Market Predictions. Ignorance on Display

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
Gold is money, this paper shit is over. Gold is the only safe bet, if you measure it in dollars then yes it goes up and down, but what Gold can buy has remained stable. Hence why it is money.

Europe is imploding, all this “bailout” does is devalue our currency even more. Perhaps this would be a great time to start reading into austrian economics.

Prices don’t go up in deflation like we are seeing now.

I have said before in other threads that we would see the collapse happen this year, and it has started. But hey if you want listen to the talking heads on CNBC and invest your money in Europe I hear its a great buying opportunity.[/quote]

Lol. Gold is down to $1,238.80 an ounce and most likely has seen its peak and will drop more. I will be interested to see what you are saying in a years time. Two years time.
[/quote]

Ill probably be sitting here like I did last year when Gold was under 1000 an ounce saying the same thing. Getting told I was wrong and then watch it go higher.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

The stock market over a long term say 15-20 years is a sure thing while a casino is loosing proposition over the long haul. I personally am going to listen to a rich person when it comes to investing than Joe Bubba at the craps table.

Everyone has their opinions, but over my 16 year experience in investing there is really no better way to make money. I am only 33 so it is almost half my life. I have personally made money over the past 10 years, not a bunch but it is a positive return.[/quote]

I have to take issue with this part of your post. The stock market is a tool for enhancing your wealth, it’s far from the best way to make money. The best way to get rich is have a valuable skill that people are willing to pay for, or start a business that becomes valuable.

Most people who get rich in the stock market are getting paid to handle other peoples money (they are perceived to have a skill), they are not getting rich investing their own money.

If you started investing in the S&P 500 in '94, after 15 years you would have only made about 3% annually. But wait, the index fund you invested in has a management fee so now you’re down to 2%.

Do you have to pay any capital gains for distributions over that time? Knock a little more off. I’m sure the 15 years up to 1982 was just as bad. Also, remember most people -even pros- underperform the S&P 500.

[quote]on edge wrote:
Has anyone else noticed these stock threads take off in down markets but people quickly lose interests when the markets are doing well? I wonder why.

[/quote]

Haha, I see this thread is getting a lot of activity again!

[quote]on edge wrote:

I have to take issue with this part of your post. The stock market is a tool for enhancing your wealth, it’s far from the best way to make money. The best way to get rich is have a valuable skill that people are willing to pay for, or start a business that becomes valuable.[/quote]

The stock market is one way to make money. It can be good or bad. But a job is not the way to make money. It is where almost everybody needs to start, but people should have some sort of passive income. You lose that job, get hurt, and that income is gone. (Barring insurance.) A business, as you mentioned, is better in that way.

That is the way some people make a lot of money, but there are plenty of people making money in the market. Warren Buffet’s big secret? Every time there is a crash, (every 6 to 10 years) he goes on a bargain sale.

It’s the most common term in investing. Buy low sell high, and nobody does it. Everybody want’s to get in on the ride up when they should be selling, and everybody pulls out after it drops when they should be buying.[quote]
If you started investing in the S&P 500 in '94, after 15 years you would have only made about 3% annually. But wait, the index fund you invested in has a management fee so now you’re down to 2%.
[/quote]

Are you sure? I figure 8.3%. Using an online ROI calculator, and starting at $482 for 1/1/94. (Rounded up due to the calculator not using cents.) To the current 1135. (Rounded down)

[quote]
Do you have to pay any capital gains for distributions over that time? Knock a little more off. I’m sure the 15 years up to 1982 was just as bad. Also, remember most people -even pros- underperform the S&P 500.[/quote]

Most funds do underperform the S&P 500, but that means either invest in the S&P 500, or look for the funds that do actually beat the S&P 500.

Personally I am, in general, slowly moving my money in and out of the market in response to how it moves, but generally out, and at the next crash, I will start to move more in.

But my return on the business I started last year is much higher, and that is nothing compared to the potential in real estate, which I will get into in the next couple of years.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
Gold is money, this paper shit is over. Gold is the only safe bet, if you measure it in dollars then yes it goes up and down, but what Gold can buy has remained stable. Hence why it is money.

Europe is imploding, all this “bailout” does is devalue our currency even more. Perhaps this would be a great time to start reading into austrian economics.

Prices don’t go up in deflation like we are seeing now.

