G0ldfinger Posted February 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Pixel8r's line should be strong support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romans holiday Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Pixel8r's line should be strong support. Is that a recent update/ revision? I thought his lines were straight up from here. http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index....st&p=154235 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romans holiday Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 A very good listen here. In this interview Jim discusses the controversial reappointment of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, the IMF as the last major seller of gold, gold purchases by other central banks such as China and India, the fact that there is a tidal wave of demand for gold, gold swaps, the impossibility of knowing the position of gold holdings of central because of the opacity, US government eventual purchasing gold, this depression cycle & more http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/Bro...m_Rickards.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errol Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Can't we have a separate thread for the GM discussions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G0ldfinger Posted February 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Can't we have a separate thread for the GM discussions? I moved the posts into this thread: http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index.php?showtopic=9195 For BV/GM-related posts, please use the thread linked to above. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errol Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Thanks. It was gettting very hard to follow the arguments relating to GM and for anyone who just popped into this forum (i.e. a new joiner) it would be nigh on unreadable. Hardly related to February 2010 gold action either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errol Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...id=af8ronprmsBE Russia’s Central Bank Boosts Gold Holdings 4.1% in Month Russia’s central bank addded 800,000 troy ounces of gold to its reserves last month, increasing its holdings of the metal in dollar terms to $22.4 billion as of Jan. 1, Bank Rossii said on its Web site. The bank’s gold reserves climbed to 20.5 million ounces from 19.7 million the previous month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G0ldfinger Posted February 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Is that a recent update/ revision? I thought his lines were straight up from here. http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index....st&p=154235 I guess you're having a good laugh here. But let's see how it will pan out. The chart above gets updated with the rest of the Apx charts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romans holiday Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 I guess you're having a good laugh here. But let's see how it will pan out. The chart above gets updated with the rest of the Apx charts. Actually, it just cheeses me off a little that "Pixel8r's lines" posted here this week are what I have been posting for a while now... and what he has been continually contradicting. Up to now, "Pixel8r's lines" have been completely opposite.... gold could only go one way. Charts should attempt to have predictive power... and should neither reflect one's own prejudices or be made ad hoc to reflect present changes. It would be nice to see people big enough to admit their error... poor sportsmanship kind of thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G0ldfinger Posted February 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Actually, it just cheeses me off a little that "Pixel8r's lines" posted here this week are what I have been posting for a while now. "Pixel8r's lines" were completely opposite last week [had been for a while] and were directly arguing against what I'd been posting and he is now posting out of the blue. Charts should attempt to have predictive power... and should neither reflect one's own prejudices or be made ad hoc to reflect present changes. It would be nice to see people big enough to admit their error... poor sportsmanship kind of thing. I have no clue what you are talking about. The chart posted above has been posted like this for months. The lines are unchanged, only prices get updated. Pixel8r has his own version of it, but I don't think there was much change either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G0ldfinger Posted February 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Ring a bell? Yes, I think these were the charts that Pixel posted. So what? Has he changed his lines/forecast? As I said, the only thing that has changed in the Apx chart is the updated price data. I don't get your point. Anyway, maybe not that important and should be talked about with Pixel8r and not with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romans holiday Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Or on the other hand we could not be finished yet. Increasing price = increasing volatility and larger mid run corrections. I have no clue what you are talking about. The chart posted above has been posted like this for months. The lines are unchanged, only prices get updated. Pixel8r has his own version of it, but I don't think there was much change either. The lines are unchanged? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romans holiday Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Yes, I think these were the charts that Pixel posted. So what? Has he changed his lines/forecast? As I said, the only thing that has changed in the Apx chart is the updated price data. I don't get your point. Updated price data?? C'mon gf... you're better than this. Anyway, maybe not that important and should be talked about with Pixel8r and not with me. Dude... you posted them above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G0ldfinger Posted February 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 The lines are unchanged? Let me assure you, the lines in the Apx chart have been identical for many months. I also not remember Pixel having changed his lines - the ones in his chart look very identical to the ones in the Apx chart. There are additional lines in his chart, but even those have been the same for a while. NOTE: I am referring to the chart that has the Apx price chart as a basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errol Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 We can't even have a chart without bickering now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G0ldfinger Posted February 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Visually, from the chart below, the daily volatility in the LBM is still below early 1970s levels. Certainly a pure coincidence that cap at exactly 10%! :lol: http://gold.approximity.com/since1968/Gold_USD_AMAM.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romans holiday Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Let me assure you, the lines in the Apx chart have been identical for many months. I also not remember Pixel having changed his lines - the ones in his chart look very identical to the ones in the Apx chart. There are additional lines in his chart, but even those have been the same for a while. NOTE: I am referring to the chart that has the Apx price chart as a basis. We are discussing "Pixel8r's lines" here [isn't it obvious?]... the ones drawn atop of the chart to draw inferences about where the price is going. It is obvious we are not discussing the blue price line of gold... I have posted them for you side by side on the previous page to help refresh your memory... I thought you said you were younger than your avatar suggests... