Gold Prices To Continue To Drop, Says Expert

[midas]

It seems there is an unbridgeable gap between those who see the arguments for and against buying gold, silver and other PM's as an alternative to the 'dunny paper' US$, UK£, Euro, etc.

Hopefully those undecided have been given some food and links for thought.

I think on this thread we are not discussing trading gold, which involves 'paper' gold, we mean buying and holding physical gold (and silver, etc) for future- proofing our purchasing power.

Nobody can predict any market bottom to perfection, you have to set a target price you yourself are happy to buy at. Me? I am adding gold and silver with all spare funds right now.

Naturally, others will not agree

It is interesting in itself how long this thread continues to run and generate more involvement.

As I said in a much earlier post "Each to his own and up to you"

well said

I have no idea what half these people like Yoshiwara

are even talking about.

in fact I regard my ownership of gold as no different to an insurance policy

I wonder how many of these people that criticise gold ownership happily

pay their annual insurance premiums on various things without batting an eyelid?

Edited May 24, 2012 by midas

[midas]

I have no problem with gold traders. They are playing the markets and have no limitations to either buying or selling. And then there are those who suddenly re-materialise as 'investors' for the long term to excuse their losses. And then there are the gold bugs who are 'all in' advising everybody to buy even at 1900+ and then (there's more?) there's the nutty uber-gold bugs who have bags of coins under their mattresses. The reality that none but the traders are happy to face is that gold has become a volatile asset and hit bear trade territory this last month. It has not been a place of safety in a contracting world economy the last 6 months. According to the gold bugs, gold is meant to appreciate against the US$ which is supposedly printing, but it hasn't recently has it? All they are left with is their usual conspiracy theories and how they wail when a gold trader calls it down. A 20% dive and no dividend. Fantastic.

hey yoshiwara - here is something for you to consider.... i would be interested to read your rebuttal ?

Bearing in mind the following news :-

" Central Bank Gold Buying Surges To Over Over 70.3 Tonnes In April "

i read this which i though was quite succinct

Central banks are buying bullion, JPM (et al) are selling paper. The supply of paper is close to infinite, the supply of bullion is decidedly finite. Therefore the price of (paper) gold will fall towards zero, while the price of bullion will rise towards ... (insert very large number here).

or are the world central banks wrong as well ?

Edited May 24, 2012 by midas

[Bpuumike]

I have no problem with gold traders. They are playing the markets and have no limitations to either buying or selling. And then there are those who suddenly re-materialise as 'investors' for the long term to excuse their losses. And then there are the gold bugs who are 'all in' advising everybody to buy even at 1900+ and then (there's more?) there's the nutty uber-gold bugs who have bags of coins under their mattresses. The reality that none but the traders are happy to face is that gold has become a volatile asset and hit bear trade territory this last month. It has not been a place of safety in a contracting world economy the last 6 months. According to the gold bugs, gold is meant to appreciate against the US$ which is supposedly printing, but it hasn't recently has it? All they are left with is their usual conspiracy theories and how they wail when a gold trader calls it down. A 20% dive and no dividend. Fantastic.

hey yoshiwara - here is something for you to consider.... i would be interested to read your rebuttal ?

Bearing in mind the following news :-

" Central Bank Gold Buying Surges To Over Over 70.3 Tonnes In April "

i read this which i though was quite succinct

Central banks are buying bullion, JPM (et al) are selling paper. The supply of paper is close to infinite, the supply of bullion is decidedly finite. Therefore the price of (paper) gold will fall towards zero, while the price of bullion will rise towards ... (insert very large number here).

or are the world central banks wrong as well ?

Sic transit Gordon Brown... (err, I failed Latin 3 times)

[midas]

[

Sic transit Gordon Brown... (err, I failed Latin 3 times)

Sic transit gloria mundi

Ah yes i forgot about that idiot

The decision to sell the gold – taken by Mr Brown when he was Chancellor – is regarded as one of the Treasury's worst financial mistakes and has cost taxpayers almost £7 billion.

Last night, George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, demanded that the information was published immediately. "Gordon Brown's decision to sell off our gold reserves at the bottom of the market cost the British taxpayer billions of pounds," he said. "It was one of the worst economic judgements ever made by a chancellor.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/gold/7511589/Explain-why-you-sold-Britains-gold-Gordon-Brown-told.html

[Bpuumike]

[

Sic transit Gordon Brown... (err, I failed Latin 3 times)

Sic transit gloria mundi

Ah yes i forgot about that idiot

The decision to sell the gold – taken by Mr Brown when he was Chancellor – is regarded as one of the Treasury's worst financial mistakes and has cost taxpayers almost £7 billion.

