A crisis tends to disrupt long economical chains first>>> are we in crisis? if not what kind of crisis do you mean? what chains are you referring to? P.S. For 100 ASEs I was offered 15000 yen couple of years ago (for bag of Franklins I was offered 2000 yen), when here was a kind of local, what should be called, crisis. I left it behind and never sold, but I kept some numismatic items of an equal value that took much less space&weight in my luggage ... so, just food for thought P.P.S. in times of disruptions silver might worth less than a half bottle of water, so cutting extremes would be wise as well
Smart cookies like Kyle Bass have stated that the effects of the outrageous money printing take years to flow through to inflation for the public. Personally I knew it was the most volatile investment out there and I'm fine with it. The future supply and demand prospects for silver keeps me sleeping well at night. Bulls and bears (including those on here) will be wiped off this precious metal bull in a number of violent price moves, that's assured... Before its over gold will move up and down a $1000 at a time I suspect.
And is the local coin store selling this coin at spot or making a large profit? Just because a PM naive person given a coin sells at below doesn't mean the coin has no premium. People on this forum seem happy to pay unbelievable amounts for desirable 1 oz coins ( eg gulo gulo). From the current sales threads both cheap premium bars and expensive coins are selling fairly evenly - as always when prices drop it's the middle of the market that suffers.
Thought 1: From here, the probability of the price going down $10 (to $18) is much lower than the probability of the price going up $10 (to $38) Thought 2: I don't really care what the price does. It won't ever go to zero. These days I'm not particularly concerned about losing my job - that peace of mind is priceless.
That's not an alternate view for the story during the covered period. That's just a later story. Another story. Do you want the figures of that later story? They show that it was the buying (well... the agreed upon deals 'in the future') by the Comex entities that drove the price then. There was no compensating selling from other silver market sides, otherwise the price wouldnt have moved up in the first place. That selling happened later, at $35, yet another story/period, where non Comex and non ETF sales drove price down 3 dollars ($35>$32). And my bet on when to buy silver starts right there, I speculate that those people sit now ready to buy, and this buying pressure then will avoid the price dropping $3 further than previous times, in other words, instead of $26 as bottom, $29. This is all just rough, since in reality the influence on the price is not 'only' Comex OR 'only stackers' OR 'only ETF's', but a varying mix of all together, sometimes one dominant, sometimes none dominant. So this speculation caused me to not wait for lower silver prices, and I already bought in the past weeks, 7 kilo silver, with money accumulated since august 2012. But to stick to the point you try to make, it's wrong, I look at all sides of the market, and unlike you seem to suggest, every seller requires a buyer, yes, but thats not relevant, the relevance is the price differential. And that couples it to the period I gave figures for. The price didnt move during that period, not because every buyer requires a seller, but because the upwards effect of the Comex position takings on the spot price, was undone by downward effect of the sales by the non Comex/non ETF/delivered market side. Simply because if a price remains stable while A buys, there must be a B selling simultaneous. Not in aspect of every buyer requires a seller, but in the aspect of DOMINANT trading behaviour. So why your silly 'alternate view' comment then?
An economy can be seen as a piramid with simple products forming the base, and complex products forming the top. A number of links/dependencies interconnects the production nodes on the levels. Ultimately, a top located product has a big number of downwards dependency links. Hence the piramidic shape. A crisis is a production node killer. Legal theft causes producers to be unable to stay profitable despite all efforts in trying. During the proces of the node killing, chains are interrupted, and since the long chains go along the biggest number production nodes; the chance a long chain is interrupted, is much bigger. And this is essentially why welfare, being the gradual increase in complexity of products that most people can afford to buy, is decreasing due to a crisis. Ultimately, the killing proces ends in queues and tickets for simple basic products. About silver and water, I'm not sure if you realize the level of welfare destruction you describe there as 'disruptions'. It would need to be a catastrophic destruction, that even a medium of exchange (in our case silver) is abandoned. My opinion is that a medium of exchange is as essential as water, because without it, pure barter would be left, which is extremely inefficient and would destroy welfare down to the level of living in caves in isolated groups. I'm not THAT pessimistic. In the end, the legal parasites are just a bunch lazy asses, if they steal so much that it ends in nothing left to steal, the same will happen as always happened in history: they get 'neutralized'. The hard way. Why would it be different this time? There is also a difference between a 'popup' crisis and a systemic crisis. A popup crisis has a temporary cause and is thus a temporary story. A systemic crisis has a permanent cause which allows the market shift to become extremely massive, up to the point that whole generations producers 'work' decades in the 'production' of wrong (ie things other people wouldnt buy when being given the choice) things. Such a crisis is hard to solve, because it requires the educational/motivational 'reworking' of whole generations/entire population parts. Todays crisis is a systemic world scale one. The consequence of the globalisation of the legal theft over the past decades, the close working-together of thieves in the theft. So to me, it's clear what is coming: a long and devastating depression, with runaway processes that kill entire economical sectors. Currencies will be devaluated / abandoned / created, with the inevitable rate divisions that inflict holders of them instant big losses. Silver is my attempt to surf through with as least loss as I can realize, by taking care of when to buy. And for the record, you can lose as much with silver as a 50% currency devaluation 'round'. Because it's a market with alot newbie entries, and there is a whole crowd out there, trying to take advantage of them. I once said it: it's not the metal that is gonna rescue your worth. It's your trading behaviour and I try to do my best, on both the speculation and human planes. About the human plane, recently someone sold to me despite higher bids. Simply because I once told him it wasn't a good moment to buy; and he waited, which was rewarded. I see other stackers as buddies in the speculative fight against the parasites that attempt to steal from them. Some try to hedge against inflation along the cyclic play. That's their right, but I think it's our right to try to outmaneuvre the theft, by self education and education. It sometimes doesnt make me popular. You can guess by who. It's often people waving with technical flags and trading on the highway along paper/derivatives. If this blabla may be of any use to you...
