Where Is Gold Going In This Market

[churchill]

Felix Zulauf's Market Prognosis - June 2012

Which means .. sell ... then buy and hold ...

but as nobody knows I will just hold for now

http://www.streettal...-june-2012.html

I would hold lots of cash, preferably in U.S. dollars.

he must have read your posting "BUY BUY BUY US DOLLARS!" Prime Minister

Yes but if the Greeks vote to stay in ...probable ??

Then where do you want to be Euro .. yes USD no ..

Gold will probably be hammered which ever way it goes ... but perhaps not ..

Je ne sait pas ...

http://www.insidefutures.com/articles/article.php?id=679428&utm_term=futures+commodities+commentary&utm_content=Relevant+futures+prices,+charts,+and+trading+commentary+authored+by+key+players+in+the+commodities,+forex+and+options+industries&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[Naam]

yes i used to have some time for his crap but now hes just a boring old fart. Go on king nam give me one of your great putdowns please. What a prat you have become sadly since i really did used to think you added some meaningful comment but feel free to post about your carpets is it crap about whatever and your puddle fans can flame away no problem

poor boys can obviously only resort to personal attacks and insults to add a little spice to their otherwise nonsensical and empty yada yada yakety-yak. interesting is that they never respond when their attention is drawn to some "measly" rubbish they spread but think they can divert from that rubbish with additional rubbish which is even more ridculous than the earlier one. somehow they remind me of this gif

[churchill]

It cannot be true ... Germany interested in Gold

or would they prefer AUD

which every way it is get out of Euros asap ..

Edited June 14, 2012 by churchill

[churchill]

There you are perhaps

yoshiwara

is right ......Art ... http://www.dezeen.com/2012/06/14/money-bowls-by-arthur-analts-and-rudolph-strelis/

[Naam]

It cannot be true ... Germany interested in Gold

or would they prefer AUD

which every way it is get out of Euros asap ..

no better source of information then Max Keiser and that ugly b*tch lady

who has to learn her questions by heart before asking Max.

informed circles claim that Angie Merkel never misses an episode with

Max and is always busy making notes of whatever advice Max renders.

[yoshiwara]

There you are perhaps

yoshiwara

is right ......Art ... http://www.dezeen.co...udolph-strelis/

I prefer ukiyo-e.

[letitbe]

yes i used to have some time for his crap but now hes just a boring old fart. Go on king nam give me one of your great putdowns please. What a prat you have become sadly since i really did used to think you added some meaningful comment but feel free to post about your carpets is it crap about whatever and your puddle fans can flame away no problem

poor boys can obviously only resort to personal attacks and insults to add a little spice to their otherwise nonsensical and empty yada yada yakety-yak. interesting is that they never respond when their attention is drawn to some "measly" rubbish they spread but think they can divert from that rubbish with additional rubbish which is even more ridculous than the earlier one. somehow they remind me of this gif

yes i used to have some time for his crap but now hes just a boring old fart. Go on king nam give me one of your great putdowns please. What a prat you have become sadly since i really did used to think you added some meaningful comment but feel free to post about your carpets is it crap about whatever and your puddle fans can flame away no problem

poor boys can obviously only resort to personal attacks and insults to add a little spice to their otherwise nonsensical and empty yada yada yakety-yak. interesting is that they never respond when their attention is drawn to some "measly" rubbish they spread but think they can divert from that rubbish with additional rubbish which is even more ridculous than the earlier one. somehow they remind me of this gif

did not take long and of course im no match for mighty Nam put downs. However their are a few who'd like some sensible discussion here instead of Mr Nams im so important and clever posts which mostly add nothing of any value. but you keep at it since it keeps you amused.

[Jayman]

Former Assistant Treasury Secretary Paul Craig Roberts discusses gold price suppression

Former assistant U.S. treasury secretary Paul Craig Roberts, an economist and newspaper columnist, discusses gold and silver price suppression at some length in a video interview with Greg Hunter at USAWatchdog. The interview is 22 minutes long and it's posted here:

http://usawatchdog.c...-craig-roberts/

The gold and silver talk starts around 12 minutes in but the whole interview is quite informative.

Edited June 16, 2012 by Jayman

[yoshiwara]

Former assistant U.S. treasury secretary Paul Craig Roberts, an economist and newspaper columnist, discusses gold and silver price suppression at some length in a video interview with Greg Hunter at USAWatchdog. The interview is 22 minutes long and it's posted here:

The guy is a financial illiterate. USA watchdog must have been quite happy to have found him (as are you). The idea that true price is suppressed by short selling (which here is thought of as a conspiracy) and part of the evil of derivatives is ridiculous. Identifies you as a know-nothing as well.

