Thai Guru's Gold und Silber ... (Informationen und Vermutungen)

  • meinste solche "gaps", die zu schliessen sind?


    übrigens wird DESWEGEN immer von der $10 als Kursziel geredet!!!


    Aber alle nur deswegen diese "erkannt" weil damaliger Höchstpunkt nach den 80ern und somit wichtiger hochpunkt. dieser ist aber gleichzeitig die #1 vom dreieck, was bedeutet, dass der aktuelle thrust als MINESTziel diese $10 hat und diesen WIderstand als UNTERSTÜTZUNG zu nehmen! Und wenn ein so starker Widerstand als Unterstüptzung genommen wurde, dann... "fängts erst an!".

  • COT Silver Report - April 16, 2004


    Note: COT Report is as of Monday, April 12 - before the large correction in silver prices.


    Silver Cot Report - Futures


    [Blockierte Grafik: http://www.silverseek.com/news/COT/images/16.04.2004b.PNG]


    Silver Cot Report - Futures & Options Combined


    [Blockierte Grafik: http://www.silverseek.com/news/COT/images/16.04.2004c.PNG]

  • @ Karl,


    es gibt mittlerweile für die etwas spekulativer eingestellten Investoren neben den "Open End"-Zertifikaten auch Call-Optionsscheine auf Silber, die erst in 2006 bzw. 2007 enden (und die ich nutze bzw. nach dem Kauf dann für einige Zeit im Depot liegen lasse). Wenn man von einem sehr stark steigenden Silber ausgeht, dann ist dies neben dem Aufbau von physischen Beständen auch eine sehr lukrative Möglichkeit der Beimischung.


    Die 6000 USD/Dollar für Gold haben mich erstaunt. Das wären - beim heutigen Gold - Silberverhältnis ja ca. 110 Dollar/Uz. (wahrscheinlich sogar deutlich mehr). Aussagen in solchen Regionen findet man bisher eher selten, aber an der Überlegung ist etwas dran.


    Grüße


    Silbertaler

  • [Blockierte Grafik: http://in.rediff.com/uim/common/newlogo.gif]


    http://in.rediff.com/money/2004/apr/17gold.htm


    [Blockierte Grafik: http://im.rediff.com/uim/common/bus_head1.gif]


    For Indians, gold shines like never before


    Sangita Shah in Mumbai | April 17, 2004 10:35 IST


    Gold continued to be in demand in India during 2003 though global gold prices soared to multiple-year highs. Indian gold demand increased 2.5 per cent in a year in which global demand fell 6 per cent.


    Indians were expected to buy more gold this year as the $400 and above price mark becomes acceptable.


    The Gold Survey 2004 report released by UK-based GFMS pointed out that jewellery fabrication declined 6 per cent in 2003 to 2,533 tonnes but outlook in 2004 was bright as markets were expected to adjust to the higher price of gold.


    Jewellery sales declined for the third year in a row in 2004. Sales were more than 20 per cent or nearly 700 tonnes less from sales reported in 2000.


    GFMS director Paul Walker noted, "Surprisingly, whilst total jewellery fabrication fell, small gains were recorded in two of the most important gold jewellery markets - China and India. Rapid adjustment of consumers price expectations and robust economic growth fuelled in part by a good monsoon helped Indian demand rise 2.5 per cent".


    Jewellery's share of annual gold demand dropped from 80 per cent to just over 60 per cent over three years even as gold price in dollar terms rose nearly 50 per cent. Volumes fell the most in Europe (109 tonnes) and East Asia (57 tonnes).


    The outlook for 2004 was seen to be positive because markets were adjusting to the $400 plus gold price. Jewellery was expected to revive as a result.


    Italian jewellery fabrication demand fell the most, to 85 tonnes. Intense competition from countries like Turkey and weaker demand in important end-markets like United States were blamed for the Italian problem.


    North American fabrication fell 7 per cent, primarily as a result of weak domestic retail sales. It could have fallen further were it not for higher than expected sales in the last quarter of 2003.


    In contrast, Turkish demand rose 46 per cent year-on-year in 2003. Offtake rose by 67 tonnes to 213 tonnes. Turkey became the third largest jewellery fabricator in the world, behind India and Italy.


    The report said the secular decline in jewellery consumption caused by changing fashions and consumer spending habits contributed, at the margin, to the overall fall in fabrication. Gold's prospects in 2004 largely depended upon further growth in investment demand.


