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 : Blue Chip Gold Stocks HM, NEM, ASA, ABX, PDG -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tommaso who wrote (14400)	1/29/2010 11:21:28 AM
From: Cogito Ergo Sum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 48092

Did you watch the Munk Interview link from BNN.. They went with the headline also when they spoke to Munk so he was off guard on that.. Still worth a watch.. Yes the video was a huge disappointment.. and really didn't fit with the print at all..

To: Tommaso who wrote (14400)	1/29/2010 11:56:21 AM
From: Cogito Ergo Sum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 48092

FWIW.. I emailed BNN Pat, When you spoke with Peter Munk on Thursday you asked him what he thought of the George Soros statement on the The ultimate asset bubble is gold The entire passage from the Telegraph article went like this..: In comments delivered on the fringe of the World Economic Forum, Mr Soros said: "When interest rates are low we have conditions for asset bubbles to develop, and they are developing at the moment. The ultimate asset bubble is gold." The article in question is here telegraph.co.uk The headline taken way out of context reads as follows and is actually not a direct quote either.. but a fabrication.. Davos 2010: George Soros warns gold is now the 'ultimate bubble' The actual text The ultimate asset bubble is gold. Mr Munk was obviously a bit uncomfortable with the question and looking at the reporting one can see why.. Did you read the article.. otherwise your sources/research on this one was severely wanting.. I posted that article with the headline on an investment board I participate on and it drew quite a bit of criticism for that very misleading point.. It is rather unfortunate that you went with the headline statement without providing the context.. regards xxxxxxx EDIT: The actual email had a lot of bells and whistles for emphasis which don't show up...