| Author |
Replies: 743 / Views: 51,904 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2168 Posts |
Maybe but silver has actually been priced low in comparison to overall historical ratios. Might be just catching up like many thought was happening last year. Who knows. But all PM are manipulated in some ways by all the Paper issued
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3692 Posts |
@silverdollar2011: Remember that lots of people come back from vacation just prior to September. Some of these people may even be investors - who knows for sure. Expect a relative drop in price at around December since people have better things to do with their money during that month (preparation for winter and the X-mas season). It's all cyclical, I find this pretty normal. The difference this year is that it's a US election year and the party that wins will always blame the last party in power for all their problems.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
223 Posts |
Personally, I think silver is a buy until about the $35 mark. I didn't stop and but any on Friday because I didn't want to be the guy who buys right at the top of a possible spike. We are currently at $23 face. I was buying at $19 face just a couple weeks ago. Once we go past a $35 level, I'll switch back to numismatic coins and continue working on my Franklins.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4008 Posts |
Quote: Ed, of course it is perception. Right but what I was getting at is that perception seems to be of greater importance than reality sometimes. When this happens, it should be quite temporary. Quote: ALL classic supply and demand data show a drastic decline in the purchase of PM's. All show a glut of silver on the market. This could be nothing more than people putting what money they have into necessities rather than PMs. When money is tight and people are reining in their spending, it is the necessities, such as food, fuel, utilities, etc. that get what money their is while everything else gets less. Interestingly enough, the BIG bullion buyers, like Eric Sprott, are saying that it is difficult for them to make large purchases these days because the silver simply is not available in large amounts. If we talking a few hundred ozs. or less, buying is usually no problem. It is when you want 100,000 oz. or more that it can be difficult to get timely delivery. Quote: Interestingly this morning I talked to a number of other dealers and they all read Bernanke's text and they all came to the same conclusion we did. I'm not surprised. We are all looking at this and trying to find a direction that the Fed will be taking. We're not reading any wishful thinking into this but others seem to be doing that. Maybe that's why we are seeing differences in what was said vs. what was heard.  Quote: Since when is it a good idea to buy when the price goes up? But that is precisely what many of the commentators are saying. Sometimes I think that is what is keeping the price up. Too many "bought HIGH, and are now afraid to sell LOW". I don't know. It seems counter intuitive to me as well. Maybe they are momentum investors who see something rising in price and want to get in on the action? It could also be that a lot of people are aware of the low price of silver and are expecting a price break-out and do not want to be left behind when the train pulls out for the last time. Quote: The difference this year is that it's a US election year and the party that wins will always blame the last party in power for all their problems. That seems to be common today. I remember that Ronald Reagan inherited an economic mess from Jimmy Carter but do not recall Reagan ever whining about it. He was just too busy fixing it to waste any time complaining about having to do the job that he asked for.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1590 Posts |
"silver is priced low compared to historical rates". Ummmmmmmmmmmm huh? Let see from before the Revolutionary War to 2004; silver has been priced between $4 and $6. And from 2004 till 2008 silver still averaged around $10/oz.
According to HISTORICAL rates silver is priced about SIX HUNDRED percent over the average. So basically for more than 250 years silver has been at one rate, and now it is at another, vastly higher, rate.
As a nation silver has maintained a narrow price range from Colonization; to Revolution; to the early western Movement; Industialization; The Civil War; the second western movement; the great silver strikes; more industrialization; two World Wars; rapid technological advances; the space race; and cold war; but some reason the last four years have been different?
Yeah....some say there is market manipulation...I say they are correct....some very lucky people are making themselves fabulously wealthy...and "it sure as shootin" ain't the Government.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
Quote: As a nation silver has maintained a narrow price range from Colonization; to Revolution; to the early western Movement; Industialization; The Civil War; the second western movement; the great silver strikes; more industrialization; two World Wars; rapid technological advances; the space race; and cold war; but some reason the last four years have been different?