    GFMS' proprietary data showed the combined demand from implied net investment (at 600t), bar hoarding (at 183t) and coin sales (at 105t) amounted to 888 tonnes in 2003. This was 420 tonnes more than World Investment demand in 2002.


    World Investment's share of total gold demand in 2003 also rose to 21 per cent, compared to 12 per cent in 2002. Contribution to demand from de-hedging fell from 11 per cent in 2002 to just over 7 per cent in 2003.


    The nominal dollar value of World Investment was about $10.4 billion in 2003 against approximately $4.7 billion in 2002.


    Powered by [Blockierte Grafik: http://www.rediff.com/money/pix/bs.jpg]

  • Wenn uns unsere eigenen Zeitungen positive Tatsachen zum Gold Geschehen nicht, oder nur Teilweise, zumeist unterschwellig mit negativem Unterton berichten, oder wie im Falle der FT London sogar gegen jede Vernunft, mit unbegründeter Panikmache, Un-, und Halbwahrheiten, plus "Fiat Money" Fantasien, versucht die Leser davon zu überzeugen, dass Gold bald stark im Preis fallen werde, und eine schlechte Anlageform darstelle, müssen wir uns Wohl, oder Übel, weiterhin im Ausland informieren!


    Gruss


    ThaiGuru


    [Blockierte Grafik: http://www.timesofoman.com/images/smalltimeslogo.jpg]


    http://www.timesofoman.com/new…?newsid=55124&pn=business


    Sunday, April 18, 2004


    Gold price to hit $450 per ounce: GFMS survey


    By K. Mohammed


    MUSCAT — Gold prices have a strong bias to the upside — $450 per ounce (28.35 grams) as a good possibility — should the conditions remain right for attracting further investor interest, GFMS, one of the world’s renowned precious metal consultancies, has said in its 2004 gold survey.


    London Spot gold was quoted at $401.45/402.15 an ounce on Friday, the last trading day of the week.


    Perhaps the greatest driver of investment over the next year or so will be economic developments in the United States, the consultancy said in its global survey.


    “The US fiscal and current account deficits, on top of eye-watering levels of consumer debt, create huge risks of another hefty slide in the dollar, plus eventual recession and a slump in equity markets. Throw in instability in Iraq and you’ve got pretty good conditions for a further surge in investment. And don’t forget that the financial inflows into gold last year — which we estimate at a little over $10 billion, on a net basis — were still tiny compared to the potential sums available,” noted Philip Klapwijk, GFMS’ managing director, in the report.


    The consultancy certainly believes that this inflow of investor money in 2003 was the key driver of last year’s dramatic price rally.


    The report, however, still sees de-hedging by producers as having played an important role.


    “We may have seen de-hedging drop by not far off a third but that still left it at over 300 tonnes, its second highest ever. Also timing was critical prices in the second quarter last year were being hit hard by investors bailing out as the Iraq war premium imploded, yet that’s precisely when we saw some of the heaviest de-hedging,” Klapwijk noted.


    Furthermore, GFMS has forecast that de-hedging should rise in 2004 to somewhere between 340 and 400 tonnes.


    Fabrication is also expected to rise in 2004, following the 4 per cent fall in year 2003 largely due to a 6 per cent drop in jewellery demand, GFMS said.


    GFMS attributed the reasons for the six per cent slip in fabrication to Iraq war, Sars, the gold rally, pockets of slack economic growth and the secular shift from plain gold to other forms of jewellery.


    Klapwijk added:


    Zitat

    “Weak physical offtake acted as a major drag on prices for much of the year. But when we saw the price sensitive markets get used to higher gold prices towards the end of the year, that certainly helped take the brakes off the rally”.


    The consultancy sees the supply side as having played a lesser role in shaping prices last year.


    Both scrap and central bank sales grew by over 10 per cent but these gains, the report states, were largely just in response to the rally.


    GFMS also do not expect to see a supply shock this year undermining the anticipated rally. Scrap might slip due to price ennui whilst official sector sales could also fall. The latter change is based on a belief that sales under the new European Central Bank Agreement may fail to reach their annual limit whilst purchases by others in 2004 are a possibility.

  • [Blockierte Grafik: http://www.usagold.com/AMK/GoldRoom.jpeg]


    Private buyers fill bullion vaults


    "Gold vaults in London are at their fullest in more than a decade following a rise in private investment in bullion and an increase in the amount of gold from producers unwinding their hedge positions."


