Jon Nadler of Kitco.......curious fellow....
RGJohn
Posts: 402
I know this has been a topic previously but I thought that today's post by Nadler at the Kitco site was a bit too egregious.
---------
$800 Gold Prediction. No, A Zero Is NOT Missing.
By Jon Nadler
May 3 2010 9:10AM
www.kitco.com
Good Morning,
..........
In an effort to stimulate apparently less-than-interested (at these prices) gold coin buyers, India Post is offering a 6% discount to would-be purchasers, good through the end of the month. In a joint effort with the World Gold Council, the country’s postal service is making 1,5, and 8 gram pure gold coins available through local head offices in various Indian provinces. It remains to be seen how much foot traffic the discount will engender.
--------------
There is no information at the India Post website to substantiate this fable and Nadler offers nothing beyond the mere bald assertion. On his own site, spot gold was $1186 which means that India Post (this is the post office BTW, not a newspaper) is selling gold for $1114. C'mon now Jon, get the facts straight. They're actually giving it away entirely free but DO limit the quantity to one's body weight.
---------
$800 Gold Prediction. No, A Zero Is NOT Missing.
By Jon Nadler
May 3 2010 9:10AM
www.kitco.com
Good Morning,
..........
In an effort to stimulate apparently less-than-interested (at these prices) gold coin buyers, India Post is offering a 6% discount to would-be purchasers, good through the end of the month. In a joint effort with the World Gold Council, the country’s postal service is making 1,5, and 8 gram pure gold coins available through local head offices in various Indian provinces. It remains to be seen how much foot traffic the discount will engender.
--------------
There is no information at the India Post website to substantiate this fable and Nadler offers nothing beyond the mere bald assertion. On his own site, spot gold was $1186 which means that India Post (this is the post office BTW, not a newspaper) is selling gold for $1114. C'mon now Jon, get the facts straight. They're actually giving it away entirely free but DO limit the quantity to one's body weight.
Many, many perfect transactions with other members. Ask please.
0
Comments
i think the discount is to get them to buy the coins and NOT fabricate it into jewellry??? just my morning shot from the hip.
Nadler has just upped his bottom. i thought it was $650 now it's $800?
i sorta stopped reading him for any educational purpose some time ago. he will be right someday, like a broken clock. i seem to think you agree.
Free Trial
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/gold/liberty-head-2-1-gold-major-sets/liberty-head-2-1-gold-basic-set-circulation-strikes-1840-1907-cac/alltimeset/268163
If I want entertaining bs, I'll watch a White House news conference.
I knew it would happen.
No doubt old Nadsless still has his own 2007 $600 prediction still set in stone. All his weary (and teary eyed) followers have been at the train station since August 2007 waiting to board the gold train. One thing for sure, they must be a hearty bunch with 3 yrs approaching fast.
The only call that Nads has gotten right was calling for a top in gold in early 2008. Like a broken clock, he eventually got a call a right. One right call in 3 years ain't much of a track record. And did he get his followers that were flush with cash waiting for an entry point back into gold on that deep $690 drop in November 2008? Of course not....he's still waiting for $600.
roadrunner
MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
The higher gold goes the more hysterical he gets...lol its a little funny
Groucho Marx
–John Adams, 1826
<< <i>I agree ..... but what a great buying opportunity. >>
I looked into the story a bit further and although there is a grain of truth therein, there is also quite a mountain of manure.
India does consume more gold than any other country. Even though it's mostly poor, gold in any amount is esteemed by society as a whole. So in order to facilitate the purchase of gold in small rural areas not served by banks ( in India banks also market gold) and to build their own reputation as a modern and trustworthy institution the India Post commissioned a Swiss firm to manufacture 1/2 half gram, one gram, and other very small 'coins' of 24K gold.
So during the month long holiday that ended Oct 24, 2009, as a promotion, India Post would give a buyer a single one-half gram when the buyer bought 10 grams in any combination of sizes. It was strictly limited to one. They had some 40,000 customers but I dunno if they all qualified for the freebee. (It sounded almost like the books of stamps one could assemble one or two stamps at a time and then when full turn it in for a US Savings Bond. Any other old timers out there remember that at our post offices? Seems to me you bought $12.50 in stamps in 25 cent increments and you got a $25 (value at maturity) bond.)
