PDA

View Full Version : gold to $650, silver to $9.80



Contemptuous
08-18-08, 12:37 AM
Got my new advisory's call half an hour ago. Gold "likely" to go to $650, silver to $9.80. Coming up soon. Hope he's wrong but that's what I got served up to me tonight. Ugh.

Jim Nickerson
08-18-08, 12:48 AM
Got my new advisory's call half an hour ago. Gold "likely" to go to $650, silver to $9.80. Coming up soon. Hope he's wrong but that's what I got served up to me tonight. Ugh.

BY WHEN ?

Edit: Luke, you continue to strike me as one of the strangest dudes who contributes here. What you posted is no rumor, it is the opinion of someone, assuming you are a truth-teller most of the time. However, as you have chosen to "share" your information with the community makes it useless.

David Bensimon, an Elliot wave counter and Fibonaccist (I hope that is a word) suggested in July that gold would decrease to 732 by April or May of next year, I forget which. He also suggested it would bounce around at 850 and 790 before its projected low. He seems wrong on the 850 resistance level in that gold blew right threw that. Whether anyone wishes to make use of this information is up to them, but the projection can be documented.

metalman
08-18-08, 09:35 AM
Got my new advisory's call half an hour ago. Gold "likely" to go to $650, silver to $9.80. Coming up soon. Hope he's wrong but that's what I got served up to me tonight. Ugh.

how much you spending our your gold guru, luke? did he call you 8/13 when gold was $844 and let you know to expect the hair raising price crash to stop at $780? not a popular call at the time.


<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="6" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td nowrap="nowrap"> akrowne (http://www.itulip.com/forums/member.php?u=213) http://www.itulip.com/forums/images/statusicon/user_online.gif <script type="text/javascript"> vbmenu_register(&quot;postmenu_43598&quot;, true); </script>
Senior iTuliper
</td> <td width="100%"> </td> <td nowrap="nowrap" valign="top"> Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 160


</td> </tr> </tbody></table> http://www.itulip.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif Re: People are sentimental, markets are not
<hr style="color: rgb(153, 255, 153);" size="1"> If gold gets to $780, that will be something else... because $780 is just about the marginal cost of production at this point. Spot silver is arguably under its marginal cost of production (in the $17s).

I am buying!


http://www.itulip.com/images/goldmarketcompcorrection.gif

still holding.

http://i37.tinypic.com/2qlg7fb.gif

seriously, what was he saying then? sometimes these guys come out with a lower number later just to sound conservative but they don't really know what they're talking about.

phirang
08-18-08, 11:41 AM
Most of these gold clowns have no understanding at all of the FX, BoP, and central banking that drive the gold price.

If you don't understand FX at least a bit, you should not be in gold, period.

Slimprofits
08-18-08, 02:25 PM
FYI,

Robin Griffiths, Technical Strategist, Cazenove Capital Management:

- gold bottom is $750
- if you want to buy more, do it ASAP, too tough to time the bottom perfectly (last night at 10:40 PST on CNBC)

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=805901852

I can't get the thing to play at this moment, so not sure if this (below) is a reference to that apperance or one made earlier in the week on CNBC, but no earlier than that for sure.



"Robin Griffiths, technical strategist from Cazenove Capital told CNBC this week he expects the normal downtrend associated with a bear trend will resume in September or October as people return from the summer vacation season. He expects another big down leg in that period."

source (http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=72509)

Who?



Robin Griffiths joined Phillips & Drew in 1966, having taken a degree in Economics at Nottingham University. He went on to be a partner at WI Carr, the first British stock broker to have offices in Hong Kong and Tokyo. Part of this firm was acquired by Grieveson Grant, with whom Robin enjoyed a stay in Japan. In 1986 Robin joined James Capel, which was already owned by HSBC.

Having left HSBC Investment Bank in 2002, Robin then joined Rathbones as Head of Global Investment Strategy, where he stayed until 2008. He is currently the Technical Strategist for Cazenove Capital and manages the Worldwide Absolute Return hedge fund.

Robin has been a regular on CNN, CNBC, Reuters and Bloomberg TV. He is a committee member and former chairman of the international Federation of Technical Analysts, and former chairman, now fellow, of the British Society of Technical Analysts.

source (http://books.global-investor.com/books/131118/Robin-Griffiths-and-Rashpal-Sohan/The-Money-Tree/)


Griffiths, Cazenove CEO Andrew Ross told Financial News “is a legend in the industry." (http://www.finalternatives.com/node/3712)

Contemptuous
08-18-08, 02:28 PM
Phirang -

Not really allowed to post the specific trades but I have a list of recent sell instructions here across a range of currencies and commodities that would stand the hairs up on the back of your neck. Every last one called very close to it's top - all logged right in the recent issues. Will try to post a dozen of these in "paraphrase" later this week.

When you look them up, you'll be extremely skeptical that someone actually issued this string of sells - yet it's all recorded in the consecutive alerts.

This person is calling gold and silver down to these numbers. He's also calling 16000 DOW within a *short period of time* (I imagine Jim Nickerson will be grubbing all around this mention trying to root up some freeby goodies). He's calling for the USD to bust out "far higher" than the most informed observers are willing to project.

I have no problem with occasionally being flat wrong. Does anyone else here have a problem with every once in a while being just plain wrong? Happens to me a lot! :D

jk
08-18-08, 02:39 PM
so luke, do you believe this call enough to sell a big chunk of your pm's to be able to buy back at reduced prices? yes, it's hard to catch a bottom, but gold is around 800 at the moment, which is quite a distance from 650, and silver's over 13 when - so someone says - you'll soon be able to buy under 10. so, you selling?

Contemptuous
08-18-08, 03:57 PM
Absolutely not selling anything JK. I don't see how that would follow from my observations above, which merely reaffirmed that this person is making some calls which at very least require people with a non-dogmatic view about these trends to sit up and pay attention.

For your info, I'm actually one of the people who has been most exposed to this savage correction, ans I hold a very large position in silver bullion. I've seen a massive reduction in my net worth, but it's a theoretical reduction only, as I am *not selling* or handing my holdings over to any ready buyers of the physical silver.

My basis was constructed from 1/3 holdings purchased at $7.00 per ounce, 1/3 purchased at $12.00 per ounce and another third (this part with less good judgement) purchased at $17.00 per ounce. I have an averaged $12.00 basis in what is admittedly a rather overweight silver holding, and I see an excellent chance of a net double to $24.00 in two to three years. If I'm wrong, the worst that occurs is that it's extended out to five to six years, or seven or ten years. This is what is referred to as investing on a macro trend, with "trycicle wheels on". There is no "wrong" in this strategy, there is only "strategy completes a little behind schedule"

Global growth in the next 20 years will be above trend, or if not, it's due to the energy crunch, which is highly inflationary anyway. Either way, the story is commodity inflation, not commodity deflation at the global level.

Silver is a hybrid investment: global GDP growth / minerals depletion / monetary dysfunction story. Silver's monetary linkage to gold is only one part of it. The part of it's story that will snooker the physical availability is the confluence of the investment demand, with it's industrial utility, which confers to it it's premier position within a commodity bull market. You can buy Jim Roger's vision, or you can dump Jim Rogers vision. Everyone has to make their own macro call on that.

Gold is only a monetary dysfunction story.

Holding silver bullion across the next five to ten years (and this is a global thesis, not just an American one) is a conservative investment within any commodity bull market, because it is a hybrid of both commodity and monetary assets, which are converging upon each other like a set of pincers. Gold does not have this edge. I will be looking carefully at scaling a significant chunk of this position out into a managed account with this adviser next February, but I am completely fluid on that part. I will take my time making a decision about that in the next few months.

If the dollar keeps going up past 80 the "gold as anti-dollar" trend would eventually break, and gold / silver would begin to drift upwards further alongside an apparently rising USD. The dollar rise (if it even occurs, I am only relating what I've read) would of course have to be an 'optical illusion", brought about by the illusion of foreign currency strength vs. the USD having dissipated. As the global vendor-financing of the US shrivels and foreign markets struggle through transitions away from US as prime consumer, all currencies weaken. As you noted yourself, that point would kick off the "race to the bottom" among all currencies, with the dollar looking stronger all through that portion of the decline. Those selling gold and silver into apparent dollar strength will have gotten fooled. But first we have to have this meat-grinder for the inflation hedges.

Some people would be in a quivering, jellified state of fear of a net 40% drawdown of their entire net worth. I'm quite distressed by the short term event in price, but I'm still sitting here with a solid core of comfort in the pit of my stomach, anticipating a changed life within probably at very latest 8 years (I'm patient). I would not have nearly this solid a feeling were I in paper silver and paper gold, or worse, in gold or silver stocks. Glad I understood that much and configured myself to withstand a bombshell. I've got the "anti-shrapnel sandbags" piled high up around my position.

This is my position. I like to stand in one place for a good while and let the big trend hand me my profits without chasing them. If I am wrong, my worst penalty will be to wait for eight to ten, rather than four years beyond now, for the same payoff. Just because I stare at the gruesome bottom in the PM's in fascination, should not lead you to infer that those doing so are acting stupidly. Right now, the nervous nellies are looking smart. Across a full decade, the nervous nellies will have lost the race.


so luke, do you believe this call enough to sell a big chunk of your pm's to be able to buy back at reduced prices? yes, it's hard to catch a bottom, but gold is around 800 at the moment, which is quite a distance from 650, and silver's over 13 when - so someone says - you'll soon be able to buy under 10. so, you selling?

Jim Nickerson
08-18-08, 05:43 PM
Absolutely not selling anything JK. I don't see how that would follow from my observations above, which merely reaffirmed that this person is making some calls which at very least require people with a non-dogmatic view about these trends to sit up and pay attention.

For your info, I'm actually one of the people who has been most exposed to this savage correction, ans I hold a very large position in silver bullion. I've seen a massive reduction in my net worth, but it's a theoretical reduction only, as I am *not selling* or handing my holdings over to any ready buyers of the physical silver.

My basis was constructed from 1/3 holdings purchased at $7.00 per ounce, 1/3 purchased at $12.00 per ounce and another third (this part with less good judgement) purchased at $17.00 per ounce. I have an averaged $12.00 basis in what is admittedly a rather overweight silver holding, and I see an excellent chance of a net double to $24.00 in two to three years. If I'm wrong, the worst that occurs is that it's extended out to five to six years, or seven or ten years. This is what is referred to as investing on a macro trend, with "trycicle wheels on". There is no "wrong" in this strategy, there is only "strategy completes a little behind schedule"

Global growth in the next 20 years will be above trend, or if not, it's due to the energy crunch, which is highly inflationary anyway. Either way, the story is commodity inflation, not commodity deflation at the global level.

Silver is a hybrid investment: global GDP growth / minerals depletion / monetary dysfunction story. Silver's monetary linkage to gold is only one part of it. The part of it's story that will snooker the physical availability is the confluence of the investment demand, with it's industrial utility, which confers to it it's premier position within a commodity bull market. You can buy Jim Roger's vision, or you can dump Jim Rogers vision. Everyone has to make their own macro call on that.

Gold is only a monetary dysfunction story.

Holding silver bullion across the next five to ten years (and this is a global thesis, not just an American one) is a conservative investment within any commodity bull market, because it is a hybrid of both commodity and monetary assets, which are converging upon each other like a set of pincers. Gold does not have this edge. I will be looking carefully at scaling a significant chunk of this position out into a managed account with this adviser next February, but I am completely fluid on that part. I will take my time making a decision about that in the next few months.

If the dollar keeps going up past 80 the "gold as anti-dollar" trend would eventually break, and gold / silver would begin to drift upwards further alongside an apparently rising USD. The dollar rise (if it even occurs, I am only relating what I've read) would of course have to be an 'optical illusion", brought about by the illusion of foreign currency strength vs. the USD having dissipated. As the global vendor-financing of the US shrivels and foreign markets struggle through transitions away from US as prime consumer, all currencies weaken. As you noted yourself, that point would kick off the "race to the bottom" among all currencies, with the dollar looking stronger all through that portion of the decline. Those selling gold and silver into apparent dollar strength will have gotten fooled. But first we have to have this meat-grinder for the inflation hedges.

Some people would be in a quivering, jellified state of fear of a net 40% drawdown of their entire net worth. I'm quite distressed by the short term event in price, but I'm still sitting here with a solid core of comfort in the pit of my stomach, anticipating a changed life within probably at very latest 8 years (I'm patient). I would not have nearly this solid a feeling were I in paper silver and paper gold, or worse, in gold or silver stocks. Glad I understood that much and configured myself to withstand a bombshell. I've got the "anti-shrapnel sandbags" piled high up around my position.

This is my position. I like to stand in one place for a good while and let the big trend hand me my profits without chasing them. If I am wrong, my worst penalty will be to wait for eight to ten, rather than four years beyond now, for the same payoff. Just because I stare at the gruesome bottom in the PM's in fascination, should not lead you to infer that those doing so are acting stupidly. Right now, the nervous nellies are looking smart. Across a full decade, the nervous nellies will have lost the race.

Luke you could be correct in your reasoning above, and for your sake I hope you are.

You detract from the rationalization of your stance by impugning those (your label: "nervous nellies") who might have had the lack of dogmatism, positioning, foresight, anticipation, cojones to trade out of what could be the first stage of the drowndraft in PM's that might have temporarily stopped Friday. From 7/15/08 highs, I believe GLD lost 19.3%, SLV lost 32.9% and spot gold lost 20%, and spot silver lost 33.9% (the last two figures from stockcharts.com highs on 7/15 to close on 8/15).

I doubt anyone here traded out of those positions at the highs, but if they did or traded out even close to those highs, then a more appropriate label would be "geniuses" as opposed to anything approaching your sour grapes assignment of "nervous nellies." Even if they are not in the genius category, I think you should have a bit more charitable opinion of them. If they were "dumb" (meaning "smart") enough to trade out of the positions, it might be possible that they will be truly smart enough to buy back at some point, way lower than where the market closed today. Then if you prove correct in your assessments of whatever your pundits predict, those "nervous nellies" will probably rack up more gains than you did because of your dogmatism, lack of positioning, lack of foresight, lack of anticipation, or having NO cojones.

phirang
08-18-08, 05:56 PM
This discussion is completely useless without an FX considerations... then again, I find technical analysis as hateful as the Fourier Transform beautiful.

Jim Nickerson
08-18-08, 06:10 PM
This discussion is completely useless without an FX considerations... then again, I find technical analysis as hateful as the Fourier Transform beautiful.

phirang-spook,

For some reason I am in a particularly foul mood today, but I also find I have time to rattle your cage, despite my notion that doing so will prove useless.

I am not very smart, and a lot of your posts seem to suggest that you know a lot about something, though exactly what, I am yet to discern.

Were it to be correct that you do actually have some insights that most of us here probably do not have, if you see any personal gain from expending the time and typing energy to go into them a bit deeper, then you might someday evolve as a worthwhile contributor here.

If the discussion here is completely useless without foreign exchange (I assume FX means "foreign exchange") considerations, why don't you be so kind as to expand on that for me and perhaps a few others.

If this is beneath your dignity, then fine.

phirang
08-18-08, 07:12 PM
phirang-spook,

For some reason I am in a particularly foul mood today, but I also find I have time to rattle your cage, despite my notion that doing so will prove useless.

I am not very smart, and a lot of your posts seem to suggest that you know a lot about something, though exactly what, I am yet to discern.

Were it to be correct that you do actually have some insights that most of us here probably do not have, if you see any personal gain from expending the time and typing energy to go into them a bit deeper, then you might someday evolve as a worthwhile contributor here.

If the discussion here is completely useless without foreign exchange (I assume FX means "foreign exchange") considerations, why don't you be so kind as to expand on that for me and perhaps a few others.

If this is beneath your dignity, then fine.