I have said before in other threads that we would see the collapse happen this year, and it has started. But hey if you want listen to the talking heads on CNBC and invest your money in Europe I hear its a great buying opportunity.[/quote]

Lol. Gold is down to $1,238.80 an ounce and most likely has seen its peak and will drop more. I will be interested to see what you are saying in a years time. Two years time.
[/quote]

‘Down’ to $1238.80…LOL! It was $35 when I was your age (prbly). It was $270 in 2001, when I put huge amounts in metal and the miners.

You might be rightthough…in one year. Who’ll be richer 10 years from now? 20? LOL!!

Here, maybe this’ll help clear the fog…
From the WSJ, so Joe can’t dismiss it as ‘opinion’:

“103: The number of months it would take to sell off all the foreclosed homes in banksâ?? possession, plus all the homes likely to end up there over the next couple years, at the current rate of sales.”

More than 8 years!!

How will the government bail out the banks collapsing under THAT? And you want to bet against gold? If you do, then you are a fool.
[/quote]

And what is the return from a properly diversified portfolio in all that time?

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
Gold is money, this paper shit is over. Gold is the only safe bet, if you measure it in dollars then yes it goes up and down, but what Gold can buy has remained stable. Hence why it is money.

Europe is imploding, all this “bailout” does is devalue our currency even more. Perhaps this would be a great time to start reading into austrian economics.

Prices don’t go up in deflation like we are seeing now.

I have said before in other threads that we would see the collapse happen this year, and it has started. But hey if you want listen to the talking heads on CNBC and invest your money in Europe I hear its a great buying opportunity.[/quote]

Lol. Gold is down to $1,238.80 an ounce and most likely has seen its peak and will drop more. I will be interested to see what you are saying in a years time. Two years time.
[/quote]

‘Down’ to $1238.80…LOL! It was $35 when I was your age (prbly). It was $270 in 2001, when I put huge amounts in metal and the miners.

You might be rightthough…in one year. Who’ll be richer 10 years from now? 20? LOL!!

Here, maybe this’ll help clear the fog…
From the WSJ, so Joe can’t dismiss it as ‘opinion’:

“103: The number of months it would take to sell off all the foreclosed homes in banksÃ?¢?? possession, plus all the homes likely to end up there over the next couple years, at the current rate of sales.”

More than 8 years!!

How will the government bail out the banks collapsing under THAT? And you want to bet against gold? If you do, then you are a fool.
[/quote]

And what is the return from a properly diversified portfolio in all that time?[/quote]

If you can outguess Obama, Geithner, and Maurice Strong over those years, then I salute you. Or maybe Al Gore will let you in on his Commodity Carbon Exchange, where he’ll get to scam billions.

The problem with that and your plan is that our money is actually a weapon aimed at those who are supposed to produce and give value to the paper. What if they don’t? What if productive people don’t WANT to produce for the thugs you hired (voted for) to rob them? Your ‘properly diversified portfolio’ will be good bird cage liner.

That’s why I still can’t believe people voted for Obama btw. Did they really expect productive intelligent people to work and create because a con artist lawyer convinced dumb jackasses to vote for him? To work so they could be punished …for success?

Who is John Galt?

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
Gold is money, this paper shit is over. Gold is the only safe bet, if you measure it in dollars then yes it goes up and down, but what Gold can buy has remained stable. Hence why it is money.

Europe is imploding, all this “bailout” does is devalue our currency even more. Perhaps this would be a great time to start reading into austrian economics.

Prices don’t go up in deflation like we are seeing now.

I have said before in other threads that we would see the collapse happen this year, and it has started. But hey if you want listen to the talking heads on CNBC and invest your money in Europe I hear its a great buying opportunity.[/quote]

Lol. Gold is down to $1,238.80 an ounce and most likely has seen its peak and will drop more. I will be interested to see what you are saying in a years time. Two years time.
[/quote]

‘Down’ to $1238.80…LOL! It was $35 when I was your age (prbly). It was $270 in 2001, when I put huge amounts in metal and the miners.

You might be rightthough…in one year. Who’ll be richer 10 years from now? 20? LOL!!

Here, maybe this’ll help clear the fog…
From the WSJ, so Joe can’t dismiss it as ‘opinion’:

“103: The number of months it would take to sell off all the foreclosed homes in banksÃ??Ã?¢?? possession, plus all the homes likely to end up there over the next couple years, at the current rate of sales.”

