5 Reasons to Avoid the Gold Rush 72 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
The arguments for why one should sell the cat, pawn the mother-in-law and use the proceeds to buy gold are well known: The Fed is printing money faster than you can read this, which will result in inflation; the government is borrowing like a drunken monkey, so the dollar will be devalued; this will debase all currencies, so the only thing that will save you is the shiny metal.
However, here are some arguments why one should think twice before jumping in bed with gold bugs.
- For investors (not speculators) it is very hard to own gold because you cannot attach a logical value to it. Unlike stocks or bonds, gold has no cash flow and has a negative cost of carry — it costs you money to hold it. It is only worth what people perceive it to be worth right now.
- The gold ETF SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) is the sixth largest holder of physical gold in the world. If its holders decide to sell (or are forced to sell; think of hedge-fund liquidations), who will they sell it to?
- In the past, gold had a monopoly on the inflation and fear trade. Not anymore. Now you have competition from Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS), currency ETFs, short US treasury ETFs, etc. (If you want to know more, I make this case in my book)
- If, because of points two or three above, gold fails to perform as expected, the perception that gold is worth something may start disappearing.
- Over the last 200 years, gold was really not a good investment. It may have a day in the sun, but it may not. And the cost of being wrong is fairly high.
The best way to deal with the risks of dollar devaluation and high inflation — with a much lower cost to being wrong — is, instead, to own stocks of companies that have pricing power of their product. When inflation hits, they will be able to raise prices and thus maintain their profitability. Also, companies that generate a large portion of their sales from outside the US will benefit from the declining dollar.
There is a wild card in the price of gold, though: China. If it decides to switch partially from owning US Treasuries to owning gold, the price of gold will skyrocket. (John Burbank made this case at the Value Investor Congress in Pasadena in May).
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most activeSee all
Instabloggers.
Top Instabloggers » -
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 72 comments:
And the Chinese are looking for another 80 bil in gold as well as putting gold in a new reserve currency along with the Russians.
Open your eyes.
China is now opening their own hedge funds! tic toc.
Isn't this how every investment works? Who is going to buy all the IBM stock if everyone decides to sell it.....DUH. IMHO, this is extremely stupid thinking.
Why would you give your savings to criminals? Trust is gone. Gold is real and a paper promise is just that: paper.
Just leave room in your nostalgic picture frame for a dollar.
On Jun 19 08:54 AM The Geoffster wrote:
> Gold is money and it will still be money when the greenback is sold
> on ebay to nostalgia buffs.
* Physical
* Gold related stock
* GLD
* goldmoney.com
If we continue to have inflation, gold is a good hedge - also silver. Some equities are a good hedge, just make sure the company is making money.
It looks to me like we are in a bull market for commodities that will probably last for another 5-10 years or so. When the market runs out, probably a good time to get back into equities.
Also, to suggest the past 200 years gold has not been good investment is likewise foolhardy.
The old test (but VERY true). Take a $20 dollar bill and a $20 dollar gold piece, go into a men's store to buy a new suit. The $20 dollar bill will get you a TIE, and a crappy one at that. The gold piece will get you an Armani suit. Now, which do you want in your safe???
Wise up!
On Jun 19 09:10 AM doubleguns wrote:
> You can now buy 100,000,000 (100 Mil) bills on ebay from Zimbabwe
> for $10.
Take your five points and replace each reference to gold with the word "paper" and see how it reads. Especially the bit on value over 200 years.
If people really understand intrinsic value, they will see the value attached to gold.
Major problem, Houston. Tell me, in our current hyper-overactive gubmint regulatory environment, why you believe ANY company will be able to maintain "pricing power?" In the scenarios where physical PMs are necessary, there are no guarantees that 1) confiscatory "windfall profits" taxation; 2) outright nationalization; or 3) counterparty failure would not destroy the value of these investments. Not to mention, the cost of being RIGHT could be obscene, in the form of capital gains taxation. Holding physical PMs evades all of these issues, very cleanly.
And TIPS- puhleeaze. Indexed to CPI, which is a cruel joke to everyone on public pensions, social security, etc. Permanently broken to sandbag real inflation, first in the early 80s and later in the early 90s.
1. This paragraph could as easily be applied to any number of widely traded equities given today's 'accounting standards'. None more so than banks.