"Technical analysis" is, in my opinion (and they're like assholes: eveyrone has one), a very poor attempt at imposing naive pattern-recognition on fat-tailed, stochastic dynamic systems. Funds like RenTech, which make 30-40% yoy using quant methods, literally create their own methods, but it doesn't entail "head-and-shoulders"(and definitely not VaR). If people are serious about technical trading, they should visit www.wilmott.com (http://www.wilmott.com) and speak with the quants there.

By FX, I mean foreign-exchange, namely recognizing the macro and micro economic effects on currencies. This entails understanding the difference between the BoJ, PBoC, ECB, BoE, and Fed. If Trichet says, "non!" to an increase in interest rates and the US Fed jawbones static or higher FFR, then one should not be surprised to see USD rally at the expense of the euro. Since central banks share data when it suits them, and since a high euro was strangling EU exports and a weak dollar spooking the US and PPT, then it makes even more sense that the ESF would do what it did knowing full-well what Trichet had in mind.

Any so-called "gold-analyst" who doesn't understand(or, in my case, have a limited yet non-zero understanding) of the relationship between the various central banks, the major drivers of the economies over which they've seignority, and the politics associated amongst and within them, is a hack.

Jim Nickerson
08-18-08, 10:09 PM
"Technical analysis" is, in my opinion (and they're like assholes: eveyrone has one), a very poor attempt at imposing naive pattern-recognition on fat-tailed, stochastic dynamic systems. Funds like RenTech, which make 30-40% yoy using quant methods, literally create their own methods, but it doesn't entail "head-and-shoulders"(and definitely not VaR). If people are serious about technical trading, they should visit www.wilmott.com (http://www.wilmott.com) and speak with the quants there.

By FX, I mean foreign-exchange, namely recognizing the macro and micro economic effects on currencies. This entails understanding the difference between the BoJ, PBoC, ECB, BoE, and Fed. If Trichet says, "non!" to an increase in interest rates and the US Fed jawbones static or higher FFR, then one should not be surprised to see USD rally at the expense of the euro. Since central banks share data when it suits them, and since a high euro was strangling EU exports and a weak dollar spooking the US and PPT, then it makes even more sense that the ESF would do what it did knowing full-well what Trichet had in mind.

Any so-called "gold-analyst" who doesn't understand(or, in my case, have a limited yet non-zero understanding) of the relationship between the various central banks, the major drivers of the economies over which they've seignority, and the politics associated amongst and within them, is a hack.

Thanks, phirang-spook, that at least lets some of know to what you may be alluding.

Jim Nickerson
08-18-08, 10:33 PM
Please don't give your fellow members a hard time because they choose anonymity. We have heads of financial firms and other corporations, and people in relatively high positions in government, here. I'm sure you can understand why many choose to remain anonymous, and we guarantee that members' privacy it will not be violated by iTulip.

Let's see, I am a hedge fund runner, CT. Interests: economics, sailing
Hobbies: music, painting.

Who is this mystery contributor? Impossible to know.

Economist, retired; interests: misdirection; hobbies: swinet. Who am I?
This one is easy. Only Alan Greenspan plays the swinet. What's a swinet? Stretch a rubber band across a hog's ass and blow on it.

I've not ever asked exactly who anybody is? People can improve their credibility by choosing to put a bit about themselves in their bio's. Those who chose not to, are spooks, and readers should tread lightly on spook's making recommendations, which a good many here do.


I wish everyone here had management experience, hiring and, unfortunately, occasionally firing people over time. What one learns, usually the hard way, is that when you are trying to learn who someone is and how they are going to behave, what they say is of little importance, and a resume is of little more use than an indication of areas of competence. That's to help you not hire a sales person with no sales experience, or if you do – and I have, with great success (they didn't know they were sales people, but I did) – you're doing it on purpose. A record of competence is no guarantee that they will be competent in the future, however, because while they may now have the skill from experience they may for various reasons have lost the motivation to apply it.

The truth of the matter is that we learn about each other here just as in the real world, by observing behavior over time. That's who the "real" Jim and phirang and everyone else here is at iTulip.

The real Jim is a pain in the ass. Whoever the real phirang-spook is, is yet to be determined based on his choice for brevity and initalisms, the use of which is presumptious in a crowd of mostly lay investors. I'm not intent on beating on phirang-spook, I would just like to be able to get the most out of what anyone knows, and unfortunately I think that may require more than a line of comment. If you wish to reject my contention on that consider how long EJ's contributions are, not to even mention Lukester's.


While I'm here, taking a quick break from the book writing, I've received a few PMs and emails regarding my call of $780 for gold's bottoming in the recent price crash. The questions can be summed up as, "How'd you do it?"

No one is going to like the answer, probably Jim least of all. No, no wave counting or other charting magic – common knowledge here I don't believe in it. The answer is, and I'm being brutally honest here, I just know.

Eric, that answer doesn't bother me in the least. Anyone putting up such an answer results in it having no meaning to me. No meaning>> no way to even consider my using it for an actionable trade. I hope it is correct.

Thanks.

metalman
08-18-08, 10:52 PM
Let's see, I am a hedge fund runner, CT. Interests: economics, sailing
Hobbies: music, painting.

Who is this mystery contributor? Impossible to know.

Economist, retired; interests: misdirection; hobbies: swinet. Who am I?
This one is easy. Only Alan Greenspan plays the swinet. What's a swinet? Stretch a rubber band across a hogs ass and blow on it.

I've not ever asked exactly who anybody is? People can improve their credibility by choosing to put a bit about themselves in their bio's. Those who chose not to, are spooks, and readers should tread lightly on spook's making recommendations, which a good many here do.

[quote]I wish everyone here had management experience, hiring and, unfortunately, occasionally firing people over time. What one learns, usually the hard way, is that when you are trying to learn who someone is and how they are going to behave, what they say is of little importance, and a resume is of little more use than an indication of areas of competence. That's to help you not hire a sales person with no sales experience, or if you do – and I have, with great success (they didn't know they were sales people, but I did) – you're doing it on purpose. A record of competence is no guarantee that they will be competent in the future, however, because while they may now have the skill from experience they may for various reasons have lost the motivation to apply it.

The truth of the matter is that we learn about each other here just as in the real world, by observing behavior over time. That's who the "real" Jim and phirang and everyone else here is at iTulip.[/quote}

The real Jim is a pain in the ass. Whoever the real phirang-spook is, is yet to be determined based on his choice for brevity and initalisms, the use of which is presumptious in a crowd of mostly lay investors. I'm not intent on beating on phirang-spook, I would just like to be able to get the most out of what anyone knows, and unfortunately I think that may require more than a line of comment. If you wish to reject my contention on that consider how long EJ's contributions are, not to even mention Lukester.

Eric, that answer doesn't bother me in the least. Anyone putting up such an answer results in it having no meaning to me. No meaning>> no way to even consider my using it for an actionable trade. I hope it is correct.

Thanks.

are you supposed to be more worth reading on the subjects of economics and finance because we know your name and that you're a dentist?

i'd rather hear what phirang has to say because at least he's a pro, as anyone can tell by reading what he says, never mind his bio and who cares if that isn't his real name.

but it's worse than that. thing is, jim, folks will get put off by you calling members 'spooks' and making fun of members' bios... but they won't complain they'll just leave and go to a more civilized forum where the cranky old men don't rule the roost.

wish fred would come back and enforce the old mutual respect rules. calling people spooks and discrediting them because they don't want to/can't say who they are is disrespectful, of you ask me.

phirang
08-18-08, 10:58 PM
Let's see, I am a hedge fund runner, CT. Interests: economics, sailing
Hobbies: music, painting.

Who is this mystery contributor? Impossible to know.

Economist, retired; interests: misdirection; hobbies: swinet. Who am I?
This one is easy. Only Alan Greenspan plays the swinet. What's a swinet? Stretch a rubber band across a hog's ass and blow on it.

I've not ever asked exactly who anybody is? People can improve their credibility by choosing to put a bit about themselves in their bio's. Those who chose not to, are spooks, and readers should tread lightly on spook's making recommendations, which a good many here do.



The real Jim is a pain in the ass. Whoever the real phirang-spook is, is yet to be determined based on his choice for brevity and initalisms, the use of which is presumptious in a crowd of mostly lay investors. I'm not intent on beating on phirang-spook, I would just like to be able to get the most out of what anyone knows, and unfortunately I think that may require more than a line of comment. If you wish to reject my contention on that consider how long EJ's contributions are, not to even mention Lukester's.



Eric, that answer doesn't bother me in the least. Anyone putting up such an answer results in it having no meaning to me. No meaning>> no way to even consider my using it for an actionable trade. I hope it is correct.

Thanks.

google is your friend.

metalman
08-18-08, 11:08 PM
google is your friend.

he doesn't know how to use google. he's still trying to figure out the dewey decimal system.

Jim Nickerson
08-18-08, 11:42 PM
are you supposed to be more worth reading on the subjects of economics and finance because we know your name and that you're a dentist?

Absolutely not, that I was a dentist and claim no economic, banking, or finance background, any reader who chooses to check out who I might be should see that anything I think should only be taken with reference to any arguments or supporting links I might choose to attempt to make a point. I never have attempted to post anything in which I insinuated that I had some professional background in investing or in any of the many areas of economics, banking, finance, whatever.


i'd rather hear what phirang has to say because at least he's a pro, as anyone can tell by reading what he says, never mind his bio and who cares if that isn't his real name.

Just how in the fuck do you know phirang-spook is a pro in anything? Did I miss his resume somewhere? Point me to it, and I would read it with interest. I don't assume anyone is a professional by virtue of what they may write. If Finster was honest, he posted some of the most lucid insights ever put up here, and he was not a professional. Neither is bart, but their posts reflect a lot of study, insight, experience, same for jk, and same for GRG55 who as least has identified his area of life experience.


but it's worse than that. thing is, jim, folks will get put off by you calling members 'spooks' and making fun of members' bios... but they won't complain they'll just leave and go to a more civilized forum where the cranky old men don't rule the roost.

Tell me a better designation for anyone, including you, who writes strong opinions or seemingly knowledgeable opinions when there is no way any reader who visits here can gather just who is the fuck you or anyone else might be. Are they supposed to go back and try to read every post metalman ever put up in order to arrive at whether anything he posts is worth reading. Easiest way is to ask: who is this dude? and click their screen-name and see what their bio might reveal. When it reveals nothing, the questioning reader is left wondering: who is this dude?

metalman, point me to any instance where I have ever made "fun" of any poster's bio. I don't think it has ever happened.


wish fred would come back and enforce the old mutual respect rules. calling people spooks and discrediting them because they don't want to/can't say who they are is disrespectful, of you ask me.

I don't think I have attempted to discredit anyone who I think is a spook. "Spooks" in my opinion would increase the possibilities of their being credible if they chose to qualify themselves in whatever manner they chose. Putting nothing in one's bio is a choice, but it does nothing for qualification.

If everyone here is happy with not giving a shit from what background people put up their opinions, then great, it is I who is out in left-field or is that right-field?

I try not to waste my time posting or the time of those who might read something I post, but for me it seems appropriate to try to present the reasons behind what I think or conclude from the topic at hand. I've learned a lot here, and it was not from poorly written one-liners with a lot of text messaging initialisms and cryptic propositions from people who never went to the trouble to argue their positions.

This horse is dead as far as I am concerned.

Jim Nickerson
08-18-08, 11:56 PM
google is your friend.

To me, a useless one liner.

Jim Nickerson
08-18-08, 11:57 PM
he doesn't know how to use google. he's still trying to figure out the dewey decimal system.

To me, another useless one-liner, just as is this post of mine.

jimmygu3
08-19-08, 12:16 AM
he doesn't know how to use google. he's still trying to figure out the dewey decimal system.

You gotta love Jim's handle. No screwing around with acronyms or cryptic monikers... 'my damn name is Jim Nickerson!' I love it.

Jim, I feel like you're the kind of guy who likes to look a man square in the eye, and all this anonymous internet stuff just isn't your style. I can respect that. But I also respect anyone's desire to remain anonymous for reasons including those EJ outlined, as well as general privacy.

I feel like there are a lot more people here playing down their credentials than there are bullshitters purporting to be big shots. Me? I bring nothing to the table here other than $95 a year and enough of a brain to keep up with the lot of you most of the time. No 'actionable trade info' here.

:D (I hate these frickin' things but for some reason I have started using them)

Jimmy

ronin
08-19-08, 12:28 AM
...While I'm here, taking a quick break from the book writing, I've received a few PMs and emails regarding my call of $780 for gold's bottoming in the recent price crash. The questions can be summed up as, "How'd you do it?"
...
There are a lot more inputs to determining tops and bottoms in prices in the gold market, and the top of the housing and tech bubbles, but the process for me is more or less the same. I read an enormous amount of material, talk to a lot of industry people, load it all in, push the data around for along time by writing and creating spreadsheets and charts, and eventually my brain, as best as I can describe the process, organizes it, finding the signal in the noise. It is not infallible but I usually know when I know, and know when I don't know.

I've always done this. My best guess as to how I came by this odd skill is that as the third and last child of three born to parents who'd gotten mighty bored with kids after the first one, I was left to figure just about everything out for myself. The bad news is that it's hard for me to learn things the way that everyone else does, by instruction, so school was tough for me, except for writing.
..."

Thanks for providing some insight into the process you use. I appreciate knowing. I'm glad you have the skills; sorry to hear how they were developed.

I also appreciate Itulip. I only wish I had known about it in 2001. Keep up the good work.
Cheers.

metalman
08-19-08, 12:45 AM
Absolutely not, that I was a dentist and claim no economic, banking, or finance background, any reader who chooses to check out who I might be should see that anything I think should only be taken with reference to any arguments or supporting links I might choose to attempt to make a point. I never have attempted to post anything in which I insinuated that I had some professional background in investing or in any of the many areas of economics, banking, finance, whatever.

also, don't need to keep reminding us that you are not smart.


Just how in the fuck do you know phirang-spook is a pro in anything? Did I miss his resume somewhere? Point me to it, and I would read it with interest. I don't assume anyone is a professional by virtue of what they may write. If Finster was honest, he posted some of the most lucid insights ever put up here, and he was not a professional. Neither is bart, but their posts reflect a lot of study, insight, experience, same for jk, and same for GRG55 who as least has identified his area of life experience.

you totally missed ej's point. a resume don't tell you shit. what members write over 100+ posts does. that's why you respect finster and grg and bart.


Tell me a better designation for anyone, including you, who writes strong opinions or seemingly knowledgeable opinions when there is no way any reader who visits here can gather just who is the fuck you or anyone else might be. Are they supposed to go back and try to read every post metalman ever put up in order to arrive at whether anything he posts is worth reading. Easiest way is to ask: who is this dude? and click their screen-name and see what their bio might reveal. When it reveals nothing, the questioning reader is left wondering: who is this dude?

so what? if i told you i was paul ******* volcker would you believe me? would it matter? name all the members here with credentials and name out in the open... only one i know of.


metalman, point me to any instance where I have ever made "fun" of any poster's bio. I don't think it has ever happened.

not everyone has thick skin like you do. it's a mistake to assume so. i'm sure i'm not the first person in your life you've heard say that.


I don't think I have attempted to discredit anyone who I think is a spook. "Spooks" in my opinion would increase the possibilities of their being credible if they chose to qualify themselves in whatever manner they chose. Putting nothing in one's bio is a choice, but it does nothing for qualification.


Economist, retired; interests: misdirection; hobbies: swinet. Who am I?
This one is easy. Only Alan Greenspan plays the swinet. What's a swinet? Stretch a rubber band across a hog's ass and blow on it.

dunno, that sounds kinda contemptuous, don't it? in any case 'spook' is a shit poor choice of terms. guests can take it the wrong way.


If everyone here is happy with not giving a shit from what background people put up their opinions, then great, it is I who is out in left-field or is that right-field?

you are the only person complaining, here or on any forum i've ever been on.


