Martlet

6 minutes ago, Wonger said:

10%, by me

10% of what, what or how are you measuring inflation?

1 hour ago, Martlet said:

If we accept the definition from 1970's dictionary, what would you say is the current rate of inflation, how is this measured?

@Wonger Care to answer?

1 hour ago, Wonger said:

 

If we accept the definition from 1970's dictionary, what would you say is the current rate of inflation, how is this measured?

1 minute ago, Wonger said:

Yes and the Government income and spending will decrease and offset the disposable income increase resulting in no change to Inflation because Inflation is determined by Currency supply only!

Rather than torturous circular arguments, using your own belief as support for your own belief, you could simply point to some reference material to back your position.  Until then i'll tap out. 

19 minutes ago, Wonger said:

None of them can cause Inflation or Deflation because none of them change the Currency supply by Central and Commercial Banks! 

If there is lower taxes there is more disposable income available to cover price rises.  If productivity increases, more is produced for same cost, making free cash flow to cover price rises.  

As currency supply is a fraction of economic output (GDP), i'm struggling to understand how anyone would hold the idea currency and prices must match 1:1.  

38 minutes ago, Wonger said:

Are you seriously trying to tell me that as a whole prices can Increase without being first proceeded by an increase of the supply of Currency? If so can you explain where the extra Currency comes from to drive the purchase cost of the whole higher?

Demand increase, supply constraint, fiscal policy changes (lower taxes), productivity adjustments.  There's a world of economics beyond money supply. 

Will you be providing a definition source to back your claim? 

40 minutes ago, Wonger said:

Deflation and Inflation definitions are solely either the decrease or increase in the supply of Currency!

You have a link to such a definition? 

Economics Help says :

"Deflation is defined as a decrease in the general price level."

Investopedia says:

"Deflation is a general decline in prices for goods and services, typically associated with a contraction in the supply of money and credit in the economy ... Deflation causes the nominal costs of capital, labor, goods, and services to fall."

Too much weight is placed on the association with money supply, that can be a cause of, not the defining characteristic, deflation or inflation. 

8 minutes ago, Wonger said:

Deflation is a reduction in the supply of Currency, you can not have Inflation, Deflation and Stagflation at the same time, the Currency supply is either increasing or decreasing via Central and Commercial Bank activity.

I see other get this wrong, i'd expect an expert to understand the terminology better. Deflation (and inflation) is relating only to prices, not to currency supply. 

2 minutes ago, Wonger said:

I just did!

Because you say so?  Not much is it, i was hoping for some solid technical analysis of the price and why that leads to a particular target.  I could say price can go to $1200, because thats the 78% fibonacci retracement level from last low end of 2015, and saw support in late 2018.  You say its going $385 ner ner.  The thread would so much more valued if you shared some of the years of trading experience.

15 minutes ago, Wonger said:

Sure, 21 years of professional Futures trading, Society of Technical Analysts, Chartered Institute of Securities and Investment leads me to short this Gold Bubble that is about to burst in spectacular fashion, as stated previously I have a technical target of $400 (its actually $385) but I thought I would round it up so as not to offend anyone here too much! 

So why unable to give any outline of why that target? 

54 minutes ago, Goldhooked said:

One sold on eBay on 9th May for £450 plus postage...

I was focusing on the "one" rather than the value. 

14 minutes ago, Cornishfarmer said:

Out of interest how may would buy this on security market?    I’ve gone the same thing in the past of getting what I think is a nice coin at a good price but when it comes to sell buyers would rather have a sovereign at spot than this.    

You mean secondary market?  I'd venture no one, evidenced by lack of any for sale or sold on ebay, and a large stock still available.  These will be sold for weight to dealers and seen as "discount offers" until they are sick of the sight of them and melt them.  More premium from the cases i reckon.

27 minutes ago, McDougall said:

I'm sorry I can't stop giggling at the fact so many English people are buying a coin made to mark 100 years of irish freedom from the united kingdom 😀

I'm amused by the prospect of seeing dozens for sale on HGM and others in months ahead as they are sold off. 