2. The same applies to any traded investment - witness last autumn's indiscriminate selling of equities.
3. TIPS are exposed to fraudulent CPI calculations; many non-USD fiat currencies are as flawed as the US in the sense that they are managed by central banks intent on devaluing them against real assets.
4. This paragraph could apply to any investment.
5. Any facts to back up this assertion?
I am not a gold-bug; I hold some simply as 'insurance'. I respect the opinion of those such as you who see it as a 'barbarous relic' (although I personally would apply that term to Citibank shares sooner than to gold). However, the arguments you use are exceptionally thin.
Even with the Chinese gold buying spree, it is less than 2% of their holdings.
On Jun 19 08:12 AM doubleguns wrote:
> "There is a wild card in the price of gold, though: China. If it
> decides to switch partially from owning US Treasuries to owning gold,
> the price of gold will skyrocket."
>
> And the Chinese are looking for another 80 bil in gold as well as
> putting gold in a new reserve currency along with the Russians.
>
>
> Open your eyes.
I have even heard of some filing bankruptcy to buy private pre1933 gold coins so that they did not have to report them to protect some of their assets that wouldnt be protected.
On Jun 19 09:10 AM doubleguns wrote:
> You can now buy 100,000,000 (100 Mil) bills on ebay from Zimbabwe
> for $10.
>
> Just leave room in your nostalgic picture frame for a dollar.
I am bullish on gold because viewed as an asset class, it is hugely underrepresented in most portfolios. And as insurance against long-term mild-moderate inflationary scenarios, it does have a valid place in a portfolio. However, when I see the comments above, I become very wary. It reminds me of the Krugerrand buying in the 80s.
If by chance we get hyperinflation in this country -- do we really believe that an ETF will protect our wealth? Or physical coins for that matter? Just because of events last year (which are minor compared to a hyperinflationary, high unemployment, scarcity-ridden environment), the government stepped in and overturned all sorts of written/unwritten expectations investors had come to rely upon (short sales, contract law, "too-big-to-fail"). When a major upheavel occurs, the likelihood that gold will save your wealth is very small indeed.
Owning and holding gold (the physical) is a long term affair. To some that can't wait its not their 'cup of tea'. The opportunities are few and far between but when they arrive gold bugs pounce on them. The old adage - sell high, buy low. But ya gotta have patience!
That's why I like the miners.
Total world Gold Stock (all ever Mined) ---- 161,000 Tons
How much "Value" in fiat paper would it take to buy up at maybe, $1000.00 an oz. all 161,000 tons. I'm not good @ math so, I'd like someone to figure that one out for me.
Oh ! The Central Banks hold (est.) 19% of this Gold & with it are controlling the World Price. That's why it's value has not risen with the increase in paper. Whatever it takes !
seekingalpha.com/artic...
If the society falls apart and people know you have gold, well, good luck then...
On Jun 19 08:32 PM mkreisel wrote:
> The best scenario for gold is a stagflation like the 70s: gold value
> will soar while the society does not fall apart (still respects private
> property). Also during a stagflation, major financial institutions
> such as NYMEX are very likely to go down and you can own the more
> convenient and liquid paper gold.
>
> If the society falls apart and people know you have gold, well, good
> luck then...
Hmmm... What happens when everybody is buying?
Thanks, Vitaliy, you made me think, maybe just in time. And I appreciate your effort - it is not easy to go against a prevalent thought.
1. It is NOT hard to own gold. I have owned gold for most of my life. Can't attach a "logical value" to it? Gold has constant value. It buys today what it did 1,000 years ago. Try thinking of it in terms of a store of value. Gold does not fluctuate in value, the percieved value of fiat fluctuates.
2. GLD may or may NOT own any physical gold. It is very interesting to note that the custodial bank for GLD is one of two banks that have established a short corner in the gold futures market. You might want to check Ted Butler's work in that area.
3. TIPs, currency ETFs. etc are ALL just paper in which you have counter party risks. Even (maybe now especially!) the US Treasury represents counter party risk. Physical gold ownership is one of the few things financial left in this world with NO counter party or intermediary risks!
4. Perceiption that gold may not be worth anything? That is idiocy as it runs counter to man's experience with gold since he has been on this planet.
5. Again, gold is NOT an investment. It is money in the truest sense of the word as it has been a constant store of value in exchange for thousands of years and will be for thousands of years to come. The current fiat "experiment" has been tried innumerable times in history. Not one has been successful. Not ONE. This one will fail as did the others.
