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: Daytek77 who wrote (25375)	1/4/1999 2:48:00 PM
From: Zardoz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116957

"NO: You presented the data that supports your viewpoint without the caveats that the author stated: That's being selective." No, I quoted the web page, and formulated the correct assumptions. 1) If he can't provide more data to support his point, it should be excluded. Total volume is correct, not caveats that he tosses in. If I did that you'd freak, as you freak on the little possibility of being WRONG for YEARS. 2) "BUT THIS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO MASK THE FACT THAT THERE HAS BEEN A STEADY IMPROVEMENT IN GOLD CONSUMPTION STATISTICS AS THE YEAR PROGRESSED." Facts are that a localized bump in data, does not offset a average over the year data. I mentioned they show demand incorrectly. His comment shows that the demand is only statistcally significant because the demand dropped, but not that it has increased. The pointing to why is a lame attempt to aid their agenda. "Hutch do you really expect 200 -300 tonnes of gold disinvestment in Asia in first quarter '99?" Don't care...{today}