"金價將觸及6300美元是不是危言聳聽﹖
金價難道真能漲到6300美元﹖
毫無疑問﹐這種情況總有一天會發生。假設黃金的實際價格保持不變﹐如果美國聯邦儲備委員會(Federal Reserve, 簡稱Fed)能夠始終堅持2%的年通貨膨脹目標﹐那麼金價會在本世紀末達到每盎司6300美元。
事實上﹐美國在過去一個世紀的年通貨膨脹率平均為3.3%﹐由此可以預計美國未來的通貨膨脹率將不止2%。而若按照3.3%的通貨膨脹率計算﹐金價會在2065年達到6300美元。
但這還比不上法國興業銀行(Societe Generale)的格賴斯(Dylan Grice)的論斷令人驚心。格賴斯預計﹐金價可能在未來十年甚至幾年內達到6300美元或更高的水平。
與許多黃金的追捧者不同﹐格賴斯看到了黃金所具有的局限性﹕黃金在歷史上有很長一段時間（達數百年之久）失去了實際價值﹔黃金沒有大宗商品價值﹔黃金不能生息﹔在防盜和貯藏成本上黃金也處於劣勢。
相關報導
如何搭上金價飛漲的順風車？
羅傑斯：金價10年內突破2000美元
市場對金價反彈持續多久意見不一
扭轉反相關走勢 美元與黃金價格同進退
但格賴斯同時指出﹐黃金必將是下一個因市場泡沫而受益的資產。他提出的目標金價是在美國全部貨幣基礎都由黃金作為依託的前提下計算出的。
從歷史上看﹐在過去40年間﹐金價只短暫觸及和超出過與覆蓋貨幣基礎相應的價位﹐這就是在上世紀70年代末80年代初嚴重通貨膨脹結束時一度出現的金價急劇上漲。
那麼這是不是衡量金價上漲潛力的合理標準呢﹖格賴斯認為這不足為憑。但一些人使用科技股泡沫時期的金價作為參考標準也比這高明不到哪裏去。關鍵問題是﹐當市場出現狂熱時﹐人們會盡其所能地證明這種狂熱的合理性。格賴斯就認為﹐新一輪市場狂熱已為期不遠。
在格賴斯看來﹐原因就在於﹐Fed以及其他國家央行的資產規模急劇擴大和全球各國政府的巨額財政赤字將導致通貨膨脹飆升。而政府和央行將在很長一段時間既沒有勇氣、也沒有國內政治支持來採取控制這輪通脹所需的嚴厲措施。
這種觀點對嗎﹖
投資者當然有些擔心﹐這從高風險資產在過去六個月的走勢中就可以看出來。大家普遍覺得央行樂於看到通貨膨脹陡然上升。許多經濟學家辯稱﹐通貨膨脹大幅上升（比如7%-9%的升幅）恰恰就是債台高筑的美國經濟所需要的良方。
然而﹐從日本的例子來看﹐製造這種通貨膨脹可能要比人們想像的困難。日本在過去20年一直飽受通貨緊縮的困擾﹐而且情況似乎在日益惡化。正因如此﹐儘管金價近來大幅上揚﹐但以日圓計的價格卻只有上世紀80年代末的一半。
另外﹐投資黃金是對沖通貨膨脹風險特別有效的方式嗎﹖也不盡然。自1969年以來﹐每12個月的黃金價格與當年美國消費者價格通貨膨脹率的相關系數只有43%﹔而且金價似乎也不能反映未來通貨膨脹情況﹐金價與隨後一至兩年的通貨膨脹率的相關系數幾乎為零。
不僅如此﹐金價的走勢似乎反倒預測出了債券收益率的變化﹐當年金價的變化與10年期美國國債收益率在隨後一年變化情況的相關系數為54%。
這樣說來﹐目前黃金市場發生的一切或許是對未來幾個月債券收益率走勢的預警。但這種相關性對於預測金價走勢沒有多大幫助。
金價有可能進一步上漲嗎﹖當然。但同時也可能慘跌。在投資黃金沒有任何利息收益的情況下﹐投資者或許更會感受到這種打擊的沉重。"
2009年11月24日 星期二
2009年11月21日 星期六
中國評論新聞：陶冬：流動性泛濫下人民幣大幅升值行不通
"陶冬：流動性泛濫下人民幣大幅升值行不通
2009-11-21