I try not to waste my time posting or the time of those who might read something I post, but for me it seems appropriate to try to present the reasons behind what I think or conclude from the topic at hand. I've learned a lot here, and it was not from poorly written one-liners with a lot of text messaging initialisms and cryptic propositions from people who never went to the trouble to argue their positions.

This horse is dead as far as I am concerned.

and ej, if you're reading this, if you want jim to 'get it' attribute your stuff to richard russell or someone else jim's age.

Jim Nickerson
08-19-08, 12:47 AM
You gotta love Jim's handle. No screwing around with acronyms or cryptic monikers... 'my damn name is Jim Nickerson!' I love it.

Jim, I feel like you're the kind of guy who likes to look a man square in the eye, and all this anonymous internet stuff just isn't your style. I can respect that. But I also respect anyone's desire to remain anonymous for reasons including those EJ outlined, as well as general privacy.

I feel like there are a lot more people here playing down their credentials than there are bullshitters purporting to be big shots. Me? I bring nothing to the table here other than $95 a year and enough of a brain to keep up with the lot of you most of the time. No 'actionable trade info' here.

:D (I hate these frickin' things but for some reason I have started using them)

Jimmy

I know who you are, Jimmy, and you have gone to the trouble to make some worthwhile observations, contributions and raise meaningful questions.

How about writing the screen-names of some who you think "are playing down their credentials"? I try not to make more out of a comment than can be interpreted from the words written, i.e. that is to make baseless presumptions about what might be a background of the writer. I tend just to mostly blow off the comment.

If anyone asked me about how screwed up is medicine, I would surely write however screwed up it is, it would be pure pandemonium if the contributions to the medical literature were done under anonymity or presentations at scientific meeting given by masked researchers. You are correct, my "style" has never involved anonymity.

Andreuccio
08-19-08, 01:22 AM
To me, a useless one liner.

Here you go, Jim. Full bio. I assume this is the same Phirang:

http://boombustblog.com/index.php?option=com_uhp2&task=viewpage&user_id=62&pageid=2

He's "an entrepreneur who exists just outside of mainstream corporate America and Wall Street."




Or, alternately, he's a European, or a disease (Sometimes Google is not your friend. :D):


After Madhav Nidan, the next in line of famous Āyurvedic books Bhav Prakash was written during the time that the Portuguese (http://www.nationmaster.com/country/po) first came to India in 1498 (http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/1498) by a man named Bhav Mishra of Madras (http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Madras) (now known as Chennai). The period in which he wrote can be pinpointed so accurately because in the Bhav Prakash, he described the symptoms of a disease called "Phirang" which was introduced to the subcontinent through contact with the Europeans. ("Phirangi" was the word used to describe Europeans in India.)

BTW, reading this got me thinking that the Indian word for Europeans, Phirangi, sounded a lot like "Ferengi" from Star Trek. Sure enough, according to Wikipedia, (which, by the way, is definitely not your friend, even though it purports to be),


Etymology

"Ferengi" and similar terms are Arabic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_language) names for European (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe) traders, or for Westerners in general. Both the Arabic word and the name are similarly pronounced [fɛˈrɪŋɡi] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA). The name is likely derived from the Arabic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_language) word faranj or ifranj, "Franks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks)", or possibly the Persian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_language) word farangi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farangi), meaning "foreigner". In Ethiopia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopia), ferenj or ferenji has the same meaning. The Greeks sometimes use fra[n]gkoi (φράγκοι) as a mild slur against western Europeans. The term was used as a partially derogatory term in India to denote the British (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom); however, the word is often used in an affectionate way. The Star Trek usage is derived from the above.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-0">[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferengi#cite_note-0)</sup><sup class="noprint Inline-Template">[unreliable source? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:RS)]</sup>
"Grand Nagus" is the appellation of the Ferengi head of state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_of_state). The similarly pronounced "Negus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negus)", a loanword from Ethiopic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopic) languages, was up until a few decades ago the appellation of the Ethiopian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopia) head of state for several centuries / millennia. It comes from the Afro-Asiatic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afro-Asiatic) (Semitic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic)) root verb for reign, "N-G-Ś".
Learn something new every day.

Jim Nickerson
08-19-08, 01:43 AM
Lukester's undisclosed advisor's call: Gold 650, silver 9.80 based on ??

Bensimon's July call. Gold 732 in April or May 2009 based on Elliot wave and Fibonacci numbers.

akrowne's assessment. $780 marginal cost of production of gold

babbittd: Robin Griffiths 750 based on ??

EJ.'s call: He just knows--780

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$GOLD&p=D&yr=0&mn=8&dy=0&id=p78431873969&a=129594324

Here's stockcharts.com continuous contract prices with low yesterday of 777.70.

If EJ, akrowne, or Griffiths are near correct, most of the pain is passed.

If Bensimom is correct there is still 5.9% to the downside from yesterday's low.

If the undisclosed advisor were to be correct, there is still 16.4% to the downside from yesterday's low for gold.

krakknisse
08-19-08, 03:04 AM
Everyone: when EJ appears out of the heavens and outstretches his hand palm downward to calm troubled waters isn't that a hint to take things to a lower level of tension? Y'all may like a fist fight. I don't think so many others like them. Can I please respectfully remind you that ad hominem arguments are often not helpful? If you do, why don't you do it in the classical British manner: understatement of the bleeding obvious. And Internet privacy is something everyone should take seriously. Think netiquette.

The opportunity cost of following ITulip and other sites is probably quite significant to most ITulipers. For that opportunity cost, we should expect some financial gain. But don't forget to have fun.

Remember: being here means we're all winners. It is just to a different degree. Some have 5% PMs, and are trading geniuses with the other 95%. Some have 65% PMs and balls of steel. Relatively speaking, we're preserving purchasing power in some very strong head winds.

So, just to liven up the spirit - hope this will cheer you up. I discovered a well-kept secret of the PMs! You'll develop balls of steel from the volatility. But what's the alternative? The old trouble and strife will eye your more accessible portfolio and grind you down with demands for keeping up with the Joneses. I call it the no balls alternative.

So for me - rather balls of steel and the gnashing of teeth from the old trouble and strife, than no balls and keeping up with the Joneses.

Slimprofits
08-19-08, 03:28 AM
Lukester's spookster's call: Gold 650, silver 9.80 based on ??

Bensimon's July call. Gold 732 in April or May 2009 based on Elliot wave and Fibonacci numbers.

akrowne's assessment. $780 marginal cost of production of gold

babbittd: Robin Griffiths 750 based on ??

EJ.'s call: He just knows--780

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$GOLD&p=D&yr=0&mn=8&dy=0&id=p78431873969&a=129594324

Here's stockcharts.com continuous contract prices with low yesterday of 777.70.

If EJ, akrowne, or Griffiths are near correct, most of the pain is passed.

If Bensimom is correct there is still 5.9% to the downside from yesterday's low.

If the Spookster were to be correct, there is still 16.4% to the downside from yesterday's low for gold.

Jim, do not be mistaken, if there was an Itulip convention, you'd all probably think I was crashing it. Most of the time, I'm just hoping to add some valid data/information to the discussions.

Spartacus
08-19-08, 08:06 AM
not hindi, "muslim". I can't ever recall hearing (ph/f)irang from indians or pakistanis (hindi, punjabi or urdu) but hear it often among Iranians - some pronounce it "furengay".

I can't tell if this web page mean farsi or arabic or what when they write "muslim".

http://www.dailymuslims.com/Education/Madrasah/Madrasah-Western_Educated_Ulemas.html


Here you go, Jim. Full bio. I assume this is the same Phirang:

http://boombustblog.com/index.php?option=com_uhp2&task=viewpage&user_id=62&pageid=2

He's "an entrepreneur who exists just outside of mainstream corporate America and Wall Street."




Or, alternately, he's a European, or a disease (Sometimes Google is not your friend. :D):



BTW, reading this got me thinking that the Indian word for Europeans, Phirangi, sounded a lot like "Ferengi" from Star Trek. Sure enough, according to Wikipedia, (which, by the way, is definitely not your friend, even though it purports to be),

Learn something new every day.

magicvent
08-19-08, 08:43 AM
Are you saying that gold will not fall below 780 in the next year?

Hugh Hendry of Eclectica hedge fund indicating gold to $600
http://www.cnbc.com/id/26282751

Hussman also calling for a decline in commodities

Andreuccio
08-19-08, 10:39 AM
not hindi, "muslim". I can't ever recall hearing (ph/f)irang from indians or pakistanis (hindi, punjabi or urdu) but hear it often among Iranians - some pronounce it "furengay".

I can't tell if this web page mean farsi or arabic or what when they write "muslim".

http://www.dailymuslims.com/Education/Madrasah/Madrasah-Western_Educated_Ulemas.html


I think I got "Indian" from here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firang


Firang or farang (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farang) or farangi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farangi) is a term, linked to the Franks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks_%28disambiguation%29), used in the Indian subcontinent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_subcontinent) and Southeast Asia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeast_Asia) to refer to any Westerner, especially people of western European descent. It was originally used to refer to foreigners, and is thought to have been used later as a pejorative term for British (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom) officers and gentry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentry) in India (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India). Today it is used commonly to refer to any Westerner in casual conversations, akin to 'gaijin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaijin)' in Japanese (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_language).

Did I mention Wikipedia is not your, or my, friend?

Spartacus
08-19-08, 10:46 AM
I think I got "Indian" from here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firang



Did I mention Wikipedia is not your, or my, friend?

true ... And since I'm no scholar of Indian languages and haven't referenced original source documents, my contribution is completely anecdotal.

Jim Nickerson
08-19-08, 11:53 AM
Jim, do not be mistaken, if there was an Itulip convention, you'd all probably think I was crashing it. Most of the time, I'm just hoping to add some valid data/information to the discussions.

babbittd, it seems you think I wrote something exclusionary to your contribution? I don't think so, but if I did it was not intended to be negative.

Actually, it is rather interesting to be collecting these various and sundry speculations as to how low PM's might go.

I would put forth one myself, but I don't have the faintest idea where it will end, or if it has ended.

Anyone else running across various pundit's projections should put them in this thread.

Jim Nickerson
08-19-08, 12:00 PM
Are you saying that gold will not fall below 780 in the next year?

Hugh Hendry of Eclectica hedge fund indicating gold to $600
http://www.cnbc.com/id/26282751

Hussman also calling for a decline in commodities



The slip in gold, which was joined by fellow precious metals platinum, silver and palladium, dragged it well below its all-time high of just over $1000 an ounce in March.

But that was predicatble, Hendry said.

Bull markets "of this variety, with the potential to trade higher, paradoxically can have these savage, and quite prolonged, bear market components, and I fear that is where we are headed," he said.

The "current markets could take gold as low as $600 or $550 per ounce," he added.

"I have greater comfort being in 10-year bonds than gold for the first time in ages," Hendry


Hendry also thinks the banking sector is insolvent, can't tell how low those stocks will go, and that FRE and FNM are likely to be put under the control of the Treasury "in a matter of months."

touchring
08-19-08, 12:16 PM
Got another batch of SKFs at 113 and 120, when Cramer was shouting, "The bear has ended! Say hello to the bull!". :eek:

phirang
08-19-08, 12:18 PM
Hendry also thinks the banking sector is insolvent, can't tell how low those stocks will go, and that FRE and FNM are likely to be put under the control of the Treasury "in a matter of months."


I see where Hugh is coming from: upon nationalizing mbs', the risk for default amongst american banks goes to zero as bad loans become zombie loans (ahem japan ahem ahem). With US taxpayer backstopping MBS' and essentially the nations banks, credit is preserved without lowering interest rates and you can now lend again: hooray, the dollar is saved.

There's ONE big problem with his hypothesis: he totally neglects how US creditors will react to this. He assumes, and this is dangerous, that foreign cb's and swf's will remain tractable, i.e. famous line, "deficits don't matter".

The US Empire is literally at stake: without the ability to export inflation, we cant finance it.

Slimprofits
08-19-08, 12:21 PM
babbittd, it seems you think I wrote something exclusionary to your contribution? I don't think so, but if I did it was not intended to be negative.

Nope, just wanted to be clear with where my contribution is coming from.

jk
08-19-08, 12:46 PM
I see where Hugh is coming from: upon nationalizing mbs', the risk for default amongst american banks goes to zero as bad loans become zombie loans (ahem japan ahem ahem). With US taxpayer backstopping MBS' and essentially the nations banks, credit is preserved without lowering interest rates and you can now lend again: hooray, the dollar is saved.

There's ONE big problem with his hypothesis: he totally neglects how US creditors will react to this. He assumes, and this is dangerous, that foreign cb's and swf's will remain tractable, i.e. famous line, "deficits don't matter".

The US Empire is literally at stake: without the ability to export inflation, we cant finance it.
it's an odd fact that spreads on gse bonds have widened since their guarantee became explicit, compared with what they were when the federal guarantee was merely implicit. it looks like a [market driven implicit] downgrade of the u.s. treasury itself.

phirang
08-19-08, 01:33 PM
it's an odd fact that spreads on gse bonds have widened since their guarantee became explicit, compared with what they were when the federal guarantee was merely implicit. it looks like a [market driven implicit] downgrade of the u.s. treasury itself.

maybe the market is being cautious, assuming that all seniority of creditors could get wiped out, since the US will have to raise a lot of debt to bailout the mortgages themselves, leaving nothing even for most seniro debt holders.

BiscayneSunrise
08-19-08, 03:20 PM
Agree with Eric. I think we just passed the bottom on gold. Like EJ, can't say exactly why other than it just feels like time.

Other factors are the recent bear market rally is now faltering and we just passed the 4 month mark since gold peaked which is about how long the 2006 correction lasted.

EJ
08-19-08, 03:39 PM
Agree with Eric. I think we just passed the bottom on gold. Like EJ, can't say exactly why other than it just feels like time.

Other factors are the recent bear market rally is now faltering and we just passed the 4 month mark since gold peaked which is about how long the 2006 correction lasted.

That's not exactly what I said. After being around gold since 1973 when I was 16 years old, spending 1000s of hours over 30 years researching and writing about it and doing careful analysis, buying and selling it, and coming up with the theory of the Dollar Ratchet (http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=43523#post43523) to explain the current pricing environment, and talking to dozens of hedge fund managers and gold experts and hard assets fund managers over many years, I have a way of figuring out the price that appears to work, at least for now. If I were to add up all the long term costs of developing this pricing system, it'd surely run into the millions of dollars.

Contemptuous
08-19-08, 08:52 PM
EJ - I'm sincerely hoping and wishing your call here is correct. But I think it can go a fair bit lower. I've read more than one call for this. I say on Thursday / Friday in the afternoon sessions this gets ugly all over again. Hope to Betsy I am flat wrong. May I inquire also, what your best guess is as to when the dollar's apparent breakout will top out? Before 80 on the USD index, or can it go up as far as 85? I know, this sort of intel is for premium members only - but throw a bone here to the public on this juncture maybe? I think it's going to cruise right up past 80. Hope I'm wrong! Anyway, I'm going to fold up my tent as a public member and "sign up" with the lime green card-carrying cohorts this week! (groans of disapproval, from numerous members here, at the prospect of the noisy and interminably lengthy posting Lukester moving over to clog up the premium pages with redundant comments). Can't do without the iTulip guidance in the next few years! Meanwhile I can only commend the overwhelmingly super-accurate calls on your part EJ. This one ain't gonna work out though, I'm guessing!