Anyway back to India. At the time this went on the price of gold was such that the half gram bonus amounted to 6%. But the whole deal ended more than 6 months ago, was limited to one single half-gram 'rebate', and has absolutely no value as supporting Big Jon's bearish argument that gold is so darned over-priced they dang near gotta give it away.
-----------
Thanks to all for your replies. The consensus is clearly:"Don't make yourself nuts reading that stuff". I accept that consensus and intend in future to act upon it!
--Severian the Lame
<< <i>He's become so discredited in my view that he isn't worth the read. There is a difference between having a negative viewpoint and having an agenda with no change in the agenda even in the face of changing market conditions.
If I want entertaining bs, I'll watch a White House news conference. >>
Fred, Las Vegas, NV
<< <i>Remember Baghdad Bob?
Comical Ali
He was almost as hilarious as BongoBongo
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
examples, please.
isn't it genuinely worrisome that the gold spot price could have a major downturn because so many governments and institutions hold thousands and thousands of tons of gold in reserve?
why hasn't that happened, then?
Isn't the price of gold subject to possible manipulation one way or the other by any one of several large governmental holders?
yes.
aren't many of the columns of Nadler informative, thought-provoking and entertaining?
not really. I find him to be always mindlessly and totally bearish
I'd be interested to know how you arrived at your assumptions.
I knew it would happen.
As I indicated, I'm just a watcher, and not investing myself (although I have a few gold buffalo coins stashed away). But if I were invested in gold bullion, I'd wonder about the approximately thirty thousand metric tons of gold supposed to be in the vaults of various governments and governmental agencies, which might be leaked out into the open market. All those southern European countries in the news with heavy indebtedness have substantial gold reserves, Greece (112 tons), Portugal (382 tons), Spain (282 tons) and Italy (2,452 tons) that could be mobilized, and the next question is where would they sell? Would it be only government to government, and even then might gold prices be affected?
Anyway, I like Nadler's writing because he has the knack of turning phrases in an entertaining way, and he seems to me to be providing useful information. I don't see where he has some sneaky or nefarious agenda. If he does, I'm hoping someone will explain that to me. His words are not in themselves a factor in the price of gold. If he presents an idea you don't share, or don't like, isn't that often more useful than getting the same opinion as yours rehashed all over again? In summary, I just don't understand exactly what the objection is to Nadler. Is the objection to something about him personally? And does any of the objection extend to Kitco itself?
"Interest rates, the price of money, are the most important market. And, perversely, they’re the market that’s most manipulated by the Fed." - Doug Casey
<< <i> ......The main thing I don't understand, and was asking about in my previous post, is why is it apparently so fashionable to bash Nadler? His columns are descriptive, and the quotes sometimes attributed to him are not his own words but ideas from other analysts.......
, and he seems to me to be providing useful information. I don't see where he has some sneaky or nefarious agenda. If he does, I'm hoping someone will explain that to me. His words are not in themselves a factor in the price of gold. If he presents an idea you don't share, or don't like, isn't that often more useful than getting the same opinion as yours rehashed all over again? In summary, I just don't understand exactly what the objection is to Nadler. Is the objection to something about him personally? And does any of the objection extend to Kitco itself? >>
###
I agree and I disagree but I sure appreciate the manner in which you express yourself.
----
I too agree that Mr. N. has a different perspective from much of what one reads. My objection to this particular thing he wrote is that it is untrue. Gold was not being sold on the date he wrote this at a 6% discount to spot by India Post. So what he wrote, while entertaining perhaps (and the man has an undisputed facility at the catchy turn of phrase), it is factually untrue. So now, may you and I fairly characterise that as 'useful information'? I can't. If it were true, I would already have gotten my required vaccinations and made financial arrangements such that if nothing less I would have enjoyed an entirely free vacation in India while I bought up 24K coins at the post office which I'd immediately ship home to you and you'd sell them to Kitco and we'd split the resulting obscene profits. See what I mean? Or, more likely , again WERE it true, Kitco would glom onto the realization that they too could made scads at this. I mean, they ARE in what business? Duh? Is there a thing called arbitrage? 6% ain't enough?
