Simit Patel

Value, special situations, gold, tech
Simit Patel
Value, special situations, gold, tech
Contributor since: 2008
Company: InformedTrades
nationaliziation is a concern of mine as well. i think firms that have already established partnerships with state-owned enterprises are a bit safer.
i don't dispute the claims of cyclicality; rather i believe that is a technical explanation of price patterns, whereas the volcker argument is a fundamental explanation. i prefer to see both technical and fundamental confirmation.
in 1980 what brought the market down was volcker raising itnerest rates. i do not consider that option possible now as the US is still running deficits. in 1980 we saw a true mania, in both gold and gold stocks, in which price acceleration during 1979 was much greater than anything we have seen in the current bull market. obviously there has been no mania in mining shares and the brief pop above 1900 pales in comparison to what we saw in the 1970s. i suspect the current bull will be greater than what we saw in the 1970s.
yes, i apologize for the error -- thanks to all who corrected in the comments.
the price has gone from 250 to over 1600 -- i think that's a pretty sizable move. i think the best is yet to come but i think the move from 250 to over 1600 reflects accumulation by china and central banks. also, i'm not 100% sure about this off the top of my head, but i believe central banks in aggregate only became net accumulators starting in 2009.
i was exaggerating in an attempt to be mildly comedic and light-hearted, though that seems to not been successfully accomplished. in any event, for very wealthy people, the lack of portability of silver is a very real issue.
i agree, the last two days look like capitulation. i think gold stocks as a whole are looking ready to take off to the upside, i was pleasantly surprised by the strength of many of them today.
would you throw away 10% of your net worth on something you didn't believe in? if he didn't believe in it, why not raise more capital from external investors instead of keeping a 25% stake for himself? most management teams as a whole of mining stocks don't own 25%. with his name and track record i suspect he could have easily raised capital -- at least more easily than many others. if he just wanted to pay himself a salary, why not take a lower stake?
you make some good points. i'll take a closer look at the numbers and the trend over the past few years.
you may be perfect, but i fully confess to being mortal and thus need to allow myself a margin of error.
lol glad i wasn't the only one! :)
that is a great question, skwest. the megatons to megawatts agreement between russia and the US to downblend nuclear warheads into uranium for power plants comes to an end in 2013; i think we will see a spike in uranium prices before then. when uranium starts moving, it's going to move quickly. unfortunately i think this market will be exceedingly difficult to time, but i'm prepared to hold these positions until 2020 -- though i think the requirements to sell will be achived well before then.
uranium is in infinite supply in the ocean. i wrote about this previously:
so i log in to my broker this morning with the intent of buying SSL.....only to see price had risen by 400%!!!!! second time this has happened to me where i was literally a day late to the big move. probably lots more upside left to SSL, but now i have to wait for some weakness.....congrats to those who got in on SSL and are enjoying very nice profits!
great comments, dave! the electric conductors in the road is a very interesting idea, and while it may seem far-fetched to many, i think it is worth noting that the automobile transformation is not isolated -- but rather will be a part of the transformations in infrastructure and urbanization that are also under way. when these trends are viewed in unison, i think something like electricity via roads becomes more plausible. though as you note, in light of how fast the industry is evolving, finding the right opportunities may be especially challenging.
yes, SSL is likely one i'll be adding to my portfolio after today's pullback.
yes, sandstorm is one i'll be adding to my portfolio.
EVs have a foothold in the trucking market as well.
i agree regarding olivut, it's on my watchlist. stornoway and diamcor are two other tiny mining stocks i've got on my watchlist.
i find amazon's long-term growth prospects to be stronger, mainly because of AWS and their distribution business. in my opinion, apple is perpetually dependent upon hit new products -- which to its credit has managed to pull off since the return of jobs -- as well as selling high-priced products in a world where i think consumer spending will be tough to come by, especially in western economies.
carbon emissions from natural gas (and increasing legislation focused on curbing emissions), as well as other uses for natural gas (such as its role in agriculture/fertilizer) make EVs preferable in some regards.
seabridge is going to sell, so that is someone else's cost. an established miner is likely to have hte resources needed to make mining economically viable.
0.55 grams per tonne grade quality is not fantastic, but in our current world, i think it's workable for the right miner. the size of the KSM project is also worth noting.
yes, i totally agree. MUX has diverisfication outside of argentina. in spite of the abundance of economically extractable mineral wealth argentina has, i do not invest in miners that are exclusive to that jurisdiction. MUX has a lot going on in mexico.
that is an excellent point. i do think hydraulic fracking will increasingly find its way to other markets and other shale deposits and thus expand the supply of natural gas accordingly, but the natural gas market is fragmenting, so there will be price descrepancies. perhaps the US can become a natural gas exporter, but there are of course bureacratic issues that must be overcome.
i'm referring to the san jose mine in argentina. link:
yes i agree.....we are talking about a huge debt cancellation, almost unfathomable, to take down the bull market in gold. UK, US, japan, EU would have to be on board with cancelling a large portion of their debt. i agree it is very unlikely.
i am a big fan of P/E and amazon's high P/E is basically the only reason i am not buying it. however i do not think it is particularly overvalued, and i would love to see a huge sell-off that would make it a great buy. the conventional rationale for a high P/E is great growth prospects, which i think amazon has.
i agree about natural gas, though the market is a tougher read -- at least for me. i think natural gas pipelines in the US are an opportunity. outsdie of the US, i'm not sure. i agree about the electricity shortage, and that is why nuclear is so important, so powerful, and one of the best opportunities out there. my interest in EVs stems in part from my interest in nuclear, as i believe that is the primary energy source of the future.
thanks paul for your insightful comment -- very much appreciated.
anyone who puts their money in treasuries is assuming they are going to get paid back.
the article you linked to regarding money supply cites M1 as their measure, i'm going with MZM which i find to be more meaningful.
i see your point, although i think the sentiment factor -- meaning how the news would be perceived by the world at large -- may be of greater relevance here. pegging to CAD would be something new in the monetary world.
thank you for the insightful comment -- i'll be ruminating on this one!