Jim Nickerson
08-19-08, 08:57 PM
EJ - I'm sincerely hoping and wishing your call here is correct. But I think it can go a fair bit lower. I've read more than one call for this. I say on Thursday / Friday in the afternoon sessions this gets ugly all over again. Hope to Betsy I am flat wrong. May I inquire also, what your best guess is as to when the dollar's apparent breakout will top out? Before 80 on the USD index, or can it go up as far as 85? I know, this sort of intel is for premium members only - but throw a bone here to the public on this juncture maybe? I think it's going to cruise right up past 80. Hope I'm wrong! Anyway, I'm going to fold up my tent as a public member and "sign up" with the lime green card-carrying cohorts this week! (groans of disapproval, from numerous members here, at the prospect of the noisy and interminably lengthy posting Lukester moving over to clog up the premium pages with redundant comments). Can't do without the iTulip guidance in the next few years! Meanwhile I can only commend the overwhelmingly super-accurate calls on your part EJ. This one ain't gonna work out though, I'm guessing!


AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH !!!

Apologies for this useless one liner.

Contemptuous
08-19-08, 09:18 PM
I knew it would get a laugh out of you. Oh well, it was nice having the run of the premium pages without me for so long Jim. All good things must come to an end, eh? :D

metalman
08-19-08, 09:25 PM
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH !!!

Apologies for this useless one liner.

ah, c'mon, jim. it'll be fun having luke in the back room behind the main room of the itulip bar and grill. too stuffy in there anyway... we can use the levity.

Jim Nickerson
08-19-08, 09:37 PM
ah, c'mon, jim. it'll be fun having luke in the back room behind the main room of the itulip bar and grill. too stuffy in there anyway... we can use the levity.

I can tolerate his levity and look forward to it, it is the unending creative writing with unending use of metaphors that wear me out. I think Lukester is a genius, or near that, while at the same time he has no respect for other people's times.

So far from having omitted reading much of what he has posted in recent times, I am doing well with making money, so I don't guess I have missed anything important.

vcif
08-19-08, 09:48 PM
Does anyone have any comments about short positions in gold relative to the price? This gets mentioned a lot by the GATA folks, but I haven't seen anyone here mention it.

EJ's call is consistent with the fact that Goldman Sachs' net short position is currently at an "all-time low".

Contemptuous
08-19-08, 09:58 PM
What about the USD? Does it bust out past 80? I say yes, it does.

GRG55
08-19-08, 10:04 PM
What about the USD? Does it bust out past 80? I say yes, it does.

Doesn't that depend on how long before the next credit "event" hits critical mass?

Jim Nickerson
08-19-08, 10:10 PM
What about the USD? Does it bust out past 80? I say yes, it does.


Here's a 10-year chart on US$.
http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$USD&p=D&yr=10&mn=0&dy=0&id=p02081301731&a=132940973

The move up from the 70.70 low, most of which has been off the secondary low of 71.31 in mid-July, has been powerful, and because 80 is almost within spitting distance, I expect the odds favor it reaching 80.

The move has been mostly uncorrected, so it may take some time before it continues up. Even 78 would take it above the highs back to December 2006.
Below is a one-year chart.

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$USD&p=D&yr=1&mn=0&dy=0&id=p53932701676&a=132940973

metalman
08-19-08, 10:19 PM
Here's a 10-year chart on US$.
http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$USD&p=D&yr=10&mn=0&dy=0&id=p02081301731&a=132940973

The move up from the 70.70 low, most of which has been off the secondary low of 71.31 in mid-July, has been powerful, and because 80 is almost within spitting distance, I expect the odds favor it reaching 80.

The move has been mostly uncorrected, so it may take some time before it continues up. Even 78 would take it above the highs back to December 2006.
Below is a one-year chart.

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$USD&p=D&yr=1&mn=0&dy=0&id=p53932701676&a=132940973

100, 90, 80, 70... short term meaningless. long term meaningful.

remember when below 80 meant the world was gonna melt down? didn't, did it? i can show you a dozen threads of guys who claimed it'd never happen. their claims have been forgotten, of course. no one cares. doesn't matter.

Jim Nickerson
08-19-08, 10:33 PM
100, 90, 80, 70... short term meaningless. long term meaningful.

remember when below 80 meant the world was gonna melt down? didn't, did it? i can show you a dozen threads of guys who claimed it'd never happen. their claims have been forgotten, of course. no one cares. doesn't matter.


Things you seem unable to grasp is that most markets move up and down despite whatever may be the overall trend, and that there are more ways to make money than the way you choose to invest. It is possible to trade these up and down moves if one chooses to take the time and risk the money. I, for one, am not going to live forever, and it makes all the sense in the world to me to attempt to define moves and play them. A lot will happen in which money can be made between now and the time the dollar becomes totally valueless in these up and down moves.

metalman
08-19-08, 10:46 PM
Things you seem unable to grasp is that most markets move up and down despite whatever may be the overall trend, and that there are more ways to make money that the way you choose to invest. It is possible to trade these up and down moves if one chooses to take the time and risk the money. I, for one, am not going to live forever, and it makes all the sense in the world to me to attempt to define moves and play them. A lot will happen in which money can be made between now and the time the dollar becomes totally valueless in these up and down moves.

you're a funny guy. you obsess over these up and down moves even though the pros all say pick a bet and stick with it... soros, rogers, buffett... anyone who has ever made real money. famous traders like jesse livermore got rich, poor, rich, poor. trick is if you are a trader is not run out of gas when you're poor.

if you're going to trade, figure there is another guy on the other side trying to take your money. ask yourself, are you smarter?

i know i'm not. so i pick a macro trend and ride it. that's why i'm here.

jesse's full of wisdom...


The market does not beat them. They beat themselves, because though they have brains they cannot sit tight.

The average man doesn’t wish to be told that it is a bull or a bear market. What he desires is to be told specifically which particular stock to buy or sell. He wants to get something for nothing. He does not wish to work. He doesn’t even wish to have to think.

I never hesitate to tell a man that I am bullish or bearish. But I do not tell people to buy or sell any particular stock. In a bear market all stocks go down and in a bull market they go up.

Contemptuous
08-19-08, 10:58 PM
Anybody else got a call on whether the USD busts out over 80 here? Or you all figure it's a slam-dunk that it's going to "behave" and resume it's downtrend like a good walking-dead dollar is supposed to do?

Jim Nickerson
08-19-08, 11:15 PM
you're a funny guy. you obsess over these up and down moves even though the pros all say pick a bet and stick with it... soros, rogers, buffett... anyone who has ever made real money. famous traders like jesse livermore got rich, poor, rich, poor. trick is if you are a trader is not run out of gas when you're poor.

if you're going to trade, figure there is another guy on the other side trying to take your money. ask yourself, are you smarter?

i know i'm not. so i pick a macro trend and ride it. that's why i'm here.

jesse's full of wisdom...



As I said this issue of trading is apparently way beyond your abilities to grasp. My aim is to make as much money everyday as I can. I certainly don't achieve that, but for the moment I am and have been achieving it and whether it is luck, genius, or idiocy, I could not be doing better by having not traded in and out of metals over the last three years and well as other issues to attempt to capture moves. My drawdown is 0.00%

What is yours?

metalman
08-19-08, 11:27 PM
As I said this issue of trading is apparently way beyond your abilities to grasp. My aim is to make as much money everyday as I can. I certainly don't achieve that, but for the moment I am and have been achieving it and whether it is luck, genius, or idiocy, I could not be doing better by having not traded in and out of metals over the last three years and well as other issues to attempt to capture moves. My drawdown is 0.00%

What is yours?

let's make sure we have our definitions straight here before i answer.

say i started with $100k in 1995... figure proportions. its more than $100k in reality but i'm not into broadcasting my net worth on the net. rode the bubble up and got out in 2000 on itulip's call with $230k march 2000.

didn't do anything but sit in cash until 2001, then bought gold & silver.

haven't done shit since.

never lost a dime, i'd say i'm up 300% at least on the metals on am up 230% on the tech... total up 530% since 1999.

what do you mean by 'drawdown'? what i missed not selling gold at $1000?

Jim Nickerson
08-19-08, 11:28 PM
Anybody else got a call on whether the USD busts out over 80 here? Or you all figure it's a slam-dunk that it's going to "behave" and resume it's downtrend like a good walking-dead dollar is supposed to do?

Luke, despite your placing this thread in the rumor mill, it has turned into a decent thread.

I think most people are sheeple on the dollar and many other things. Waiting to be told what to do. I know I am prone to that myself, but even in old age occasionally I can come up with an independent action.

However the dollar moves, it will not be because of any consensus that might arrive here, if anything any consensus here would probably represent excellent opinion upon which to act contrarily.

metalman
08-19-08, 11:31 PM
Luke, despite your placing this thread in the rumor mill, it has turned into a decent thread.

I think most people are sheeple on the dollar and many other things. Waiting to be told what to do. I know I am prone to that myself, but even in old age occasionally I can come up with an independent action.

However the dollar moves, it will not be because of any consensus that might arrive here, if anything any consensus here would probably represent excellent opinion upon which to act contrarily.

there's a whole thread here on that topic... Too many dollar bears? (http://itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1271)

maybe reread it?


As a contrarian, the near unanimity of expectations of the dollar's decline is emotionally bothersome. However, the significance of the crowd's agreement on the dollar's decline depends on where we are in the cycle.

Back in 1998 when we first started to track the decline of the dollar on iTulip during stock bubble boom times, dollar negativity was uncommon, as you'd expect. The US economy was flying high. The government ran a fiscal surplus, the stock market was high, inflation was low, and so on. The iTulip 2001 gold call was based on the expectation that dollar depreciation was going to be part of the US economy reflation program. Finally, after years of dollar depreciation since then, popular sentiment has turned against the dollar.

The crowd gets on board after a trend is observable, and the crowd extrapolates the trend into the infinite future. The dollar trend they are on board with is the gradual decline. The crowd does not expect a dollar crash. So the question is, will the slow depreciation trend continue, accelerate, or reverse?

Jim Nickerson
08-19-08, 11:37 PM
let's make sure we have our definitions straight here before i answer.

say i started with $100k in 1995... figure proportions. its more than $100k in reality but i'm not into broadcasting my net worth on the net. rode the bubble up and got out in 2000 on itulip's call with $230k march 2000.

didn't do anything but sit in cash until 2001, then bought gold & silver.

haven't done shit since.

never lost a dime, i'd say i'm up 300% at least on the metals on am up 230% on the tech... total up 530% since 1999.

what do you mean by 'drawdown'? what i missed not selling gold at $1000?

Don't feel badly, neither did I know what drawdrawn was before I joined iTulip. Take your highest attained gain and take your present value and subtract the present value from the highest gain. The difference is the loss, e.g. 10-7.5= 2.5 The 2.5 is an approximation I have made for those who held gold and silver to the top and still have not sold. Divided 2.5 by 10 and you have a 25% drawn down. This says where you are now.

Where you are now is what counts because it can be determined. Where you may be in 10 years is useless until you get there and see what you have. Hopefully more than dashed dreams.

metalman
08-19-08, 11:56 PM
Don't feel badly, neither did I know what drawdrawn was before I joined iTulip. Take your highest attained gain and take your present value and subtract the present value from the highest gain. The difference is the loss, e.g. 10-7.5= 2.5 The 2.5 is an approximation I have made for those who held gold and silver to the top and still have not sold. Divided 2.5 by 10 and you have a 25% drawn down. This says where you are now.

Where you are now is what counts because it can be determined. Where you may be in 10 years is useless until you get there and see what you have. Hopefully more than dashed dreams.

wait a minute... doesn't it depend on where you started counting? i seem to recall you're saying you had a big drawdown after the tech bubble busted?

counting unrealized gains and losses as realized gains and losses strikes me as a dubious measure. let's try this.

i'm up 530% since 1999. you?

Jim Nickerson
08-20-08, 12:32 AM
wait a minute... doesn't it depend on where you started counting? i seem to recall you're saying you had a big drawdown after the tech bubble busted?

counting unrealized gains and losses as realized gains and losses strikes me as a dubious measure. let's try this.

i'm up 530% since 1999. you?

Since 1/3/2000 I am down 5.36% in liquid assets, that is no accounting for personal effects, property, etc. That equates to a compounded annual
?gain? of -0.52% or -$86,925.82 before I will have regained the nominal wealth I had on 1/3/00. My drawdown on my maximum ever liquid wealth is -5.36%.

I was hoping you wouldn't pick up on that, and then I was facing the dilemma of bringing it to your attention or not. You can accuse me of dishonesty if you like, but it was a mistake in my thinking because of the way I keep up with all this. Back to 2000 is fairly painful to think about, so I don't spend much if any time lamenting it. I have primarily focused on what has happened from my personal max drawdown that existed on 10/9/02 when I reached my nadir with a drawndown of -67.17%

Anyone can elaborate on "drawdown" as they please, and please do, but I don't think the concept of drawdown is dubious or invalid as a means of comparative measure. Whether it is escapism or not, my spreadsheet column that tracks drawdown is computed from max gains since 10/9/02. I have to do some other stuff when I account it back to 2000, and I only do that periodically.

So the bottom line is my drawdown from my maximal gains in my lifetime in liquid assets is -5.36%. My drawdown since 10/9/02 is zero today.

What is your present drawdown?

I went back and checked by computations. Max drawndown on lifetime high is -4.42% not -5.36%.

2nd edit: don't even get into inflation adjustments. I can't handle it.

jtabeb
08-20-08, 12:38 AM
wait a minute... doesn't it depend on where you started counting? i seem to recall you're saying you had a big drawdown after the tech bubble busted?

counting unrealized gains and losses as realized gains and losses strikes me as a dubious measure. let's try this.

i'm up 530% since 1999. you?

HA! Rimshot!

metalman
08-20-08, 12:53 AM
Since 1/3/2000 I am down 5.35% in liquid assets, that is no accounting for personal effects, property, etc. That equates to a compounded annual
?gain? of -0.52% or -$86,925.82 before I will have regained the nominal wealth I had on 1/3/00. My drawndown on my maximum ever liquid wealth is -5.35%.

I was hoping you wouldn't pick up on that, and then I was facing the dilemma of bringing it to your attention or not. You can accuse me of dishonesty if you like, but it was a mistake in my thinking because of the way I keep up with all this. Back to 2000 is fairly painful to think about, so I don't spend much if any time lamenting it. I have primarily focused on what has happened from my personal max drawdown that existed on 10/9/02 when I reached my nadir with a drawndown of -67.17%

Anyone can elaborate on "drawdown" as they please, and please do, but I don't think the concept of drawndown is dubious or invalid as a means of comparative measure. Whether it is escapism or not, my spreadsheet column that tracks drawndown is computed from max gains since 10/9/02. I have to do some other stuff when I account it back to 2000, and I only do that periodically.

So the bottom line is my drawdown from my maximal gains in my lifetime in liquid assets is -5.36%. My drawndown since 10/9/02 is zero today.

What is your present drawndown?

whatever criticisms i've ever had of you, dishonesty ain't one of them.

again, if by drawdown you mean since 1999 peak value of invested capital versus today, i'm up 530% but could be at 600% if i'd dumped by gold and silver at the latest top. if your definition definition means at any moment the delta between all the gain on all of your investments since a certain date to today plus or minus what it could have been at the peak?

i guess our brains work differently. i go for the roger's philosophy... first don't lose money. second, try to make money. third, try to keep your gains. my sense is that you are very focused on #2 and #3.

i don't lose money. ever. i make money and mostly keep my gains but don't try to keep every penny. i try to identify the big thing going on and my time frames are the length of the event going on... tech bubble, reflation, dollar depreciation. now i'm trying to play the death of the fire economy... alt energy boom or wwiii or whatever the fuck happens when the fire econ blows up and a generation of entitled boomers goes crying to the president and congress for a war to go get 'em some more money. (http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/watch.html)

Jim Nickerson
08-20-08, 01:34 AM
whatever criticisms i've ever had of you, dishonesty ain't one of them.

again, if by drawdown you mean since 1999 peak value of invested capital versus today, i'm up 530% but could be at 600% if i'd dumped by gold and silver at the latest top. if your definition definition means at any moment the delta between all the gain on all of your investments since a certain date to today plus or minus what it could have been at the peak?

i guess our brains work differently. i go for the roger's philosophy... first don't lose money. second, try to make money. third, try to keep your gains. my sense is that you are very focused on #2 and #3.

i don't lose money. ever. i make money and mostly keep my gains but don't try to keep every penny. i try to identify the big thing going on and my time frames are the length of the event going on... tech bubble, reflation, dollar depreciation. now i'm trying to play the death of the fire economy... alt energy boom or wwiii or whatever the fuck happens when the fire econ blows up and a generation of entitled boomers goes crying to the president and congress for a war to go get 'em some more money. (http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/watch.html)

Thank for your equanimity with the honesty issue.

