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 : Gold & Gold Stock Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Veteran98 who wrote (28043)	6/8/2012 9:09:34 AM
From: GROUND ZERO™	Respond to of 29622

Good point, gold could just as easily be in the process of basing here... who knows... GZ

To: Veteran98 who wrote (28043)	6/8/2012 10:08:17 AM
From: Anchan	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29622

So Armstrong says, gold will drop to 1350 (=the 2011 low(?)) before its slingshot bounce to new heights. But I also see that at the time of gold's 2011 low, the miners GDX was at 52.31, i.e. at 22% below its Dec 2010 ATH -- whereas today, the GDX is at a mere 46, some 47% below its ATH. Question to self: "And this means -- what?" Feeble guess #1: if history rhymes, i.e. IF 2011: GDX dropped by 22% from previous ATH (Dec 2010), then rose over 8 months by 27% to a new ATH; THEN 2012: GDX, having dropped by 47% (to 39.08 in mid May 2012) from previous ATH (Sep 2011), may/must/will/shall rise proportionately by 58% over 8? months (=mid Feb 2013) to about 62. Which would not even bring us a new ATH. (Cough. Not good enough. I have bills to pay.) Feeble guess #2: The GDX's next slingshot is equipped with a self-amplifying thinggy, propelling it to 111 by December this year. (There, now I feel better.) Feeble guess #3: history does not rhyme. P.S. I failed maths.