Our purpose when investing is to correctly judge the future trend based on the facts we have. Ahead of the crowd! The market has already bid up gold to near 1000 an ounce and the expectation based on actions taken by the government is that the price will rise significantly in the future.
But when is the future?
This is what separates the cats from the mice. It is a waiting game but it does not hurt to be in early if you are highly confident of the outcome. It pays to watch and wait and strike when the time is right.
So the questions you need to ask yourself are these. "Do I believe that current Government actions and policies are highly inflationary?" And if they are inflationary, will that result in a loss of purchasing power and therefore a real price hike for Gold and related commodities?
If you are certain of these things then Gold (and silver) are a good bet when it comes to preserving your wealth. Would you rather wait until a full fledged inflation kicks in before buying....?
Would you prefer to wait until the last minute and run with the crowd?
(which is what the mice will do by the way, panic and run to security)
Or is it better to just watch the price of precious metals slowly and steadily creep up until you have lost the opportunity to protect your wealth in real terms and in real time?
If you are confident about the future trend you will look for a good entry point and buy what makes you feel comfortable. We will see that nice entry point again soon but I don't think it will last this time.
cant miners lie about their assets just like the gold etf?
On Jun 19 07:12 PM Roger Knights wrote:
> Comment: "If by chance we get hyperinflation in this country -- do
> we really believe that an ETF will protect our wealth? Or physical
> coins for that matter?"
>
> That's why I like the miners.
On Jun 19 11:36 PM PYRAMIDHUNT wrote:>
> cant miners lie about their assets just like the gold etf?
on Jun 19 07:12 PM Roger Knights wrote:
On Jun 20 12:06 AM tom Andersen wrote:
> Owning gold mines is owning a company that 'can raise prices with
> inflation' - in fact the real price of gold will go up with inflation,
> while expenses are basically tied to the rate of inflation. So its
> a leveraged position on gold that can pay dividends, etc. You don't
> have to buy the metal.
I don't even know where to begin with the above statement.
The author is completely lost at sea on the issue of holding physical gold at this point in time.
This article is written by someone who does not understand why people are buying physical gold right now.
The suggestion that buying
arabianmoney.net/2009/.../
People who don't like gold are dumber than someone trying to open a snowmobile store in Sudan.
If you take a 20 dollar gold piece from over a hundred years ago and an antique rare paper 20 dollar bill from the same period, you may be surprised that the paper bill is worth more or worth many times its face as well.
If I bought just about ANY investment at the time of the minting of the 20 dollar gold coin, I would have many times what the intrinsic value of the gold coin is.
Comparing the commodity appreciation of gold, however pathetic over the long haul, to paper money is idiotic. Let's compare it over 100 years to other investments. You name it.... Real estate, utilities, paintings, blue chips w/ reinvested divs, the DOW, etc.
Invest in real return investments with cash flow.
Gold is no silver bullet.
On Jun 19 10:48 AM 5142152-337 wrote:
> I beg to differ with your assessment that gold has no LOGICAL value.
> Nonsense!
>
> Also, to suggest the past 200 years gold has not been good investment
> is likewise foolhardy.
>
> The old test (but VERY true). Take a $20 dollar bill and a $20 dollar
> gold piece, go into a men's store to buy a new suit. The $20 dollar
> bill will get you a TIE, and a crappy one at that. The gold piece
> will get you an Armani suit. Now, which do you want in your safe???
>
>
> Wise up!
Your first point:
1. Perception o' value, the perception change is what has brought Gold to where it is now........anna it takes a long time to change perceptions..........t... Gold should continue its strength
Otherwise, da Rock issa in agreement with you on commodities.....
Thanks.........
On Monday, I decided to short PMs through ZSL and GLL. My momentum indicator is signalling a short term downturn for these assets. As soon as it signals an upturn, I'll roll these over into UGL and AGQ.
Short term - bearish.
Long term - bullish.
I hold silver and gold not as an investment but as a preservation of my capital... I don't hold that much but what I do hold I know that it is mine.
Ratio wise silver is a better than gold as less of it above ground.
On Jun 20 11:14 AM MadScientist wrote:
> Whether or not you choose to take delivery, gold and silver are good
> bets for the imminent inflationary cycle we are about to enter (and
> by "about to enter", I mean at some time in the next year, maybe
> sooner).