More than 8 years!!

How will the government bail out the banks collapsing under THAT? And you want to bet against gold? If you do, then you are a fool.
[/quote]

And what is the return from a properly diversified portfolio in all that time?[/quote]

If you can outguess Obama, Geithner, and Maurice Strong over those years, then I salute you. Or maybe Al Gore will let you in on his Commodity Carbon Exchange, where he’ll get to scam billions.

The problem with that and your plan is that our money is actually a weapon aimed at those who are supposed to produce and give value to the paper. What if they don’t? What if productive people don’t WANT to produce for the thugs you hired (voted for) to rob them? Your ‘properly diversified portfolio’ will be good bird cage liner.

That’s why I still can’t believe people voted for Obama btw. Did they really expect productive intelligent people to work and create because a con artist lawyer convinced dumb jackasses to vote for him? To work so they could be punished …for success?

Who is John Galt?
[/quote]

People were pretty productive with tax rates much higher than they are now, at least for the top earners.

I’m not a high tax supporter but history says that some of the “golden” eras also had marginal tax rates around 90%.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:
Gold is money, this paper shit is over. Gold is the only safe bet, if you measure it in dollars then yes it goes up and down, but what Gold can buy has remained stable. Hence why it is money.

Europe is imploding, all this “bailout” does is devalue our currency even more. Perhaps this would be a great time to start reading into austrian economics.

Prices don’t go up in deflation like we are seeing now.

I have said before in other threads that we would see the collapse happen this year, and it has started. But hey if you want listen to the talking heads on CNBC and invest your money in Europe I hear its a great buying opportunity.[/quote]

Lol. Gold is down to $1,238.80 an ounce and most likely has seen its peak and will drop more. I will be interested to see what you are saying in a years time. Two years time.
[/quote]

‘Down’ to $1238.80…LOL! It was $35 when I was your age (prbly). It was $270 in 2001, when I put huge amounts in metal and the miners.

You might be rightthough…in one year. Who’ll be richer 10 years from now? 20? LOL!!

Here, maybe this’ll help clear the fog…
From the WSJ, so Joe can’t dismiss it as ‘opinion’:

“103: The number of months it would take to sell off all the foreclosed homes in banksÃ??Ã?¢?? possession, plus all the homes likely to end up there over the next couple years, at the current rate of sales.”

More than 8 years!!

How will the government bail out the banks collapsing under THAT? And you want to bet against gold? If you do, then you are a fool.
[/quote]

And what is the return from a properly diversified portfolio in all that time?[/quote]

If you can outguess Obama, Geithner, and Maurice Strong over those years, then I salute you. Or maybe Al Gore will let you in on his Commodity Carbon Exchange, where he’ll get to scam billions.

The problem with that and your plan is that our money is actually a weapon aimed at those who are supposed to produce and give value to the paper. What if they don’t? What if productive people don’t WANT to produce for the thugs you hired (voted for) to rob them? Your ‘properly diversified portfolio’ will be good bird cage liner.

That’s why I still can’t believe people voted for Obama btw. Did they really expect productive intelligent people to work and create because a con artist lawyer convinced dumb jackasses to vote for him? To work so they could be punished …for success?

Who is John Galt?
[/quote]

That is a 100% non-answer. People made much more money from the stock market, real estate investments, and other investments than gold in the period you mentioned. It has nothing to do with Obaama. Or the government. Nice try, though.

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

The stock market over a long term say 15-20 years is a sure thing while a casino is loosing proposition over the long haul. I personally am going to listen to a rich person when it comes to investing than Joe Bubba at the craps table.

Everyone has their opinions, but over my 16 year experience in investing there is really no better way to make money. I am only 33 so it is almost half my life. I have personally made money over the past 10 years, not a bunch but it is a positive return.[/quote]

I have to take issue with this part of your post. The stock market is a tool for enhancing your wealth, it’s far from the best way to make money. The best way to get rich is have a valuable skill that people are willing to pay for, or start a business that becomes valuable.

Most people who get rich in the stock market are getting paid to handle other peoples money (they are perceived to have a skill), they are not getting rich investing their own money.

If you started investing in the S&P 500 in '94, after 15 years you would have only made about 3% annually. But wait, the index fund you invested in has a management fee so now you’re down to 2%.

