Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

LOL

sorry, one flip short.  heading down and right.

[cypherdoc]

get ready:

[tvbcof]

=================
The following is courtesy of KingWorldNews.com:

Today legendary trader and investor Jim Sinclair told King World News the gold market has turned into a coiled spring that will be extraordinarily explosive on the upside.  Sinclair also said that central banks have been aggressively accumulating gold because it is going to part of the monetary solution.  But first, here is what Sinclair had to say about the gold market:  “The attempt to keep (the gold market) from moving higher, creates, by nature, a spring, a coil as it were in markets.  If the spirit of the gold market could have been broken, it certainly would have been broken down at the $1,500 level.  This thing is turning into a spring, into a coil, and when it goes it’s going to be something to behold on the upside.  Both in the shares and in gold itself.”
==================

My observation over the years is that when we have a year or so of chop, the last few months of the chop fall below the preceding trend line, then a new trend line with a greater slope comes into existence.  Looks to me like we are getting to toward the end of this latest choppy pattern.

One way or another Sinclair was, by happenstance, one of the first people in the PM space who I started paying attention to, and in spite of his 'outlandish' claims that gold would hit $1650 which most people wrote off as completely bonkers at the time.  Even if he does make a wrong call and I take a hit by listening to him it is most unlikely that it would erase more than a minor fraction of the gains which I can thank him, in part, for my realizing.

Sinclair is the guy who rode the last bull and stepped off at the top of the market in '80.  I don't know if he was as free with his information and advice at that time since I was not around, but the guy seems to have an understanding of the markets.  Does he have other motivations?  It would be foolish to ignore the possibility.  The same could be said for the provider of any financial advice however.

[cypherdoc]

oops

[cypherdoc]

so just why is it that gold/silver have no guts w/o further QE?  is this how u want to invest; based on what Ben does?

you will soon see just how illiquid bullion can be.

my subscribers have been getting my warnings.

[cypherdoc]

new yearly lows in NEM:

[waveaddict]

new yearly lows in NEM:

You gotta love how they declared a dividend at the top. Classic 

Same thing is about to happen to Apple and soon.

[cypherdoc]

Same thing is about to happen to Apple and soon.

Not according to this.  Oh wait...:

[cypherdoc]

why has the # of Bitcoins for bid more than doubled @ $4.60 since it first went up the other nite?

[notme]

why has the # of Bitcoins for bid more than doubled @ $4.60 since it first went up the other nite?

Because they're trying to force a slow sideways correction rather than a quick selloff.  Either way, after the bears are satisfied (still a little way off IMO), we can probe 7.2 again.

[cypherdoc]

why has the # of Bitcoins for bid more than doubled @ $4.60 since it first went up the other nite?

Because they're trying to force a slow sideways correction rather than a quick selloff.  Either way, after the bears are satisfied (still a little way off IMO), we can probe 7.2 again.

LOL, sounds good to me!

[MatthewLM]

http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomcminutes20120313.htm

To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with its dual mandate, the Committee expects to maintain a highly accommodative stance for monetary policy. In particular, the Committee decided today to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and currently anticipates that economic conditions--including low rates of resource utilization and a subdued outlook for inflation over the medium run--are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate at least through late 2014.

Voting for this action: Ben Bernanke, William C. Dudley, Elizabeth Duke, Dennis P. Lockhart, Sandra Pianalto, Sarah Bloom Raskin, Daniel K. Tarullo, John C. Williams, and Janet L. Yellen.

Voting against this action: Jeffrey M. Lacker.

So 90% for more monetary inflation. Jeffrey Lacker voted against a similar statement last time for pretty much the same reason. Nothing changed, yet I'm reading articles that are saying the new FOMC minutes is new bearish news for gold? Nothing is different and 90% of the committee agree to keep rates super low.

[cypherdoc]

http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomcminutes20120313.htm

To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with its dual mandate, the Committee expects to maintain a highly accommodative stance for monetary policy. In particular, the Committee decided today to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and currently anticipates that economic conditions--including low rates of resource utilization and a subdued outlook for inflation over the medium run--are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate at least through late 2014.