針對美元低利率政策對中國等新興市場資產價格產生的影響，瑞信亞洲區首席經濟學家陶冬近日指出，中國已產生了流動性泛濫，實際盯住美元的匯率政策是其中重要原因之一，而國際熱錢也出現了加速流入跡象，推高了資產價格的快速上漲。針對上述觀點，《每日經濟新聞》(下稱NBD)對他進行了專訪。
盯住美元對經濟不是好事
NBD：在美元長期低利率政策的影響下，中國的流動性管理是否已經遇到一些障礙？
陶冬：中國今天採取的策略依然是適時地盯著美元走。我個人認為這一做法對於中國經濟本身不是件好事，對於世界經濟也不是件好事。對於世界經濟而言，這一做法會製造價格錯位，並由此引發消費、出口和全球經濟的不平衡。而對於中國經濟而言，這製造了通貨膨脹的壓力，不利於中國經濟持續增長。
中國的流動性泛濫，實際盯住美元的匯率政策在其中承擔了大部分責任。這是因為只要美元發流動性，中國也只能跟著發出流動性。此舉不僅炒熱了中國自身的資產，也影響到周邊國家或地區的資產，所以在香港特區和新加坡等地，房價已被炒得“雞飛狗跳”。
明年下半年房地產市場或現調整
NBD：國際熱錢流入的原因是什麼？
陶冬：今年5月份開始，一方面炒家重新有資金了，另一方面因為中國是第一個復甦的國家，又有人民幣升值的預期，同時人民幣資產價格上漲速度遠遠快過其他多數國家，這些都是熱錢流入的重要原因。
還有一點需要考慮到的因素是，很多國內企業尤其是大企業，向銀行借了美債，並且全部兌換成人民幣了，這些錢也沒有向外投資，就待在國內銀行賬號裡面做利差。因為人民幣的利率要高過美元的利率，這部分錢在不斷往上漲。換句話說，所謂的熱錢不僅僅是外部的熱錢，還包括內部參與炒作的熱錢。
NBD：對於流動性泛濫環境下中國房地產市場的未來，您有何判斷和預期？
陶冬：今後3～6個月房地產市場仍將漸漲。因為一級城市沒有太多房源可以賣了，我估計現在新的房源大概相當於4～5個月的銷售量。由於房地產市場需要有一個建設周期，房源緊俏的瓶頸現象在今後6個月一定會持續下去，這就為房價進一步上升提供了基礎。但到明年某一時點，今年第三季度買的地會有相當一部分趕工完成，到明年第二、第三季度又會有新房源出來，同時在加息等因素影響下，我認為明年下半年房地產會出現調整。
美元數月內或強烈反彈
NBD：美元何時能重拾升勢，這是否會引發中國等新興市場的資產價格波動？
陶冬：美元是失去信用的貨幣，長期跌勢還會持續一段時間。因為美元作為儲蓄貨幣的黃金時代已經過去，許多國家都在不動聲色地減持美元。與此同時，美元作為交易貨幣也已到了頂峰，無論是石油輸出國還是商品出口國，都在做一些調整，我相信幾年以後會出現一系列不以美元作為計價的商品交易，而這個過程將是美元走弱的過程。
另一方面，目前還沒有貨幣可以取代美元。相反一旦出現一個觸發點，美元的反彈會很激烈。尤其是過去幾個月美元作為套利交易的主要貨幣，一旦出現升值一定會帶來套利交易的清盤，越清盤美元越反彈，越反彈清盤的量越大，這不僅會帶來美元一次快速、驚人的反彈，同時也會帶來所謂的風險資產、商品價格、新興市場價格的大幅波動。今後3個月可能會出現這一情況，且來勢將非常凶猛。
人民幣大幅升值沒有可行性
NBD：近期國際輿論對於人民幣升值的壓力開始加劇，您怎樣看這一問題？對於未來人民幣兌主要貨幣的走勢有何判斷？
陶冬：我認為目前人民幣升值是不可行的，但是中長期人民幣的全面可兌換10年以內基本上可以完成。
最近，國際上對於人民幣匯率升值的呼聲突然加大，但我認為逼迫人民幣大幅度升值完全沒有可行性。因為在目前流動性泛濫、熱錢過剩的情況下，突然製造人民幣升值的預期將導致更多熱錢擁入，進而製造更多、更大的流動性，刺激出更大的資產泡沫。這同時將逼迫政府以更加果斷、更加激進的錯誤手段去進行調控。一旦中國經濟往下走，受傷害的不僅僅是中國人民，也是全球的經濟復甦。
