Real estate vs cash or gold

[Anonymous]

[quote=stockstradr]
Having said all that, I’ll finish by sharing the simple fact that I made twenty-five grand on gold in the last 48 hours. [/quote]

Good bait, I will bite.

(hijack)

So it that a paper gain or booked profit ?
In either case what happens if it moves again, quickly and substantially, in the opposite direction ?

Just trying to get a feel when/whether to book profit/loss or let it run or wait/hope for recovery.

One of the basic trading dilemmas I am yet to resolve/understand.

(/hijack)

[34f3f3f]

My post was more hypothetical, and pointing to security of assets rather than short term profits to be had from current gold speculation. I do know Rich and am aware of his views, and have myself been well invested in gold for some time. However, for those seeking a little more stability and security, bricks and mortar, even if still on a depreciating curve, has one fundamental benefit over everything else, you can live in it. I don’t think the time has been reached yet for many of us, but is got pretty close to at least considering it over the last few days, driven less my prices and more by financial anarchy.

[34f3f3f]

My post was more hypothetical, and pointing to security of assets rather than short term profits to be had from current gold speculation. I do know Rich and am aware of his views, and have myself been well invested in gold for some time. However, for those seeking a little more stability and security, bricks and mortar, even if still on a depreciating curve, has one fundamental benefit over everything else, you can live in it. I don’t think the time has been reached yet for many of us, but is got pretty close to at least considering it over the last few days, driven less my prices and more by financial anarchy.

[34f3f3f]

My post was more hypothetical, and pointing to security of assets rather than short term profits to be had from current gold speculation. I do know Rich and am aware of his views, and have myself been well invested in gold for some time. However, for those seeking a little more stability and security, bricks and mortar, even if still on a depreciating curve, has one fundamental benefit over everything else, you can live in it. I don’t think the time has been reached yet for many of us, but is got pretty close to at least considering it over the last few days, driven less my prices and more by financial anarchy.

[34f3f3f]

My post was more hypothetical, and pointing to security of assets rather than short term profits to be had from current gold speculation. I do know Rich and am aware of his views, and have myself been well invested in gold for some time. However, for those seeking a little more stability and security, bricks and mortar, even if still on a depreciating curve, has one fundamental benefit over everything else, you can live in it. I don’t think the time has been reached yet for many of us, but is got pretty close to at least considering it over the last few days, driven less my prices and more by financial anarchy.

[34f3f3f]

My post was more hypothetical, and pointing to security of assets rather than short term profits to be had from current gold speculation. I do know Rich and am aware of his views, and have myself been well invested in gold for some time. However, for those seeking a little more stability and security, bricks and mortar, even if still on a depreciating curve, has one fundamental benefit over everything else, you can live in it. I don’t think the time has been reached yet for many of us, but is got pretty close to at least considering it over the last few days, driven less my prices and more by financial anarchy.

[peterb]

I read Rich’s analysis as the why gold is not in a bubble. And I would agree based on fundemental analysis rather than chart analysis. If you looked at house price charts, they dont look too different from gold from 2001 to 2006.

From a fundemental aspect, it’s difficult to value gold, but I think that the cost of extraction/production is a fair place to start. The break-even for gold is $500 to $600. So anything above this is a premium for what someone would consider it’s future value or hedge against currency devaluation/weakness/instability.
So, by my way of thinking(suspect at best)if gold is selling for say $900/ounce, then there’s a $300 premium for it. So you’re kind of betting that the currency or US$ has got some devaluing to do in the future. Hopefully sooner than later.
One caveat about this analysis is that if energy prices decrease, the cost of gold extraction will decrease as well since extraction is energy intensive.
At any rate, the cost of production indicates to me that gold is not in a bubble. However, If oil prices continue to decrease and the US$ gains stregnth, the premium for gold should decrease as a result. But, how long can these two factors contunue?!

In this evironment, being liquid has a lot of appeal to me as opportunities are coming and houses are still decreasing in price. You can always rent. Why buy a house and hang-up your money in a devaluing, illiquid asset?

[peterb]

I read Rich’s analysis as the why gold is not in a bubble. And I would agree based on fundemental analysis rather than chart analysis. If you looked at house price charts, they dont look too different from gold from 2001 to 2006.

From a fundemental aspect, it’s difficult to value gold, but I think that the cost of extraction/production is a fair place to start. The break-even for gold is $500 to $600. So anything above this is a premium for what someone would consider it’s future value or hedge against currency devaluation/weakness/instability.
So, by my way of thinking(suspect at best)if gold is selling for say $900/ounce, then there’s a $300 premium for it. So you’re kind of betting that the currency or US$ has got some devaluing to do in the future. Hopefully sooner than later.
One caveat about this analysis is that if energy prices decrease, the cost of gold extraction will decrease as well since extraction is energy intensive.
At any rate, the cost of production indicates to me that gold is not in a bubble. However, If oil prices continue to decrease and the US$ gains stregnth, the premium for gold should decrease as a result. But, how long can these two factors contunue?!

In this evironment, being liquid has a lot of appeal to me as opportunities are coming and houses are still decreasing in price. You can always rent. Why buy a house and hang-up your money in a devaluing, illiquid asset?

[peterb]

I read Rich’s analysis as the why gold is not in a bubble. And I would agree based on fundemental analysis rather than chart analysis. If you looked at house price charts, they dont look too different from gold from 2001 to 2006.