Do you have to pay any capital gains for distributions over that time? Knock a little more off. I’m sure the 15 years up to 1982 was just as bad. Also, remember most people -even pros- underperform the S&P 500.[/quote]

My opinion was for the average person out there who can only save about 5-6% of their income. What better way is there to increase wealth for that type of person? Mutual Funds are really the only way to get started without taking a huge amount of risk.

I agree with your point though. It is the people getting paid to invest the money that make the money. That is why I pick my own funds, stocks, and bonds.

Also My point was in contrast to the investing is gambling theory that is going around. Getting that 3% is much better than the negative that happens on average at the casino.

For those that have an interest, I am starting to scale in short again. I am using Dec. put options on the SPY.

I believe the manic echo of the former bubble is fading.

Looks like a good call so far, Jeaton. My down side puts and ETF’s have done a good job of keeping me even but god if I hadn’t had them…

[quote]on edge wrote:

I’ve observed over the past ten years or so that when the market makes a huge one day drop and recovers quickly, it’s basically foretelling where it’s going. In other words it drops fast and recovers. It then consolidates for a few days before dropping back down to where it dipped before. It then consolidates for a few more days or even a week or two before dropping again. In my opinion the markets are in for a world of hurt in 2010.

[/quote]

Now if only I could make some money off being so smart. Look for it to start consolidating again in a day or two. It will consolidate for a week or two then, who knows.

When I made the post above I was pretty sure I did know, and it would be down. Now I’m not as convinced. We might have a good run up from here. I’m considering getting back into energy maybe even OIL. Probably will just sit back and watch though.

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

I’ve observed over the past ten years or so that when the market makes a huge one day drop and recovers quickly, it’s basically foretelling where it’s going. In other words it drops fast and recovers. It then consolidates for a few days before dropping back down to where it dipped before. It then consolidates for a few more days or even a week or two before dropping again. In my opinion the markets are in for a world of hurt in 2010.

[/quote]

Now if only I could make some money off being so smart. Look for it to start consolidating again in a day or two. It will consolidate for a week or two then, who knows.

When I made the post above I was pretty sure I did know, and it would be down. Now I’m not as convinced. We might have a good run up from here. I’m considering getting back into energy maybe even OIL. Probably will just sit back and watch though.

[/quote]

I plan on putting some funds to work very soon. The fear is starting to come back into the market. Yeah us. The questions is how much fear, and how long will it last.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

I’ve observed over the past ten years or so that when the market makes a huge one day drop and recovers quickly, it’s basically foretelling where it’s going. In other words it drops fast and recovers. It then consolidates for a few days before dropping back down to where it dipped before. It then consolidates for a few more days or even a week or two before dropping again. In my opinion the markets are in for a world of hurt in 2010.

[/quote]

Now if only I could make some money off being so smart. Look for it to start consolidating again in a day or two. It will consolidate for a week or two then, who knows.

When I made the post above I was pretty sure I did know, and it would be down. Now I’m not as convinced. We might have a good run up from here. I’m considering getting back into energy maybe even OIL. Probably will just sit back and watch though.

[/quote]

I plan on putting some funds to work very soon. The fear is starting to come back into the market. Yeah us. The questions is how much fear, and how long will it last.[/quote]

I agree. Does the market put in lower lows than the lows of 2008? Jeaton is a smart guy and he seams to think so. I thought so up until a couple of weeks ago. Now my thought process is something like this; The '08 lows were due to BIG problems in our country. The trigger point this time is in Europe. I don’t think Europe can take us down as low and I don’t see such extreme internal problems coming to light so soon after the banking/credit scandals. Europe is a hasbeen economy, SE Asia is an up and coming economy and will pull us along more than Europe will drag us down.

Having said that, I think lower lows are a lot more likely than higher highs any time in the next five years.

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

I’ve observed over the past ten years or so that when the market makes a huge one day drop and recovers quickly, it’s basically foretelling where it’s going. In other words it drops fast and recovers. It then consolidates for a few days before dropping back down to where it dipped before. It then consolidates for a few more days or even a week or two before dropping again. In my opinion the markets are in for a world of hurt in 2010.

[/quote]

Now if only I could make some money off being so smart. Look for it to start consolidating again in a day or two. It will consolidate for a week or two then, who knows.

When I made the post above I was pretty sure I did know, and it would be down. Now I’m not as convinced. We might have a good run up from here. I’m considering getting back into energy maybe even OIL. Probably will just sit back and watch though.

[/quote]

I plan on putting some funds to work very soon. The fear is starting to come back into the market. Yeah us. The questions is how much fear, and how long will it last.[/quote]

I agree. Does the market put in lower lows than the lows of 2008? Jeaton is a smart guy and he seams to think so. I thought so up until a couple of weeks ago. Now my thought process is something like this; The '08 lows were due to BIG problems in our country. The trigger point this time is in Europe. I don’t think Europe can take us down as low and I don’t see such extreme internal problems coming to light so soon after the banking/credit scandals. Europe is a hasbeen economy, SE Asia is an up and coming economy and will pull us along more than Europe will drag us down.

Having said that, I think lower lows are a lot more likely than higher highs any time in the next five years.

[/quote]

Agree entirely. We will be able to trade this market for a few years before buy and hold comes back.

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

[quote]on edge wrote:

I’ve observed over the past ten years or so that when the market makes a huge one day drop and recovers quickly, it’s basically foretelling where it’s going. In other words it drops fast and recovers. It then consolidates for a few days before dropping back down to where it dipped before. It then consolidates for a few more days or even a week or two before dropping again. In my opinion the markets are in for a world of hurt in 2010.

[/quote]

Now if only I could make some money off being so smart. Look for it to start consolidating again in a day or two. It will consolidate for a week or two then, who knows.

When I made the post above I was pretty sure I did know, and it would be down. Now I’m not as convinced. We might have a good run up from here. I’m considering getting back into energy maybe even OIL. Probably will just sit back and watch though.

[/quote]

I plan on putting some funds to work very soon. The fear is starting to come back into the market. Yeah us. The questions is how much fear, and how long will it last.[/quote]

I agree. Does the market put in lower lows than the lows of 2008? Jeaton is a smart guy and he seams to think so. I thought so up until a couple of weeks ago. Now my thought process is something like this; The '08 lows were due to BIG problems in our country. The trigger point this time is in Europe. I don’t think Europe can take us down as low and I don’t see such extreme internal problems coming to light so soon after the banking/credit scandals. Europe is a hasbeen economy, SE Asia is an up and coming economy and will pull us along more than Europe will drag us down.

Having said that, I think lower lows are a lot more likely than higher highs any time in the next five years.

[/quote]

I would say it a slightly different way. Europe is the neighbor’s crisis that temporarily diverts our attentions from our own issues. Do not forget about the bankrupt states, the coming commercial real estate crash, and the fact that we cured nothing in the first act of our crisis. We simply transferred the costs of the sins of “too big to fails” to the government, “we the people.”

As this echo of the previous manic asset bubble runs out of steam, deflationary pressures will start to exert themselves. Our current economy cannot sustain the monetary velocity necessary to keep assets inflated. I believe we are just starting to see this in oil. We now have more homes in foreclosure than any other time in recorded history.

Repost for content and context:
It is estimated that less than 5% (actually more like 2% to 3%) of our money supply consist of physical coin and paper money. The rest is created through lending by means of quantitative easing using fractional reserve banking. The remaining lions share is represented by credits and debits on electronic ledger that are moved from bank to bank. This seems to be one of the harder things for people to wrap their heads around. They say things like “the money has to be somewhere. It goes from one mans pocked to another.” It is a misunderstanding. When I ran the largest GM dealer in my zone, we handled millions of dollars in transactions per month. I rarely saw a paper bill.

When things are going well and money velocity is steadily increasing, money supply is increasing. The same dollars are being spent over and over and over again. But remember, the monetary base is not increasing. For demonstration purposes, all this additional money is simply electronic data.

If and when the commercial real estate market implodes, all of this electronic money that is tied to hard assets will be revalued. Money velocity fails to create new money at a faster pace than old money is being destroyed. When a commercial loan goes bad, and the bank eventually has to liquidate the asset, a write down occurs. If a $1 million dollar asset (loan debt) is liquidated for $300,000.00, the the money supply has now decreased by $700,000.00.

Something else to consider. In an economy that is dominated by fractional reserve lending, the value of the assets are not inherent to the asset. The value is determined by both the promise and the ability to pay the loan backed by the asset. When the promise and ability to pay becomes worthless (ie default) the value of the underlying asset deflates. It the economy is not growing at a sufficient rate and such defaults on promises grow, deflation begins to take center stage.