Last night, George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, demanded that the information was published immediately. "Gordon Brown's decision to sell off our gold reserves at the bottom of the market cost the British taxpayer billions of pounds," he said. "It was one of the worst economic judgements ever made by a chancellor.

http://www.telegraph...Brown-told.html

"That idiot" didn't sell quite at the bottom of the market. He, single handed, created a market bottom by dumping that much gold - your gold if you were a UK taxpayer (fortunately not I).

I think we digress from the thread?

[12DrinkMore]

"That idiot" didn't sell quite at the bottom of the market. He, single handed, created a market bottom by dumping that much gold - your gold if you were a UK taxpayer (fortunately not I).

I think we digress from the thread?

It was announced in advance that the gold was to be sold off.

I have never read a clear explanation why this was done, except a rumour that a couple of banks in "the City" had a few issues and a lower gold price would help them out of their difficulties.

I suspect it was a clandestine bailout of the bankers.

I don't believe that that Osborne ever received an answer, or, if he did, was probably told that he must keep his mouth shut, or there would be a few ramifications.

Who knows?

Edited May 24, 2012 by 12DrinkMore

[Bpuumike]

"That idiot" didn't sell quite at the bottom of the market. He, single handed, created a market bottom by dumping that much gold - your gold if you were a UK taxpayer (fortunately not I).

I think we digress from the thread?

It was announced in advance that the gold was to be sold off.

I have never read a clear explanation why this was done, except a rumour that a couple of banks in "the City" had a few issues and a lower gold price would help them out of their difficulties.

I suspect it was a clandestine bailout of the bankers.

I don't believe that that Osborne ever received an answer, or, if he did, was probably told that he must keep his mouth shut, or there would be a few ramifications.

Who knows?

Gordon Brown did not leave public office as a 'financially poor' Socialist, though dwarfed in riches I understand by certain 'Socialist' A.T. Blair.

Come on Private Eye or we shall never know.

Enough! We are very much off thread

[Naam]

I have no idea what half these people like Yoshiwara

are even talking about.

in fact I regard my ownership of gold as no different to an insurance policy

I wonder how many of these people that criticise gold ownership happily

pay their annual insurance premiums on various things without batting an eyelid?

i mentioned "gold and insurance premium" several times and a looooong time ago in this thread.

[Naam]

" Central Bank Gold Buying Surges To Over Over 70.3 Tonnes In April "

this "central bank buying" has been mentioned in this thread ad nauseam. the same

applies to "fiat will fall" and "gold will rise".

facts:

-all the recent "surges" of central banks buying left and right did not prevent the value of gold,

denominated in "worthless fiat", to fall. reason: the big global conspiracy of dark forces which

keeps the price from rising?

-will... will... will... = yawwwwnnnnnn...

[yoshiwara]

I have no problem with gold traders. They are playing the markets and have no limitations to either buying or selling. And then there are those who suddenly re-materialise as 'investors' for the long term to excuse their losses. And then there are the gold bugs who are 'all in' advising everybody to buy even at 1900+ and then (there's more?) there's the nutty uber-gold bugs who have bags of coins under their mattresses. The reality that none but the traders are happy to face is that gold has become a volatile asset and hit bear trade territory this last month. It has not been a place of safety in a contracting world economy the last 6 months. According to the gold bugs, gold is meant to appreciate against the US$ which is supposedly printing, but it hasn't recently has it? All they are left with is their usual conspiracy theories and how they wail when a gold trader calls it down. A 20% dive and no dividend. Fantastic.

hey yoshiwara - here is something for you to consider.... i would be interested to read your rebuttal ?

Bearing in mind the following news :-

" Central Bank Gold Buying Surges To Over Over 70.3 Tonnes In April "

i read this which i though was quite succinct

Central banks are buying bullion, JPM (et al) are selling paper. The supply of paper is close to infinite, the supply of bullion is decidedly finite. Therefore the price of (paper) gold will fall towards zero, while the price of bullion will rise towards ... (insert very large number here).

or are the world central banks wrong as well ?

Sure. Gold must have lost 20% in 6 months because central banks were buying. Right?

And these central banks no doubt would be the same central banks who don't know what they are doing according to the gold bugs. Right?

