote (56100)	10/9/2009 5:38:12 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217557

Hello c2, just landed in hk from beijing, after 2 nights of discussion to charge against the windmill. These episodes go better for folks with copious depth of sense of humor. I figure I am one. I am looking forward to "art jamming" tomorrow (sarurday) night - painting on canvass with a bunch of unmarried women sauced of champagne n wine. My wife groped me in, and she can only stay for 1 out of 4 hours. I intend to challenge a big piece of canvass. On paper gold, I am not biased against it, at least not yet, not now, not until the end-game starts. I have always traded paper gold, given its liquidity and my greed for gaming, to lower the cost basis of my physical. We must be near a point where we all would be tempted to trade, even if just a little. Trouble w/ paper gold is that it is too easy to buy n sell, first a little then a lot, after that, a worrying allocation of our nav. I am worried, a little, and at 1.2K, a lot, then 1.25K, frightened, n 1.3K, petrified. We simply do not deserve 1.2k yet, imo. When gold was at 700, I figured we would see 1k before we see 500. Now, with gold at 1.05K, I fear we could see 500 before we see 2K, even though, as far as I am hopeful, 5k is for sure w/i 14 years, more likely 10, or even 7. I have no plans to ever sell my physical metals. That zero-state reset option is best left for the next generation. Of my metals, I am now about 25% physical pt, 25% physical au, 50% paper au. On top of that construction, I have addiitional 33% in gdx and paas.

To: carranza2 who wrote (56100)	10/9/2009 7:25:06 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217557

hi c2, just in in-tray player 1: From a friend of mine who is managing the back office of a few large Hedge funds… “….All folks are heavy into gold contracts. Actual contracts whereby you sign up for delivery at Fort Knox. Most at the moment are bearishness about macroeconomic conditions…..” Gold at $2K next summer? This is the same herd that drove oil to $146/barrel… but this is different I fear, Timmy Boy and Ben are going to drive the dollar down as far as they can go… big mistake. player 2: If only a portionthat are long futures actually decide to take physical delivery, there isn't nearly enough gold that is deliverable. Much easier to take delivery of physical gold than it is to take delivery of physical oil.... It "could" get interesting. I'm curious as to how many funds are heavily leveraged, and how many are simply using futures because it is the cheapest and most efficient medium.....