From a fundemental aspect, it’s difficult to value gold, but I think that the cost of extraction/production is a fair place to start. The break-even for gold is $500 to $600. So anything above this is a premium for what someone would consider it’s future value or hedge against currency devaluation/weakness/instability.
So, by my way of thinking(suspect at best)if gold is selling for say $900/ounce, then there’s a $300 premium for it. So you’re kind of betting that the currency or US$ has got some devaluing to do in the future. Hopefully sooner than later.
One caveat about this analysis is that if energy prices decrease, the cost of gold extraction will decrease as well since extraction is energy intensive.
At any rate, the cost of production indicates to me that gold is not in a bubble. However, If oil prices continue to decrease and the US$ gains stregnth, the premium for gold should decrease as a result. But, how long can these two factors contunue?!

In this evironment, being liquid has a lot of appeal to me as opportunities are coming and houses are still decreasing in price. You can always rent. Why buy a house and hang-up your money in a devaluing, illiquid asset?

[peterb]

I read Rich’s analysis as the why gold is not in a bubble. And I would agree based on fundemental analysis rather than chart analysis. If you looked at house price charts, they dont look too different from gold from 2001 to 2006.

From a fundemental aspect, it’s difficult to value gold, but I think that the cost of extraction/production is a fair place to start. The break-even for gold is $500 to $600. So anything above this is a premium for what someone would consider it’s future value or hedge against currency devaluation/weakness/instability.
So, by my way of thinking(suspect at best)if gold is selling for say $900/ounce, then there’s a $300 premium for it. So you’re kind of betting that the currency or US$ has got some devaluing to do in the future. Hopefully sooner than later.
One caveat about this analysis is that if energy prices decrease, the cost of gold extraction will decrease as well since extraction is energy intensive.
At any rate, the cost of production indicates to me that gold is not in a bubble. However, If oil prices continue to decrease and the US$ gains stregnth, the premium for gold should decrease as a result. But, how long can these two factors contunue?!

In this evironment, being liquid has a lot of appeal to me as opportunities are coming and houses are still decreasing in price. You can always rent. Why buy a house and hang-up your money in a devaluing, illiquid asset?

[peterb]

I read Rich’s analysis as the why gold is not in a bubble. And I would agree based on fundemental analysis rather than chart analysis. If you looked at house price charts, they dont look too different from gold from 2001 to 2006.

From a fundemental aspect, it’s difficult to value gold, but I think that the cost of extraction/production is a fair place to start. The break-even for gold is $500 to $600. So anything above this is a premium for what someone would consider it’s future value or hedge against currency devaluation/weakness/instability.
So, by my way of thinking(suspect at best)if gold is selling for say $900/ounce, then there’s a $300 premium for it. So you’re kind of betting that the currency or US$ has got some devaluing to do in the future. Hopefully sooner than later.
One caveat about this analysis is that if energy prices decrease, the cost of gold extraction will decrease as well since extraction is energy intensive.
At any rate, the cost of production indicates to me that gold is not in a bubble. However, If oil prices continue to decrease and the US$ gains stregnth, the premium for gold should decrease as a result. But, how long can these two factors contunue?!

In this evironment, being liquid has a lot of appeal to me as opportunities are coming and houses are still decreasing in price. You can always rent. Why buy a house and hang-up your money in a devaluing, illiquid asset?

[cr]

Today was a forced rally.

To me it just shows how many traders really expected this decline to continue.

So the shorts are covered, now what? These banks are suddenly profitable again?

Yeah right.

Fleckenstein (the mullet) ripped the shorting ban last night with a great line in response to the claim that shorting artificially drove prices down, and said that if the prices are artifically low, then where are the buyers?

Look at the stocks that aren’t up today, and I think it’s telling of what’s really happening. This quasi-government induced rally is only designed to pad the holdings the Government just bought with more of our borrowed money.

It will end and stocks will plummet back to where they need to be.

[cr]

Today was a forced rally.

To me it just shows how many traders really expected this decline to continue.

So the shorts are covered, now what? These banks are suddenly profitable again?

Yeah right.

Fleckenstein (the mullet) ripped the shorting ban last night with a great line in response to the claim that shorting artificially drove prices down, and said that if the prices are artifically low, then where are the buyers?

Look at the stocks that aren’t up today, and I think it’s telling of what’s really happening. This quasi-government induced rally is only designed to pad the holdings the Government just bought with more of our borrowed money.

It will end and stocks will plummet back to where they need to be.

[cr]

Today was a forced rally.

To me it just shows how many traders really expected this decline to continue.

So the shorts are covered, now what? These banks are suddenly profitable again?

Yeah right.

Fleckenstein (the mullet) ripped the shorting ban last night with a great line in response to the claim that shorting artificially drove prices down, and said that if the prices are artifically low, then where are the buyers?

Look at the stocks that aren’t up today, and I think it’s telling of what’s really happening. This quasi-government induced rally is only designed to pad the holdings the Government just bought with more of our borrowed money.

It will end and stocks will plummet back to where they need to be.

[cr]

Today was a forced rally.

To me it just shows how many traders really expected this decline to continue.

So the shorts are covered, now what? These banks are suddenly profitable again?

Yeah right.

Fleckenstein (the mullet) ripped the shorting ban last night with a great line in response to the claim that shorting artificially drove prices down, and said that if the prices are artifically low, then where are the buyers?

Look at the stocks that aren’t up today, and I think it’s telling of what’s really happening. This quasi-government induced rally is only designed to pad the holdings the Government just bought with more of our borrowed money.

It will end and stocks will plummet back to where they need to be.

[Author]

Posts