----
So I find that curious. Why does a person of his stature in the precious metals community resort to behavior of this sort? The objection on my part is certainly not personal. I don't know the man. His appearance is unobjectionable. He knows his 'your, yore, you're' stuff. Got the 'way with words' thing we all love about him.
I sure don't mind him ( or anybody else) presenting an idea that I don't share. But if one is reduced to knowingly fabricating fictions or distorting the true nature of a situation to such an extent as seems to me has been done in this case, then I don't feel that I have done the fellow any injustice in merely pointing that out. No bash intended.
----
As to the company itself by which Mr. N. is employed, my understanding is that it enjoys ,deservedly, a near-exalted status.
------
Thanks again to all and one. I thought this thread had died but it just gets better!
John
Here's one of my favorite JN youtubes (the entire series is probably worth a listen) he jumps in at around 2:30:
Korelin Economics Report: Is Silver Money? Pt.3
Sure. But when those opposing opinions are almost always calling for gold to resort to commodity status then it gets a bit tiresome. After 3 years of calling for $600 gold (when gold was still under $700) don't you think you could tweak the message just a bit and admit you were wrong? When has Nadler ever been bullish on gold above $1000? I don't think he ever has been. The only other major analyst I can think of with a worse track record in longer term gold predictions is Prechter, who has been calling for $200 gold....since it was $400.
But if I were invested in gold bullion, I'd wonder about the approximately thirty thousand metric tons of gold supposed to be in the vaults of various governments and governmental agencies, which might be leaked out into the open market. All those southern European countries in the news with heavy indebtedness have substantial gold reserves, Greece (112 tons), Portugal (382 tons), Spain (282 tons) and Italy (2,452 tons) that could be mobilized, and the next question is where would they sell? Would it be only government to government, and even then might gold prices be affected?
Those amounts of gold are hardly substantial compared to the TRILLIONs in currency, debt, and derivatives in existance. For instance the USA's 8100 tons of gold, even if all there and put to immediate use towards the budget, would cover
roadrunner
Roadrunner is much more knowledgeable than me, and I'm grateful for his insights. Yes, all the gold in the world wouldn't be enough to underpin even the U.S. economy alone. How does that affect gold being the ultimate measure of value? Doesn't that mean gold is becoming less and less essential to the monetary system, and behaving more and more like an actual commodity? Didn't Nadler seem to reject that idea in the video? Regardless, ignoring Nadler, what are the implications of all this for us readers of posts on this Precious Metals forum, how do we best translate the current world economic situation into small-scale actions we can take privately for our own protection?
<< <i>Having watched the Korelin youtube video kindly provided by meluaufeet of Maui, my impression was Nadler appeared much too smug, but probably everyone on that panel also had a strong ego. As for Nadler's statement that gold is money and silver is not as proven by Central Bank holdings, that may be correct in a theoretical textbook way. But in practice, gold may not be the best form for protecting assets, especially for an ordinary individual or family, when paper currency loses value drastically, as was argued by others on that panel. In any case, Nadler didn't seem to display a bias there against gold.
Roadrunner is much more knowledgeable than me, and I'm grateful for his insights. Yes, all the gold in the world wouldn't be enough to underpin even the U.S. economy alone. How does that affect gold being the ultimate measure of value? Doesn't that mean gold is becoming less and less essential to the monetary system, and behaving more and more like an actual commodity? Didn't Nadler seem to reject that idea in the video? Regardless, ignoring Nadler, what are the implications of all this for us readers of posts on this Precious Metals forum, how do we best translate the current world economic situation into small-scale actions we can take privately for our own protection? >>
"Gold is money and nothing else" ~ JP Morgan, 1913.