Voting for this action: Ben Bernanke, William C. Dudley, Elizabeth Duke, Dennis P. Lockhart, Sandra Pianalto, Sarah Bloom Raskin, Daniel K. Tarullo, John C. Williams, and Janet L. Yellen.

Voting against this action: Jeffrey M. Lacker.

So 90% for more monetary inflation. Jeffrey Lacker voted against a similar statement last time for pretty much the same reason. Nothing changed, yet I'm reading articles that are saying the new FOMC minutes is new bearish news for gold? Nothing is different and 90% of the committee agree to keep rates super low.

Don't look now but i see this as a huge potential problem for your thesis:

[notme]

http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomcminutes20120313.htm

To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with its dual mandate, the Committee expects to maintain a highly accommodative stance for monetary policy. In particular, the Committee decided today to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and currently anticipates that economic conditions--including low rates of resource utilization and a subdued outlook for inflation over the medium run--are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate at least through late 2014.

Voting for this action: Ben Bernanke, William C. Dudley, Elizabeth Duke, Dennis P. Lockhart, Sandra Pianalto, Sarah Bloom Raskin, Daniel K. Tarullo, John C. Williams, and Janet L. Yellen.

Voting against this action: Jeffrey M. Lacker.

So 90% for more monetary inflation. Jeffrey Lacker voted against a similar statement last time for pretty much the same reason. Nothing changed, yet I'm reading articles that are saying the new FOMC minutes is new bearish news for gold? Nothing is different and 90% of the committee agree to keep rates super low.

But the markets want more free money.  It's the only motivation strong enough to convince people to buy this shit at this point.  Banks will let out just enough of their built-up reserves to keep the deflation from spiraling out of control.  Even 0% interest has a cost when deflation is happening.

[MatthewLM]

Keep what deflation spirally out of control? More likely you'll see inflation spiralling out of control if the fed wants to maintain low interest rates. I still 100% believe that the banking system will never be allowed to go into any major collapse. Under the current regime, the banks run the game.

My point still remains that the FOMC minutes have just reaffirmed what people already heard, that the committee is happy with super low rates through to 2014. They say late 2014 so let's just say until 2015.

[notme]

Keep what deflation spirally out of control? More likely you'll see inflation spiralling out of control if the fed wants to maintain low interest rates. I still 100% believe that the banking system will never be allowed to go into any major collapse. Under the current regime, the banks run the game.

My point still remains that the FOMC minutes have just reaffirmed what people already heard, that the committee is happy with super low rates through to 2014. They say late 2014 so let's just say until 2015.

No... the banks have funds held back to add a little inflationary pressure to taper off the deflation, not keep it out of control.  Banks win with inflation or deflation, but since they mostly hold debt, deflation increases the value of their holdings more.  The only reason inflation makes them money is because they get first crack at the newly printed funds.  I'll say it one more time: during deflation you still have to pay back something worth more than you borrowed even at 0% APR.

[bitcool]

Maybe it's a problem with your view point?

[cypherdoc]

=================
The following is courtesy of KingWorldNews.com:

Today legendary trader and investor Jim Sinclair told King World News the gold market has turned into a coiled spring that will be extraordinarily explosive on the upside.  Sinclair also said that central banks have been aggressively accumulating gold because it is going to part of the monetary solution.  But first, here is what Sinclair had to say about the gold market:  “The attempt to keep (the gold market) from moving higher, creates, by nature, a spring, a coil as it were in markets.  If the spirit of the gold market could have been broken, it certainly would have been broken down at the $1,500 level.  This thing is turning into a spring, into a coil, and when it goes it’s going to be something to behold on the upside.  Both in the shares and in gold itself.”
==================

My observation over the years is that when we have a year or so of chop, the last few months of the chop fall below the preceding trend line, then a new trend line with a greater slope comes into existence.  Looks to me like we are getting to toward the end of this latest choppy pattern.

