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: donald martin who wrote (27256)	1/29/1999 9:40:00 AM
From: lorne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116906

Hello Donald, you said >> (I still think MANIPULATION is sensationalistic and betrays a misunderstanding of how free markets work.)<< Interesting how you have the words manipulation and free markets in the same sentence. Instead of the word manipulation how about "Insider Advantage ". I think as long as insiders have prior knowledge to how the markets are being manipulated it is not a free market, I agree that I have a free will to bet on the markets in any way I choose but free will and free markets are not the same thing. Lorne

To: donald martin who wrote (27256)	1/29/1999 12:03:00 PM
From: long-gone	Respond to of 116906

<<That is not an entitlement that LTCM enjoys. However, the Fed is entitled to get involved if THEY so decide.>> When the Federal Reserve became involved in brokering the bail-out of LTCM and allowing the majors involved to remain in charge, all bonuses after that point became the same as welfare - an entitlement - though this is going to become another type of "welfare to work" program as the Federal Reserve changes the situation. <<They can't steal something that hasn't been earned. (Dividends come out of retained earnings.) Call the process what you will (I still think MANIPULATION is sensationalistic and betrays a misunderstanding of how free markets work.), if the going market price is not high enough for miners to have EARNINGS then there are no dividends. It's like saying Lotus STOLE money from bookkeepers by manipulating their wage market with the introduction of spreadsheet software.>> This is a comparison of apples to oranges. There would have been earnings were there no manipulation. The worth of gold in jewelry and industry has not been replaced by anything. MANIPULATION is sensationalistic - you got one right.(note: betrays a misunderstanding - use of a double negative) When blatant lies concerning sales of "the vast gold holdings of the Central Banks of Europe" hit the market. It moves the price of gold lower. Last year, the total demand for gold was greater that the total supply. The factor that maintained a low was the (false) report of pending sales. When you to deny the impact of European sales on the market (real or only threatened) your further points become ludicrous and you show your true colors as the ringer you are. <<Yeah, yeah, yeah. Like the bonuses paid to Microsoft employees were stolen from IBM OS/2 programmers. After all, MSFT manipulated the OS market, didn't they?>> I don't believe it, but, there is enough belief in the point of view that all was less than fair at MSFT to allow a law suit. <<Your idea of a fair, non-manipulated market still strikes me as one that only moves in your favor.>> As I said before, my idea of "non-manipulated" is a market in which there is no false information released through recognized news media as fact. <<I ADVISE you not to pay attention to it. I wouldn't presume to tell you or any other market participant what they may or may not do in the market. Just as I would ignore anyone who might try to tell me what I should do in the market. (If what they told me ran counter to what I believed to be true.) >> I was not manipulated - others were. <<You cannot compare a securities market to a commodities market, especially as you insist on bringing up the idea of "manipulation". Securities are instruments that are tightly controlled, with settlement through DTC (although you can cut out DTC, the exchanges and NASDAQ and the brokers, but few people do it). For better or for worse, ownership of publicly traded stocks is public information. Contrast that with gold. You and I can easily trade gold amongst ourselves. There are no legal barriers, that I'm aware of, to ECO selling its gold directly to a jewelry manufacturer, a central bank, or a private bullion investor. (Although I think I heard somewhere that in the US, gold may only be transported via USPS. There's some weird rules out there.) These calls for transparency in the gold market are not rational. You have no right to know how much gold I'm hoarding. And any push to get me to disclose how much gold I own makes the market LESS free, not more so.>> I could care less how much gold YOU hoard. What I do care about are the lies, distortions, and erroneous news releases concerning the sales of European Central Bank Holdings reported by spin masters. I have every right to expect that the news media not be corrupted and that when a sale is reported it is real. When any member of the media reports market moving information which is false, they have broken the law. Rational: ra·tio·nal Pronunciation: 'rash-n&l, 'ra-sh&-n&l Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English racional, from Latin rationalis, from ration-, ratio Date: 14th century 1 a : having reason or understanding b : relating to, based on, or agreeable to reason : REASONABLE <a rational explanation> <rational behavior> It is (despite your misplaced implications) rational to expect, no to demand, that everything published by the recognized media be the truth. It would be rational and reasonable to ask if perhaps some of the shills and ringers which have published these fraudulent reports are paid by shorts such as you.