The way I see it - Gold is the monetary system - everything else revolves around it. Just because government printed trillions in paper money doesn't change Gold. Gold should rise in price to meet the expansion of printed money, as it's done before and throughout history. There's some out there calling for 5K for an ounce of gold and others for 15K gold; these calls are based on that need for expansion.
Free Trial
botanist, I didn't mean to sound harsh or blunt in my response (well, maybe a little bit). Regarding Nadler, if you read enough of him for a long enough period of time, you will begin to notice his bias. Bias is a killer when it comes to making good financial moves, and I see that is your interest here, like it is for most everyone else here - so some of us do have unfavorable views of Nadler's because of his perceived bias.
Gold has been demonetized officially for years, and that is part of the irony. If gold isn't important, why DO the central banks bother with it? The simple fact is that gold has been considered money throughout history - and just because we live in modern times, it really doesn't change that fact. Every paper currency that has ever existed in the world has met the same endgame - first, it gets abused by the government that creates it and eventually it goes to zero. The dollar and every other modern currency on earth has followed the same tragectory. It happens. Plan for that contingency, because the odds are tremendous and the evidence mounts in every aspect of today's news.
Nadler's statement that gold is money and silver is not as proven by Central Bank holdings, that may be correct in a theoretical textbook way. But in practice, gold may not be the best form for protecting assets, especially for an ordinary individual or family, when paper currency loses value drastically, as was argued by others on that panel.
In my lifetime, government budgets have gone from hundreds of millions, to hundreds of billions and now to trillions. There is nothing on the horizon to tell me that the trend won't continue. If not silver or gold, then it needs to be something that will still be worth something at a later date. Nothing else fits the requirements as well as silver or gold. Maybe Intel chips? Nah. Everything's been tried at least once before, eh?
I did like the part of the video that discussed the decoupling of silver from gold due to demand destruction in silver. That makes sense to me, and it also seems to indicate to me that silver supply is now getting tighter because it seems to track the stock market more than it tracks gold. While gold seems to maintain a more stable status as real money, I continue to wonder when or if silver demand will finally overtake silver supply enough to cause a problem in Comex deliveries.
what are the implications of all this for us readers of posts on this Precious Metals forum, how do we best translate the current world economic situation into small-scale actions we can take privately for our own protection?
That's what we're all here to discuss. You might think that this place has only one viewpoint and that it's closedminded towards anything but a rising gold price. Let me be the first to say that is not the case. We're all looking for good rationales to make the right moves. A healthy debate is good for keeping reality on the front burner.
Some of us here are accumulators and some are traders. If you ventured into this place without prior knowledge, don't worry. You are asking great questions. Welcome!
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>On the day when gold hits an all time high his Kitco article is titled "Rhodium Rocks"
It didn't say: "Jump through the windows for any who paid $10,000/ounce?" Can't imagine being one of those poor suckers...I'll take my average buy-in for silver $17-ish over a 70% decline (or 90% decline at the lowest point!) any day...
I knew it would happen.
As for what Kitco-employee Jon Nadler might have socked away in his own personal portfolio, even if he honestly told us, or we could guess that correctly, it's almost irrelevant, and should not affect what we decide to do for ourselves. If we're preparing for total financial collapse and anarchy, precious metals or coins might be of little value compared to ammo, booze, canned goods, sacks of potatoes, cigarettes, solar-rechargeable batteries, and stuff like that. If we're preparing for the much more likely hyper-inflation, then this precious metals forum seems to be a fine place for discussion: precious metals might be the absolute best store of value, especially for those with limited resources. The main problem then is which metal(s) and in which form(s).
And that reminds of my previous question about gold, which I'm still hoping someone will answer: Why isn't it very worrisome to link our investment with the actions and fortunes of governments who hold maybe about 30,000 tons of the metal, and who can therefore make a big downward dent in the market anytime they wish? Also there's supposed to be another 100,000 tons of gold out there in private hands, how does that affect the gold market?
And that reminds of my previous question about gold, which I'm still hoping someone will answer: Why isn't it very worrisome to link our investment with the actions and fortunes of governments who hold maybe about 30,000 tons of the metal, and who can therefore make a big downward dent in the market anytime they wish? Also there's supposed to be another 100,000 tons of gold out there in private hands, how does that affect the gold market?