I have no idea how often you track the value of your liquid investments which in my book would include any physical PM's one might possess. I update my portfolios daily since 1986. At some point recently, probably around when gold hit its highs in mid-March, I presume if you figured or can figure your wealth at that time, and you had a sizeable allocation to precious metals your computed wealth including all the assets in your brokerage account on that day might have been say 1,000,000 bonars if you could have liquidated them at that days closing price--which of course one cannot actually do. I also assume, perhaps wrongly, that your portfolio likely reached its maximum valuation when gold, etc. hit their highs in March, but depending upon all your allocations that may be wrong. As of today's closing price what would those assets be worth? Don't tell us, but subtract their worth now from the value on the date they were highest whenever since 1999 that date was, and the difference divided by their highest value is the drawdown.

Regardless of whose philosophy you or I or anyone follows, and regardless of how much you have made and I have lost over any time period, what is your drawdown from your maximum valuation on the day your portfolio of stocks, bonds, cash, precious metals, short sales, options, etc. were at their highest valuation?

Is it possible for you to compute that and divulge it?

Edit: I guess I can guesstimate your drawdown. 600% is an amazingly round number, but using it and subtracting 530% =70% -70%/600% = -11.67%. So within the realm of correctness of 530% and 600%, your drawdown is -11.67%. I guess it depends upon how individuals wish to assess the performance of their investments, but if what you wrote as a decrease in your gains were applied to my portfolio, I would consider that I had lost 11.67% from my maximum gains. In my own instance, I guess were I really compulsive, I could go back and not count the value of my portfolio maximum value on 1/3/2000 as the starting point from which I should calculate all future gains and losses. It woud be way too complicated to take out the "paper gains" and only consider real gains, and personally I think I would be fooling myself by doing that.

Slimprofits
08-20-08, 06:03 AM
Anybody else got a call on whether the USD busts out over 80 here? Or you all figure it's a slam-dunk that it's going to "behave" and resume it's downtrend like a good walking-dead dollar is supposed to do?

No, it won't.

Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=aEB3iD_bYoDU&refer=japan)



Platinum futures in Tokyo rallied and palladium had its biggest gain in two weeks, following advances in oil and other commodities, on expectations rising inflation will drive up investor demand for precious metals as a hedge.

Platinum futures rebounded from yesterday's one-year low after the U.S. Labor Department reported a 9.8 percent surge in July producer prices, the biggest advance since 1981.

``The fundamentals are now swinging back toward more favorable conditions for commodities,'' Jonathan Barratt (http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Jonathan+Barratt&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1), managing director of Commodity Broking Services in Sydney, said today by phone. ``The figures out in the U.S. yesterday show you've still got to look for inflationary concerns and so people will continue to buy gold and platinum.''


Dollar got a little boost from EUROland second quarter GDP numbers, oil price coming down and the dollar intervention Bart tuned us into.

Inflation worries appear to already be tamping that boost.

Dollar could get another little boost when the U.S. 2nd quarter GDP preliminary report is released on August 28th. (Rebate checks)

After that, it is back into the doldrums for the rest of 2008.

On 09/11, the U.S. international trade report will show exports hurt by trading partners suffering from recession. On 10/30 the advance 3rd quarter GDP numbers will bring very bad news.

raja
08-20-08, 07:41 AM
IMHO, this debate between Jim and MM comes down to this:
MM says invest in the long-term trend for the greatest profits, while Jim says it's possible to make more money by investing in short term ups and downs.

Despite MM assertions and EJ's calculations to the contrary, Jim is theoretically correct. One simple example . . . if you bought gold at 800, sold it at 1040, then rebought it at 790, you'd make more money that the guy who bought at 800 and held it.

The reason this debate can go on to infinity and never be settled is because the possibilities are infinite. What has happened to Jim and MM with their personal portfolios cannot settle this question. :( It also cannot be settled by EJs previous calculations, since alternative scenarios can be created that would show an opposite effect (as in the example I gave above).

The only partially satisfactory answer would be one of probability, but even that could be picked apart because there are so many real-world variables . . . .

Jim Nickerson
08-20-08, 11:22 AM
IMHO, this debate between Jim and MM comes down to this:
MM says invest in the long-term trend for the greatest profits, while Jim says it's possible to make more money by investing in short term ups and downs.

Despite MM assertions and EJ's calculations to the contrary, Jim is theoretically correct. One simple example . . . if you bought gold at 800, sold it at 1040, then rebought it at 790, you'd make more money that the guy who bought at 800 and held it.

The reason this debate can go on to infinity and never be settled is because the possibilities are infinite. What has happened to Jim and MM with their personal portfolios cannot settle this question. :( It also cannot be settled by EJs previous calculations, since alternative scenarios can be created that would show an opposite effect (as in the example I gave above).

The only partially satisfactory answer would be one of probability, but even that could be picked apart because there are so many real-world variables . . . .


That's not an unfair assessment, but my argument, I don't think, is not that I or anyone necessarily will make more money attempting to trade trends, but that attempting to trade trends is how I have evolved to attempting to make my liquid wealth grow, and as you point out if one could perfectly trade any trend then certainly one would make the maximum profit in that asset, but that is impossible.

The success of any method will vary over time between individuals and within individuals. To attempt to determine money managers' successes the most frequent methods I encounter are statements of gains/losses on an annualized basis from various times past, or year to date. For managers whose results are public, i.e. mutual funds, one can determine their drawdowns at any time by looking at current NAV and 52wk high or the all-time high. For me personally, I look at my annualized gains for comparison with not infrequently posted statements in the MSM about how various managers are performing over various periods.

Check out your own gains against so-called "Sir" Warren Buffet (for all I know, maybe Buffet has been knighted), and ask yourself if you were invested with the Oracle of Omaha, would you be pleased with the management of your money right now. I would also ask myself how can one prevent sustaining such losses (-23% as of close 8/19/08) as he has currently? My answer is to employ stop losses.

Actually, my purpose is asking metalman and Lukester to state their current drawdowns is most like sticking my thumb in one of their eyes as a malevolent form of "fun." If they have been as heavily invested in PM's as I surmise (and I have NO actual knowledge of their percentage allocations of their overall portfolios to PM's), then they have taken a "hit." I think its "fun" to see if anyone will admit to just how big has the "hit" been. My assessment so far is it is hard to get people to "fess up" about their drawdowns, which is fine by me.

EDIT: One other thing I mean very sincerely, anybody who has losses in their investments, I hope they fully recover and continue to do well over their lifetimes.

drumminj
08-20-08, 01:19 PM
Jim -

I don't know that I've ever posted here before. I've been reading for a while, and know that you've certainly made wise decisions in the past regarding timing (JPY and PMs, from the discussion here). One thing I've not seen you really discuss is what led you to sell the positions when you did? It's easy to sit back and say "hey, I banked some $$$ - you guys shoulda sold" (I admit it's nice to feel that way and be able to say that), but it would certainly add to the discussion to not just poke at Lukester and MM's eyeballs but also to hopefully add to the collective wisdom as to what signals you saw that you responded to.

Another comment I'd like to make that's more relevant to this discussion is that picking the macro trend and investing based on it requires a lot less effort than trying to keep up to date on a daily/hourly basis regarding all the indicators in the market, central bank actions, new gov't programs, etc.

My neighbor across the street from me is retired. He has an immaculate lawn. Why? Because he has the time to be out there every day mowing, pulling weeds, working on flower beds, etc. Because I work during the day, I'm pretty happy that my grass is mostly green and my trees and shrubs get trimmed back when necessary.

From what I understand, you're retired, which puts you in a much better position to be able to do the research and acquire the knowledge to identify each of the smaller trades within this big trade. For me (and likely others), it's feasible for me to check in at regular intervals and make sure that my intermediate to long term investment theses still hold. There's no way I could keep an eye on it every day while working 50+ hours a week, taking time to train my foster dog, working on home improvement projects, and making a point to get out and be social so as not to turn into a hermit.

I agree that one could potentially make more money by trading the smaller moves. But those of us who don't aren't just silly saps who don't know any better, as I feel you are implying to a degree.

Jim Nickerson
08-20-08, 01:58 PM
Jim -

I don't know that I've ever posted here before. I've been reading for a while, and know that you've certainly made wise decisions in the past regarding timing (JPY and PMs, from the discussion here). One thing I've not seen you really discuss is what led you to sell the positions when you did? It's easy to sit back and say "hey, I banked some $$$ - you guys shoulda sold" (I admit it's nice to feel that way and be able to say that), but it would certainly add to the discussion to not just poke at Lukester and MM's eyeballs but also to hopefully add to the collective wisdom as to what signals you saw that you responded to.

Another comment I'd like to make that's more relevant to this discussion is that picking the macro trend and investing based on it requires a lot less effort than trying to keep up to date on a daily/hourly basis regarding all the indicators in the market, central bank actions, new gov't programs, etc.

My neighbor across the street from me is retired. He has an immaculate lawn. Why? Because he has the time to be out there every day mowing, pulling weeds, working on flower beds, etc. Because I work during the day, I'm pretty happy that my grass is mostly green and my trees and shrubs get trimmed back when necessary.

From what I understand, you're retired, which puts you in a much better position to be able to do the research and acquire the knowledge to identify each of the smaller trades within this big trade. For me (and likely others), it's feasible for me to check in at regular intervals and make sure that my intermediate to long term investment theses still hold. There's no way I could keep an eye on it every day while working 50+ hours a week, taking time to train my foster dog, working on home improvement projects, and making a point to get out and be social so as not to turn into a hermit.

I agree that one could potentially make more money by trading the smaller moves. But those of us who don't aren't just silly saps who don't know any better, as I feel you are implying to a degree.

Last things, first. I try not to "imply" anything, and I have not implied nor thought to myself that anyone who doesn't trade is a "silly sap."

Not all my decisions are wise, maybe none are, fortuitous or lucky would generally be a better description, and at time just down right dumb.

In deciding, in general, when to get out of positions--in recent years--I use stop loss points on new positions and from maximun gains in a position. I am not always paying strict attention and sometimes move too late or later than I prefer, but this is life. I sold some DZZ the other day, in part because I had ~20% profit in two weeks, and in part because I think Gold will bounce, at least bounce in here. I've locked in that profit, and redeployed into DGP, but now it remains to be seen how that will do.

I use charts with RSI and MACD indicators--basically the default parameters on those two indicators as exist in bigcharts.com. You will have to read a book or something if you don't understand the potential of using those, and there exist many other, indicators. Some people spit on such technical analysis as useless, everyone can and does think in those ways that most meet their needs.

I don't think I have ever sat back and made any comments about my trading that suggests I was "smart" and others are "dumb." I put up the trades when I have time and think I comment on whatever seems appropriate. Actually, I am not smart. I try to be attentive to the things I think I may understand, and I don't always succeed.

I have a real luxury of time (which grows ever dearer) to spend trying to make money in the markets, not because I have to, but because I really like the challenge. Young working people with families, commitments, duties do not have my luxury, and with regard to investing the opportunitie for you are different than they are for me.

Read Harry Browne book(s) on diversification, and if you must put money into to something then diversify it and periodically rebalance the allocations. The big thing is save money as you go along through life regardless of whether it does the best it could possibly do, or does as well as your neighbor says his is doing, just make sure you pay enough attention not to let an asset go to zero, as I have recently done with DCR. The more you learn along the way, and the more you have saved, the greater will be your opportunties at some point.

If I left something out, please get back on it.

jk
08-20-08, 02:16 PM
1. re the dollar. the best discussion i've seen of short-intermediate trajectory is today's at macro man http://macro-man.blogspot.com/2008/08/buck-up.html his feeling is that a sideways move is likely for the next months/quarters.

2. re drawdown. take your high water mark, i.e. the highest value your portfolio has ever attained in the history of the universe. subtract it from your current portfolio value. unless you are at this moment at your high water mark, this will produce a negative number. then divide this number by said high water mark. this is your current drawdown. it is the percentage you are down from your high water mark. this calculation is a common one in the world of money management, and e.g. hedgefunds will always be able to document their largest drawdowns. past drawdowns are a shortcut way of assessing risk, as people think past performance will predict future results; boilerplate warnings to the contrary are uniformly ignored.

3. #1 above refers to what someone thinks is "likely," while #2 above refers to "risk." probability and risk are what it's all about.

re the dollar- i'm really unsure, because in recent history currencies are an ugly contest. so i've got about 25% in u.s. dollars and 25% in [mostly asian] currencies, and i don't have a clue.

re trading versus long term positional investing - my personal concern is that i don't "blow up." money managers are said to "blow up" when they sustain losses that lead to them having to close up shop. i'm interested in avoiding big losses. i'm currently on an 11% drawdown, the worst i've sustained in recorded history. [of course i only began recording history, weekly at least, about 8 years ago. i can't vouch for what i might have experienced in the foggy days of my prior investing.] i am not happy with this drawdown, which i can pretty much ascribe to the sell off in pm's. i console myself with the fact that i'm flat ytd, while pm's are actually down, so i'm adding some value in other spheres.

i'm willing to ride with the moves in pm's, or at least have been willing to date, because of the conviction i have about them. it leads me to think that the risk is low relative to the likely reward. i've also outsmarted myself in the past trying to trade the pm's. specifically, i had a large position in cef when gld became available but slv had not yet come on the market. cef was at a premium, and my assumption was that the premium would be arbitraged away once slv became available. i therefore cleverly decided i would sell my cef, buy some gld and wait to buy slv once it became available, and avoid the loss of the arbitrage. it was at this juncture that silver rose from about 12 to over 15. and i missed that move, and in size in that i had a substantial position i had traded out of. so that was an opportunity cost, and taught me i'm not as smart as i'd like to think i am. and since then, btw, cef has maintained its premium because, i learned, as a closed end fund it is eligible for capital gains treatment, unlike gld and slv which are "collectibles."

4. re risk management. jim's short term trading approach exposes him to the risk of being wrong. he'll counter and say that this risk is limited by his stop loss orders- either placed or mental. i'll counter by saying that event risk raises the possibility of markets blowing through stop losses, by going to sleep with the price at one place, and waking up to the price being at a very different place indeed. but he'll counter that by pointing out that he controls the size of his positions, and keeps a big chunk in cash. and he'll be right. controlling the size of his positions is his most important risk control. what's yours?

Jim Nickerson
08-20-08, 02:32 PM
1. re the dollar. the best discussion i've seen of short-intermediate trajectory is today's at macro man http://macro-man.blogspot.com/2008/08/buck-up.html his feeling is that a sideways move is likely for the next months/quarters.

2. re drawdown. take your high water mark, i.e. the highest value your portfolio has ever attained in the history of the universe. subtract it from your current portfolio value. unless you are at this moment at your high water mark, this will produce a negative number. then divide this number by said high water mark. this is your current drawdown. it is the percentage you are down from your high water mark. this calculation is a common one in the world of money management, and e.g. hedgefunds will always be able to document their largest drawdowns. past drawdowns are a shortcut way of assessing risk, as people think past performance will predict future results; boilerplate warnings to the contrary are uniformly ignored.