>
> On Monday, I decided to short PMs through ZSL and GLL. My momentum
> indicator is signalling a short term downturn for these assets. As
> soon as it signals an upturn, I'll roll these over into UGL and AGQ.
>
>
> Short term - bearish.
> Long term - bullish.
On Jun 19 08:12 AM doubleguns wrote:
> "There is a wild card in the price of gold, though: China. If it
> decides to switch partially from owning US Treasuries to owning gold,
> the price of gold will skyrocket."
>
> And the Chinese are looking for another 80 bil in gold as well as
> putting gold in a new reserve currency along with the Russians.
>
>
> Open your eyes.
the clock is ticking. Tick Tock Tick Tock
I read that silver has more industiral uses besides being a semi precious metal and is constantly being used up (even though there is more of it than gold). I also read that gold will always be with us while silver will not (unless gold has future uses besides jewelry,etc).
Is there anyone else here who is undecided which metal to buy?
On Jun 20 07:14 PM PYRAMIDHUNT wrote:
> why buy gold over silver and vice versa?
> I read that silver has more industiral uses besides being a semi
> precious metal and is constantly being used up (even though there
> is more of it than gold). I also read that gold will always be with
> us while silver will not (unless gold has future uses besides jewelry,etc).
>
>
> Is there anyone else here who is undecided which metal to buy?<br/>
>
>
Physical gold is also very risky in that you don't know it's true quality unless you're an expert.
Gold can also be taken from you (unless GLD stock) and costs money to store.
Also, in the future, gold may be worthless once a scientist figures out how to create it from a tube.
On Jun 19 10:48 AM 5142152-337 wrote:
> I beg to differ with your assessment that gold has no LOGICAL value.
> Nonsense!
>
> Also, to suggest the past 200 years gold has not been good investment
> is likewise foolhardy.
>
> The old test (but VERY true). Take a $20 dollar bill and a $20 dollar
> gold piece, go into a men's store to buy a new suit. The $20 dollar
> bill will get you a TIE, and a crappy one at that. The gold piece
> will get you an Armani suit. Now, which do you want in your safe???
>
>
> Wise up!
On Jun 21 12:13 PM Paul H. M. wrote:
> Correction: the gold coin would buy you nothing, since stores do
> not accept gold coins.
>
> Physical gold is also very risky in that you don't know it's true
> quality unless you're an expert.
>
> Gold can also be taken from you (unless GLD stock) and costs money
> to store.
>
> Also, in the future, gold may be worthless once a scientist figures
> out how to create it from a tube.
The average house price in 1910 was around $5000; Gold prices were fixed at $20.67 per ounce.
Now as for the $20 gold coin, a 1907 (uncirculated) double-head eagle gold coin currently sells for around $7,250.
A 1929 $20 Minneapolis note sells for around $50 and a 1929 $20 Kansas City note, for $90.
On Jun 20 10:08 AM Smackdown wrote:
> This is the most moronic comment I have ever read. If you take
> today's 20 dollar bill and a currently minted 20 dollar coin, they
> are both worth 20 dollars.
>
> If you take a 20 dollar gold piece from over a hundred years ago
> and an antique rare paper 20 dollar bill from the same period, you
> may be surprised that the paper bill is worth more or worth many
> times its face as well.
>
> If I bought just about ANY investment at the time of the minting
> of the 20 dollar gold coin, I would have many times what the intrinsic
> value of the gold coin is.
>
> Comparing the commodity appreciation of gold, however pathetic over
> the long haul, to paper money is idiotic. Let's compare it over
> 100 years to other investments. You name it.... Real estate,
> utilities, paintings, blue chips w/ reinvested divs, the DOW, etc.
>
>
> Invest in real return investments with cash flow.
>
> Gold is no silver bullet.
Every major inflation of 10% or more since the 30's has resulted in stock P/E's being compress down to single digit multiples. The S&P is currently trading on 15 times 2009 forecasts!
The following article was published in the FT in 2004. The genius that wrote this piece declared that gold was a pointless and basically concluded that it was finished. Gold was around $400 per oz at the time! How I laughed and bought some more.
