patrick.net

I had to look up your comments Graybox. Here's what you said when gold was just above $1200: "Absolutely, XAU can go below $1000 and if it does $920 is interesting to me. On a shorter time frame there are fair odds of a $30-$50 pop but I would tighten up much above that."

I'm not sure how someone can be more wrong than this.

LOL that was the slumlord from Concord. he promoted gold here as he tried to unload a crap ton of it. he had been hoarding gold, missing out on substantial gains in the stock market for several years.

BorderPatrol says

no he was WRONG. at any given time, it is also safe to buy many, many things. so it would be a stupid thread if he wasn't advising people to buy. advising people to invest in gold when the stock market is about to rise 20-30% for the next few months is a WRONG call. gold in the mean time, has been flat.

I don't think you even read the thread. This was his quote from the OP: "Gold is probably in a consolidation phase which may last for a few months or a few years." A consolidation phase means flat, no gain, no loss.

Not only was he absolutely right but Graybox totally missed the call.

anon_25c83 says

BorderPatrol says

no he was WRONG. at any given time, it is also safe to buy many, many things. so it would be a stupid thread if he wasn't advising people to buy. advising people to invest in gold when the stock market is about to rise 20-30% for the next few months is a WRONG call. gold in the mean time, has been flat.

I don't think you even read the thread. This was his quote from the OP: "Gold is probably in a consolidation phase which may last for a few months or a few years." A consolidation phase means flat, no gain, no loss.

apparently you completely missed my point.

All also add that anyone who sold options based on his prediction made a fortune. One hell of a lot more than the gains in the stock market. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

anon_25c83 says

All also add that anyone who sold options based on his prediction made a fortune. One hell of a lot more than the gains in the stock market. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

i would continue the conversation but i don't think you have the intellect to comprehend what's being said and respond to points being made.

BorderPatrol says

i would continue the conversation but i don't think you have the intellect to comprehend what's being said and respond to points being made.

You're probably right. You'll do well here. Carry on.

Sniper says

Really? When did gold hit $1000 like he predicted?

I think it got very close to $1000 but I was talking about what he wrote in February. I doubt anyone could have described this market better.

Sniper says

There will either be a very weak bargain hunter rally or their wont, however I expect gold to enter a fairly steep decline until it drops into the $1000 neighborhood at which point I will probably, tentatively, look into starting to acquire it again.

Am I to understand that you're using a 2013 market prediction to contradict a 2017 market prediction?

Tell me that's not what you're doing. From the looks of it, he was also right in 2013 also since gold bottomed around $1050 I believe. That's certainly in the neighborhood of $1000.

BorderPatrol says

i would continue the conversation but i don't think you have the intellect to comprehend what's being said and respond to points being made.

See what I mean about selective moderation?

This is going to be the norm from now on out.

Graybox says

I know I could buy almost 6.5 oz of gold today with 1 BTC

You're comparing a parabolic rise to a long investment, maybe you can tell us how apples are like oranges next...

Graybox says

10 year chart

How can that be a 10 year chart when bitcoin was released in 2009? Are all your assertions here this inaccurate?

Graybox says

Exponential growth

No, parabolic. Words have meaning. You don't get to garble them into a hodge-podge of generalizations because you feel like it. Only fools hold long positions in a parabolic market, or those who would refute Newton's law of universal gravitation.

I regret that i did NOT go all in when gold was 1050. I was too greedy. I planned to go all in when gold drops below 700$.
I bought zero bit coin. I do NOT regret at all. I will NOT regret when BTC goes above 1mil a coin.

Neither gold nor BTC is investment.

Gold is store of value and BTC is gambling.

BTC has limited supply due to math, but there are unlimited amount of "other" cryptos. Gamblers can bet on any one of them while gold is gold, there is NO replacement and you can still buy it around production cost.

Graybox says

Interesting comments, very uneducated opinions however interesting just the same... All markets are a ZERO-sum game and all about compounding wealth.... I've seen many comments like the trash comments I see here, likely by the same type of jealous people who missed the boat and instead of doing 1 iota of research of a legitimate revolutionary investment such as blockchain with so much more to come they just trash something they have Zero understanding of.... The dumb fact is your government, banks and lending organizations will be implementing this very technology over the next several years and beyond.... Ignorance is bliss I guess....

The point about uptake and increased implementation is duly noted, but that doesn't make one bitcoin suddenly inherently worth 10x although I agree with you that it was a great investment and uptake may give it stability and/or durability. So how much did you buy?

NuttBoxer says

Graybox says

Exponential growth

No, parabolic. Words have meaning. You don't get to garble them into a hodge-podge of generalizations because you feel like it. Only fools hold long positions in a parabolic market, or those who would refute Newton's law of universal gravitation.

If you reach escape velocity (approximately 11.2 km/s), you make it to the other end of the universe without ever returning to Earth.