    Financial Times

  • Guest Commentary, by Richard Benson

    Using the Consumer Price Index to Rob Americans Blind
    April 16, 2004
    Richard Benson is president of Specialty Finance Group, LLC , offering diversified investment banking services.


    Most Americans have been led to believe that the Consumer Price Index (CPI) actually measures, from one year to the next, the “cost of maintaining a constant standard of living” as the prices for goods we purchase increase. Indeed, we are foolish enough to believe that the index is an accurate measure of the price increases for the same basket of goods we buy every year.


    If this were actually true, the index would show an honest increase of 3% - 4% in price, there would be no productivity miracle, interest rates would be much higher, and bond and stock prices would be lower. Of course, with an election approaching, our elected officials don’t want the CPI to be an honest measure of the cost of maintaining the same standard of living or quality of life. They want a politically convenient index, cleverly devised to hardly ever rise at all!


    What you should find unsettling and fraudulent are the ways that the CPI is manipulated to ensure there is no inflation, regardless of how high the prices rise for things we must buy to live. Manipulating the CPI - specifically because the benefits to the retired on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are tied to it - and making people believe that inflation is low, will keep the “fraud” of monetary inflation alive. The government simply can’t afford to keep the promises it has made, and it needs to use this clever accounting fraud. If productivity is really so high, why isn’t government policy pushing through a 10% flat increase in Social Security benefits so that the retired can get their share of the productivity miracle? (Maybe the real miracle is robbing them without them noticing!) By changing the definition of “what inflation is”, our government won’t have to pay nearly as much to retirees as they were anticipating. The implications of defining inflation away are vast, and the magnitude of the fraud is extraordinary!


    The primary sources of manipulation are: 1) Making sure the wrong items are in the index; 2) Taking “hedonics” to ridiculous extremes; 3) Getting consumers to do more of the work and receive less services; and, 4) Changing to a Chain Weighted Index.


    First, it is not a coincidence that the CPI assumes that everyone in the country rents their home. (Rents have been declining over the last year in some major cities, such as San Francisco -6%; Denver -4.3%; and, Atlanta -4.5%). Making sure that the CPI does not pick up the real cost of housing is critical because the very reason that rents are soft is that with easy mortgage credit available, former renters are leaving the rental market and buying houses instead, which has pushed up housing prices. Over the last four years, housing prices have risen 45%, so how could the index possibly be kept so low if housing prices were actually part of the “cost of living”?


    The drop in rents is very material since the cost of housing is a full 30% of the CPI. Unfortunately, for those 80 plus million Americans with incomes tied to the CPI, 69% of households own their home. So, over two-thirds of Americans are forced to use a Consumer Price Index that has absolutely no relevance to them! To say the cost of living is going down for homeowners is just ridiculous! If the CPI was honestly set to measure the costs associated with owning a home for those 69% (vs. renting), the index would be rising over 3% a year! Those 80 plus million Americans who are short-changed include recipients of Social Security, Medicare, welfare and food stamps, as well as retired military and many private pensions.


    To take a closer look, my wife and I prepared a monthly “nut” spreadsheet on our own personal expenses. We own our home and car outright (so we don’t have a mortgage or car payment), but we still have all the usual expenses, including: Insurance for Health Care, Automobile and property; electricity; DSL connection; telephone; property taxes; monthly maintenance; etc. Before we have even purchased a gallon of gas, a piece of clothing, or a single grocery item, our annual nut amounts to over $25,000 and it is rising around 8 to 10 percent a year. We recommend you do the same and then compare your “housing cost” to the CPI. You’ll notice that you probably do not live in the world the government describes!


    Second, the CPI is managed down by arbitrary decisions made by bureaucrats on the “quality improvements” in goods and services, pleasantly referred to as “hedonics”. When you buy a computer that has “more storage” or purchase a new car made with more plastic rather than steel, the bureaucrats at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bureau of Economic Advisors and the Federal Reserve, get all excited because productivity and deflation can be “defined into existence” the same way that the Federal Reserve can “print new money out of thin air”. While there are some benefits from quality improvements in the cost of goods and services, the extent of the “arbitrary hedonic adjustments” are breathtaking and, alone, are adding 1% to 1.5% of real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth by “magically lowering inflation” by the same amount. All you need to do is look at the actual number of dollars spent on “technology equipment” in the GDP. Dollar spending hardly changes, but “real spending” is rocketing up. Take a look at the price deflator for tech equipment, falling from 90% to 60% over the past few years, to realize how arbitrary these hedonic adjustments are and how devoid the adjustments are of any common sense.