How about we look at this from a different perspective  In 1900 you could get a gold $5 coin with about1/4oz gold in it or 5 Morgan dollars with less than 4oz of silver in them. That equates to less than 16 to 1 silver ratio  I don't think silver has gone crazy over the last2 decades, I think gold has. Now that silver has recently been taken taken seriously as a bullion alternative to gold I imagine the price will go up to get closer to the traditional silver to gold ratio. Just my take on things 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1590 Posts |
Apples and oranges. And it doesn't answer the question.
But how about we look at this from a different perspective!!!
In 1900 a gold $5 coin with about a quarter ounce of gold could buy 50 loaves of bread. The bread to gold ratio was then about 200 to 1.
Now a gold $5 coin with a quarter ounce of gold can buy 420 loaves of Bread. The bread to gold ratio is now 1680 to 1.
So you see it is not gold that is over priced, bread is just way under priced. However; we will soon see bread returning to its traditional ratio soon and all of us will be happily paying $8 bread!
You can make a ratio of anything. While true that the gold/silver ratio made more sense and had more meaning when we were on a gold standard; it is no longer meaningfull. It is, by and large, an obsolete standard. You might as well look at the platinum to gold ratio. Which, by the way, is upside down from a historical perspective.
Indeed people try to take the out of sync data point, gold, and then rearrange all the other data points to suit the aberrant rather than have gold seek its place in the norm.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
Quote: Apples and oranges. And it doesn't answer the question.
I have no idea what you are talking about  A gold coin OR 5 silver coins could have bought the same amout of bread in 1900, This is what I was eluding to is that the smaller gold coin had the same buying power as the 5 silver coins which gives you a ratio as to what each metal could buy. The "Gold standard" may not exist officialy but both metals have an intrinsic value and always will have and the demand for security in the savings of people will determine the price of each diferant metal.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1590 Posts |
Actually the gold/silver ratio in 1900 was 30.58/1. Gold was $18.96/oz and Silver was $0.62/oz.
Therefore the monetary value of the silver dollar was greater than it's intrinsic value.
With Nineteen Silver dollars you buy an ounce of Gold. The intrinsic value of those silver dollars was only $11.78.
That's an aside. The question was directed at why the sudden change in price from a price range that went back centuries. Why is the current price range the new norm? All one has to do is follow the money. Cause and effect. It is not rocket science. The price in most commodities have gone up since 2004 when the speculators invaded the Commodities market. Or at least those Commodities on the S&P Goldman Sachs Commodity Index (GSCI). Interestingly those commodities that are NOT on the S&P GSCI are at some of their lowest levels in years; ala Iron.
It is very easy to see that speculation, not supply and demand, has driven the price of commodities on the GSCI. The same people who have made massive profits on the GSCI are the same ones who have made record profits during the "Great Recession".
It is not about the intrinsic value of Gold or Silver. It is not about supply and demand. Demand is down; especially for silver. The GSCI is nothing more, or less, than the financial sectors form of "Las Vegas". They even call it "bets", because that is what they are. They bet on the price of a given commodity rising or falling.
Look at oil. The pump price is tied to the Commodity price. Note this is not the actual price. BP's cost to produce a barrel of oil is consistent within the given extraction method. It does not change every time the commodity index moves up or down.
So if you were a large Oil corporation and you wanted your profits to go up you simply leverage the Spot Price for a barrel of oil up to justify raising the pump price. Your actual overhead never goes up. It is all paper oil. That is how and why gas prices are where they are at and why Oil companies keep making record profits.
The same thing with Gold and Silver. Except that there are people that don't own much physical pm's so much as they own large amounts of paper/ETF's.
If you were a big enough player you could go long and simply by purchasing enough bets you can leverage the market up and make a profit. Then, since you know that the market is up because of your actions, you short the market and sell. If your frontage when you sell is wide enough it produces a perception of a broad based sell off which causes other traders to follow suit. Which brings your price point down to your sell level and you then take your profits from shorting the market. If you had millions of shares in ETF's you can make millions a day.