Going, going, gold
Published: April 16 2004 5:00 | Last Updated: April 16 2004 5:00
The barbarous relic, as Keynes called it, is crumbling to dust. When even the venerable NM Rothschild has quit the gold market and the Bank of France, among the most stubborn of the official goldbugs, is thinking again about its bullion holdings, the end of gold as an investment has come a little closer.
It will not be before time. The fetishisation of shiny yellow metal, decades after it ceased to be used as the anchor of the international monetary system, is a lingering anomaly in modern financial markets. Perhaps Rothschild's last service to the bullion market could be to keep a live gold trader on display behind glass as a reminder of a bygone age, like the former coal miners who now make a living giving tours of defunct pits.
The one advantage of gold as a reserve asset is that, unlike assets based on fiat money, governments cannot make it worthless by inflating it away. But in an era of low inflation, and given that independent inflation-targeting central banks are the norm across the industrialised world, that risk has very sharply diminished.
Indeed, for both private and official investors, gold is now a rather risky asset with a nil or low return. The intrinsic value of gold, determined by its use in various industrial processes, is well below its market price. Gold does not grow. So its value to any one investor as an asset is dependent on other investors also holding it as an investment asset. The gold price hangs precariously by its own bootstraps.
For private investors to hold gold on this basis is their own foolish affair. For central banks and governments to hold it as a reserve asset is a betrayal of the public on whose behalf they are acting. Despite recent sell-offs, governments and central banks still hold about a fifth of the world's bullion. Their large holdings relative to the size of the market by themselves make gold particularly ineffective as a reserve asset: the very act of official selling of bullion on any large scale to raise cash will itself drive down the price.
This danger was amply demonstrated by the UK's unhappy experience of trying to sell some of its gold holdings. Announced in 1999 in a sensibly open and transparent fashion, the sales sparked such a fall in the global bullion price that a group of central banks signed a concord limiting such sales. That has recently been superseded by a new agreement providing for limited official sales.
Given the pointlessness of holding gold, the speed of its official sell-off scarcely matters, unless leaching the gold into the market bit by bit somehow maximises the return to the public purse by limiting the impact on the price. That would imply some irrationality on the part of the market. But then holding gold is irrational in the first place. Perhaps the central banks are right to go slowly.
Whatever the speed, the direction is clear. Gold is on its way out as an investment and a reserve asset. Three cheers for that.
One of the posters tried to make an analogy between houses and gold. He failed to allocate the costs properly. If you had X amount of dollars to invest in gold or real property (say you could buy it outright), then real property can either serve as a home or a rental. Subtract off that savings, after property taxes, insurance and maintenance. Guess who wins? Real property. OK, you don't always win with real property, because if you buy any asset, gold, houses, paintings or whatever, at the wrong time, you can lose a fortune. To me, buying gold at $1000/oz, when I could buy it at $810/oz at some future point, is the danger of investing in gold. No one ever bothers explaining this to newbie investors. That is the rub, bubba. You call that a safe asset? LOL.
hmmm...I think the cost of not owning precious metals and their proxies including precious metal mining stocks is potentially very high.
Central bankers used to back paper currencies with gold. They no longer do. So we need to do it ourselves. One should not put all his money in precious metals but a portion of it. It is like an insurance policy. I discuss the formula of assett allocation at: portfolioforlife.blogs...
On Jun 21 05:20 PM Abe Mishima wrote:
> Is gold a hedge or an investment? If one sees it as hedge, then at
> what point does one cash out, unless one plans on holding to perpetuity
> (a dumb decision, since gold will decline off any top). If it is
> an investment, then how much profit can one make, optimally trading
> in the metal? In neither case do I see the ROI being what I could
> make day trading securities. If inflation rises above 10%, gold will
> increase by what amount? 15%? Maybe. Who cares? I'll find ways to
> make money that don't involve tying up money.
>
> One of the posters tried to make an analogy between houses and gold.
> He failed to allocate the costs properly. If you had X amount of
> dollars to invest in gold or real property (say you could buy it
> outright), then real property can either serve as a home or a rental.
> Subtract off that savings, after property taxes, insurance and maintenance.
> Guess who wins? Real property. OK, you don't always win with real
> property, because if you buy any asset, gold, houses, paintings or
> whatever, at the wrong time, you can lose a fortune. To me, buying
> gold at $1000/oz, when I could buy it at $810/oz at some future point,
> is the danger of investing in gold. No one ever bothers explaining
> this to newbie investors. That is the rub, bubba. You call that a
> safe asset? LOL.
