gold: new highs or reversal leg forming ?
- Thread starter Wallace
- Start date
Drops like this are usual, and usually followed by higher prices.
However one can just as easily say that there is a +/-10 years cycle
However one can just as easily say that there is a +/-10 years cycle
there was a CBC - Canadian Broadcasting Corporation documentary on the box on
Thursday night - 'Secret World of Gold' available on YouTube, 3 parts about 45mins
presume it's a one-off, a bit flighty, lots of topics, no conclusions:
- one open CFTC investigation (filed March 10/10 ?) into a silver trade the complain-
ant says is market manipulation by 2 banks
- gold is power - national power
- Germany's gold is held in the US and the US won't give it back, plus other countries
whose gold is being held by another country or the IMF
- leasing ?!?!? of gold which has generated a number of 'conspiracy' theories
- Fort Knox constructed to store the gold ordered to be turned in by US citizens in 1933
is said to be empty - where's the gold ? this confiscation was similar to the Cyprus
bank depositors seizures since the US Fed grabbed gold at $20.67 per troy ounce
and then raised the price to $35 an ounce. see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102
and the 'Exchange Stabilization Fund': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchange_Stabilization_Fund
- one commentator John Embry says a monumental shift is underway as Eastern
countries - China, Viet Nam, India, Russia are taking delight in buying 'cheap gold' -
[ does that infer he thinks gold is going to - thousands of $s an ounce ? ] - that gold
goes where the wealth is - so 'what does that say for the West ?'
http://www.sprott.com/market-insights/john-embry/ and: http://watch.bnn.ca/#clip900741 -
first listed in 'Market Insights from John Embry'
China buying all the gold they can get their hands on [Chinese won't allow gold to be
exported]
'physical gold is being cleaned out by the Russians, Chinese etc at some point the
Chinese will then up the price of gold'. paper to physical gold - estimated at 100:1 !
pdf: John Embry 'Manipulation of Gold Market at All Time High'
"Because gold is a constant, its true value doesn't change - it's the paper money in
which gold's price is quoted that changes.
And there's no doubt that all paper money is rapidly verging on collapse"
Thursday night - 'Secret World of Gold' available on YouTube, 3 parts about 45mins
presume it's a one-off, a bit flighty, lots of topics, no conclusions:
- one open CFTC investigation (filed March 10/10 ?) into a silver trade the complain-
ant says is market manipulation by 2 banks
- gold is power - national power
- Germany's gold is held in the US and the US won't give it back, plus other countries
whose gold is being held by another country or the IMF
- leasing ?!?!? of gold which has generated a number of 'conspiracy' theories
- Fort Knox constructed to store the gold ordered to be turned in by US citizens in 1933
is said to be empty - where's the gold ? this confiscation was similar to the Cyprus
bank depositors seizures since the US Fed grabbed gold at $20.67 per troy ounce
and then raised the price to $35 an ounce. see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102
and the 'Exchange Stabilization Fund': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchange_Stabilization_Fund
- one commentator John Embry says a monumental shift is underway as Eastern
countries - China, Viet Nam, India, Russia are taking delight in buying 'cheap gold' -
[ does that infer he thinks gold is going to - thousands of $s an ounce ? ] - that gold
goes where the wealth is - so 'what does that say for the West ?'
http://www.sprott.com/market-insights/john-embry/ and: http://watch.bnn.ca/#clip900741 -
first listed in 'Market Insights from John Embry'
China buying all the gold they can get their hands on [Chinese won't allow gold to be
exported]
'physical gold is being cleaned out by the Russians, Chinese etc at some point the
Chinese will then up the price of gold'. paper to physical gold - estimated at 100:1 !
pdf: John Embry 'Manipulation of Gold Market at All Time High'
"Because gold is a constant, its true value doesn't change - it's the paper money in
which gold's price is quoted that changes.
And there's no doubt that all paper money is rapidly verging on collapse"
It is ironic that John Embry being such a proponent for gold with his long disertation about it was written in March, a month before gold's historic plunge. At the end of his article: "...gold demand is on the verge of an explosion..." Presumably, it first needed an implosion as we saw Apr 12-15.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3780893#post3780893
Nevertheless, as I have posted elsewhere, when that plunge was occuring on those dates, I recorded many hours of financials on cable, financial networks for my review, and I found almost all professional traders interviewed said SELL at the time, but were BULLISH for the long term.
I'm sure all Embry's pro-gold points have been discussed elsewhere, ad nausesm. I am curious about many of them for more detail I would have liked to have seen and wonder about the quality of merit about them. That begs having discusion on them, which understandably was not the ojective of his piece as much as it was for him enumerating all the pro's for owning gold. Regardless, some of his points were pretty provocative.