    Looking forward, the good news is all the attention being paid to the rising cost of health care, but these costs may prove to be “embarrassing” in an election year. So much so, that the CPI is in the midst of a major “make-over” to include all those tremendous “hedonic improvements” in health care that granny is getting from her HMO. The government staticitans have entered the world of science fiction: “Please beam me up Scottie”.


    Third, every time we pull into a gas station in the rain and have to swipe a credit card and pump our own gas, we remember the old days when a gas station attendant actually provided service, checked the oil, and cleaned the windshield free of charge!


    In my own business, travel reservations are made over the internet which is convenient but time consuming when researching flights. For other services, just try and get through to technical support (which is generally a fee-based service) or speak to a customer service rep; the whole day could be spent on hold waiting to speak to someone in Bangladore or Calcutta. Everywhere we look, the consumer is now providing a portion of the labor in order to receive normal services. Yes, this holds measured prices down but the downside is the loss of the purchaser’s valuable time. The government masters of the CPI who welcome “hedonics” turn a “blind eye” to this significant cost phenomenon. Moreover, we spend an additional 30 minutes a day cleaning “spam off of our computers. Not one minute of this lost time shows up as a cost and drain in productivity.


    Remember, “Only the good stuff counts.” Do you honestly think the time you spend delayed in traffic, on a train, or on an airplane, would be calculated in the CPI? What about the extra hour we get to spend at the security gate at the airport? What does that do for your “productivity”? Isn’t that a real material cost?


    Fourth, in order to guard against anyone actually seeing inflation, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, at the Federal Reserve’s urging, wants to use an “Expenditure/Chain-Weighted Index.” This price weighting idea works something like this: If you consume a very small amount of something and its price goes up a lot, it will affect the CPI very little because it has a very small “Weight in the Index”. This, of course, is correct. What the Federal Reserve and the Bureau of Labor Statistics want to do next is insidious and should be criminal fraud – the Fed wants the Bureau of Labor Statistics to change the weights as the prices change.


    This is the way the Index will be constructed: As the cost of some items goes up and you can no longer afford to buy them, you are then forced to use that item less and find a less expensive alternative. Then, the weight of that expensive item goes down, but the weight of the less expensive item goes up, resulting in prices that have hardly changed at all! (George Orwell would simply love this!) Indeed, think about Granny in the kitchen: She used to buy steak and croissants but the price got so high that she now has to eat spam and dough balls fried in lard. Since she doesn’t buy steak anymore and now eats spam and uses lard (items she never used to buy) her cost of living has gone down! (Granny’s weight for steak is now zero.) Obviously, Granny’s standard of living went down when the price of steak went up. What matters in today’s world is not Granny’s standard of living, but her cost of living! Granny’s costs need to be kept down and the way to do that is to keep her CPI down! If Granny receives $400 a month to live on, it is truly convenient to make sure her “cost of living” stays the same even if surviving on $400 a month means she freezes in the dark, cancels cable, and eats what her dog eats. Yet, she should feel good because the CPI tells her that costs haven’t gone up. The real miracle in America isn’t the productivity miracle; it’s the never rising Consumer Price Index.


    The Federal Reserve wants to run an easy money policy and keep interest rates down; the Treasury wants to short-change social security recipients and buyers of TIPS and I-Bonds. Fudging the CPI is the way to go; however, this strategy is intellectually dishonest, morally fraudulent and will remain quite effective until Americans start looking at their actual cost of living, or discover one day that what’s good for Rover is good for them.


    Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of David W. Tice & Associates, LLC. The opinions are subject to change, are not guaranteed and should not be considered recommendations to buy or sell any security.

  • ThaiGuru
    Herr Mohammed von der Times of Oman weiß aber anscheinend nicht, dass der Preis von Gold nicht in Ounces (1 oz = 28,34952 g), sondern in Troy Ounces (1 ozt = 31,1034807 g) angegeben wird.
    Nicht, dass ich mich wegen der "lächerlichen" 2,7539607 g groß aufregen würde. Aber wenn jemand nicht mal diese Fundamentaldaten weiß, wie soll ich dann dem glauben, was er sonst so über Gold schreibt? Ich jedenfalls habe den Bericht nicht mehr weitergelesen. Nach Mohammeds Angaben müsste also der Goldpreis bis auf 494 $ / ozt steigen. Richtig?
    Noch etwas: ich möchte damit NICHT die Qualität von ThaiGurus Artikeln bezweifeln.


    Grüße


    extrel

Schriftgröße:  A A A A A