Therefore, gold coins are pretty damn worthless for all practical purposes.
For physical investments, I'll take land over gold any day of the week.
Land is the ultimate store of wealth (you can live of it, gold gives you nothing you need to survive).
Gold only has value if we perceive it to have value. It has no real tangible value.
On Jun 21 12:35 PM Market Sniper wrote:
> What are you going to do when/if the currency collapses? As to how
> do you know? Guess you do not understand hallmark bar strikes and
> bullion coinage. What do you have in GLD? You have a paper trading
> vehicle. think your local store will take a share in exchange for
> goods? LOL As for keeping it. How do you keep your house? Your car?
> Any valueables? You defend your ownership. With lethal force, if
> required. Test tube gold? Yep. Hold your breath waiting for that
> one. Only alchemy going on around here is central banking alchemy
> where they create "money" out of thin air.
However, gold has a 5,000 year history (far longer than any concept of deposit notes) that enforces the idea that gold, along with silver, is one of the few materials on this planet which meet all the requirements for specie money or money in absolute terms.
If you believe in a true currency crisis then why would you purchase something like GLD? It's not gold. It's a $USD representation of what Gold (AU) is worth on a US stock market. If the $USD goes to zero how will you be able to retrieve your wealth from a busted ETF riding on a busted Market on a busted currency?
GLD is nice for inflation hedging and very convenient.
GLD is useless for a currency crisis. For that you need something you can put in your pocket and take to someone who can give you Euro's, Rupees, Yen, Pounds based on the value of what you have in your pocket.
On Jun 19 08:54 AM The Geoffster wrote:
> Gold is money and it will still be money when the greenback is sold
> on ebay to nostalgia buffs.
On Jun 21 08:15 PM noob wrote:
> Gold is not money. You cannot use Gold in the US as "tender" by law.
>
>
> However, gold has a 5,000 year history (far longer than any concept
> of deposit notes) that enforces the idea that gold, along with silver,
> is one of the few materials on this planet which meet all the requirements
> for specie money or money in absolute terms.
>
> If you believe in a true currency crisis then why would you purchase
> something like GLD? It's not gold. It's a $USD representation of
> what Gold (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) is worth on a US stock
> market. If the $USD goes to zero how will you be able to retrieve
> your wealth from a busted ETF riding on a busted Market on a busted
> currency?
>
> GLD is nice for inflation hedging and very convenient.
> GLD is useless for a currency crisis. For that you need something
> you can put in your pocket and take to someone who can give you Euro's,
> Rupees, Yen, Pounds based on the value of what you have in your pocket.
>
>
> On Jun 19 08:54 AM The Geoffster wrote:
On Jun 21 08:15 PM noob wrote:
> Gold is not money. You cannot use Gold in the US as "tender" by
> law.
> GLD is nice for inflation hedging and very convenient.
> GLD is useless for a currency crisis. For that you need something
> you can put in your pocket and take to someone who can give you Euro's,
> Rupees, Yen, Pounds based on the value of what you have in your pocket.
On Jun 19 02:39 PM TurtleTrader72 wrote:
> From a technical perspective, GLD does appear to have additional
> upside potential over the intermediate term. Refering to the weekly
> bar charts, GLD's recent consolidation (over the last several weeks)
> has formed a 'symmetrical triangle' chart pattern which tend to be
> a continuation pattern. This chart formation suggests that GLD is
> in short term corrective state but will likely continue its uptrend
> within the coming months. However, there is a chance of a trend reversal
> off this pattern, so if the chart breaks the pattern to the downside,
> we could see a rather large move downwards. At this point, I would
> suggest watching the $85 mark on the GLDs. If the ETF breaks below
> that level the bulls may be in trouble. Based on my view of the US
> dollar (which is not as bearish as most people) I think $110 -120
> would be a high point for GLD. However, that is just speculation...hope
> this helps.
"> cant miners lie about their assets just like the gold etf?"
No, because (at least in Canada and some other places) their claims must be supported by drilling projects that are audited by bonded, independent companies.
On Jun 23 10:55 PM Roger Knights wrote:
> Vuke wrote:
> "> cant miners lie about their assets just like the gold etf?"<br/>
>
> No, because (at least in Canada and some other places) their claims
> must be supported by drilling projects that are audited by bonded,
> independent companies.