One way or another Sinclair was, by happenstance, one of the first people in the PM space who I started paying attention to, and in spite of his 'outlandish' claims that gold would hit $1650 which most people wrote off as completely bonkers at the time.  Even if he does make a wrong call and I take a hit by listening to him it is most unlikely that it would erase more than a minor fraction of the gains which I can thank him, in part, for my realizing.

Sinclair is the guy who rode the last bull and stepped off at the top of the market in '80.  I don't know if he was as free with his information and advice at that time since I was not around, but the guy seems to have an understanding of the markets.  Does he have other motivations?  It would be foolish to ignore the possibility.  The same could be said for the provider of any financial advice however.

ask me if i listen to KWN,  answer: yes, to ALL of the interviews.  i occasionally glance at Eric Degroots posts in deference to miscreanity.  but do i agree with them? answer: NO.  why?  b/c I have a brain of my own.  i understand both the inflation AND the deflation argument and recognize that there's an end to everything.

which of those guys made the calls i did in my OP of my subscription thread?  answer: neither of them.  all they ever say is UP, UP, UP.  they are linear thinkers.  they see a line and can't help but extrapolate it to infinity.

perhaps they don't understand cycles?  perhaps they can't recognize the end of a bull?  how many ppl were talking like they are at the end of the housing cycle in 2007?  answer: alot.

[tvbcof]

ask me if i listen to KWN,  answer: yes, to ALL of the interviews.  i occasionally glance at Eric Degroots posts in deference to miscreanity.  but do i agree with them? answer: NO.  why?  b/c I have a brain of my own.  i understand both the inflation AND the deflation argument and recognize that there's an end to everything.

which of those guys made the calls i did in my OP of my subscription thread?  answer: neither of them.  all they ever say is UP, UP, UP.  they are linear thinkers.  they see a line and can't help but extrapolate it to infinity.

I don't listen to all of the KWN stuff.  I pay particular attention to a select handful of people but listen to others if I am bored and have time.  A lot of the KWN regulars including especially the most bullish were saying anything but 'up, up, up' when you supposedly made your genius call to dump gold.  There was closer to universal consensus that it was a time to expect something of a blow-off in fact.  To be fair, a lot of these same folks called the bottom of the correction to soon and to high.

perhaps they don't understand cycles?  perhaps they can't recognize the end of a bull?  how many ppl were talking like they are at the end of the housing cycle in 2007?  answer: alot.

I don't understand 'cycles', but nor do I understand voo-doo.  Both have their practitioners and followers, and many of latter will shell out items of value for the service of the former.  To each his own.

I was expecting the end of the property bubble in 2004 and I expect that it was due to paying attention to someone.  Maybe I was just wrong on my own, but probably not.  I try to amalgamate input from a wide variety of viewpoints and don't get fixated on any particular one.

I run across exceedingly few sources who share my understanding of money (right or wrong though it may be.)  One or two on KWN, but they don't usually get heavily into the subject.  I really cannot think of anyone on this forum.  Most amatures will try to map their own joe-sixpack experiences with money, finance, etc to financial institutions, but it works about as well as mapping Newtonian physics to quantum electrodynamics...it is only practicable by those who have an extraordinary mastery of both subjects and very very few people do.

[cypherdoc]

A lot of the KWN regulars including especially the most bullish were saying anything but 'up, up, up' when you supposedly made your genius call to dump gold.  There was closer to universal consensus that it was a time to expect something of a blow-off in fact.  To be fair, a lot of these same folks called the bottom of the correction to soon and to high.

on the contrary.  the GDX was ramping into a breakout in mid August early Sept and guys like Sinclair were saying that FINALLY the gold stocks were being recognized for the value they deserve and that they were going to propel the metal to extraordinary heights.  they never recognized the technical "head fake":

I don't understand 'cycles', but nor do I understand voo-doo.  Both have their practitioners and followers, and many of latter will shell out items of value for the service of the former.  To each his own.

to insinuate a correlation btwn the two is evidence of a closed mind.

I run across exceedingly few sources who share my understanding of money (right or wrong though it may be.)  One or two on KWN, but they don't usually get heavily into the subject.  I really cannot think of anyone on this forum. 

perhaps you should consider sharing it with us.