[yoshiwara]

"That idiot" didn't sell quite at the bottom of the market. He, single handed, created a market bottom by dumping that much gold - your gold if you were a UK taxpayer (fortunately not I).

I think we digress from the thread?

It was announced in advance that the gold was to be sold off.

I have never read a clear explanation why this was done, except a rumour that a couple of banks in "the City" had a few issues and a lower gold price would help them out of their difficulties.

I suspect it was a clandestine bailout of the bankers.

I don't believe that that Osborne ever received an answer, or, if he did, was probably told that he must keep his mouth shut, or there would be a few ramifications.

Who knows?

You clearly don't.

[midas]

hey yoshiwara - here is something for you to consider.... i would be interested to read your rebuttal ?

Bearing in mind the following news :-

" Central Bank Gold Buying Surges To Over Over 70.3 Tonnes In April "

i read this which i though was quite succinct

Central banks are buying bullion, JPM (et al) are selling paper. The supply of paper is close to infinite, the supply of bullion is decidedly finite. Therefore the price of (paper) gold will fall towards zero, while the price of bullion will rise towards ... (insert very large number here).

or are the world central banks wrong as well ?

Sure. Gold must have lost 20% in 6 months because central banks were buying. Right?

And these central banks no doubt would be the same central banks who don't know what they are doing according to the gold bugs. Right?

and what is your recommendation regarding which assets people should be holding right now?

Edited May 25, 2012 by midas

[yoshiwara]

'

duplicate

Edited May 25, 2012 by yoshiwara

[yoshiwara]

and what is your recommendation regarding which assets people should be holding right now?

Buy now shares generating good dividend streams.

BP, Shell, Vodaphone as examples

And property in prime/central locations with English legal systems. (eg London, Hong Kong)

Cash in $US also very OK at least in the short term.

*Singapore is a bit of a problem now as there is an added 10% transaction tax for overseas buyers. Hong Kong just puts in added tax for flipping)

Edited May 25, 2012 by yoshiwara

[midas]

and what is your recommendation regarding which assets people should be holding right now?

Buy now shares generating good dividend streams.

BP, Shell, Vodaphone as examples

And property in prime/central locations with English legal systems. (eg London, Hong Kong)

Cash in $US also very OK at least in the short term.

*Singapore is a bit of a problem now as there is an added 10% transaction tax for overseas buyers. Hong Kong just puts in added tax for flipping)

I think I can understand why we have diametrically opposed views

Regarding equities my concern is that we may be at the equivalent of the Nikkei 225

in 1990?

Regarding real estate I own two nice condominiums in Sydney Australia both in good locations I bought in 1984 and while they they are valued considerably higher than what I paid for them originally, the values are coming down ( but they are still way above my purchase prices ).

But I also accept the fact that if I want to sell them there is always the risk I will not be able to.

It seems the UK property market is also starting to deteriorate again according to this article.

And cash.... well that needs no comment because the risks have already mentioned

several times earlier in this thread.

http://www.thisismon...redictions.html

Edited May 25, 2012 by midas

[Jayman]

Gold is infinitely more liquid than land.

[churchill]

Gold is infinitely more liquid than land.

Yes as those in Samui Greece , Spain ....are finding

Prime site .. London still OK .. If one has property in a prime location .. rental returns should always be good

Negative Equity More Widespread Than Previously Thought, Report Says

• http://blogs.wsj.com/developments/2012/05/24/negative-equity-more-widespread-than-previously-thought-report-says/?mod=google_news_blog
  

[midas]

Gold is infinitely more liquid than land.

yes and it is not only the liquidity one has to be worried about

Even in Hong Kong which yoshiwara cited as a recommendation

of where to buy prices are dropping

Hong Kong Homes Face 25% Drop in Year of the Dragon

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-08/hong-kong-homes-face-25-drop-in-year-of-the-dragon-mortgages.html

[Naam]

Portwine is infinitely more liquid than Gold.

source: http://www.naams-basic-wisdom.org

[xylophone]

The thread is still making interesting reading although off on a tangent from time to time. In view of this I would like to recommend that for those who haven't seen it, you look at the movie/documentary "Inside Job", narrated by Matt Damon.

In a nutshell, how the financial meltdown happened due primarily to a totally unregulated investment banking market in the USA and it names names and also has some interesting interviews. Well worth a watch to anyone who wants to know a little more about how we got here.

[12DrinkMore]

"That idiot" didn't sell quite at the bottom of the market. He, single handed, created a market bottom by dumping that much gold - your gold if you were a UK taxpayer (fortunately not I).

