Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
peterb
ParticipantI think all the Wall Street lobbyist beat me to the call. They give more money than me, too.
ParticipantI think all the Wall Street lobbyist beat me to the call. They give more money than me, too.
ParticipantI think all the Wall Street lobbyist beat me to the call. They give more money than me, too.
ParticipantOK all you knife catchers out there, unemployment just called and it’s 7.7%. Officially! Cant wait for next month!!
How about that bottom now?
Look out
below…..
ParticipantOK all you knife catchers out there, unemployment just called and it’s 7.7%. Officially! Cant wait for next month!!
How about that bottom now?
Look out
below…..
ParticipantOK all you knife catchers out there, unemployment just called and it’s 7.7%. Officially! Cant wait for next month!!
How about that bottom now?
Look out
below…..
ParticipantOK all you knife catchers out there, unemployment just called and it’s 7.7%. Officially! Cant wait for next month!!
How about that bottom now?
Look out
below…..
ParticipantOK all you knife catchers out there, unemployment just called and it’s 7.7%. Officially! Cant wait for next month!!
How about that bottom now?
Look out
below…..
ParticipantI 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?
ParticipantI 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?
ParticipantI 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?
ParticipantI 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?
ParticipantI 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?
September 19, 2008 at 9:13 AM in reply to: So now the Feds are gonna clear out the Banks REO’s???? #272639ParticipantCount on the govt to screw up whatever they decide to do. This actually could be beneficial in that re-pricing of the market would be done on a wholesale basis. Rather than wait for the market to process all the upside down people, the govt just starts slashing the loans and thus reducing the encumberance that must be dealt with before a new transaction can be completed..i.e..reducing the outstanding loan balance. They could lock-up the homes from transactions, but that would kill the RE business. So I doubt they’d go that far.
It’s pretty hard to deny the market pressure out there, but it’s funny watching the massive incompetants of our politicians as they try to “solve” the problem. No matter what scenario I run through my mind, it still ends up that the prices will be forced down for the market.
-
AuthorPosts