至於人民幣具體走勢，我們預計明年人民幣兌美元會升值5%。我相信目前人民幣是被低估的，但要怎麼調整取決於中國政府在匯率政策上的態度。我認為隨著明年資產價格過熱問題逐漸變得顯著，匯率政策可能會在貨幣政策主導的調控措施之外承擔部分職責。
NBD：您認為中國應該採取哪些手段對目前過剩的流動性進行調整？
陶冬：我認為銀行的貸款增長應該是負值，中國的新增貸款要控制在5萬億以下。7萬億不是收緊，8萬億不是，10萬億更不是。
來源：每日經濟新聞 作者：馬駿駸"
2009-11-21
針對美元低利率政策對中國等新興市場資產價格產生的影響，瑞信亞洲區首席經濟學家陶冬近日指出，中國已產生了流動性泛濫，實際盯住美元的匯率政策是其中重要原因之一，而國際熱錢也出現了加速流入跡象，推高了資產價格的快速上漲。針對上述觀點，《每日經濟新聞》(下稱NBD)對他進行了專訪。
盯住美元對經濟不是好事
NBD：在美元長期低利率政策的影響下，中國的流動性管理是否已經遇到一些障礙？
陶冬：中國今天採取的策略依然是適時地盯著美元走。我個人認為這一做法對於中國經濟本身不是件好事，對於世界經濟也不是件好事。對於世界經濟而言，這一做法會製造價格錯位，並由此引發消費、出口和全球經濟的不平衡。而對於中國經濟而言，這製造了通貨膨脹的壓力，不利於中國經濟持續增長。
中國的流動性泛濫，實際盯住美元的匯率政策在其中承擔了大部分責任。這是因為只要美元發流動性，中國也只能跟著發出流動性。此舉不僅炒熱了中國自身的資產，也影響到周邊國家或地區的資產，所以在香港特區和新加坡等地，房價已被炒得“雞飛狗跳”。
明年下半年房地產市場或現調整
NBD：國際熱錢流入的原因是什麼？
陶冬：今年5月份開始，一方面炒家重新有資金了，另一方面因為中國是第一個復甦的國家，又有人民幣升值的預期，同時人民幣資產價格上漲速度遠遠快過其他多數國家，這些都是熱錢流入的重要原因。
還有一點需要考慮到的因素是，很多國內企業尤其是大企業，向銀行借了美債，並且全部兌換成人民幣了，這些錢也沒有向外投資，就待在國內銀行賬號裡面做利差。因為人民幣的利率要高過美元的利率，這部分錢在不斷往上漲。換句話說，所謂的熱錢不僅僅是外部的熱錢，還包括內部參與炒作的熱錢。
NBD：對於流動性泛濫環境下中國房地產市場的未來，您有何判斷和預期？
陶冬：今後3～6個月房地產市場仍將漸漲。因為一級城市沒有太多房源可以賣了，我估計現在新的房源大概相當於4～5個月的銷售量。由於房地產市場需要有一個建設周期，房源緊俏的瓶頸現象在今後6個月一定會持續下去，這就為房價進一步上升提供了基礎。但到明年某一時點，今年第三季度買的地會有相當一部分趕工完成，到明年第二、第三季度又會有新房源出來，同時在加息等因素影響下，我認為明年下半年房地產會出現調整。
美元數月內或強烈反彈
NBD：美元何時能重拾升勢，這是否會引發中國等新興市場的資產價格波動？
陶冬：美元是失去信用的貨幣，長期跌勢還會持續一段時間。因為美元作為儲蓄貨幣的黃金時代已經過去，許多國家都在不動聲色地減持美元。與此同時，美元作為交易貨幣也已到了頂峰，無論是石油輸出國還是商品出口國，都在做一些調整，我相信幾年以後會出現一系列不以美元作為計價的商品交易，而這個過程將是美元走弱的過程。
另一方面，目前還沒有貨幣可以取代美元。相反一旦出現一個觸發點，美元的反彈會很激烈。尤其是過去幾個月美元作為套利交易的主要貨幣，一旦出現升值一定會帶來套利交易的清盤，越清盤美元越反彈，越反彈清盤的量越大，這不僅會帶來美元一次快速、驚人的反彈，同時也會帶來所謂的風險資產、商品價格、新興市場價格的大幅波動。今後3個月可能會出現這一情況，且來勢將非常凶猛。