I think we digress from the thread?

It was announced in advance that the gold was to be sold off.

I have never read a clear explanation why this was done, except a rumour that a couple of banks in "the City" had a few issues and a lower gold price would help them out of their difficulties.

I suspect it was a clandestine bailout of the bankers.

I don't believe that that Osborne ever received an answer, or, if he did, was probably told that he must keep his mouth shut, or there would be a few ramifications.

Who knows?

You clearly don't.

No I don't.

I never claimed to know.

So maybe you do?

If so, spill the beans.

[yoshiwara]

Gold is infinitely more liquid than land.

yes and it is not only the liquidity one has to be worried about

Even in Hong Kong which yoshiwara cited as a recommendation

of where to buy prices are dropping

Hong Kong Homes Face 25% Drop in Year of the Dragon

http://www.businessw...-mortgages.html

There is constant chatter about the 'forthcoming HK property crash', but it just doesn't happen. Cheaper property in prime areas hold its value very well and generates good income. The problem is the entry price which is expensive.

[yoshiwara]

and what is your recommendation regarding which assets people should be holding right now?

Buy now shares generating good dividend streams.

BP, Shell, Vodaphone as examples

And property in prime/central locations with English legal systems. (eg London, Hong Kong)

Cash in $US also very OK at least in the short term.

*Singapore is a bit of a problem now as there is an added 10% transaction tax for overseas buyers. Hong Kong just puts in added tax for flipping)

I think I can understand why we have diametrically opposed views

Regarding equities my concern is that we may be at the equivalent of the Nikkei 225

in 1990?

Regarding real estate I own two nice condominiums in Sydney Australia both in good locations I bought in 1984 and while they they are valued considerably higher than what I paid for them originally, the values are coming down ( but they are still way above my purchase prices ).

But I also accept the fact that if I want to sell them there is always the risk I will not be able to.

It seems the UK property market is also starting to deteriorate again according to this article.

I have no knowledge of the Sydney property market. I have no interest in the UK property market as a whole. Only London zone 1 and within that certain areas. Prime location and regularity of income. No focus in immediate period on capital value. Again, problem here is the relatively hefty entry price (350k up). Selling the property not an issue.

Edited May 26, 2012 by yoshiwara

[midas]

Gold is infinitely more liquid than land.

yes and it is not only the liquidity one has to be worried about

Even in Hong Kong which yoshiwara cited as a recommendation

of where to buy prices are dropping

Hong Kong Homes Face 25% Drop in Year of the Dragon

http://www.businessw...-mortgages.html

There is constant chatter about the 'forthcoming HK property crash', but it just doesn't happen. Cheaper property in prime areas hold its value very well and generates good income. The problem is the entry price which is expensive.

There is constant chatter about the 'forthcoming HK property crash', but it just doesn't happen.

you are so tunnel visioned I am convinced you must be an estate agent or a financial adviser

it doesn't get any plainer than this-

Signs that property market in Hong Kong is cooling as land sells for less than expected

http://www.propertywire.com/news/asia/hong-kong-property-sales-201205096505.html

Edited May 26, 2012 by midas

[midas]

Buy now shares generating good dividend streams.

BP, Shell, Vodaphone as examples

And property in prime/central locations with English legal systems. (eg London, Hong Kong)

Cash in $US also very OK at least in the short term.

*Singapore is a bit of a problem now as there is an added 10% transaction tax for overseas buyers. Hong Kong just puts in added tax for flipping)

I think I can understand why we have diametrically opposed views

Regarding equities my concern is that we may be at the equivalent of the Nikkei 225

in 1990?

Regarding real estate I own two nice condominiums in Sydney Australia both in good locations I bought in 1984 and while they they are valued considerably higher than what I paid for them originally, the values are coming down ( but they are still way above my purchase prices ).

But I also accept the fact that if I want to sell them there is always the risk I will not be able to.

It seems the UK property market is also starting to deteriorate again according to this article.

I have no knowledge of the Sydney property market. I have no interest in the UK property market as a whole. Only London zone 1 and within that certain areas. Prime location and regularity of income. No focus in immediate period on capital value. Again, problem here is the relatively hefty entry price (350k up). Selling the property not an issue.

Selling the property not an issue.

Not everyone would agree with that !!

And it is an enormous issue if the property you own turns out to be in one of these kinds of locations......