That confirms my opinion... any alternate view to yours must be 'silly'. However, my silly view and technical flag waving has shown to be more accurate than your "complex" inside views over the last couple of months. I'll leave you with your over-analytical, conspiracial fantasy and let you get on with your delusional moralistic highgrounding. In the end, you are merely a trader like all of us, looking for a financial benefit - as there is no other reason to exchange fiat for metal. You can try justifying this trading to yourself any way you wish, tell yourself you are doing it ethically, claim a defense against organised theft, even lay blame on the 'parasites', but it doesn't change what you are doing - financial benefit through exchange. No more comments from me, it is dragging me into the argumentative dialog I wished to avoid this year.
That 'silly' applied to you changing my market sides (that each buy/sell) into transaction sides (every buyer requires a seller). I was talking about which marketsides (ETF's, stackers, Comex) were dominantly affecting the price in the given time frames, and you applied your 'alternate view' on the transaction side instead. In discussion, they name this 'strawmen'. And that I find 'silly'. Someone with an opinion, is able to support his opinion with reasoning. Only liars and people that want to hide their real thoughts, have to use strawmen. The same applies to your post here. 'complex' 'over-analytical' 'conspiracial' 'fantasy' 'delusional' 'highgrounding' 'moralistic' Are these arguments? No, they are not. Do you make an interesting discussion? No, you don't. So your presence or not matters as much as advertisements between movies to them. About 'financial benefit', wrong. If all prices double, then there is only a "mathematical benefit", not an economical benefit. If I can buy over some decades the same with my silver as now, then I don't have any economical benefit. Even if the price of silver (and thus the stuff I really wanted) doubled, tripled, quadrupled,... Some others though, that try to mislead people as to maximalise magnitude and frequency of price fluctuations because they need it to milk, want more. And that implies people that get less. Complex? Heh. No. Just obvious.
My experience I showed above clearly states that medium of exchanges loses its role in our life as soon as there's danger (just because one have 1 oz of gold doesn't make bottle of water appear in his hands). Medium of exchange like fiat, silver, gold stands far behind of food and water. Pessimistic? May be. But the history of last 100 years shows that medium might not be the best alternative in crisis time ... may be second. After crisis it has its advantages but not in time of actual disruptions. Hope for the best and prepare for the worst ... I know from the history of my country and the country I'm in now how worse can things be ... of course it is very subjective, but "parasite neutralization" faze might lead to very severe events with unknown consequence. Things are the same but the details are not ... for example read about collapse of House of Bardi (13th century) - very interesting story about crisis, about different consequences which "Why would it be different this time" "it's not the metal that is gonna rescue your worth. It's your trading behaviour" History shows that traders as a group (I mean short term traders with buy-sell period of less than 1 year) in long term lose (refer to studies regarding mutual funds profitability). Of course there are some fortunate traders who are able to make money longer than 10 years, and far less that are able to do it within 20 years. At the same time "buy and hold" in preservation and building of wealth beats traders' numbers. Considering silver as a trading/investment instrument I've came to the conclusion that I'd better stick to the buy and hold instead of constant in&out.
Sounds like you should sell your stack then if you don't believe silver will hedge against money printing.
I believe that GP should strip you of your title "Silver Stacker" because you sure dont deserve that title ...
Joking aside it's a good point, I don't think traders should be called stackers. Guess it depends on your definition of stacker...
I'm neither for or against, just a little skeptical and would like a better understanding of silvers recent performance (last 2 years) in relation to money printing in that same period. I think its a fair enough to have that question. I'm sorry if I'm not as enlightened as you oh wise one :lol:
