This is hardly an intellectual argument but I have long been struck by the 'quality' of prominent gold supporters. By quality I suppose I mean original and independent style of thought, appearance of integrity, strength of personality. I think of Faber, Rickards, Schiff, R.Russell, McAlvaney, Aden Sisters, Puplava, even Mike Baloney
The most intelligent commentator that I think of is the spot price ... whether forecasters are correct or not, whether Germany gets all its gold back or not, or other nations do or dont, i really dont care .... its all about the spot price ...
Fair enough, that's a lot more objective. But if smart independent original thinkers are backing gold that is a reassurance to me. That's apart from the content of what they say. Sometimes I think, how can they all be wrong?
Well, authors of quality fiction (and propaganda) are usually highly intelligent and are certainly astute observers of the world and of their target audience. They can spin a compelling tale. But if you are after accuracy, or anything resembling the truth, then you need to collect data, review past commentary and highlight any specific projections over a long enough period to objectively evaluate their statements.
That's the problem. You are seeking out opinions that reinforce your own and discounting those that clash with your world view. It's a well known cognitive bias that we are all subject too and is very difficult to bypass.
"They" are hardly "the crowd" - who are usually wrong.. Gold Backers are the contrarions in the media and are seldom heard from or given a chance other than to be mocked when gold is not breaking records see Peter Schiff videos.. he is continuously made a spectacle of (by the short term caring talking heads) 1for1
While the spot is great for the "now". It is no indicator o f the future. I like SilverPete's idea of plotting the past opinions of these guys against the spot prices. That way you can generate a %age rating for each one. If Bill Jones said gold will go up in March and Bill has a rating of 85% but Al Smith says gold will trend down all year (rating of 55%). In that case I would wait until March to sell some gold and buy a car.
Personally i enjoy the views of the forecasters mentioned by Finicky but looking at the spot price trends only time will tell ...
Silvers more about gambling for high profits , and we can expect it to attract a more colorful and less reasoned commentator than gold.
They are the crowd when it comes to weaving stories supportive of the general zeitgeist within the PM bull community. To be a contrarian here is to predict flat or declining prices. Criticism of their views usually revolves around the economic fundamentals supply and demand, all in production costs, investor sentiment, asset yields, etc. which is typically responded to with passionate accusations of manipulation, conspiracies, imminent hyperinflation, etc. But as mentioned above, this is a thread about perceived quality of commentary, a subjective measure that does not necessarily align with reality. They are very good at authoring a compelling commentary and humans love a good story.
That's part of what makes it all so interesting. Gold may be sensible, but silver is fun. The colorful commentary, the hyperbolic predictions, the passion.
I think part of the problem is that the really smart guys in equities and really trading of all sorts Stent the type of people who go around cheerleading. If they have a line on something they keep it close to the chest. Gold and silver are a little different because there are broader issues at play. Often the smart guys promoting PM are trying to make a point about the nature of or danger in the economy.