See?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1454 Posts |
Quote: Note this is not the actual price. BP's cost to produce a barrel of oil is consistent within the given extraction method. It does not change every time the commodity index moves up or down. So if the price of steel or petroleum or some other intrinsic commodity required in the extraction process went up, wouldn't that mean the commodity index does indeed impact a company's operating costs? If this is an accurate assessment on my part, perhaps oil companies, regardless of size- much like all the super corps- are indeed slaves to the commodity market like the rest of us, at least in certain respects. Quote: Which brings your price point down to your sell level and you then take your profits from shorting the market. If you had millions of shares in ETF's you can make millions a day. Wouldn't we have seen more volatility in the market if an NGO like GS or JPM was running up the market then shorting it ad nauseum? Or is it more likely that the few big players in the silver market end up effectively cancelling each other out due to the fact that they are all working at cross purposes with one another? Thanks for the insight, Jim. Fascinating stuff. I always look forward to read your stuff!
Edited by traevin 09/03/2012 6:12 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
Quote: Wouldn't we have seen more volatility in the market if an NGO like GS or JPM was running up the market then shorting it ad nauseum? Or is it more likely that the few big players in the silver market end up effectively cancelling each other out due to the fact that they are all working at cross purposes with one another?
I am of the opinion that the "Fat Cats" are working together to manipulate the markets 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1590 Posts |
Volume the key. If you owned millions of shares and moved the price up even forty cents you would make a tremendous profit; relative to the number of shares you hold.
We have all seen the cycle of the last few months where it has been low before the New York opening and then then climbed to an afternoon peak....only to sell off.
Imagine if you had a million shares and you went long each morning and short each afternoon. If the trading range was only $0.20 you would have made $400,000 each and every day; if you bought and sold at the proper time. And we are talking about the people that truely control the market.
The entities we are talking about have tens of millions shares; if not more. So; no, we had volatility in the market but not so extreme that it brought notice. A forty percent profit is a handsome return in anyone's book.
The Price of petroleum going up does not affect a petroleum company. They are not going to charge themselves more just because they charge their customers more.
And while the price of steel might affect them, those commodities are not traded on the GSCI and so are actually at recent lows. Also remember that large corporations buy in bulk and under contract at a specific price. And many of today's corporations are part of conglomerates. So If a petroleum company wants to build a drilling rig AND they own a steel mill, then commodities price points are meaningless....to them.
I agree though that it could keep them enthralled as well; at least in theory.
There was a write up on a recent study by the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich looking into Corporations and the web of ownership around the world and found that only 147 corporations owned 40 percent of the worlds business'. They also noted that they did not delve any deeper and that the number might be for a much smaller owning group; and much large "owned" group. This was a preliminary model.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1454 Posts |
Quote: The Price of petroleum going up does not affect a petroleum company. They are not going to charge themselves more just because they charge their customers more. Right. What I had in mind were the thousands of products that are petroleum-based. Each company selling products created from an increased petrol price would pass on the cost to a company like Exxon, for instance. Although oil companies make great windfalls by speculating in the market they essentially own, the ancillary commodity costs do impact them. That was the only point that I wanted to expound upon. But with record profits entering their coffers, I doubt Big Oil is complaining. When 90% of our nation is in the hands of less than 10% of the population, we are well down to path to an autocratic political system with only the dying vestiges of our once great democracy intact.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1590 Posts |
Oh, right, Traevin, my mistake. You are, of course, correct.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4008 Posts |
Quote: Let see from before the Revolutionary War to 2004; silver has been priced between $4 and $6. Don't know about the Revolutionary War days but in the late 19th century, the US silver price was fixed at about $1.29 per ozt., which is why a US silver dollar contains 0.7734 ozt. of silver.
|
| |
Replies: 743 / Views: 51,904 |