I'm not saying it's zero, but every lower high should have been sold, and if you're looking for a good out you'll see it drop to the 160-155 level on GLD, where you can back in. If you're in the commodity, the studies I've seen on the effects of roll effectively remove any long term profits you might make, so switching out the commodity to gld will really allow your investments to compound since they won't be paying extravagant fees every time the front month ends. From that perspective the Buffet bias is more about cash flow. He would rather bet money he understands than the off chance that his commodity might get hit with an inflationary price jump.
We all know? You mean you've convinced your egotistical jello mush of your brain something that is absurd and false? I think you should phone Buffett and give him some tips from a real trader, he seems to only like the long cash account stuff... cheers
If you bought Gold in 1980 during the last gold bubble and paid 850 an ounce back then, gold would need to trade at 2320 today for you to break even. So you would still be underwater. Buying during bubbles is a fools play.
Very good! The definition of profitability is always relative to the period in question, and if we don't outperform the underlying index per se, the difference I was trying to to highlight is even more exacerbatted by the performance of the index over time as a percentage of profit, than the basic definition of "profit" was according to any definition of time and the value of 1987 before that where gold was priced even more abundantly than its' usefullness as a potential variant to silver or other abundantly consumable use as silver even though we use them as shields to the bright of the sun it's use is limited to the individual who depends on its' ultimate dependence of brightness that must always be valued by its' ability to reflect the dangers of the sun on all of the values it might otherwise be used, therefore. <b>Therefore!.</b>
Yeah, imagine being so unlucky putting all your money in gold those 2 weeks in 1980 where gold was above 600 USD an ounce... Man, I wouldnt want to be that guy man... Urgh, this is such a worn out argument. How bout if you bought Citi at 50 $, or Pet.com at 300$.... How are those guys doing? But yeah thats an unfair comparison right because ofcourse everyone only invests in the index... Oh and by the way did you know the average life expectancy for companies is 30 years? So logic would dictate if you put all your money in stocks in 1980 you wouldnt be doing so well today either....
Good man, that is the point of this thread that even though Warren Buffet knows that the return from this storm is greater than the most profitable aspect of buy and hold trader is from $600 to maybe $1,800 per share if the value of those stocks didn't exceed the 200% only profitability of the storm then this was indeed a bad bet as attested to the storm by way of a multiple of only 200% the potential profit of 1980 doesn't exceed what you would have proifited in this example of 200% profit if you had brought the calm from the storm 20 years hence than 30 years hence...that profit, even before oil, which was Iraq's regular production export would have been below even the most calmest production hedger's price that never would have brought a profit because $1,800 30 years hence is always less than $100 years hence because the calm of the storm always accounted for inflation and until the inflation of oil was accounted for in the inflation of silver or gold or precious medals it will always be that oil was selling at a higher price than any amount of gold could ever have been valued at the time. If the gold wasn't valued as high as silver but not as high as oil, then its productive end use wasn't nearly as high as any commodity, even one that is consumed every day and even one that is produced with the expectation that all of those without an alternative method of production like electricity won't ever produce a more higher productive value as anything that gold or silver or oil produces without the production of endless energy that is produced by the most theoretical distributions that include cold fusion, and include natural gas energy only price in terms of undervaluation by the market whereas the tools of profitability are consumption than production if we have water, then the production of such is limitless because H2O is entirely limitless and I am one of those that is attracted to such abundance because the theoretical basis is confined to the owners of such resources who have access to this without limit. Indeed, to infinity, cold fusion goes, and if you know someone with that intelligence, you will invest every dollar to its highest end use in such technologies because its highest end use is limitless if you account for the relative abundance of its' existence. Water is limitless, and potential electrochemical energy has produced more of a holy grail than any resource that can produce abundance like trading strategies ever could...
Well, since the Dow is in strong backwardation and gold is in strong forwardation - looks like Buffet and his fanboys are going to make a fortune if this bet is right. Seriously though, investment managers don't put out stories like this except to shore up a shaky position, book a quick short-term profit, or escape a bad trade. If Buffet was "sure" in his bet then he'd keep his mouth shut and continue piling into the position while making massive profit. Why dilute your trade by telling the world about it? The only amazing thing is that everyone keeps buying into these nonsense press releases.
Many Gold bugs invest in it like a religon. It doesn't mean you won't make lots of money but today's market in metals reminds me of the early to mid 1990s. The downside to picking Gold is its not really a fundamental play. If enough people ever bail on the trade it can get ugly very fast. I remember in the early 1990s Gold was supposed to go up forever, everyone wanted to buy a mining stock. In the end, it was better to be picking tech companies. Anyone who sold out of their gold plays and put their money into tech made out like bandits.
I know what you are saying very well. My business partner was actually one of those few people that bought gold at the 700's in the last spike in the 80's. He literally lost a house in 1 night. Personally I prefer copper, but it seems like all the hot money is going into treasuries and gold. So a peon like me might as well go with the trend. Until it changes of course.