3. #1 above refers to what someone thinks is "likely," while #2 above refers to "risk." probability and risk are what it's all about.

re the dollar- i'm really unsure, because in recent history currencies are an ugly contest. so i've got about 25% in u.s. dollars and 25% in [mostly asian] currencies, and i don't have a clue.

re trading versus long term positional investing - my personal concern is that i don't "blow up." money managers are said to "blow up" when they sustain losses that lead to them having to close up shop. i'm interested in avoiding big losses. i'm currently on an 11% drawdown, the worst i've sustained in recorded history. [of course i only began recording history, weekly at least, about 8 years ago. i can't vouch for what i might have experienced in the foggy days of my prior investing.] i am not happy with this drawdown, which i can pretty much ascribe to the sell off in pm's. i console myself with the fact that i'm flat ytd, while pm's are actually down, so i'm adding some value in other spheres.

i'm willing to ride with the moves in pm's, or at least have been willing to date, because of the conviction i have about them. it leads me to think that the risk is low relative to the likely reward. i've also outsmarted myself in the past trying to trade the pm's. specifically, i had a large position in cef when gld became available but slv had not yet come on the market. cef was at a premium, and my assumption was that the premium would be arbitraged away once slv became available. i therefore cleverly decided i would sell my cef, buy some gld and wait to buy slv once it became available, and avoid the loss of the arbitrage. it was at this juncture that silver rose from about 12 to over 15. and i missed that move, and in size in that i had a substantial position i had traded out of. so that was an opportunity cost, and taught me i'm not as smart as i'd like to think i am. and since then, btw, cef has maintained its premium because, i learned, as a closed end fund it is eligible for capital gains treatment, unlike gld and slv which are "collectibles."

4. re risk management. jim's short term trading approach exposes him to the risk of being wrong. he'll counter and say that this risk is limited by his stop loss orders- either placed or mental. i'll counter by saying that event risk raises the possibility of markets blowing through stop losses, by going to sleep with the price at one place, and waking up to the price being at a very different place indeed. but he'll counter that by pointing out that he controls the size of his positions, and keeps a big chunk in cash. and he'll be right. controlling the size of his positions is his most important risk control. what's yours?

Worthwhile input, jk, thanks for it.

I don't put in stop loss orders, preferring mental stops, which has taken me a long time to develop a means of how to keep up with max gain and then losses for every position. Finally devised a spreadsheet that updates everytime I import real-time quotes. One limitation is size of screen to be able to see all positions and to try to maintain actual awarenes of what they are doing. Another thing I have gravitated to believing is correct is to minimize the number of positions one has because it is easier to be attentive to fewer things, at least for me that is true.

drumminj
08-20-08, 03:11 PM
jk - your description of drawdown with regards to evaluating risk, if I understand correctly, would show the max % loss one can assume to be exposed to (if past performance has bearing on future results). Did I get that right?

I see the value in that. The metric in an of itself appears to indicate how good one is at capturing potential gains in the investments one has chosen. It doesn't take into account the actual investments themselves, and whether there were better(or worse) opportunities available.

I'd rather be up 100% with a -20% drawdown then be up only 50% with a 0% drawdown. As such, I think discussion of such a number can be misleading, unless (as is the case here, for the most part) we're speaking of a specific investment - namely PMs or silver.

As far as my risk control....I'm relatively new to this game. My positions are small, and for the most part I'm sitting in cash and treasuries (yes, that is a "position" as well, I suppose). At times I use stop losses, which have mainly worked against me, and mental stop losses, which also have worked against me. So I won't claim to have a cohesive policy at this point. I try to take gains when I can, often selling too early, and cut my losses rather than riding the elevator all the way down.

Contemptuous
08-20-08, 03:16 PM
Babbittd -

Thanks for providing the only post here that stayed squarely on topic. I really would like to get some opinions on whether the dollar is going to make a channel busting move here. JK mentioned it - everybody else seems blind to this, or considers it irrelevant. It's not - it will have a massive impact on anyone still holding inflation hedge investments who is not a trader. Any other answers?


No, it won't. Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=aEB3iD_bYoDU&refer=japan) Dollar got a little boost from EUROland second quarter GDP numbers, oil price coming down and the dollar intervention Bart tuned us into. Inflation worries appear to already be tamping that boost. Dollar could get another little boost when the U.S. 2nd quarter GDP preliminary report is released on August 28th. (Rebate checks) After that, it is back into the doldrums for the rest of 2008. On 09/11, the U.S. international trade report will show exports hurt by trading partners suffering from recession. On 10/30 the advance 3rd quarter GDP numbers will bring very bad news.

jk
08-20-08, 03:19 PM
drawdowns are a rough measure of risk, but you need to be careful and not really rely on them for that purpose. that's what i meant when referring to people's blithe assumption that past performance can predict future results. e.g. bill miller got famous for beating the s&p for [i think] 15 years running. now he's down big time, and worse than the index.

Jim Nickerson
08-20-08, 03:22 PM
JK - your description of drawdown with regards to evaluating risk, if I understand correctly, would show the max % loss one can assume to be exposed to (if past performance has bearing on future results). Did I get that right?

I see the value in that. The metric in an of itself appears to indicate how good one is at capturing potential gains in the investments one has chosen. It doesn't take into account the actual investments themselves, and whether there were better(or worse) opportunities available.

I'd rather be up 100% with a -20% drawdown then be up only 50% with a 0% drawdown. As such, I think discussion of such a number can be misleading, unless (as is the case here, for the most part) we're speaking of a specific investment - namely PMs or silver.

As far as my risk control....I'm relatively new to this game. My positions are small, and for the most part I'm sitting in cash and treasuries (yes, that is a "position" as well, I suppose). At times I use stop losses, which have mainly worked against me, and mental stop losses, which also have worked against me. So I won't claim to have a cohesive policy at this point. I try to take gains when I can, often selling too early, and cut my losses rather than riding the elevator all the way down.

If you could succeed wouldn't you rather have a 100% gain with a 10-15% drawdown? I would.

Nobody I've known hits more than an occasional top and sells, if that many, and no one has much luck at buying at exact bottoms. In fact neither selling at perceived top or buying at perceived bottoms is the best way to try to play.

There are no perfect answers of which I have ever heard or read.

Bernard Baruch commented: I made my money by selling too soon.

I think trying to gain understanding of one's emotions of greed and fear is also worthwhile. One reason I read iTulip daily is to attempt to gather some sense of jubilation or despair as posters may reveal in their comments. When or if everyone is ecstatic, it might be time to consider selling, and vice versa. Of course, there is not so much gain from the flurry in geopolitical threads at the moment.

Andreuccio
08-20-08, 03:26 PM
ah, c'mon, jim. it'll be fun having luke in the back room behind the main room of the itulip bar and grill. too stuffy in there anyway... we can use the levity.

Levity's fine. My worry is that if Lukester starts posting in the Member's only section as well, the Internet might run out of space! :eek: :D

Contemptuous
08-20-08, 07:31 PM
Ah, c'mon. I'm actually regarded as being very succinct in my comments! :rolleyes:


Levity's fine. My worry is that if Lukester starts posting in the Member's only section as well, the Internet might run out of space! :eek: :D

EJ
08-20-08, 10:43 PM
1. re the dollar. the best discussion i've seen of short-intermediate trajectory is today's at macro man http://macro-man.blogspot.com/2008/08/buck-up.html his feeling is that a sideways move is likely for the next months/quarters.

2. re drawdown. take your high water mark, i.e. the highest value your portfolio has ever attained in the history of the universe. subtract it from your current portfolio value. unless you are at this moment at your high water mark, this will produce a negative number. then divide this number by said high water mark. this is your current drawdown. it is the percentage you are down from your high water mark. this calculation is a common one in the world of money management, and e.g. hedgefunds will always be able to document their largest drawdowns. past drawdowns are a shortcut way of assessing risk, as people think past performance will predict future results; boilerplate warnings to the contrary are uniformly ignored.

3. #1 above refers to what someone thinks is "likely," while #2 above refers to "risk." probability and risk are what it's all about.

re the dollar- i'm really unsure, because in recent history currencies are an ugly contest. so i've got about 25% in u.s. dollars and 25% in [mostly asian] currencies, and i don't have a clue.

re trading versus long term positional investing - my personal concern is that i don't "blow up." money managers are said to "blow up" when they sustain losses that lead to them having to close up shop. i'm interested in avoiding big losses. i'm currently on an 11% drawdown, the worst i've sustained in recorded history. [of course i only began recording history, weekly at least, about 8 years ago. i can't vouch for what i might have experienced in the foggy days of my prior investing.] i am not happy with this drawdown, which i can pretty much ascribe to the sell off in pm's. i console myself with the fact that i'm flat ytd, while pm's are actually down, so i'm adding some value in other spheres.

i'm willing to ride with the moves in pm's, or at least have been willing to date, because of the conviction i have about them. it leads me to think that the risk is low relative to the likely reward. i've also outsmarted myself in the past trying to trade the pm's. specifically, i had a large position in cef when gld became available but slv had not yet come on the market. cef was at a premium, and my assumption was that the premium would be arbitraged away once slv became available. i therefore cleverly decided i would sell my cef, buy some gld and wait to buy slv once it became available, and avoid the loss of the arbitrage. it was at this juncture that silver rose from about 12 to over 15. and i missed that move, and in size in that i had a substantial position i had traded out of. so that was an opportunity cost, and taught me i'm not as smart as i'd like to think i am. and since then, btw, cef has maintained its premium because, i learned, as a closed end fund it is eligible for capital gains treatment, unlike gld and slv which are "collectibles."

4. re risk management. jim's short term trading approach exposes him to the risk of being wrong. he'll counter and say that this risk is limited by his stop loss orders- either placed or mental. i'll counter by saying that event risk raises the possibility of markets blowing through stop losses, by going to sleep with the price at one place, and waking up to the price being at a very different place indeed. but he'll counter that by pointing out that he controls the size of his positions, and keeps a big chunk in cash. and he'll be right. controlling the size of his positions is his most important risk control. what's yours?

As usual, a collection of sublimely astute comments. One confession on the discussions over the question of trading vs not: I have not been entirely clear and consistent. Let me see if I can remedy that.

Transaction costs of trading aside, I view PMs as dollar depreciation insurance. So far they have acted well as insurance, hedging dollar depreciation risk in my portfolio since 2001. In fact, they have worked too well, and by standard principles of portfolio balancing I "should have" sold roughly half to diversify, and would have if not for conversations I have had with a wide range of fund managers over the past six months that convey the increasing risk of admittedly still low probability more dire events that PMs also insure against, the kind that Jim Rogers is talking about.

Without naming names, one of the highly respected people I have interviewed for iTulip over the years once expressed the opinion that Jim's views are extremist – and I'm using polite language here, as distinguished from the language the interviewee used. But let's consider the pattern of behavior that we have seen in the actions of Hank Paulson. This article is worth a read by all members as it is an excellent piece of journalism, and I'm disappointed that it was pulled off the Chicago Sum-Time's site – praise to Fred for keeping a copy somehow. The "money shot" quote is from ex-Fed governor Larry Lindsey:

"Surely things are somewhat amiss when a country's finance minister plays bond salesman for a supposedly privately owned company."

- Lawrence B. Lindsey on US Crony Capitalism (http://itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=44283#post44283)
Yes, something is amiss. Here is how I'd summarize the events that Lindsey refers to:


Government looks the other way while FIRE Economy interests take huge risks to make piles of money.
Bets blow up in their faces, threatening said FIRE Economy interests and the taxpayer's economy, too.
Government takes action to bail out the FIRE Economy with taxpayer money ostensibly to rescue taxpayers; FIRE Economy interests are rescued, too, even though FIRE Economy interests never distributed their winnings to taxpayers back when they were winning.
A third world style politically oriented wealth transfer has occurred, and not a peep from the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, et al, only a few dozen screaming bloggers and, from the MSM, a little article in the Chicago Sun-Times that disappears a month later.
A child could see it all coming.

Does this behavior recommend a policy of trust that this same government might not confiscate wealth again to "save the economy" again, in the future via capital controls?

And as long as this pattern of behavior continues, is it wise to lighten one's insurance policy against the likely impact?

It is these "forest" issues that I believe weigh most heavily on our portfolio decisions, unfortunately, and that is why I spend so little time on "trees" issues that are important for trading purposes.

As for the confession, I preach "don't trade" making the argument that between errors in timing and transaction costs, net of time spend on the project, you can't make money unless your time is free. That said, I've made some decent timing calls that make it appear as though making money on trade timing is possible. For consistency, I will not longer provide those here but elsewhere.

Jim Nickerson
08-20-08, 10:59 PM
As usual, a collection of sublimely astute comments. One confession on the discussions over the question of trading vs not: I have not been entirely clear and consistent. Let me see if I can remedy that.

Transaction costs of trading aside, I view PMs as dollar depreciation insurance. So far they have acted well as insurance, hedging dollar depreciation risk in my portfolio since 2001. In fact, they have worked too well, and by standard principles of portfolio balancing I "should have" sold roughly half to diversify, and would have if not for conversations I have had with a wide range of fund managers over the past six months that convey the increasing risk of admittedly still low probability more dire events that PMs also insure against, the kind that Jim Rogers is talking about.

Without naming names, one of the highly respected people I have interviewed for iTulip over the years once expressed the opinion that Jim's views are extremist – and I'm using polite language here, as distinguished from the language the interviewee used. But let's consider the pattern of behavior that we have seen in the actions of Hank Paulson. This article is worth a read by all members as it is an excellent piece of journalism, and I'm disappointed that it was pulled off the Chicago Sum-Time's site – praise to Fred for keeping a copy somehow. The "money shot" quote is from ex-Fed governor Larry Lindsey:

"Surely things are somewhat amiss when a country's finance minister plays bond salesman for a supposedly privately owned company."

- Lawrence B. Lindsey on US Crony Capitalism (http://itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=44283#post44283)
Yes, something is amiss. Here is how I'd summarize the events that Lindsey refers to:


Government looks the other way while FIRE Economy interests take huge risks to make piles of money.
Bets blow up in their faces, threatening said FIRE Economy interests and the taxpayer's economy, too.
Government takes action to bail out the FIRE Economy with taxpayer money ostensibly to rescue taxpayers; FIRE Economy interests are rescued, too, even though FIRE Economy interests never distributed their winnings to taxpayers back when they were winning.
A third world style politically oriented wealth transfer has occurred, and not a peep from the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, et al, only a few dozen screaming bloggers and, from the MSM, a little article in the Chicago Sun-Times that disappears a month later.
A child could see it all coming.
Does this behavior recommend a policy of trust that this same government might not confiscate wealth again to "save the economy" again, in the future via capital controls?

And as long as this pattern of behavior continues, is it wise to lighten one's insurance policy against the likely impact?

It is these "forest" issues that I believe weigh most heavily on our portfolio decisions, unfortunately, and that is why I spend so little time on "trees" issues that are important for trading purposes.

As for the confession, I preach "don't trade" making the argument that between errors in timing and transaction costs, net of time spend on the project, you can't make money unless your time is free. That said, I've made some decent timing calls that make it appear as though making money on trade timing is possible. For consistency, I will not longer provide those here but elsewhere.

EXTREMIST!!! Screw up you courage and tell me who the guy is and I'll blow his knees out; I'm not extremist.:)

EJ
08-20-08, 11:04 PM
EXTREMIST!!! Screw up you courage and tell me who the guy is and I'll blow his knees out; I'm not extremist.:)

A conversation between you and Jim Rogers would be highly entertaining.

drumminj
08-20-08, 11:06 PM
Last things, first. I try not to "imply" anything, and I have not implied nor thought to myself that anyone who doesn't trade is a "silly sap."

Jim, I don't have much to say with regards to the rest of your comment (besides thanks for the insights -- I do need to pick up a book on TA one of these days just so I can understand the specifics of what people are talking about, but simply knowing that TA + presumably a gut feel is what led you to unload those positions is helpful), but I wanted to apologize for reading too much into your comments here. You do appear to be one to not hold back your opinions, so I have no reason not to believe that you did not intend to imply such a thing.

Jim Nickerson
08-20-08, 11:20 PM
A conversation between you and Jim Rogers would be highly entertaining.

