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: Alex who wrote (34273)	5/20/1999 3:57:00 PM
From: long-gone	Respond to of 116764

<<Greenspan said central banks are aware that the price of gold will go down once it is announced they are selling their gold holdings and that they will be able to get it back at a lower price. Greenspan said he suspects most central banks believe it inappropriate to take advantage of private financial participants in that regard.>> Is he saying there is manipulation, and there is some central banks that are doing it?

To: Alex who wrote (34273)	5/20/1999 4:06:00 PM
From: Ahda	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116764

Alex sorry to trouble you but i have not been able to obtain figures on how much of this economy is directly tied to brokerage market and the resulting jobs that off shoot from it. If you or anyone else happen to run into any figures available I would appreciate if they could be shared.

To: Alex who wrote (34273)	5/20/1999 6:25:00 PM
From: Enigma	Respond to of 116764

Do you suppose he thinks the Brits. are about to buy some gold before the auction, and then auction it off at a higher price? Now that would be manipulation! Could do it every couple of months. d

To: Alex who wrote (34273)	5/20/1999 7:56:00 PM
From: hunchback	Respond to of 116764

March 30 FOMC minutes The significance of these minutes has been reduced with the May 18 announcement of a biased directive toward tightening. However, the minutes still shed light on the concerns of the FOMC and under what circumstances it might actually pull the trigger. There was no dissent with regard to maintaining the neutral stance at the close of the March 30 FOMC meeting. A few important points to note from the minutes are: "However, some members were concerned about the risk that sustained rapid growth in the aggregate demand would stretch market even more." "Many referred in particular to the absence of any warning signs of accelerating inflation over the near term as a major consideration in support of a steady policy at this time. In the view of some, however, the next policy action was more likely to be a firming than an easing." "The members concluded that the Committee was in a position to wait for developments to unfold, especially given the absence of any evidence of an impending acceleration of underlying inflation." The minutes also noted that the "the timing of the next policy action was highly uncertain." Inflation fears are clearly evident in the discussion (which is expected), but the resolve to change policy was less certain. The important question is why did the Fed adopt a biased directive toward tightening at the May 18 meeting when the only threatening number was April core CPI against the backdrop of decelerating hourly earnings, benign core PPI, and favorable productivity and unit labor cost data. The March 30 discussion and recent data suggest that the biased directive was only a declaration of their preparedness to combat impending inflation - a credibility issue. Bothersome data between now and June 30 would certainly prompt the FOMC to raise the overnight rate. Essentially, the FOMC needs confirmation of at least one more unsavory core CPI number before raising the federal funds rate. ntrs.com