Home Precious Metals

Gold $1330 Silver $22.25 Platinum $1450 Palladium $710 Rhodium $1025 .... about right here, going hi

13»

Comments

  • BaleyBaley Posts: 22,660 ✭✭✭✭✭
    you mortal you image

    Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry

  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,124 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I still think its going to drop 50%

    Someone said they wanted charts with price projections and timeframes..

    image


    If the blue uptrend line breaks the chart will progress very similarly to that of oil. Target $400 by end of summer.
    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • BaleyBaley Posts: 22,660 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Palladium at 736 looks like it has broken the blue trend line a little.

    The new "equilibrium" numbers appear to be gold 1200 silver 17 for now.

    Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry

  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,124 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Actually palladium posted a nice solid weekly close under the uptrendline for its lowest "weekly" close in over a year. Could very well be on the cusp of an "oilesque" type of move.

    To add---im gonna call my buddies and make sure they push Palladium right to the limit orders everyone has set. My media sources should start talking about this in a week or so to help it get moving. A little Russia conspiracy and manipulation talk and we should me able to make this go where we want. I pity the fools... imageimage
    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • BaleyBaley Posts: 22,660 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well, here we are back testing intermediate resistance at 1225 gold and 17.50 silver.

    If they can move past those marks on any kind of volume, this rally might have legs.. still quite a ways from 1330 and 22 though, aren't we?

    Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry

  • jmski52jmski52 Posts: 22,850 ✭✭✭✭✭
    If you wanted silver in the $16 range, I think you might have missed it. On the other hand, it's just a number.
    Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally

    I knew it would happen.
  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,124 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I still think its going to drop 50%

    Someone said they wanted charts with price projections and timeframes..

    image


    If the blue uptrend line breaks the chart will progress very similarly to that of oil. Target $400 by end of summer. >>




    Currently at $643. Making good progress. Stupid charts. image
    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • rawteam1rawteam1 Posts: 2,472 ✭✭✭
    Yea neat symmetry would be end of year 1st q 2016....
    keceph `anah
  • BaleyBaley Posts: 22,660 ✭✭✭✭✭
    ah, remember these old prices?

    Hope we get back there someday.

    Metals investing is a lot more fun when the prices go up

    Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry

  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,124 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Originally posted by: cohodk
    I still think its going to drop 50%

    Someone said they wanted charts with price projections and timeframes..

    image


    If the blue uptrend line breaks the chart will progress very similarly to that of oil. Target $400 by end of summer.



    Currently at $643. Making good progress. Stupid charts. image


    Palladium hit 451 last week. The VW diesel scandal put a wrinkle in the timing. I sure roadrunner will call exception to my prognostication. Oh well, when we please all we have pleased no one.





    Almost forgot. ...stupid charts. Lol

    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • jmski52jmski52 Posts: 22,850 ✭✭✭✭✭
    You think it would be smart to wait on buying platinum?
    Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally

    I knew it would happen.
  • BaleyBaley Posts: 22,660 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well, would you look at that, gold is back where it was 3 years ago! Silver and the other metals off their lows, but still below where they were..



    for now. Looks like we might finally get a little excitement with metals, what, does it look like the world as we know it might end, again?

    Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry

  • jmski52jmski52 Posts: 22,850 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm glad that I didn't wait around for an answer back in January.image
    Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally

    I knew it would happen.
  • derrybderryb Posts: 36,823 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Unlike other PMs, 90% of palladium demand is industrial. Palladium shows no real promise in the current economic environment. It takes productivity to drive palladium. For the near future, it will behave more like a rare industrial metal than it will a "store of value" precious metal.

    "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

  • BaleyBaley Posts: 22,660 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @OPA said:
    So far is appears, that the winner is Rhodium.

    Indeed, we all should have bought Rhodium... um, except its hard to find and very hard to sell physical, with enormous spreads.

    Five years later, another oldie but goodie thread with interesting comments.

    Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry

  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,124 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Baley said:

    @OPA said:
    So far is appears, that the winner is Rhodium.

    Indeed, we all should have bought Rhodium... um, except its hard to find and very hard to sell physical, with enormous spreads.