Governments are very secretive about their holdings of gold, and practically all estimates of how much gold any government holds is speculation. Otherwise, we would be seeing regular reporting of those holdings. There is no reason for government holdings of gold to be sequestered and kept secret. There are only two conclusions I can make: 1) is that the government mismanages the gold inventory as badly as they mismanage everything else and don't want disclosure, 2) the government values gold as the ultimate resource and doesn't want to tip their hand to any rivals about how much trouble they are really in, or how strong their ultimate position is.
In any case, given the secrecy about government holdings of gold, all else being equal - you must assume that any overhang of excess gold inventory is a constant and is already baked into the price of gold. If they needed to sell the gold, or wanted to sell the gold, they would have sold the gold or they would be selling the gold, and we would know about it or we wouldn't know about it. In any event, it's a constant unknown.
On the other hand, I know that we are hundreds of $Trillions of dollars in the hole, and my best guess is that gold is going to be much more reliable as a store of wealth than dollar-denominated assets, all things being equal, known and unknown. Is it worrisome that the government might be sitting on a pile of gold, ready to sell it into the market on a whim? Not to me.
I knew it would happen.
Yes, you're right, there's no question that Kitco must own a meaningful amount of Rhodium in order to be selling it in a form apparently of their own design. Although I suspect they may not have an tremendous quantity, partly because they're strongly advising buyers to let them at Kitco hold your Rhodium for you, so when you're ready to sell back to them, it's only a matter of an electronic click and drag. However, if buyers do that, doesn't that imply Kitco has the capability for dabbling in creative bookkeeping, and won't have to handle or stockpile all the Rhodium they sell, they can leverage it, and maintain only a small inventory? Then the next question is when did Kitco buy their Rhodium and what did they pay?
Kitco might also be pushing Rhodium because they can buy and sell so profitably with such a large spread between bid and ask, a large spread perhaps made possible by a lack of competition. As far as I know, the only other firm selling Rhodium to the public is the Cohen Mint which is offering tiny one-gram coin-shaped disks with an extremely unattractive design.
Reverting to gold, because of those enormous secret holdings perhaps tied up by secret deals and agreements, and maybe for other reasons, doesn't silver appear to be much more promising as a hedge against currency devaluation? Especially for the small holder, it's in much more convenient and recognizable units. And for me, very importantly, the market for it is relatively free, isn't it?
<< <i>Why isn't it very worrisome to link our investment with the actions and fortunes of governments >>
In essence... doesn't this apply to all (or nearly all) investments/assets?
Regarding JN... him being a bear is not what bugs me (although he has stated on occasion that he thought spot price might go up "next week") its that his 'long term' outlook has been wrong for so long, and the way he seems to take such enjoyment in mocking people.
... its not any different (to me) than the countless pundits on CNBC/Bloomberg/etc. that were/are always long term bulls during the past decade... they were just as wrong, they also seem to enjoy mocking people with opposite views.
JN has the right to earn a living, and one could infer that he is good at what he does... to that end I wish him well.
I've always felt that silver had the greatest potential for large gains, but that hasn't always caused silver to go up. I've always felt that gold was harder to make money investing in, but that's not necessarily true either.
Silver does have the advantage of being available in smaller increments. Gold has the advantage of packing more value into a smaller number of cubic inches.
With the metals reaching new intermediate and long term highs, and with the metals being "on fire" the best approach to accumulation for long term asset preservation continues to be cost averaging into a position. You can figure out your own schedule, but there is NO substitute for making a commitment and then sticking to it, like any savings plan.
Some people advocate trading, impeccable timing, and chart reading. I've made money on temporary positions when I felt the trend was strong and decided to play it, but I'm convinced that it's more rewarding and more satisfying to build a position slowly and to watch it grow during a longterm trend. Since I feel that we are still in a longterm trend, I still feel that this approach makes the most sense for me. Not as exciting as a quick score on margin in a fast market - to be sure, but exciting none the less.
I knew it would happen.
Hear, hear sir, and so say we all!