When I first retired and was too cheap to stay online much, this was 1992-3 somewhere in there, and I was longdistance from any internet connections being way out in the woods in Alabama my main contact with what was happening in the investment world was CNBC. Rogers used to be on there not uncommonly, and someway I got his address and wrote him offering to pick him up in Birmingham when he flew home to go to visit his mother who was in Demopolis, AL. I am sure I told him I would do this, and I would have, so as to be able to talk with him about whatever he wished to talk. He wrote me back on a post card (which I still have taped to my chest) thanking me but failing to accept my offer.

With both of us being Alabama boys, I am sure we would get along.

I am sure Rogers knows nothing about trading, oh, but wait, isn't that the way he made his forture (actually I don't know whether he traded or was a buy and holder), so it would actually be a wasted conversation probably because it would be like the local trash collector talking with a rocket scientist at Houston.

FRED
08-20-08, 11:49 PM
When I first retired and was too cheap to stay online much, this was 1992-3 somewhere in there, and I was longdistance from any internet connections being way out in the woods in Alabama my main contact with what was happening in the investment world was CNBC. Rogers used to be on there not uncommonly, and someway I got his address and wrote him offering to pick him up in Birmingham when he flew home to go to visit his mother who was in Demopolis, AL. I am sure I told him I would do this, and I would have, so as to be able to talk with him about whatever he wished to talk. He wrote me back on a post card (which I still have taped to my chest) thanking me but failing to accept my offer.

With both of us being Alabama boys, I am sure we would get along.

I am sure Rogers knows nothing about trading, oh, but wait, isn't that the way he made his forture (actually I don't know whether he traded or was a buy and holder), so it would actually be a wasted conversation probably because it would be like the local trash collector talking with a rocket scientist at Houston.

The essence of Rogers' philosophy: "People feel like they always have to be doing something, constantly making trades. What they don't see is that this takes time, time they could be spending making real money. I spend my time looking for a free bag of cash that someone's left in the corner. When I find it, I go pick it up."

Here at iTulip we choose to spend our time looking for free bags of cash, such as PMs in 2001, and figuring out when to dump them instead of trading in and out of little price movements.

Jim Nickerson
08-21-08, 12:03 AM
The essence of Rogers' philosophy: "People feel like they always have to be doing something, constantly making trades. What they don't see is that this takes time, time they could be spending making real money. I spend my time looking for a free bag of cash that someone's left in the corner. When I find it, I go pick it up."

Here at iTulip we choose to spend our time looking for free bags of cash, such as PMs in 2001, and figuring out when to dump them instead of trading in and out of little price movements.

But, oh FRED, wouldn't the world be a much duller place if we all wore the same faddish clothing, had the same tattoos, listened to the same songs on iPods, had the same wireless carrier, and no one owned anything but an iPhone, had the same sized flat-screen TV's, drove the same model of Infinity's, had exactly the same features in our home theaters in our McMansions and all had to act on what any single financial guru thought?

I couldn't stand it.

Seriously, if my "extremism" is counter-productive to the goals of iTulip, let me know, and I'll come blow out your knees; I am not an extremist.:) Seriously let me know if I am sand in the gears, and I'll try to stop commenting. You know I actually will stoop and pickup a penny on the street, I guess my philosophy is one should try to make a buck when and wherever one encounters the opportunity.

FRED
08-21-08, 12:10 AM
But, oh FRED, wouldn't the world be a much duller place if we all wore the same faddish clothing, had the same tattoos, listened to the same songs on iPods, had the same wireless carrier, and no one owned anything but an iPhone, had the same sized flat-screen TV's, drove the same model of Infinity's, had exactly the same features in our home theaters in our McMansions and all had to act on what any single financial guru thought?

I couldn't stand it.

Seriously, if my "extremism" is counter-productive to the goals of iTulip, let me know, and I'll come blow out your knees; I am not an extremist.:) Seriously let me know if I am sand in the gears, and I'll try to stop commenting. You know I actually wil stoop and pickup a penny on the street, I guess my philosophy is one should try to make a buck when and wherever one encounters the opportunity.

You realize that EJ was talking about the other Jim was considered by another interviewee as extremist, right?

Got another investment tip for you :D

"Don't gamble. Take your savings and buy some good stock and hold it til it goes up, then sell it. If it don't go up, don't buy it." - Will Rogers

Jim Nickerson
08-21-08, 12:18 AM
You realize that EJ was talking about the other Jim was considered by another interviewee as extremist, right?

Got another investment tip for you :D

"Don't gamble. Take your savings and buy some good stock and hold it til it goes up, then sell it. If it don't go up, don't buy it." - Will Rogers

Awh, shit!! I totally blew that, didn't I? I was wondering why EJ was singling me out. See, I keep writing I am not very smart, and I don't always read with full comprehesion. Glad to be wrong here.:)

I agree fully with Rogers' (Will) philosophy. To make it work, one has to close it out if the position goes against the hope.

touchring
08-21-08, 02:07 AM
You realize that EJ was talking about the other Jim was considered by another interviewee as extremist, right?

Got another investment tip for you :D

"Don't gamble. Take your savings and buy some good stock and hold it til it goes up, then sell it. If it don't go up, don't buy it." - Will Rogers


i like buffet's quote -

"Rule No.1: Never lose money. Rule No.2: Never forget rule No.1." :D

Jim Nickerson
08-21-08, 02:20 AM
i like buffet's quote -

"Rule No.1: Never lose money. Rule No.2: Never forget rule No.1." :D

Check out BRKA ,and it makes one wonder if Buffet has forgotten his rule, at least for most of this year. I think it just shows that nobody can be correct without setbacks.

metalman
08-21-08, 10:03 AM
Awh, shit!! I totally blew that, didn't I? I was wondering why EJ was singling me out. See, I keep writing I am not very smart, and I don't always read with full comprehesion. Glad to be wrong here.:)

I agree fully with Rogers' (Will) philosophy. To make it work, one has to close it out if the position goes against the hope.

will rogers was making a joke... you can't not buy a stock because it didnt go up, you've already bought it. that's called irony.

this livermore quote sounds like what ej was saying: "Every stock is like a human being : it has a personality - a distinctive personality - aggressive, reserved, hyper, high-strung, volatile, boring, direct, logical, predictable, unpredictable. I often studied stocks like I would study people; after a while their reactions to certain circumstances become more predictable."

livermore was anti-trading, just life all the guys who made lots of money: "Throughout all my years of investing I've found that the big money was never made in the buying or the selling. The big money was made in the waiting."

that's not what he did, tho. he kept trading anyway, even though he knew it wasn't the way to make money. the #1 problem with active trading is that it uses up your time. the jim rogers way, you spend your time living your life... livermore's most famous quotation: "My life has been a failure."

Andreuccio
08-21-08, 10:56 AM
the #1 problem with active trading is that it uses up your time. the jim rogers way, you spend your time living your life... livermore's most famous quotation: "My life has been a failure."

I don't spend much time trading. I do, however, spend a significant amount of time reading iTulip. :(

Jim Nickerson
08-21-08, 11:06 AM
will rogers was making a joke... you can't not buy a stock because it didnt go up, you've already bought it. that's called irony.

this livermore quote sounds like what ej was saying: "Every stock is like a human being : it has a personality - a distinctive personality - aggressive, reserved, hyper, high-strung, volatile, boring, direct, logical, predictable, unpredictable. I often studied stocks like I would study people; after a while their reactions to certain circumstances become more predictable."

livermore was anti-trading, just life all the guys who made lots of money: "Throughout all my years of investing I've found that the big money was never made in the buying or the selling. The big money was made in the waiting."

that's not what he did, tho. he kept trading anyway, even though he knew it wasn't the way to make money. the #1 problem with active trading is that it uses up your time. the jim rogers way, you spend your time living your life... livermore's most famous quotation: "My life has been a failure."

Believe it or not, I do and have from first reading of Will Rogers' quote understood it. Actually, it strikes me more as being a non sequitur; whatever it is, it is possible to accomplish the first part: buy a good stock and hold it till it goes up. That is possible. But then what is next? It could go down, at which time my approach would be to have decided, hopefully, when I would cut the loss of profits.

Life in interesting. When I worked 10 or more hours most days, and 5-6 most Saturdays and Sundays, more than once someone told me to "get a life." Often these were people who spent their times doing the same things repetitively when they did not work. Golfing incessantly, tailgating at every home and away ballgame, fishing, hunting, playing gin or bridge with every free minute, etc. I've lived life, I been around the world and many other places abroad more than I can readily count. I've traveled in all the states and seen many things--but not everything in the world for sure. I'm met my share of interesting characters.

Presently, which has actually been for a couple or three years, the only thing that seriously interests me is attempting to make more money by playing in the stock market. Nothing else attracts my interest--whether that is good or bad in the eyes of any other human, I don't give a shit.
I'm not out to make the money because I have immediate needs for it, just to do it is the game.

If I die today, my life has been a good life. There are things looking back that were it possible, I'd do differently, but that isn't life. Several effects from my life, which I found out by chance, are to my assessment perhaps the most important results of my life. Probably we never know what has been the full impact of our lives, so to make a self-assessment could come up short.

Edit: The best part of my life right now, is that I can do any goddammed thing I wish to do, and that was not the case for most of my life.

jk
08-21-08, 03:06 PM
That said, I've made some decent timing calls that make it appear as though making money on trade timing is possible. For consistency, I will not longer provide those here but elsewhere.
eric, "elsewhere" meaning other threads or meaning other venues than itulip?

rabot10
08-21-08, 03:14 PM
he doesn't know how to use google. he's still trying to figure out the dewey decimal system.

lol Me too, i sold half of my PMs at 19.6 silver and 980 gold. Not because I have a brain more because i was scared of the big draw downs i have experienced every time the PMs make a big run. Only wish that i had gotten all out. I know I know they would have then gone up.

Luke, it would be nice to know who to subscribe to or pay to get the advice. Not sure i would take it as i am getting way too much as it is. But if your numbers come in, i will send u a check for the name big guy. How is So Calif doing?

Jim Nickerson
08-21-08, 10:57 PM
Lukester's undisclosed advisor's call: Gold 650, silver 9.80 based on ??

Bensimon's July call. Gold 732 in April or May 2009 based on Elliot wave and Fibonacci numbers.

akrowne's assessment. $780 marginal cost of production of gold

babbittd: Robin Griffiths 750 based on ??

EJ.'s call: He just knows--780

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$GOLD&p=D&yr=0&mn=8&dy=0&id=p78431873969&a=129594324

Here's stockcharts.com continuous contract prices with low yesterday of 777.70.

If EJ, akrowne, or Griffiths are near correct, most of the pain is passed.

If Bensimom is correct there is still 5.9% to the downside from yesterday's low.

If the undisclosed advisor were to be correct, there is still 16.4% to the downside from yesterday's low for gold.

Here is another call on gold by Marc Faber http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/08/20/15214/dr-doom-let-us-just-assume-the-financial-system-blows-up/

Dr Doom: ‘Let us just assume the financial system blows up…’ (http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/08/20/15214/dr-doom-let-us-just-assume-the-financial-system-blows-up/)



Gold — and the division of assets - is on the mind of Marc (aka Dr Doom) Faber (http://www.gloomboomdoom.com/portalgbd/homegbd.cfm) this week in a special interim note to his subscribers. It’s not a particularly attractive trade right now, he notes, although personally, he’s hooked. And anyway, people have been asking …..

For investors with all their assets in US dollar cash (and no other holdings), Faber suggests accumulating gold from here on down to possibly $600/oz. While not necessarily forecasting such a drop (from the current level of about $820/oz), he notes the metal could decline to that level.

Those with “99 per cent of their assets in gold and no cash flow” should hold for now, says Faber, as the gold chart looks “truly horrible” since prices fell below the key support levels of around $850.

For traders, however, gold may have some short-term appeal right now because it is becoming oversold. But what, then, is the immediate upside potential? Heavy resistance would seem to exist at $850-$900 while the downside risk is at least as large as the upside potential.


If you care to look, click the link from my original post above and as of 8/21/08 $GOLD moved back above its 325 DMA.

Can anyone imagine an investor that Faber knows who has 99% of their assets in gold? I can't.

Unless I missed something above, Faber's notion of a possible 600$ floor for $Gold is the lowest I encountered from any pundit.

Finster
08-22-08, 11:04 AM
Gold is only a monetary dysfunction story.

Kinda like oil ... ;)

:D

Contemptuous
08-22-08, 04:29 PM
Kinda like oil ... ;) :D

Finster! You have returned! I was beginning to think the two headed Cerberus dog had lost one of it's noggins. All I can report is that the Bart-Cerberus has been a little more frequent a poster than usual in past months (translates as uttering more than a few monosyllables occasionally) but this has probably been due to his "other half" having gone out for an extended Sabbatical. Have you been sojourning in the "Brown Study"?

Contemptuous
08-22-08, 04:32 PM
Hi Rick -

Apologies for the late reply - I have an office move on my hands down here. I'll PM you on the weekend.


lol Me too, i sold half of my PMs at 19.6 silver and 980 gold. Not because I have a brain more because i was scared of the big draw downs i have experienced every time the PMs make a big run. Only wish that i had gotten all out. I know I know they would have then gone up.

Luke, it would be nice to know who to subscribe to or pay to get the advice. Not sure i would take it as i am getting way too much as it is. But if your numbers come in, i will send u a check for the name big guy. How is So Calif doing?

Finster
08-23-08, 08:42 AM
Finster! You have returned! I was beginning to think the two headed Cerberus dog had lost one of it's noggins. All I can report is that the Bart-Cerberus has been a little more frequent a poster than usual in past months (translates as uttering more than a few monosyllables occasionally) but this has probably been due to his "other half" having gone out for an extended Sabbatical. Have you been sojourning in the "Brown Study"?

Never really left, Lukester. I started a band and it's been taking a lot of time. It will probably continue to do so for a while until we get our basic repertoire down. But meanwhile, I will still have to pop in at least now and then just to make sure you and Bart don't get tooo out of line ... ;)

phirang
08-23-08, 09:25 AM
Is there a connection between 3 U.S. banks selling an additional 78,611 gold futures contracts (7,861,100 ounces) in a month, followed shortly by a severe price decline in gold? That’s equal to 10% of annual world production and amounts to more than $7 billion worth of gold futures being sold by 3 U.S. banks in a month. How can this extraordinary concentrated trading size not be manipulative?
Because prices fell so sharply after the short sales were taken (with the appropriate dirty tricks as I have previously explained) holders of known physical silver in the world suffered a decline in value of more than $2.5 billion and long COMEX silver futures holders suffered a similar $2.5 billion decline in the value of their contracts. In gold, because the dollar value held is much greater than silver, investor losses were much greater, on the order of hundreds of billions of dollars on their physical holdings. Declines in the value of mining shares adds many billions more. Was this loss of value caused by the concentrated short selling of 2 or 3 U.S. banks?
What real legitimate business do 2 or 3 U.S. banks suddenly have for selling short such quantities of speculative instruments over a brief time period? Do we want banks to be engaging in this type of activity? If the manipulation was not successful, would U.S. taxpayers be called on to bail out yet another bank speculation gone bad?



http://news.silverseek.com/TedButler/1219417468.php

Reminds me of the ESF funded by FDR stealing gold at 20/oz and reselling it at 35/oz...

Forrest
08-23-08, 11:35 AM
http://news.silverseek.com/TedButler/1219417468.php

Reminds me of the ESF funded by FDR stealing gold at 20/oz and reselling it at 35/oz...


Manipulation of this kind seems to be the hallmark of those who induce fear in others, and then profit by it.

In possessing gold at least we have more in our hands than a piece of paper, or a brokers statement telling us that we have 'wealth', and can hopefully bear the daily supposed gains and losses in value that we might have had, 'if only'!