[Jayman]

Former assistant U.S. treasury secretary Paul Craig Roberts, an economist and newspaper columnist, discusses gold and silver price suppression at some length in a video interview with Greg Hunter at USAWatchdog. The interview is 22 minutes long and it's posted here:

The guy is a financial illiterate. USA watchdog must have been quite happy to have found him (as are you). The idea that true price is suppressed by short selling (which here is thought of as a conspiracy) and part of the evil of derivatives is ridiculous. Identifies you as a know-nothing as well.

The guy holds a PhD in economics. What degree do you hold oh wise assed one. ...

[flying]

The idea that true price is suppressed by short selling (which here is thought of as a conspiracy) and part of the evil of derivatives is ridiculous.

I do not think you have interpreted what he said clearly he was not speaking about normal short selling

He was speaking about "naked" shorts as in not having nor controlling nor borrowing the shorted amount of shares at any point.

[yoshiwara]

Former assistant U.S. treasury secretary Paul Craig Roberts, an economist and newspaper columnist, discusses gold and silver price suppression at some length in a video interview with Greg Hunter at USAWatchdog. The interview is 22 minutes long and it's posted here:

The guy is a financial illiterate. USA watchdog must have been quite happy to have found him (as are you). The idea that true price is suppressed by short selling (which here is thought of as a conspiracy) and part of the evil of derivatives is ridiculous. Identifies you as a know-nothing as well.

The guy holds a PhD in economics. What degree do you hold oh wise assed one. ...

So does Ben Bernanke.

[Jayman]

Former assistant U.S. treasury secretary Paul Craig Roberts, an economist and newspaper columnist, discusses gold and silver price suppression at some length in a video interview with Greg Hunter at USAWatchdog. The interview is 22 minutes long and it's posted here:

The guy is a financial illiterate. USA watchdog must have been quite happy to have found him (as are you). The idea that true price is suppressed by short selling (which here is thought of as a conspiracy) and part of the evil of derivatives is ridiculous. Identifies you as a know-nothing as well.

The guy holds a PhD in economics. What degree do you hold oh wise assed one. ...

So does Ben Bernanke.

And how does that apply to your lack of degree ?

Edited June 17, 2012 by Jayman

[yoshiwara]

The idea that true price is suppressed by short selling (which here is thought of as a conspiracy) and part of the evil of derivatives is ridiculous.

I do not think you have interpreted what he said clearly he was not speaking about normal short selling

He was speaking about "naked" shorts as in not having nor controlling nor borrowing the shorted amount of shares at any point.

Since both calls and puts can be settled in cash terms prior to expiration (exercising of options) then the question is moot.

The other myth is that puts (shorting) is somehow less holy than calls (going long). Both are a process of price discovery.

[yoshiwara]

And how does that apply to your lack of degree ?

It is rude to ask unless you put yourself first on display.

[Jayman]

And how does that apply to your lack of degree ?

It is rude to ask unless you put yourself first on display.

You are the one to call the PhD in economics an economic illiterate. You opened the can mate. I believe you also insulted me add well for even listening to him.

Edited June 17, 2012 by Jayman

[flying]

Since both calls and puts can be settled in cash terms prior to expiration (exercising of options) then the question is moot.

The other myth is that puts (shorting) is somehow less holy than calls (going long). Both are a process of price discovery.

Your still trying to compare normal to naked.

[flying]

It is rude to ask unless you put yourself first on display.

Major "pot kettle black" example.

especially since you just got done insulting yet another member in different thread...

http://www.thaivisa....s/#entry5399091

Not sure exactly what your damage is.....but if your bored or seeking an audience you will need to

post more than hollow words in an attempt to imply some sort of superiority

Edited June 17, 2012 by flying

[yoshiwara]

And how does that apply to your lack of degree ?

It is rude to ask unless you put yourself first on display.

You are the one to call the PhD in economics an economic illiterate. You opened the can mate. I believe you also insulted me add well for even listening to him.

I said he was illiterate in what he was saying. I made no reference to his qualifications. You were the one who brought that up.

I should have added that he is a nutcase. He compared supporters of George W Bush to: "brownshirts with the same low intelligence and morals as Hitler's enthusiastic supporters." He is also opposed to the War on Drugs. He is also opposed to the War on Terror as it has "made widows and orphans of millions of Muslims". He also believes the official explanation for the events on 9/11 is a "scientific impossibility"

You should check out the fruitcakes you support before you sound off.

[yoshiwara]

Since both calls and puts can be settled in cash terms prior to expiration (exercising of options) then the question is moot.

