GOLD

[nicejim]

Bullish yes, but this illustrates my point about them being dopey.

 

Look how they bury the lead:

 

 

 

That's the lead. And that's why they are bozos.

 

It should read:

The bit that struck me was "Central banks were net buyers for the first time since at least 2000". They're not even pretending any more, they're protecting themselves.

 

 

That $10 rise today...are the bipolar swings getting more frequent or are we still deciding whether the next move is up or down?

[id5]

I recall a post on HPC ages ago where some chap was arguing that investing in gold was a mugs game as eventually scientists will be able to make gold out of other elements. Wish I could find the post now it was hilarious. I remember the chap getting quite indignant saying "and yes the technology does exist" then going on to say gold atoms are produced as a by-product of reactions in large hadron colliders! Not exactly a very cost efficient approach

I remember that thread! He also started going on about a thin layer of gold being formed on the lead sheilding inside nuclear reactors, another money spinner i'm sure

[aardvark]

I recall a post on HPC ages ago where some chap was arguing that investing in gold was a mugs game as eventually scientists will be able to make gold out of other elements. Wish I could find the post now it was hilarious. I remember the chap getting quite indignant saying "and yes the technology does exist" then going on to say gold atoms are produced as a by-product of reactions in large hadron colliders! Not exactly a very cost efficient approach

 

yeah, it was realistbear - total bollocks but i think he was just trying to goad the gold bugs, i don't think he actually believed it.

[G0ldfinger]

yeah, it was realistbear - total bollocks but i think he was just trying to goad the gold bugs, i don't think he actually believed it.

With RB you can never be sure. Similarly cells, with his pseudo-rationalism.

[lowrentyieldmakessense(honest!)]

I recall a post on HPC ages ago where some chap was arguing that investing in gold was a mugs game as eventually scientists will be able to make gold out of other elements. Wish I could find the post now it was hilarious. I remember the chap getting quite indignant saying "and yes the technology does exist" then going on to say gold atoms are produced as a by-product of reactions in large hadron colliders! Not exactly a very cost efficient approach

 

From: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djVDd0IATug

 

 

 

 

From: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzG-AvlKBAA

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzG-AvlKBAA

[aardvark]

With RB you can never be sure. Similarly cells, with his pseudo-rationalism.

 

i'm giving him the benefit of the doubt - i assume he isn't that stupid, then again, this is the internet...

[Pixel8r]

From:

 

$15,000 dollars per ounce, the answer is the cycle has just begun!

 

 

[drbubb]

$15,000 dollars per ounce, the answer is the cycle has just begun!

 

I will post this chart without comment - to me, it speaks very clearly!

 

US stocks (SPX) -to- Gold Ratio

 

It would be interesting to know what others here think of it

 

[G0ldfinger]

I will post this chart without comment - to me, it speaks very clearly!

...

Or for the DOW: http://gold.approximity.com/since1968/DJIA...-Ratio_LOG.html

[Pixel8r]

I will post this chart without comment - to me, it speaks very clearly!

 

US stocks (SPX) -to- Gold Ratio

 

It would be interesting to know what others here think of it

Next wave down coming very soon then, but do you think it means gold up, s&p down or both. I think both will happen.

 

Bill Murphy talks about the possibility of a commercial signal failure with Eric King;

 

http://www.kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews.../8/14_GATA.html

 

[drbubb]

Or for the DOW: http://gold.approximity.com/since1968/DJIA...-Ratio_LOG.html

 

That 10-level (Dow/Gold) looks rather important.

It looks like we have rallied up to "kiss it goodbye"

 

I expect to Gold to fall with stocks for a few days, before it "finds its feet" and rallies

[id5]

That 10-level (Dow/Gold) looks rather important.

It looks like we have rallied up to "kiss it goodbye"

 

I expect to Gold to fall with stocks for a few days, before it "finds its feet" and rallies

If money flows out of stocks Dr. B. where do you expect it to go? The answer to that may be worth a long trade.

[romans holiday]

If money flows out of stocks Dr. B. where do you expect it to go? The answer to that may be worth a long trade.

Hold your nose and buy.

[jamesspeed]

That 10-level (Dow/Gold) looks rather important.

It looks like we have rallied up to "kiss it goodbye"

 

I expect to Gold to fall with stocks for a few days, before it "finds its feet" and rallies

 

 

What about Gold Mining Shares - I am expecting gold to fall along with the markets as the $ strengthens , how low will it go ? down to 850? before a bounce .

[Steve Netwriter]

Is it just me, or does anyone else here think these fellas are just a bit . . . dopey?

 

From what I have read the so called "world gold council" far from what you might be led to believe are not the friend of the goldbug.

They are on a par with Jon Nadler.

 

IMO take what they say with a large pinch of salt.

[Mr Pipples]

From what I have read the so called "world gold council" far from what you might be led to believe are not the friend of the goldbug.

They are on a par with Jon Nadler.

 

IMO take what they say with a large pinch of salt.

 

Yes. What was that about ignoring the purchases of central banks???