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/berlin-exhibition-explores-modern-ghost-towns-a-835282.html#ref=rss?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[yoshiwara]

you are so tunnel visioned I am convinced you must be an estate agent or a financial adviser

it doesn't get any plainer than this-

Signs that property market in Hong Kong is cooling as land sells for less than expected

http://www.propertyw...1205096505.html

'Er no I am not an estate agent or a realtor. And that article is talking about land sales in new areas. I am not interested in new developments. I am interested in the historic heart of Hong Kong namely the West of the Island and am an owner. My one reluctance in recommending purchase is that property cost is rather a lot and if one cannot afford the entry price it is not an option. The same thing would apply to Zone 1 in London compared to the rest of the UK. It is one of my suggestions re focussing on income and dividends to financially navigate forwards. Income and dividends. Zero with gold.

Edited May 26, 2012 by yoshiwara

[Naam]

you are so tunnel visioned I am convinced you must be an estate agent or a financial adviser

it doesn't get any plainer than this-

Signs that property market in Hong Kong is cooling as land sells for less than expected

http://www.propertyw...1205096505.html

Midas,

the question remains who is tunnel-visioned. the one with a ridiculous claim

"it does not get any plainer than this" and posting a link in which an obvious

clueless journàsslist reports

The winning bid for the site near Repulse Bay Road, in the Island

South district, was HK$1.67 billion but the site, with a total buildable area

of 42,000 square feet, was expected to fetch HK$1.68 billion, according

to the median estimate of five analysts surveyed by Bloomberg News.

using the difference of 0.6% in context with amounts exceeding one billion

as an indicator is utterly ridiculous!

CAPTAIN! long range sensors report

"it doesn't get any plainer than this!"

[how241]

Gold is only taking a breather on its 11 year BULL run. Later this year or early next year, after the election, I think will make new highs (over $2000).

[midas]

you are so tunnel visioned I am convinced you must be an estate agent or a financial adviser

it doesn't get any plainer than this-

Signs that property market in Hong Kong is cooling as land sells for less than expected

http://www.propertyw...1205096505.html

Midas,

the question remains who is tunnel-visioned. the one with a ridiculous claim

"it does not get any plainer than this" and posting a link in which an obvious

clueless journàsslist reports

The winning bid for the site near Repulse Bay Road, in the Island

South district, was HK$1.67 billion but the site, with a total buildable area

of 42,000 square feet, was expected to fetch HK$1.68 billion, according

to the median estimate of five analysts surveyed by Bloomberg News.

using the difference of 0.6% in context with amounts exceeding one billion

as an indicator is utterly ridiculous!

CAPTAIN! long range sensors report

"it doesn't get any plainer than this!"

I am saying this represent the beginning of a long downturn as occured in the Japan real estate market.

I share the view of economist and investment manager David Kauders ( in the link I provided earlier ) where he suggests

" that this is actually the start of 'a slow-motion crash - so slow that many commentators will not even see it. They will observe only the shorter-term trends.'

His prediction centres on his analysis that claims the substantial house price rises seen since the 1970s have reflected an exceptional period of time when mortgage credit expanded.

That has now come to an end, Kauders suggests, and a slow Japan-style crash will now occur over the coming decades with short rallies punctuating a gradual decline in property prices "

it makes sense to me because incomes are not even going up enough to justify the prices in many places that were set years ago.

of course one could try to capture the short rallies he refers to but for me that would be like falling knives

Edited May 26, 2012 by midas

[midas]

you are so tunnel visioned I am convinced you must be an estate agent or a financial adviser

it doesn't get any plainer than this-

Signs that property market in Hong Kong is cooling as land sells for less than expected

http://www.propertyw...1205096505.html

'Er no I am not an estate agent or a realtor. And that article is talking about land sales in new areas. I am not interested in new developments. I am interested in the historic heart of Hong Kong namely the West of the Island and am an owner. My one reluctance in recommending purchase is that property cost is rather a lot and if one cannot afford the entry price it is not an option. The same thing would apply to Zone 1 in London compared to the rest of the UK. It is one of my suggestions re focussing on income and dividends to financially navigate forwards. Income and dividends. Zero with gold.

but you dont get dividends when you pay for insurance either

and like i said before i and many others are holding

gold as an insurance.

BTW i hope you have paid the premium to buy sufficient put options to adequately

cover your shares in case of a sudden market crash

and how would you get income on your property if as a result of a

Euro collapse for example your tenants lose their jobs ?

Edited May 26, 2012 by midas