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 Price Monitor -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alan Whirlwind who wrote (11356)	5/6/1998 3:51:00 PM
From: Giraffe	Respond to of 116815

>>This 50 percent margin requirement, set by the Fed, has been unchanged since January 1974. Margin debt is at the highest level relative to GDP since the 1920s. Arthur Levitt, the Securities and Exchange Commission's chairman, agreed on Wednesday that margin debt is high. ''People are borrowing for some purposes that perhaps they would not have borrowed for in the past,'' Levitt told CNBC Television. ''It's a time to be cautious.'' Raising margins would cool the ''equity market froth'' without damaging the economy, said William Barker, chief investment strategist at Dain Rauscher. ''I think it's certainly a tool they have got to consider using,'' Barker said. ''But I don't think they will do it.'' << biz.yahoo.com

To: Alan Whirlwind who wrote (11356)	5/6/1998 4:18:00 PM
From: Wizzer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116815

Alan, I appreciate your comments. I was talking about the current silver market, and the effect that Warren Buffet was having on it. You indicate a valid point and of course your scenario is quite plausible. Like anything, differing factors over time will change an analysis. Warren Buffet has a different time frame than we would have and I believe for "us" a shorter term investment may be more profitable and most of all safer. I indicated what factors I was looking at, and clarified that unless a new factor is introduced into the silver market, the price of silver would not be able to sustain the incredible highs that it once did. Sorry if there was a misunderstanding, and perhaps you still disagree which is your choice. I also indicated that there is a secondary supply of silver and that is in the hands of regular people that continually undermines the price of silver. In other words, many "personal mines" in people's households. When the price of silver goes up, this new supply is "tapped" as regular individuals from all over the world (mostly India, and other Asian countries who have significant amounts of personal silver items) begin to sell their silver possessions into the rising price. Of course, the supply I am talking about can't be measured by market indicators, as these "personal supplies" of silver are introduced outside of mined silver production. In fact, this was the factor that led to the unsuccessful attempt to corner the silver market. So, in conclusion, although the price of silver may go up, it is very difficult to maintain a high price of silver. Most certainly, an investor could ride this upswing and enjoy a good profit. I hope that this clarifies my original post. I also believe that the above, is a limiting factor on the price of gold. In 1979-1980 when the price of gold skyrocketed, personal gold now became it's own gold mine and played a role in bringing down the price of gold by meeting demand with supply outside of mined gold production. There are other metals that are not "personally held in households" in the above sense, and thus are less likely to be undermined in the way I have described. Thanks for your comments.