[alexreeve]

From what I have read the so called "world gold council" far from what you might be led to believe are not the friend of the goldbug.

They are on a par with Jon Nadler.

 

IMO take what they say with a large pinch of salt.

How about this if you want to present the same figures in a more positive light?

http://news.goldseek.com/GATA/1250748900.php

Central banks bought 14 tonnes of gold more than they sold, the first quarterly net purchases since at least 2000, according to the council, based on figures from London-based research company GFMS Ltd. The so-called official sector had net sales of 69 tonnes in the second quarter last year, the report said. Wozniak said GFMS wouldn't identify any of the buyers. Central bank purchases aren't counted in the 719.5 tonnes of total demand because they are considered a traditional source of supply, she said."

 

You have got to be kidding me! Net buyers aren't counted as demand because traditionally they are sellers!

 

That is just the most contrived reporting to come up with the negative gold news GFMS always wants to produce. This means that the change in demand from the central banks, going from selling a net 69 tonnes to buying 14 tonnes, is a positive difference of 83 tonnes. This means that global demand for gold increased by 2 percent, instead of declining 8.6 percent.

[TrueNorth]

From what I have read the so called "world gold council" far from what you might be led to believe are not the friend of the goldbug.

They are on a par with Jon Nadler.

 

IMO take what they say with a large pinch of salt.

 

Exactly what Ed Steer wrote in today's missive:

 

In a Bloomberg story yesterday is this headline... "Gold Demand Shrinks to Six-Year Low on Recession, Council Says". I suggest you have a full salt shaker nearby...as this story will require a lot of those grains of salt when you read it. The link is here.

 

I really do wonder what the "point" of the World Gold Council is.

[bitbigt]

I will post this chart without comment - to me, it speaks very clearly!

 

US stocks (SPX) -to- Gold Ratio

 

It would be interesting to know what others here think of it

Looks good ...but can it really be that simple?

 

Oil inventories are down (so growth happenning!), economies coming out of recession every day, loads of cash burning holes in pockets looking for a home, etc

 

And you've plotted straight lines on a non-log chart.

 

In short - I still feel this bouyant stock market may not fall much or at all from here, and could even gain further.

[romans holiday]

Jobless claims update rocking the market.

 

Up 15,000 to 570,000

 

Worse than expected.

[Gatesy]

And you've plotted straight lines on a non-log chart.

 

It's a long time since I did my GCSE maths. Can someone explain why the log versions make more sense and why straight lines on a non log chart may be invalid?

 

 

In short - I still feel this bouyant stock market may not fall much or at all from here, and could even gain further.

 

So gold gains a quicker rate than any stock gains from now on?

[bitbigt]

It's a long time since I did my GCSE maths. Can someone explain why the log versions make more sense and why straight lines on a non log chart may be invalid?

If something goes up a pound day after day then it will plot as an upward diagonal straight line on a non-log graph. But on a log graph it will plot as an upward sloping curved line that becomes more horizontal with higher values. This is because the spacing of the units on a log graph get more and more compressed on the axis at higher and higher values.

 

In contrast, if something increases by some factor day after day (e.g., doubles , triples) then it will plot as an exponentially increasing upward slope on a non-log graph, but as an increasing diagonal straight line on a log graph.

 

Since the stock market can't keeping dropping by the same X dollars every 6 months forever (as it would then hit zero and go negative), I was questioning the validity of drawing a straight line channel on a linear graph.

 

So gold gains a quicker rate than any stock gains from now on?

No. But everyone seems to be predicting the imminent recurrance of a collapse in the stock market and a reactive rise in gold as panic again grips the world.

 

Certainly the fundemantals all say this should happen, but I suspect the world will be happy to keep ignoring reality for quite some time longer. So stocks will hold their price or even rise further, whilst gold may slide.

 

But really its 50:50 ...so I topped up on my gold anyway, keeping some cash in reserve.

 

 

 

[peterb]

When it comes to a chart showing the ratio between two stocks, commodities or indices, the ratio should not be plotted on a log scaled chart as a ratio should always fluctuate within a defined range and not be subject to exponential growth over time.

[G0ldfinger]

When it comes to a chart showing the ratio between two stocks, commodities or indices, the ratio should not be plotted on a log scaled chart as a ratio should always fluctuate within a defined range and not be subject to exponential growth over time.

I don't agree entirely. For instance, an exchange rate is such ratio, but if one currency gets systematically debased (GBP?) while the other seems largely stable (EUR??), a logscale can make sense.

 

http://gold.approximity.com/since1968/EURGBP_LOG.html

[peterb]

I don't agree entirely. For instance, an exchange rate is such ratio, but if one currency gets systematically debased (GBP?) while the other seems largely stable (EUR??), a logscale can make sense.

 

If a currency is completely debased along the road of hyperinflation, then a log chart may make sense with regards exchange rates using that currency.

 

Otherwise charts showing Dow/Gold ratio should not be logarithmic as they are both based on the same currency and fluctuate within a certain range over time. If the USD is debased, then both the Dow and Gold would equally reflect the change and the ratio would remain within the range.