It seems that my article last week stirred some "morality" issues amongst the Seeking Alpha readership. And, to be honest with you, I found it quite thought provoking.
For those that know me, I am actually a very religious person, both in action and in thought. But, when I did not respond to the posts regarding the question of morality of a "manipulated" market, some of you took exception and assumed I was amoral.
But, let's try and keep our eyes on the ball here. As I have said before, whether the market is manipulated or not, either you accept it and get out of the market, or simply find a way to trade with the movements of the market as they develop. The question of morality of supposed manipulation is well beyond the scope of what we are trying to do here.
But, does it really need to be stated that doing something underhanded is immoral? Do you really need for me to make such a proclamation? If so, then maybe you need to check your own moral compass if you need for me to validate the immorality of such collusion, if any exists in this market. And, as I have said so often, if it is validation you seek, you should be turning to your spouse, and not a financial analyst.
I am here to provide alpha and not question the morality within the marketplace. And, in providing alpha, I try to provide to you my expectation for the upcoming week's action in the metals, along with remind you that I do not believe the true lows in the metals have yet been seen. So, I want to be clear. I will not be opining as to the morality of the market, nor will I be responding to comments which bring up supposed "fundamentals" in the metals arena, as they provide no insight as to where the metals are heading over the next week, month, or year. As I said in my comment last weekend:
If fundamentals do not move the market all the time, then they are NEVER really in control of the market, are they?? Someone help me understand the logic in this "fundamental" thought process!??!? And if the metals now rise along with the "fundamentals being in line," does it not mean that the fundamentals are only coincident to the metals rise, as the market has been dropping despite the "fundamentals?"
But, one thing did strike me as informative about these posts. It seems bulls are starting to get amazingly impatient and grasping at every little issue in the market, since it has not reacted as they expected for almost three years. They are truly worn to the bone. And, as I said about a month ago, 2014 will likely be the year the bulls die, and their demise will be ushered in by a final, heart-breaking drop to the 1000 region of even a bit lower, as too many people believe 1000 is the floor of the market.
As for the actual analysis and targeting, we finally saw an initial break through resistance of 121GLD, but we are still awaiting the breakthrough of 123GLD for the stronger break out trigger. So, my prior analysis still is quite applicable, with the only change now being that I would, ideally, like to see 121GLD held as support:
For weeks I have been noting my "Main Resistance" region on my charts to you, and continually explaining that I need to see a strong break out through the 121 region, with follow through over the 123 region on strong buying volume to then target the 125/126 region, on our way to 131.50 and then to 136-140.
The problem now is if the market breaks down below last week's low before strongly taking out the 121 region, we could be setting up a decline back towards the old 105-108 target below. Clearly, it would take a strong break down below the 117/118 support region to get there.
Disclosure: I am long SLV. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
Additional disclosure: I have an intermediate term strangle in GLD