12 hours ago, HerefordBullyun said:

https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/largest-ever-physical-transfer-gold

Worth noting the $30bn physical delivered in 2 months, is less than half a single day trading volume. 

2 hours ago, Melon said:

Before anyone asks, my excuse is I had to average out the postage cost.... 😄

 

How much was the postage cost then?

19 minutes ago, TheApe said:

What a load of rubbish. 

Not that gold will go down to 750..just this video.

Elliot wave with Fib replacements, whats not to like? 

9 minutes ago, GoldenPhil said:

Perceived crises coming and everybody buys gold.

Actual crises hits results in people having to sell gold irrespective of their wishes

Seems an interesting difference of behaviour between east and west.  We start from believe gold will help preserve wealth over long term or through troubled times.  Here we are mid-crisis, in the west we want to buy more for the future expecting prices to rise.  The east sell for the here and now, not giving a jot for the price trend, as gold has served its purpose. 

1 hour ago, Zhorro said:

Also, I think the US Department of Justice has a number of ongoing investigations into precious metal price manipulation.

There is little doubt there is manipulation, short term end of day or contract movements.  Logically if there is supposed to be large scale manipulation of price over longer periods, the price must be reflecting that manipulation.

5 hours ago, Minimalist said:

As opinions make discussions on here, especially about the subject of the futures and spot market prices, it is unequivocal - indisputable - incontrovertible - irrefutable that the existence of a paper market inherently serves a handful elite to maneuver prices to their desired price. Manipulation is the convention, the regulation is created so that these elites can get away with it; its their protection. The average judge is subject to a day to day oppression that eliminates philosophical understandings of financial instruments and securities - most of them understand financial markets at a superficial degree making it unattainable to acknowledge the fundamental structure and desires of paper markets; how it came about; why it exists and who it serves.

Your position is the entire market is manipulated by paper market trading. The medium and long term price action has been for gold to rise.  Therefore the prices have been manipulated upward. 

48 minutes ago, GoldenPhil said:

Its all relative isn't it? 15% up when it should be 30% up is still manipulation 

Should be? Based on what analysis? Certainly nothing from the linked article.  To be able to say we should be at some price, we could point to some structured maths model that shows this movement leads to this price target with such and such probability.  But we dont.  

S&P dropped near 50% from the high, while gold dropped 15%, so its position as safe haven is looking pretty good isn't it?

Gold has risen 15% this year, so presumably the manipulation is to the upside?

40 minutes ago, vacancies said:

But... interesting that the UK released a -0.003 (neg) bond and it was over subscribed!  So that says that people are happy to take a loss to avoid inflation - surely a boon for silver and commodities which have value.

No, their was a gilt auction and it ended up at the reported yield because it was over subscribed. The bond coupon is 0.75%.

24 minutes ago, Shep said:

No I realise that but if you check other sources they confirm 7.8g.
 

I think it must be a typo, I don’t see how they could sell a coin as being “1/4 oz fine gold” and shave .72g off it. It would be deliberate mis-selling. 
 

At current prices and if using 0% commission currency exchange (Revolut or similar) it represents a purchase of 1/4oz gold under spot price. I can’t find any other gold available at the minute at a premium that good!

This article from 2016 may explain things, they set the price at €375 and never adjusted it with the gold price. 

12 minutes ago, Wonger said:

Commercials are net short 278000 futures contracts, ive explained previously the likely outcome and that I am short with a target price of $400! 

You have covered why short, I dont remember seeing why the target is $400.  Any more expansion on that?

2 hours ago, MancunianStacker said:

Over the last 50 years the price of Gold in £’s has increased 9,400%, that’s 188% per annum (basic). In $’s it has increased 4,800%, that’s 96% per annum (basic).

So, if we extrapolate this forward 10 years, at £1,400 in 2020, we are looking at 1,880% and we come out at £26,320 per oz in 2030.

If I go back 10 yrs, the price hasn't risen 188% in total, let along average to now, so why expect the longer term average to play out going forward?  There's an awful lot of economic, geopolitical change in that 50 span that had a bearing and wont repeat.