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G0ldfinger Posted February 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 We are discussing "Pixel8r's lines" here... the ones drawn atop of the chart to draw inferences about where the price is going. The 'original' Pixel8r lines are the 3 diagonal lines down to the right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romans holiday Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 The 'original' Pixel8r lines are the 3 diagonal lines down to the right. Oh right... so they were up-dated once before... then up-dated again now... we just should forget about the previous update right. This is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G0ldfinger Posted February 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Oh right... so they were up-dated once before... then up-dated again now... we just should forget about the interim update right. This is ridiculous. RH, these lines have NEVER been updated or changed. At least not in the Apx charts. They have always lined out the highs during the consolidation phases. EDIT: Just to make my point clear: the three lines have always been the same. Pixel8r added two lines and three circles in his version, that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romans holiday Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 RH, these lines have NEVER been updated or changed. At least not in the Apx charts. They have always lined out the highs during the consolidation phases. EDIT: Just to make my point clear: the three lines have always been the same. Pixel8r added two lines and three circles in his version, that's all. OK. But do you see my point? There is a confusion about what is referred to as "Pixel8r's lines". In a technical sense you may be right... but the previous "Pixel8r's lines" that have been posted for some time now pointed to higher prices in the near term. Suddenly, this set of "Pixel8r's lines" [different to what the forum became familiar with] is presented with a completely different message... that gold will decline and consolidate around 1000. This is a message that the "Pixel8r's lines" we all became familair with was diametrically opposed to. Do you see my point? I ca't believe I'm having this conversation. The issue is that two very different conflicting messages/ charts are both labelled "Pixel8r's lines". Some might think this new presentation of "Pixel8r's lines", as if they were always "Pixel8r's lines" [people do have short memories] as quite ingenuous... but I couldn't possibly comment on that. If somebody as influential as Pixel8r is changes there view [and especially if they have been pushing it so hard] then they would no doubt give some recognition or explanation for that. But of course Pixel8r did not post the new "Pixel8r's lines", you did. And to be frank I'm surprised you didn't think about the kind of issues I have been raising here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G0ldfinger Posted February 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 The issue is that two very different conflicting messages/ charts are both labelled "Pixel8r's lines". ... Different people interpret things differently. I can not speak for Pixel8r, or anyone else. All I say is that I think that the top line in the Apx chart could be strong support if this downturn continues, as illustrated by this chart here: Whether it will turn out like this, or whether this is going to be a smaller correction and we will follow more Pixel8r's projection, who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romans holiday Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 Whether it will turn out like this, or whether this is going to be a smaller correction and we will follow more Pixel8r's projection, who knows? This is my last post on the matter. I find it exasperating that you don't see that Pixel8'r projections just last week were more or less straight up. This projection here is what I've been projecting since gold was going parabolic above 1200... that is what charting [and macro-economics]should be all about... the aatempt/ ability to predict before the event. Anyway, I give up.. you seem to have a mental block in this area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixel8r Posted February 6, 2010 Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 OK. But do you see my point? There is a confusion about what is referred to as "Pixel8r's lines". In a technical sense you may be right... but the previous "Pixel8r's lines" that have been posted for some time now pointed to higher prices in the near term. Suddenly, this set of "Pixel8r's lines" [different to what the forum became familiar with] is presented with a completely different message... that gold will decline and consolidate around 1000. This is a message that the "Pixel8r's lines" we all became familair with was diametrically opposed to. Do you see my point? I ca't believe I'm having this conversation. The issue is that two very different conflicting messages/ charts are both labelled "Pixel8r's lines". Some would think this new presentation of "Pixel8r's lines", as if they were always "Pixel8r's lines" [people do have short memories] as quite ingenuous... but I couldn't possibly comment on that. If somebody as influential as Pixel8r is changes there view [and especially if they have been pushing it so hard] then they should give some recognition or explanation for that. My lines chart was pointing to the repeating pattern that there is a surge in the gold price every two years, followed by a sloping resistance line, which ounce broken acts as support. I don't see at all what you are talking about saying that there are conflicting messages within my graph. I still think we are half way through this move and still target $1350 gold/$26 silver for the end of March/early April. Here's my latest one which was posted over at 24knews.com, if you want to keep up with what I am saying you will need to look on 24k a I don't always post here as well anymore. I have been developing my graph as I have had more time to work on it and have always posted explanations as I have done so. I really don't think I am influential as you make out though, this graph is just my thinking everyone is entitled to their own opinion. This week we have had a breakout to the downside from the correction circle. Is this a change to the path gold has been following for 5 year or just a head fake by the cartel? We will soon know the answer, I won't be selling whatever happens as gold is insurance and the situation looks more precarious not less. IMO with all the talk of sovereign debt default this week the cartel have chosen to shoot the messenger which is gold. Think about it if the investors of the world are worried about debt default shouldn't they be going to gold as a safe haven, rather than the dollar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G0ldfinger Posted February 6, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2010 This is my last post on the matter. I find it exasperating that you don't see that Pixel8'r projections just last week were more or less straight up. This projection here is what I've been projecting since gold was going parabolic above 1200... that is what charting [and macro-economics]should be all about... the aatempt/ ability to predict before the event. Anyway, I give up.. you seem to have a mental block in this area. I think the problem that you have is to see that I am not Pixel8r. For me "Pixel8r's lines" are the three lines we talked about earlier, because he was one of the first to talk about them. I am not disputing what you, or he, or anyone said about future price moves. All I say is that in the current situation the top line of the 3 Pixel8r lines as drawn in the Apx chart could be strong resistance. If you have pointed towards this since gold at $1,200, then credit should be given to you in all fairness. I do not follow individuals posters' predicitions too closely, so excuse me if I didn't pay enough respect. Anyway, I give up.. you seem to have a mental block in this area. And this was unnecessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now