Many investors have gotten so used to the idea of buying paper investments low, and selling high that they forget that with gold they own something tangible that has a real value, no matter how it is expressed in fiat currency reckoning.

Gold is never worthless, though it is true that on rare occasions in history there may have been nothing to trade it for. And, since the value of gold is not entirely dependant on those manipulating it's trading, one can, with a little patience, watch with relative equinimity the banking houses and governments play their games.

One may not be able to always buy and sell gold at the perfect highs and lows, but holding ownership of a chunk of the stuff is comforting.

Gold has the infinite reassurance inherent in it, that it is a real form of wealth that has value attached to it by almost anyone.

It takes only a little shift of perception to learn to bear not looking at the daily gains and losses of the fiat currency value of gold, and simply hang on to the knowledge that despite the number of dollars you might have traded for it, gold is the real measure of value, and that if the price of gold goes down, you have lost nothing but a perceived value.

The gold is still gold. The currency's stated worth is what truly changes.

What is left for us to do then is to watch without emotion for the times to buy and sell, and buy again.

phirang
08-23-08, 12:08 PM
Manipulation of this kind seems to be the hallmark of those who induce fear in others, and then profit by it.

In possessing gold at least we have more in our hands than a piece of paper, or a brokers statement telling us that we have 'wealth', and can hopefully bear the daily supposed gains and losses in value that we might have had, 'if only'!

Many investors have gotten so used to the idea of buying paper investments low, and selling high that they forget that with gold they own something tangible that has a real value, no matter how it is expressed in fiat currency reckoning.

Gold is never worthless, though it is true that on rare occasions in history there may have been nothing to trade it for. And, since the value of gold is not entirely dependant on those manipulating it's trading, one can, with a little patience, watch with relative equinimity the banking houses and governments play their games.

One may not be able to always buy and sell gold at the perfect highs and lows, but holding ownership of a chunk of the stuff is comforting.

Gold has the infinite reassurance inherent in it, that it is a real form of wealth that has value attached to it by almost anyone.

It takes only a little shift of perception to learn to bear not looking at the daily gains and losses of the fiat currency value of gold, and simply hang on to the knowledge that despite the number of dollars you might have traded for it, gold is the real measure of value, and that if the price of gold goes down, you have lost nothing but a perceived value.

The gold is still gold. The currency's stated worth is what truly changes.

What is left for us to do then is to watch without emotion for the times to buy and sell, and buy again.

But wait, the financial times told me we're entering deflation...:rolleyes:

jk
08-23-08, 01:41 PM
if you read jesse livermore, you'll read lots of stories of stock manipulations - driving prices up or down to fleece other holders. there is no doubt that buying or selling a huge number of futures contracts in what is a relatively small market - like that of the pm's - will in the short run drive prices this way or that. but it seems to me that it cannot affect prices in the long run. the shorts must be covered, the longs must be closed eventually. open interest goes up and then down again. and the long term trend - the really long term trend - is untouched.

by the same token, i think it naive to believe that this moment's gold price is necessarily a true measure of value. to believe so is to assert that this moment's price is resting precisely on the long term trend line. but this is unlikely. it is much more likely that there is some momentary deviation from the trend, and it is especially likely that there is a significant such deviation in the face of a quick and big expansion of open interest in a relatively small market. otoh, these deviations of value from the trend line provide opportunities for trading for those so inclined.

Forrest
08-24-08, 01:18 AM
But wait, the financial times told me we're entering deflation...:rolleyes:

They might be wrong, but even if they are correct, to me that would be a good thing, so that the economy worldwide can stabilize, and not go through an inflationary cycle.

If the dollar deflates, my income in dollars will rise in value, and buy more, while the price of gold will adjust to what the dollar buys, and as demand for it is still high, I will be able to sell gold at a true, uninflated profit, having transferred my cash to gold in 2005.

I am not in gold to make a profit due to inflation, but because of coming scarcity of the metal, and to have my liquidity in a safe, tradable asset that is able to survive inflationary times.

My newly earned more valuable dollars under deflation, that I receive as income from other investments, on the other hand, will be able to buy more of profitable investments than they can in their current weak state. In addition, with a more stable economy, I will be able to invest that dollar income in the GreenTech Infrastructure industry with some confidence that I will not lose innate value in those investments due to an inflationary spiral.

As a stronger, more stable economy winds into action here in America, I can invest dollars that are suddenly worth more into a safer U.S.. market, and profit from riskier investments to profit from the growth industries in India and China.

Forrest
08-24-08, 01:27 AM
if you read jesse livermore, you'll read lots of stories of stock manipulations - driving prices up or down to fleece other holders. there is no doubt that buying or selling a huge number of futures contracts in what is a relatively small market - like that of the pm's - will in the short run drive prices this way or that. but it seems to me that it cannot affect prices in the long run. the shorts must be covered, the longs must be closed eventually. open interest goes up and then down again. and the long term trend - the really long term trend - is untouched.

by the same token, i think it naive to believe that this moment's gold price is necessarily a true measure of value. to believe so is to assert that this moment's price is resting precisely on the long term trend line. but this is unlikely. it is much more likely that there is some momentary deviation from the trend, and it is especially likely that there is a significant such deviation in the face of a quick and big expansion of open interest in a relatively small market. otoh, these deviations of value from the trend line provide opportunities for trading for those so inclined.


It is true that today's gold price is not necessarily reflective of a specific value in any currency, but despite global fiat currencies, it does have a value that can be realized even in the worst markets.

Contemptuous
08-24-08, 01:46 AM
Forrest -

Can't say I find your game plan too focused on the most probable events upcoming.

Don't forget you are looking at $400 oil in just another seven or eight years? Yes indeed. $400 well within a decade. While the entire world tries to squeeze through the eye of a needle into a non-hydrocarbons new industrial paradigm in the space of maybe 5 years out there? Stock markets? Uh, better be equipped with multiple airbags.

And gold is not necessarily a "safe" asset as it can see 25% drawdowns (or worse!) any time. $400 oil makes the events you ponder below concerning the presence or absence of fiscal prudence in America a sideshow - because the larger inflationary event will be happening to all nations in the world. Still does not seem to have sunk in to a lot of iTuliper's frames of reference. If you don't buy the $400 a barrel oil in 7 years you should nonetheless obtain a firsthand view of our progress towards that end within a much shorter time frame, e.g. two to three more years?

A) Pondering possibilities for US fiscal prudence leading to a stronger US dollar and a stable US economy is a waste of time, because all paper money is going to catch fire and incinerate in a world of $400 a barrel oil, along with the economies too, who will be convulsing as they try to squeeze 40 years of industrial paradigm changes frantically into 10 years, and B) the flowering of "GreenTech" and the growth of India and China, and the distinction of "stable" vs. "unstable stock markets" may be an entirely moot point as well, as $400 oil well and truly puts the entire world economy in crisis.

That is really all we need to know. Are we really going to have $400 oil in seven or eight years, and if so, how can any of our economies or stock markets possibly remain "normal"? Some people here suggest that will be orderly, like an English bus queue - I think that requires a remarkable stretch of the imagination.

<< My newly earned more valuable dollars under deflation, that I receive as income from other investments, on the other hand, will be able to buy more of profitable investments than they can in their current weak state >>

I say, "Dream on".


They might be wrong, but even if they are correct, to me that would be a good thing, so that the economy worldwide can stabilize, and not go through an inflationary cycle.

If the dollar deflates, my income in dollars will rise in value, and buy more, while the price of gold will adjust to what the dollar buys, and as demand for it is still high, I will be able to sell gold at a true, uninflated profit, having transferred my cash to gold in 2005.

I am not in gold to make a profit due to inflation, but because of coming scarcity of the metal, and to have my liquidity in a safe, tradable asset that is able to survive inflationary times.

My newly earned more valuable dollars under deflation, that I receive as income from other investments, on the other hand, will be able to buy more of profitable investments than they can in their current weak state. In addition, with a more stable economy, I will be able to invest that dollar income in the GreenTech Infrastructure industry with some confidence that I will not lose innate value in those investments due to an inflationary spiral.

As a stronger, more stable economy winds into action here in America, I can invest dollars that are suddenly worth more into a safer U.S.. market, and profit from riskier investments to profit from the growth industries in India and China.

Forrest
08-24-08, 02:20 AM
Forrest -

Can't say I find your game plan too focused on the most probable events upcoming.

Don't forget you are looking at $400 oil in just another seven or eight years? Yes indeed. $400 well within a decade. While the entire world tries to squeeze through the eye of a needle into a non-hydrocarbons new industrial paradigm in the space of maybe 5 years out there? Stock markets? Uh, better be equipped with multiple airbags.

And gold is not necessarily a "safe" asset as it can see 25% drawdowns (or worse!) any time. $400 oil makes the events you ponder below concerning the presence or absence of fiscal prudence in America a sideshow - because the larger inflationary event will be happening to all nations in the world. Still does not seem to have sunk in to a lot of iTuliper's frames of reference. If you don't buy the $400 a barrel oil in 7 years you should nonetheless obtain a firsthand view of our progress towards that end within a much shorter time frame, e.g. two to three more years?

A) Pondering possibilities for US fiscal prudence leading to a stronger US dollar and a stable US economy is a waste of time, because all paper money is going to catch fire and incinerate in a world of $400 a barrel oil, along with the economies too, who will be convulsing as they try to squeeze 40 years of industrial paradigm changes frantically into 10 years, and B) the flowering of "GreenTech" and the growth of India and China, and the distinction of "stable" vs. "unstable stock markets" may be an entirely moot point as well, as $400 oil well and truly puts the entire world economy in crisis.

That is really all we need to know. Are we really going to have $400 oil in seven or eight years, and if so, how can any of our economies or stock markets possibly remain "normal"? Some people here suggest that will be orderly, like an English bus queue - I think that requires a remarkable stretch of the imagination.

<< My newly earned more valuable dollars under deflation, that I receive as income from other investments, on the other hand, will be able to buy more of profitable investments than they can in their current weak state >>

I say, "Dream on".

Ah, Lukester, you didn't hear the IF of my answer to the rumor that the economy is deflating.

If I thought our economy was deflating, that is how I would act.

I agree with you that it is not...between the banking mess, the ridiculous government debt levels, and debt peonage ever expanding in the U.S. and around the world, I feel it is far more likely that we will have a good deal of inflation, and a truly scary economic climate for some time.

None of my investments are in stock...just gold, and some well located rental property, as well as living on a tiny farm that can produce most of what my family eats.

I do hope that the powers that be manage to re-orient our economy into Green Tech, mostly so that I can go completely off grid at a cheaper price than I can now, but I am prepared with plans for whatever happens. I would also like to take advantage of communication and transportation technology around the world, a bit here, and a bit there, so as to tred lightly in these essentially risky business climates.

But, since I don't believe the powers that be will be able to do all that much, I am hunkering down, and getting ready to weather a very bad storm.

Contemptuous
08-24-08, 03:20 AM
Forrest -

My bad. And indeed what you describe is a very cautious stance. The little farm forms a very valuable part of the overall configuration also, as one of the most direct expressions of ultra-expensive oil must be directly into the food complex. We all need to keep in mind however that to call gold and silver "safe" is a considerable misconception. You are making a very specific market call by positioning significantly into these. Having said that, I have yet to read a compelling argument anywhere, as to how $400 oil could cause a rise in the purchasing power of fiat money in a fiat money world.


None of my investments are in stock...just gold, and some well located rental property, as well as living on a tiny farm that can produce most of what my family eats.

Forrest
08-24-08, 04:18 AM
Forrest -

We all need to keep in mind however that to call gold and silver "safe" is a considerable misconception.

I agree that an investment in metals is not entirely safe, but so long as you are prepared to neither access the metal, bury it deep, and wait for however long it takes for the value to equal the original investment, I don't see a problem, particularly when I call all paper money FAKE money these days, and consider it only worthwhile until I spend it...mostly these days on upgrading the little farm, and gathering in long term food and water storage, against disaster.


You are making a very specific market call by positioning significantly into these. Having said that, I have yet to read a compelling argument anywhere, as to how $400 oil could cause a rise in the purchasing power of fiat money in a fiat money world.

Having been expecting $10.00/gallon gas prices since 1985 - after a trip to England when I drove around the island at $7.00 dollars/gallon - I see a rapid, forced switch to public transportation, and an immediate switch to commuting by phone and computer. Americans have always done what they have to, although I admit we've gotten out of practice lately.

But unless America starts switching their energy dollars into restructuring how we live in America, I don't see any happy endings for anyone. And if we actually do....well, then I can see light at the end of the tunnel.

With gold and silver, one has the reality of true coinage, and one has to look at what gold and silver will buy, particularly since there is little income to be had of it, unless you are buying and selling large lots constantly.

Since saving fiat currency at a stated 4% APR is actually closer to -4% in real terms, I would rather have my cash in metals, and my long term investments in small rental properties that are held forever. As the economy strengthens, then I'll take an occasional flyer on a stock or two.

metalman
08-24-08, 08:58 AM
I agree that an investment in metals is not entirely safe, but so long as you are prepared to neither access the metal, bury it deep, and wait for however long it takes for the value to equal the original investment, I don't see a problem, particularly when I call all paper money FAKE money these days, and consider it only worthwhile until I spend it...mostly these days on upgrading the little farm, and gathering in long term food and water storage, against disaster.



Having been expecting $10.00/gallon gas prices since 1985 - after a trip to England when I drove around the island at $7.00 dollars/gallon - I see a rapid, forced switch to public transportation, and an immediate switch to commuting by phone and computer. Americans have always done what they have to, although I admit we've gotten out of practice lately.

But unless America starts switching their energy dollars into restructuring how we live in America, I don't see any happy endings for anyone. And if we actually do....well, then I can see light at the end of the tunnel.

With gold and silver, one has the reality of true coinage, and one has to look at what gold and silver will buy, particularly since there is little income to be had of it, unless you are buying and selling large lots constantly.

Since saving fiat currency at a stated 4% APR is actually closer to -4% in real terms, I would rather have my cash in metals, and my long term investments in small rental properties that are held forever. As the economy strengthens, then I'll take an occasional flyer on a stock or two.

the argument around here for why gas didn't go to $10 is the dollar cartel and the bubble the fire economy created in dollars, making oil cheap. the uk... and ireland, australia, and others... had fire econs of their own. the uk's is toast and the pound is getting pounded. the usa's is over and the bonar is on its way to pesoville. as always some stocks will go up, but i'm not smart enough to pick 'em...

'I never hesitate to tell a man that I am bullish or bearish. But I do not tell people to buy or sell any particular stock. In a bear market all stocks go down and in a bull market they go up.' - jesse livermore

' The average man doesn’t wish to be told that it is a bull or a bear market. What he desires is to be told specifically which particular stock to buy or sell. He wants to get something for nothing. He does not wish to work. He doesn’t even wish to have to think.' - jesse livermore

Forrest
08-24-08, 07:17 PM
the argument around here for why gas didn't go to $10 is the dollar cartel and the bubble the fire economy created in dollars, making oil cheap. the uk... and ireland, australia, and others... had fire econs of their own. the uk's is toast and the pound is getting pounded. the usa's is over and the bonar is on its way to pesoville. as always some stocks will go up, but i'm not smart enough to pick 'em...

'I never hesitate to tell a man that I am bullish or bearish. But I do not tell people to buy or sell any particular stock. In a bear market all stocks go down and in a bull market they go up.' - jesse livermore

' The average man doesn’t wish to be told that it is a bull or a bear market. What he desires is to be told specifically which particular stock to buy or sell. He wants to get something for nothing. He does not wish to work. He doesn’t even wish to have to think.' - jesse livermore





Jumping into the stock market just now would scare me to death! I don't know enough about who is who right now, and whether they are safe (comparatively) to invest in.

Not being a high flyer, and trying to keep my nest egg from getting broken, I need to be playing with the house's money in order to just throw it away. But I have my eye on a few little companies, and if they survive this cycle, I'll know where to place my bet.