The other myth is that puts (shorting) is somehow less holy than calls (going long). Both are a process of price discovery.

Your still trying to compare normal to naked.

The concept of normal here is just inside your head.

[yoshiwara]

It is rude to ask unless you put yourself first on display.

Major "pot kettle black" example.

especially since you just got done insulting yet another member in different thread...

http://www.thaivisa....s/#entry5399091

Not sure exactly what your damage is.....but if your bored or seeking an audience you will need to

post more than hollow words in an attempt to imply some sort of superiority

'er no. But I will comment that the gold bug fraternity does attract those with limited understanding of economics.

As for the other thread, still waiting for the sterling threads intimated at by the OP fixated with hyperinflation.

[mccw]

And how does that apply to your lack of degree ?

It is rude to ask unless you put yourself first on display.

You are the one to call the PhD in economics an economic illiterate. You opened the can mate. I believe you also insulted me add well for even listening to him.

I said he was illiterate in what he was saying. I made no reference to his qualifications. You were the one who brought that up.

I should have added that he is a nutcase. He compared supporters of George W Bush to: "brownshirts with the same low intelligence and morals as Hitler's enthusiastic supporters." He is also opposed to the War on Drugs. He is also opposed to the War on Terror as it has "made widows and orphans of millions of Muslims". He also believes the official explanation for the events on 9/11 is a "scientific impossibility"

You should check out the fruitcakes you support before you sound off.

He sounds like one of sound mind and a clear view of reality.

Guess your part of the brain washed majority, unwilling to step outside the cozy mental bubble created for you.

[Naam]

The idea that true price is suppressed by short selling (which here is thought of as a conspiracy) and part of the evil of derivatives is ridiculous.

I do not think you have interpreted what he said clearly he was not speaking about normal short selling

He was speaking about "naked" shorts as in not having nor controlling nor borrowing the shorted amount of shares at any point.

Flying, don't forget that even naked shorts need a counterpart. there is no such thing like being all alone 'nekkid' and shorting any asset at will. in essence... every "shorter" needs a "longer" the latter is something that gloom&doomers always suppress.

that also applies to the multiple fanfares "X has bought Y tons of gold!" X could only buy Y tons because Z sold them! as simple as that.

[mccw]

The idea that true price is suppressed by short selling (which here is thought of as a conspiracy) and part of the evil of derivatives is ridiculous.

I do not think you have interpreted what he said clearly he was not speaking about normal short selling

He was speaking about "naked" shorts as in not having nor controlling nor borrowing the shorted amount of shares at any point.

Flying, don't forget that even naked shorts need a counterpart. there is no such thing like being all alone 'nekkid' and shorting any asset at will. in essence... every "shorter" needs a "longer" the latter is something that gloom&doomers always suppress.

that also applies to the multiple fanfares "X has bought Y tons of gold!" X could only buy Y tons because Z sold them! as simple as that.

Price moves according to demand and supply. So by offering up huge amount of artificial supply the price is manipulated down. Simple as that.

Your not going to try and say "if demand far outstrips supply then because there are still buyers and sellers the price will not be effected"? Come on don't be silly.

[Naam]

The idea that true price is suppressed by short selling (which here is thought of as a conspiracy) and part of the evil of derivatives is ridiculous.

I do not think you have interpreted what he said clearly he was not speaking about normal short selling

He was speaking about "naked" shorts as in not having nor controlling nor borrowing the shorted amount of shares at any point.

Flying, don't forget that even naked shorts need a counterpart. there is no such thing like being all alone 'nekkid' and shorting any asset at will. in essence... every "shorter" needs a "longer" the latter is something that gloom&doomers always suppress.

that also applies to the multiple fanfares "X has bought Y tons of gold!" X could only buy Y tons because Z sold them! as simple as that.

Price moves according to demand and supply. So by offering up huge amount of artificial supply the price is manipulated down. Simple as that.

Your not going to try and say "if demand far outstrips supply then because there are still buyers and sellers the price will not be effected"? Come on don't be silly.

what is to say to people who deliberately try to misinterpret my words which did not contain the expressions "price, demand, supply, artificial supply, manipulated, outstrips".

if you think there is something wrong in my claim "X could only buy Y tons because Z sold them!" put up and point out what is wrong or just shut up and stop ridiculing yourself.

[flying]

Flying, don't forget that even naked shorts need a counterpart. there is no such thing like being all alone 'nekkid' and shorting any asset at will. in essence... every "shorter" needs a "longer" the latter is something that gloom&doomers always suppress.

that also applies to the multiple fanfares "X has bought Y tons of gold!" X could only buy Y tons because Z sold them! as simple as that.

My understanding has always been as follows...