1. It appears to me the traditional heart and soul for being pro-gold is the fiat currency argument which he espouses and which has been around for ages. (Voltaire saying paper currency will return to its intrinsic value eventually, which is zero !) Well, given the fact that even a broken watch is correct twice each day, one day this fatigued logic about gold will be equally correct, not to mention it may become at that time and going forward permanently correct when it happens ! Problem: Sitting on dead money waiting for it to happen. For many, it's not "will it happen," but "when will it happen ?" For traders, it's irrelevant because traders trade, not wait around. For investors, the dead money problem is meaningful. That is probably why it is so popular for advisors to say, "Have some gold for insurance."
2. His first "fact" that gold represents money (I assume in the "universal" and "always" sense) has been argued vehemently on the other side that is not the case. I would like to see that debate among the best to argue for their side of this premise.
3. "But China's hoard has proved insufficient for its needs with the result that it now rivals India as the biggest gold importer."
A. That makes China the world's poster child for dollar cost averaging. (Not relevant, but it just struck me that way.)
B. What is China's "needs" for gold he refers to ? I would like more specificity.
C. I don't necessarily argue the following of his premises, but they are on the surface very presumptuous of him to say (1) China "knows exactly what it is doing." How does he know ? (2) "The Chinese...know only too well where the world's latest misadventure in fiat currency is heading." How does he know what is in the minds of Chinese ? I am just saying it is convenient for him (and any other pro-gold person) to extrapolate from one's own conviction in gold that the Chinese are thinking exactly the same as him. I want to know his source for (1) and (2).
He did a great job for me fulfilling his objective. I enjoyed reading it and learning a lot.
Thanks, Wallace, for the long post of references.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3780893#post3780893
Nevertheless, as I have posted elsewhere, when that plunge was occuring on those dates, I recorded many hours of financials on cable, financial networks for my review, and I found almost all professional traders interviewed said SELL at the time, but were BULLISH for the long term.
I'm sure all Embry's pro-gold points have been discussed elsewhere, ad nausesm. I am curious about many of them for more detail I would have liked to have seen and wonder about the quality of merit about them. That begs having discusion on them, which understandably was not the ojective of his piece as much as it was for him enumerating all the pro's for owning gold. Regardless, some of his points were pretty provocative.
1. It appears to me the traditional heart and soul for being pro-gold is the fiat currency argument which he espouses and which has been around for ages. (Voltaire saying paper currency will return to its intrinsic value eventually, which is zero !) Well, given the fact that even a broken watch is correct twice each day, one day this fatigued logic about gold will be equally correct, not to mention it may become at that time and going forward permanently correct when it happens ! Problem: Sitting on dead money waiting for it to happen. For many, it's not "will it happen," but "when will it happen ?" For traders, it's irrelevant because traders trade, not wait around. For investors, the dead money problem is meaningful. That is probably why it is so popular for advisors to say, "Have some gold for insurance."
2. His first "fact" that gold represents money (I assume in the "universal" and "always" sense) has been argued vehemently on the other side that is not the case. I would like to see that debate among the best to argue for their side of this premise.
3. "But China's hoard has proved insufficient for its needs with the result that it now rivals India as the biggest gold importer."
A. That makes China the world's poster child for dollar cost averaging. (Not relevant, but it just struck me that way.)
B. What is China's "needs" for gold he refers to ? I would like more specificity.
C. I don't necessarily argue the following of his premises, but they are on the surface very presumptuous of him to say (1) China "knows exactly what it is doing." How does he know ? (2) "The Chinese...know only too well where the world's latest misadventure in fiat currency is heading." How does he know what is in the minds of Chinese ? I am just saying it is convenient for him (and any other pro-gold person) to extrapolate from one's own conviction in gold that the Chinese are thinking exactly the same as him. I want to know his source for (1) and (2).
He did a great job for me fulfilling his objective. I enjoyed reading it and learning a lot.
Thanks, Wallace, for the long post of references.
entered 2nd xauusd demo Sell last night at $1477.73
1st Sell at $1388.26 currently down about $923
the 'proper' trade should have been after the original Sells from $1573.69 were closed
a Buy should have been initiated - 'always in the market' . the idea being that if as in
my case one has a Sell price level, one waits - in profit - until one has confirmation
the Buy can be closed, and the Sell then entered - I realise you know this already
1st Sell at $1388.26 currently down about $923
the 'proper' trade should have been after the original Sells from $1573.69 were closed
a Buy should have been initiated - 'always in the market' . the idea being that if as in
my case one has a Sell price level, one waits - in profit - until one has confirmation
the Buy can be closed, and the Sell then entered - I realise you know this already