    Five years later, another oldie but goodie thread with interesting comments.

    Lots of consistency.

    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • OPAOPA Posts: 17,121 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Interesting reading. It appears, for the most part, that the same group of posters, that's been wrong over the last 7+ years with their forecasts, missed the "nail" once again. Time to replace those "crystal balls."

    "Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
  • bronco2078bronco2078 Posts: 10,225 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I am committed to wait forever to buy platinum. B)

  • jmski52jmski52 Posts: 22,850 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'm committed to averaging in with silver, gold and platinum. That's been the case for me for the past 20 years.

    Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally

    I knew it would happen.
  • TwoSides2aCoinTwoSides2aCoin Posts: 44,293 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Sucks to be me in a coin shop. But , I just suck it up.

  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,124 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 6, 2018 10:43AM

    @jmski52 said:
    I'm committed to averaging in with silver, gold and platinum.

    Well no $hit......you certainly haven't been able to sell for a profit.

    "Averaging in" is a just another term for psychological masterbation.

    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • jmski52jmski52 Posts: 22,850 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Well no $hit......you certainly have been able to sell for a profit.

    Actually, I have, I did and I intend to again and again. In fact, the metals have been very good to me for more years than you've been out of school. And for the most part, so have stocks (which are a totally different animal, incidentally). I just not in the unenviable position of having to sell in a panic because of a few little bouts of manipulation in the metals markets from time to time or - well, almost continuously - but after awhile you get acclimated to it.

    Unless you're an insider selling on inside information or an investment banker front-running your own clients, the best approach is to call it like you see it. Most of us don't have that built-in advantage. Investing has always been long term for me - I don't know about you. Seems not. Seems to me that the need to sell for a profit when you don't need the money qualifies as psychological masturbation more than anything else does.

    I didn't buy Chrysler when it was bailed out, I didn't buy stocks in 2009 when the Fed started QE and I'm not selling Emerging Market bonds now - not because I think they wouldn't have been or won't be winners, but because I'm not willing to bet on decisions obviously made to influence markets by people I simply don't trust.

    Let's do a brief review. When you hold your own metals, you know who has them and exactly where they are. When you own stocks, you have no idea who has control or how to get your money if there's a real problem. It's always been a confidence game with paper assets, and it's no different now. Simple fact.

    Banking & finance have had so many scandals that they haven't earned anyone's trust for years, in my estimation.

    That, and a buck will get you a cup of coffee at Mickey D's.

    Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally

    I knew it would happen.
  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,124 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Jmski, your views are so jaded. I'm sorry your life experiences have manipulated you so. You view everything is stacked against you, yet you benefit from those very things.

    You've written the words "I don't understand" so many times in this forum. That has become obvious. With metals again at generational lows vs other assets I'm sure you will be bailed out again. But think about that, "generational lows", dang!!

    Reversion to mean is your best friend.

    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • jmski52jmski52 Posts: 22,850 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 6, 2018 5:16PM

    You're pretty full of it, cohodk. Show me where I said "I don't understand" other than in reference to market opacity.

    I'll give you this much, the republic looks to be in better shape on this very day, than it's been in a long time. For investing, it will still take some more positive changes, and there's a chance that some of those changes are being made.

    Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally

    I knew it would happen.
  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,124 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 7, 2018 3:40AM

    @jmski52 said:

    I'll give you this much, the republic looks to be in better shape on this very day, than it's been in a long time. For investing, it will still take some more positive changes, and there's a chance that some of those changes are being made.

    So for 10 years you complained and poo-pooed the economy while being rebuffed continuously by improving economic data, and NOW you say it looks good? Lol

    Did you just top-tick the stock market?

    Given your record of understanding markets and economics, perhaps it's time for me to cash in some chips.

    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • jmski52jmski52 Posts: 22,850 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 7, 2018 7:37AM

    So for 10 years you complained and poo-pooed the economy while being rebuffed continuously by improving economic data, and NOW you say it looks good? Lol

    It's been a long time since I've dealt with a person who keeps twisting a conversation as much as you. You aren't quite as good at it as some of my past acquaintances, but you do try.