Definition of 'Naked Shorting'

The illegal practice of short selling shares that have not been affirmatively determined to exist. Ordinarily, traders must borrow a stock, or determine that it can be borrowed, before they sell it short. But due to various loopholes in the rules and discrepancies between paper and electronic trading systems, naked shorting continues to happen.

I tend to not believe a counterpart truly exists if the shares if xyz do not exist in the first place.....Because basically it could allow folks with enough clout to take both sides of this non-existent product/share in an attempt to move a stock/commodity price to benefit their long term goal of buying or selling what they in fact do actually/physically own in shares etc.

Similar but not exactly as this definition points out....

naked short selling

The practice of seeking to profit from an expected fall in the price of an asset by selling shares you do not own without borrowing, or making arrangements to borrow them.

In short selling, investors borrow stocks to sell them, betting that they can buy them back at a lower price and profit from the difference. A "naked" short seller has not arranged to borrow the stock at the time of sale

Edited June 18, 2012 by flying

[edgarfriendly]

And how does that apply to your lack of degree ?

It is rude to ask unless you put yourself first on display.

You are the one to call the PhD in economics an economic illiterate. You opened the can mate. I believe you also insulted me add well for even listening to him.

I said he was illiterate in what he was saying. I made no reference to his qualifications. You were the one who brought that up.

I should have added that he is a nutcase. He compared supporters of George W Bush to: "brownshirts with the same low intelligence and morals as Hitler's enthusiastic supporters." He is also opposed to the War on Drugs. He is also opposed to the War on Terror as it has "made widows and orphans of millions of Muslims". He also believes the official explanation for the events on 9/11 is a "scientific impossibility"

You should check out the fruitcakes you support before you sound off.

you are joking arent you??

GWBush supporters ARE of the same low intelligence & morals as Nazis(clue - they ARE nazis)

The fake 'war on terror' HAS made widows & orphans of MILLIONS of Humans!!

The official version of 9/11 IS a weak bunch of LIES....

but some people, MILLIONS in fact, swallow that shit and regurgitate it all over the rest of us constantly.....

Honestly, i think you have nothing better to do or are a christian fundamentalist, heavy on the mental, light on the fun....

[Naam]

naked short selling

The practice of seeking to profit from an expected fall in the price of an asset by selling shares you do not own without borrowing, or making arrangements to borrow them.

In short selling, investors borrow stocks to sell them, betting that they can buy them back at a lower price and profit from the difference. A "naked" short seller has not arranged to borrow the stock at the time of sale

pure refined rubbish because it omits basic facts! the order has to be accepted by another party. if there is no other party then the financial institution which accepts that order becomes automatically the counterparty and has to bear any losses if the short seller is successful or rake in the profit if the short seller's bet went wrong.

[Naam]

I tend to not believe a counterpart truly exists if the shares if xyz do not exist in the first place... Because basically it could allow folks with enough clout to take both sides of this non-existent product/share in an attempt to move a stock/commodity price to benefit their long term goal of buying or selling what they in fact do actually/physically own in shares etc.

you don't need clout for that kind of exercise. i could do that any time on any trading day with rather modest amounts and perhaps with success should the traded asset be rather illiquid. there is also no law that forbids one of my corporations to offer any asset it owns at any price, enabling another corporation (which i own too) to buy that asset at the offered price.

however, should any of the afore-said companies have tax liabilities the banks compliance department would step in and invoke "money laundering" consequences. that also applies if any of the companies' beneficiaries have tax liabilities.

but as long as both companies are setup, operated in a tax free environment and their beneficiaries are not liable to pay any taxes, nobody can raise an eyebrow.

[mccw]

The idea that true price is suppressed by short selling (which here is thought of as a conspiracy) and part of the evil of derivatives is ridiculous.

I do not think you have interpreted what he said clearly he was not speaking about normal short selling

He was speaking about "naked" shorts as in not having nor controlling nor borrowing the shorted amount of shares at any point.

Flying, don't forget that even naked shorts need a counterpart. there is no such thing like being all alone 'nekkid' and shorting any asset at will. in essence... every "shorter" needs a "longer" the latter is something that gloom&doomers always suppress.

that also applies to the multiple fanfares "X has bought Y tons of gold!" X could only buy Y tons because Z sold them! as simple as that.

Price moves according to demand and supply. So by offering up huge amount of artificial supply the price is manipulated down. Simple as that.

Your not going to try and say "if demand far outstrips supply then because there are still buyers and sellers the price will not be effected"? Come on don't be silly.

Your saying that the price is not manipulated down because there was a buyer for the short? If not then what are you saying?

Different words same meaning.