Harold Goodman

SLV Still a Great Buy

On Apr 07 12:51 PM Conan the Barbarian wrote:
<<< Speedspirit felt that the Article gave Trading Info. Somehow he was mislead. >>>

Paul -

Isn't this trading info?

<<<Now that SLV is again trading 3% below the 26 day EMA, it looks like a great buy for both the short term trader and long term investor in the $12.00 to $12.60 range.>>>

I'm not here to provide entry and exit points for you to make trades.

You can always get a pay service for that. If you want to dispute this trading info and provide alternate trades, I would be interested to hear your opinion, with supporting facts, of course.

Please read my articles more carefully and try to stay on point.

As for proof of market manipulation, did I ever state that I could prove it? Or that anyone could?

Obviously the PPT and hedge funds are completely non-transparent, so I just submit suspicious trading patterns to the readers as circumstantial evidence to make their own determination whether it is manipulation or not.

As for reporting my knowledge to the SEC of manipulation in one particular stock, many others with more specific knowledge than I had already reported it. Why should I waste my time reporting to an organization that has proved itself worthless since inception in 1934?

If you think that you can disprove ANY of the facts I present, or want to dispute ANY of my analysis with valid, factual analysis of your own, I would be MORE than glad to respond.

By the way, the past tense of "mislead" is "misled".

SLV Still a Great Buy

I stand by everything I wrote. SLV below 12 is just a better entry point, a better value. No need for exit strategy, it is a hold for many years. Short term exit is determined by your own greed.

You doubt that silver is being manipulated? Read Ted Butler and refute any of his arguments here on SA. I will be waiting.


<<<Harold keeps trying to fit everything into
> a Manipulation/Conspiracy slot. He does provide some interesting
> perspectives, Unfortunately, everything is one sided. There are no
> exits.>>>

Consumers Still Flashing Buy Sign

<<<Consumer confidence is up four points from a week ago, up twelve points from a month ago and up nine points from the beginning of the year.>>>

<<<retail growth is indeed leading to US economic recovery.>>>

Please explain why these isolated data points are any indication of a recovery?
Jobs are vanishing, stocks and real estate are still over valued by conventional criteria, the money supply has been greatly inflated which will inevitably result in higher prices to come which will reduce consumption, corporate profitability and consumer confidence.

We need economic analysis of the big picture and macroeconomic trends, not another cheerleader.

Canadian Energy Trusts: The Best Long Term Income and Dollar Hedge? (Part 2)

Two questions:

Why don't you include PGH on your list of recommended energy trusts?

Why aren't you concerned that all the Canroys will get slaughtered by the upcoming change in tax regulations in 2011, and when do you believe that investors will start dumping them in advance of this?

U.S. Markets' Future - I Think

The average bear market cycle is 17 years long and this one started in 2000. I see Dow/Gold at 1:1 within 8 yrs, but you never know since they keep changing the components of the Dow 30 Industrials.


On Mar 26 09:51 AM clam75 wrote:

> What led you to pick 2017 as the end of the bear market? Do you
> see the Dow/gold ratio hitting 2:1 or 1:1 in 8 years?
>
> You are correct that the bear market has trashed the idea of buy
> &amp; hold. While such a strategy may be appropriate for a secular
> bull market, we are not in such a market now.

U.S. Markets' Future - I Think

I don't really know how to answer this.

Mark to market should be a good thing for the economy in the long run, but in the short run, many more banks could be exposed as insolvent if the true nature and value of their speculative holdings became public.

That would be good for SKF, and good for the economy to weed out the insolvent banks. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the largest banks would have to go into bankruptcy proceedings, but we would come out of it a lot stronger and more productive.

Market perceptions could end up affecting SKF more than the long term benefits of mark to market.


On Mar 26 01:36 PM goodfigs wrote:

> You recommend SKF and I want to agree, but the meeting on April 8
> to discuss mark to market and reinstating the uptick rule scares
> me. Even though any changes likely wouldn't go into effect immediately
> both of these issues could significantly hurt SKF. Do you agree?

How to Profit from Market Manipulation

# abcde_98 -

The surge of buying at the close today sure felt like PPT was painting the tape, although I have not really analyzed it. If you look at the first chart in the article that I submitted for tomorrow, entitled "The Future of US Markets", it shows that the S&P 500 is above its 50 day EMA for only the second time since the panic in Oct/Nov, and it seems logical that the manipulators want to bring buyers into the market by attempting to hold at these levels.
My guess is that their use of stock index futures and such can only fight the market forces for short periods of time before it becomes too expensive to maintain. Every technical indicator is screaming overbought, and I am short the financial and real estate sector for the next few weeks, expecting some nice gains.


On Mar 25 05:02 PM abcde_98 wrote:

> Harold,
>
> 1. Any thoughts on what just happened in the final 30 minutes, particularly
> the final 10 minutes of today?
> Was the PPT in full force trying to paint the tape to show a positive
> (+ve) day and/or demonstrate support? Last time we were above 7,800
> it was a channel trading range between approx 7800 and 8200. Are
> they trying to pump fake us to be in that zone?
>
>
> 2. Any comments to my questions posted above:
> (a) So, should we look for strong support the next time the 50day
> MA nears the 200day MA ?
> (b) What other nearer-term events (say in the next month) do you
> think would lead to "manipulation" forces to make an appearance?
>
>
> Appreciate your viewpoint/input.
>
>
> 3. My market quote system data feed tends to "freeze" (for a minute
> or so) at rather significant point moves whether +/- moves and of
> course it happened in the last part of today. In the mid-late 1990's,
> our trading team conceived that the retail investor was "frozen
> out" of trading by automated trading and/or software in the electronic
> order placement systems. Any thoughts on this?

Is it Time to Jump Back into the Market?

Brilliant analysis. It shows that charts can and do lie, especially to the uniformed.

Bernanke Desperate, Fed Out of Ammo

If you read a little more carefully, you will see that I was referring to the Japanese government tried lowering their fed funds rate to zero, not buying back their own debt.

Buying treasuries on the open market is actually one of the "accepted" practices of the federal reserve when necessary to increase the money supply, but not at a time when record amounts of new treasuries are being issued.

This is selling with the right hand, and buying back with the left hand. It is a pathetic attempt to make the treasury bond auctions look like they are not failing.


On Mar 22 03:46 PM lbsterling wrote:

> You say the Fed buying long bonds "has only ever been done in third
> world countries before the US did it this week, and the UK did it
> last week."
>
> Of course the U.S. did it in the 1940s and you yourself say one paragraph
> later :
> "Japan tried this in 1991, and their economy has never recovered."
>
>
> Why should we listen to anything else you say when you are ignorant
> of history and self-contradictory?
>
>