If one believes all financial products are zero sum game andarket is a wealth transfer mechanism rather than wealth creation, please do treat all market as casinos.
The reason I do NOT gamble is because for every gambleong game I saw, everybody is wiped out except one. So 1/99 rules. If i know i am the 1, I will do it. If i am the 99, i will skip. I am NOT sure I am the 1 for any of the gambling venues.
How ever, I do believe businesses do "create wealth" andy owning shares can channel the "created wealth" to me rather than transferring somebody else's.
For BTC, it has all the nice properties I like, except for government's military backing which $ do have.

If people would like to use BTC to transfer $ to each other, that's fine.

Owning gold is when you have doubt in $, not to transfer $ from each other.

wouldn't gov implementing their own blockchain crypto-currency only cause bitcoin to crash?

I myself is a learner as well. The game rules keep changing and we all need to figure out the rules to survive. BTC, block chain, distributed digital ledger are all game changers. They all have tremendous utility as "currency". Like all currencies, as long as they are fiat without real stuff backing, the dominant element is "speculation" or gambling. Ben Gram and Buffet's definition of investment is "above the layer of currency". They assume the currency will stay as a stable unit account of wealth and they define "investment" as analysis of cash "currency" flows of future. Currency trading is below this layer and inherently assumes the relationships among currencies are unstable. The analysis usually goes into geopolitical analysis and macro economic conditions rather than business analysis.
The difference between investment and currency speculation is "investment", if done right, gives you a protection against going zero. Speculation, like ambling, could wipe you out. Remember Mt Cox for bit coin or Swiss Franc?
I am NOT against speculation or gambling. But I do want to clarify they are NOT "investment" and people are treading dangerous waters which is perfectly fine as long as they are clear what they are doing and mitigate risk.
For myself, I go by Buffet's rule no.1 "do not lose money". So I emphasis downside risk more than upside profit. Gold will NOT go zero even under .gov confiscation scenario. BTC "can" go zero due to either .gov protection of $ or competition from other cryptos.
Above are my thought and reasons of why I do what I do. People are different and choices are different. I respect and I like to exchange thoughts to make myself understand myself more.

Graybox says

The dumb fact is your government, banks and lending organizations will be implementing this very technology over the next several years and beyond....

You're talking about two completely different things. Bitcoin as an investment, and blockchain as a technology. You're inability to make clear distinctions in your thought process between things that are very different is the reason you can't understand anyone.

I personally like bitcoin for the reason that it was started as a means to circumvent banks and lending. But there are major security flaws if people aren't careful with how they safeguard it, and several big exchanges have been hacked over the years, leaving many people with nothing. There's a learning curve with any new tech, but that does add risk to this as an investment.

The fact that there was a recent split in the community over making bitcoin more viable as a purchasing mechanism should show how new things still are, and add caution to anyone's mind who wants to predict the future of this technology.

Comparatively, gold and silver have been used as a store of wealth, and to transact since the beginning of time, so their is a HUGE risk gap between the two in terms of investment, something you have completely failed to gauge.

This is where you begin the gold comparison, around 2000 when it was just starting to climb.

Yes, the spectacular mic drop moments are silly, since we are all pretty much anonymous (except for me).

I think increased moderation has been great, thanks for helping, @WookieMan

Patrick says

I think increased moderation has been great, thanks for helping, @WookieMan

Unfortunately I've been mega busy lately. I signed on for housing but honestly haven't moderated a thing due to not having time. There was one thread in housing that got a little messy by the looks of it, but I didn't have any influence in cleaning it up. I did make a comment that it technically wasn't really a housing topic in the first place. More politics regarding the tax plan IMO. Just wanting to be honest that I haven't done anything if you think I have.

Topic shift. I'll read political threads, but politics is not logical in my opinion. While there are facts regarding many/most things in politics, politics is too god damn emotional for my liking. Therefore I don't really feel the need to suppress (moderate) peoples emotions in that realm. Think and feel the way you want. It most likely doesn't matter as the candidates you get to choose from are very likely chosen by the oligarchy. Very few "Robin Hood" types make it through and I'd guess the ones that do are also chosen by the oligarchy.

So while I'll make a comment here and there in politics, I'm not a fan of moderating political type threads at all. If it gets completely out of line in other topics I'm game to help, but you (and I think Goran) are on your own there in the political realm. I'm not certain with politics, emotions, that you can moderate that in the end.

WookieMan says

Who really gives a shit? Not me, but some do apparently.

And yes, I'm fully aware that me making this exact comment looks like I actually do care. I don't.

WookieMan says

I'm not certain with politics, emotions, that you can moderate that in the end.

I agree that it's an emotional topic, and believe that most political opinions are merely rationalizations for those emotions. But we can at least be civil to each other in endlessly repeating our rationalizations, lol.

It would be more productive to talk about how these emotions come to be (generally a reaction to something that caused some bad feeling) but that's probably not possible.

So feminists feel bad about being judged by men all the time on their beauty, and channel their anger at innate biology into untouchable positions like "ending harassment". No one could be pro-harassment, so the rationalization looks good. But it's really just anger at immutable biological facts, and the anti-harassment policies end up making it very hard for any woman to find a husband via the workplace anymore.

That's the kind of political discussion worth having, but I don't know that anyone is really interested in these truths because they are so painful to acknowledge. An anonymous forum is at least a fairly "safe space" for talking about them though. Heh.