    I've poo-pooed the economic & (social engineering) tax policies, and the generally bogus economic data in the past - but not always the economy. Sometimes, but not always. I'll admit that the economy has worked out better than I've expected, but the data is still skewed so don't be surprised when Trump gets blamed when the debt bubble gets popped if it happens on his shift.

    Employment looks to have improved since Trump was inaugurated, but not for the 10 years prior to that. The kicker is that ALL TYPES of debt keep increasing out of control. Do you consider debt levels as a significant piece of economic data? Simple question for you. Focus, and think about it.

    Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally

    I knew it would happen.
  • bluelobsterbluelobster Posts: 1,220 ✭✭✭

    @jmski52 said:

    Employment looks to have improved since Trump was inaugurated, but not for the 10 years prior to that.

  • thefinnthefinn Posts: 2,656 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Baley said:

    @OPA said:
    So far is appears, that the winner is Rhodium.

    Indeed, we all should have bought Rhodium... um, except its hard to find and very hard to sell physical, with enormous spreads.

    Five years later, another oldie but goodie thread with interesting comments.

    I don't know. I think the people that were buying $10,000 an ounce Rhodium might disagree.

    thefinn
  • OPAOPA Posts: 17,121 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @thefinn said:

    @Baley said:

    @OPA said:
    So far is appears, that the winner is Rhodium.

    Indeed, we all should have bought Rhodium... um, except its hard to find and very hard to sell physical, with enormous spreads.

    Five years later, another oldie but goodie thread with interesting comments.

    I don't know. I think the people that were buying $10,000 an ounce Rhodium might disagree.

    Suggest you look at the date of this thread....2013. We all knew what the all time high was, but the discussion was based on 2013 and forward possibilities.

    "Bongo drive 1984 Lincoln that looks like old coin dug from ground."
  • thefinnthefinn Posts: 2,656 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @OPA said:

    @thefinn said:

    @Baley said:

    @OPA said:
    So far is appears, that the winner is Rhodium.

    Indeed, we all should have bought Rhodium... um, except its hard to find and very hard to sell physical, with enormous spreads.

    Five years later, another oldie but goodie thread with interesting comments.

    I don't know. I think the people that were buying $10,000 an ounce Rhodium might disagree.

    Suggest you look at the date of this thread....2013. We all knew what the all time high was, but the discussion was based on 2013 and forward possibilities.

    I saw it, but someone brought it back from the dead, so it is listed as a new post. And the insert at the beginning is showing the current PM pricing. But thanks for watching out for me and correcting me BB.

    thefinn
  • jmski52jmski52 Posts: 22,850 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 7, 2018 2:02PM

    BL, correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the majority of this chart influenced by large increases in part-time employment which were then magnified even more when the unaffordable ACA was enacted?

    It was common knowledge that employers were cutting off the hours worked of part timers to keep under the 30 hour minimum requirement for full time benefits of ACA, which then necessitated that workers get a 2nd job which was then counted as another "employed" in the data. I'd love to see the chart if it only reflected full-time employment.

    I'm inclined to think that the effects of fewer regulations and changes in tax law have had a more real effect. Your interpretation would be interesting.

    Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally

    I knew it would happen.
  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,124 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That is a chart of full-time employment jmski.
    https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS14100000

    Yeah, ummm, not much of what Trump says during his rallies is accurate.

    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • bluelobsterbluelobster Posts: 1,220 ✭✭✭

    @jmski52 said:
    BL, correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the majority of this chart influenced by large increases in part-time employment which were then magnified even more when the unaffordable ACA was enacted?

    It was common knowledge that employers were cutting off the hours worked of part timers to keep under the 30 hour minimum requirement for full time benefits of ACA, which then necessitated that workers get a 2nd job which was then counted as another "employed" in the data. I'd love to see the chart if it only reflected full-time employment.

    I'm inclined to think that the effects of fewer regulations and changes in tax law have had a more real effect. Your interpretation would be interesting.

    I think the data show pretty much the same thing as in Coh's chart above, which tells me above anything the cycle is cyclical. I try to avoid applying personal political bias to economic numbers, it never seems to work very well for me, but people love to do it anyway.