I learn so much from this site, some damn smart people around these parts.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
The Case for Japanese Small Stocks (world’s cheapest stock market):

Div 2.36% Price to Book .83 Price to Sales .4

These numbers are far better than any other market in the world. May I also add that a price to book of .83 means that you can buy $1 of assets for 83 cents?

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article17629.html

Although very leery of stocks right now, I did just put a goodly chunk into Fidelity’s Japan Smaller Companies fund, to ameliorate risk.

[/quote]

First book value sucks, it just lets you know how much was invested in the company, not how much the company is worth. Second if you think buying a dollar for $.83 is good, you should go back and investigate value investing. I don’t buy a solid company unless I’m getting fifty cents on the dollar.[/quote]

Able to find any right now at those prices Brother? Are you willing to share your ideas? I made a killing last year. I bought at 50 cents and now they are worth a dollar.[/quote]

I will, I first look for an industry that is depressed, which is a lot of them. But I’m looking for the shittiest of the shitty.[/quote]

You have any ideas that you would like to share?[/quote]

Not at the moment, I am currently looking over the balance sheets. I however am interested in the Computer Wholesale.

I recommend picking up Security Analysis and another book, but I can’t for the life of me remember the name.

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]JoeGood wrote:

Hecla is up 133% in the past year, its down 50% over three years. and even over 5 years while its universally regarded as the worst run company in it’s own industry. Since 1982 its down 75% because its a crappy mining company and somehow it missed on revenues this quarter. I get you have precious metals blindness and are going to live and die without any regard about what happens if you are wrong. But why not, at the very least, pick a well managed company?

No insiders have purchased its shares in over a year while several have divested.

For a more serious question. just about every reasonable person knows there is a chance that their investment ideas might well be wrong. What are your investment options if silver doesn’t run?
[/quote]

It was recommended to me by my families broker, I am not married to the company and if I don’t see a decent rise in the next few months I will go to another company.

You do ask a good question, you are right there is always a chance my investment could be wrong. But to tell you the truth I am kind of betting the farm so to speak on silver. If my investment bombs I will probably be asking JEATON for advice.[/quote]

Wait you are waiting for a company to start going up before you buy it. That is like waiting for milk to go off sale to buy it.

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]JEATON wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]JoeGood wrote:

Hecla is up 133% in the past year, its down 50% over three years. and even over 5 years while its universally regarded as the worst run company in it’s own industry. Since 1982 its down 75% because its a crappy mining company and somehow it missed on revenues this quarter. I get you have precious metals blindness and are going to live and die without any regard about what happens if you are wrong. But why not, at the very least, pick a well managed company?

No insiders have purchased its shares in over a year while several have divested.

For a more serious question. just about every reasonable person knows there is a chance that their investment ideas might well be wrong. What are your investment options if silver doesn’t run?
[/quote]

It was recommended to me by my families broker, I am not married to the company and if I don’t see a decent rise in the next few months I will go to another company.

You do ask a good question, you are right there is always a chance my investment could be wrong. But to tell you the truth I am kind of betting the farm so to speak on silver. If my investment bombs I will probably be asking JEATON for advice.[/quote]

Remember, although I did not correctly call the high in stocks, my opinions on Gold and the dollar have held up very well.

And, for what its worth, I have begun nibbling in on the short side again on the major index ETFs.

Gold looks ready to reverse.

Silver looks ready to reverse.

I could see the dollar selling off a bit in the near term before another run up, but I still see the overall trend as up.

Remember, John, I hedge my bets and make sure to set stops so that my ideology doesn’t get in the way of reality should I be wrong.

“Betting the farm” rarely works, though I do admit to falling for it from time to time. [/quote]

Things like this remind me of Warren Buffet’s first two rules

  1. Never lose money.
  2. Don’t forget rule 1

While I find much more merit in investing in Silver rather than Gold I still am not a big fan of it. If I was looking for a commodity to invest in I would go with Oil or copper.
I also would never let a commodity be my main investment strategy. Just my .02
[/quote]

I wouldn’t go for Copper, it going up. Bad time to buy, wait until it falls again to start buying, otherwise you are wasting your time and money. For Oil, same thing, don’t buy.