  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,124 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 8, 2018 5:51AM

    Jmski, does this "correct you if your wrong'? You can plainly see that part-time employment has held steady while full-time employment has increased. In fact, the number of full-time workers has increased since the trough in 2010 by 28 million people. Thats the equivalent to the entire populations of the fly-over states of Missouri, Wyoming, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Montana, Idaho, South Dakota, Iowa, Arkansas, Nebraska and North Dakota.

    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • jmski52jmski52 Posts: 22,850 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 8, 2018 6:46AM

    Thank-you for the data. It does appear that all the QE to save the banking system since the recession has supported employment as well. I didn't put much stock in Trump's claims of instantaneous economic success when he started making them so soon after he took office, however I do agree with him that the Fed's rate hikes will hurt the recovery now.

    I'm not the only one who thinks so, per John William's interview with Greg Hunter on USAWatchdog.com. It's a good interview and worth watching. John Williams points out that the Fed's tightening (along with Trump's tax cuts and over-budget spending) makes for a situation that's ever more un-manageable.

    Blue Lobster, bias or not - I don't think that you can separate out politics from economics. Voters have always voted with their pocketbooks and politicians on either end of the spectrum always use economics to target their constituents. The question is always who has the "best" interpretation of "what's going on". Data and standards get changed to fit the narrative. That's why I think that John Williams' work is valuable.

    Here's a link, but it's not working for me.

    https://usawatchdog.com/

    Economist John Williams says the recent rate hikes mean the “Fed is killing off the economy.”
    Williams says, “I heard President Trump make some comments to that effect, and he’s right. The Fed is trying to raise rates. The idea is if you get higher rates, the banks will be able to make more profits on their lending. It will also encourage bank lending. Unfortunately, on the consumer end, it raises the consumers’ cost of borrowing as interest rates go up. It makes mortgages more expensive. It makes borrowing more expensive. Mortgages go up, people don’t buy as many houses. What you are seeing right now is effectively a recession in the housing market, in the construction area. Existing home sales have been down for six or seven months in a row, and it’s down year over year.”
    Williams says, “The Fed is trying to get the system back to normal.” In doing so, the Fed could kill the system. Williams says, “Well, that’s what they are doing. In many ways, it would have been easier if the banking system would have collapsed and had a banking holiday, and restructured it and reopened it back in 2007 and 2008. That would have been a very difficult time for the people who owned the banks, and again, the Fed owns the banking system.”
    So, they are trying to fix the banks, and to do that, they will simply screw the consumer? Williams says, “Well, they have an escape clause. Former Fed Head Janet Yellen said that if the economy falls back into recession, ‘we will just go back into quantitative easing’ (QE/money printing). I think that could easily happen here. When the economy goes down, it increases the liquidity stresses on the banking system. There is default on debt, and companies tend to go out of business. That will stress the bank earnings. QE was aimed at propping up the banks in tough times. The Fed is very open to QE, and from the Fed’s standpoint, I think we are going to end up in a perpetual state of quantitative easing, unless they let the banking system reorganize and get a new functioning system. It’s still not functioning.”
    John Williams has long said that this money printing orgy by the Fed will end in a hyperinflationary event. Williams says, “Unfortunately, it is unavoidable. It is only a matter of when. It can only be avoided if the U.S. can get its long term financial house in order.”
    We all know that is not going to happen. Williams says, “As they keep going here, there is going to be hyperinflation. The dollar will weaken. Gold and silver will rally, and that will be part of a self-feeding cycle, which will get you into very high inflation. . . . If the Fed can’t get this banking crisis worked out, I would not be surprised to see a complete overhaul of the system."

    Q: Are You Printing Money? Bernanke: Not Literally

    I knew it would happen.
  • cohodkcohodk Posts: 19,124 ✭✭✭✭✭

    So the economy slows down, so what? It will pick up again. Always has.

    Hyperinflation----nope.

    Excuses are tools of the ignorant

    Knowledge is the enemy of fear

  • TwoSides2aCoinTwoSides2aCoin Posts: 44,293 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Stress test , my ass...ets

Sign In or Register to comment.