人民幣大幅升值沒有可行性
NBD：近期國際輿論對於人民幣升值的壓力開始加劇，您怎樣看這一問題？對於未來人民幣兌主要貨幣的走勢有何判斷？
陶冬：我認為目前人民幣升值是不可行的，但是中長期人民幣的全面可兌換10年以內基本上可以完成。
最近，國際上對於人民幣匯率升值的呼聲突然加大，但我認為逼迫人民幣大幅度升值完全沒有可行性。因為在目前流動性泛濫、熱錢過剩的情況下，突然製造人民幣升值的預期將導致更多熱錢擁入，進而製造更多、更大的流動性，刺激出更大的資產泡沫。這同時將逼迫政府以更加果斷、更加激進的錯誤手段去進行調控。一旦中國經濟往下走，受傷害的不僅僅是中國人民，也是全球的經濟復甦。
至於人民幣具體走勢，我們預計明年人民幣兌美元會升值5%。我相信目前人民幣是被低估的，但要怎麼調整取決於中國政府在匯率政策上的態度。我認為隨著明年資產價格過熱問題逐漸變得顯著，匯率政策可能會在貨幣政策主導的調控措施之外承擔部分職責。
NBD：您認為中國應該採取哪些手段對目前過剩的流動性進行調整？
陶冬：我認為銀行的貸款增長應該是負值，中國的新增貸款要控制在5萬億以下。7萬億不是收緊，8萬億不是，10萬億更不是。
來源：每日經濟新聞 作者：馬駿駸"
98/11/20劉憶如：石油黃金價恐泡沫化 - 金足成舊金黃金飾金免耗損金條160回收白金K金回收鑽石諮詢回收金價查詢 - Yahoo!奇摩部落格
劉憶如：石油黃金價恐泡沫化
分類：國際黃金、白金價格最新資訊!
2009/11/20 11:38
為積極推動國際間銀行合作及專業資訊交流，中國信託商業銀行今年獨家贊助亞太地區貸款市場公會(Asia Pacific Loan Market Association，簡稱APLMA)主辦的「台灣聯貸市場研討會」，中信銀法金總經理陳佳文於致詞時指出，兩岸MOU(金融監理合作備忘錄)簽署將加深台灣銀行業發展與大陸金融市場之連結，雖然將開創更多商機，但也將面臨更多新挑戰，未來需仰賴國內及兩岸銀行間之合作，以提供企業全方位的金融服務。
「台灣聯貸市場研討會」今日假台北君悅飯店舉行，除了陳佳文總經理應邀於開幕式致詞之外，有鑑於各國經濟前景與金融活動息息相關，也特別邀請對全球經濟局勢有長期研究的中國信託首席經濟顧問劉憶如，以「金融風暴後亞洲經濟展望」為題發表專題演講，此次研討會吸引了超過30家來自香港、新加坡及上海等地飛抵台灣參與會議的外資銀行代表，國內也有逾15家銀行代表到場，共計100餘人出席，可說是海內外銀行界的重要盛會。
「台灣聯貸市場研討會」，除針對台灣聯貸市場未來發展趨勢進行討論外，適逢MOU簽署使兩岸銀行業發展邁向重要里程碑，更力邀大陸銀行業者與會，探討陸資銀行來台發展業務重點、台資銀行登陸發展契機及大陸相關法規對聯貸市場發展影響等重要議題。
中信銀法金總經理陳佳文指出，國內銀行因資金充裕，使台灣聯貸市場成為金融風暴後少數仍活絡發展的亞洲市場之一，過度競爭下致放款利率偏低，銀行業獲利微薄，如何制定合理放款訂價策略或是加強參與國際聯貸以提升銀行獲利能力，一直是中國信託思考之重要課題。
陳佳文表示，隨全球景氣逐漸復甦， MOU簽署勢必加深台灣銀行業發展與大陸金融市場之連結，雖然將開闢更多業務新契機，但同樣伴隨而來的將是市場大幅轉變和更多新挑戰，未來更需仰賴國內及兩岸銀行間之合作，以擴大金融版圖並提供企業便利且全方位的金融服務。
以「金融風暴後亞洲經濟展望」為題發表專題演講的中國信託首席經濟顧問劉憶如，則自不同面向深入剖析未來亞太各國之經濟動向。劉憶如教授指出，從各項經濟指標都顯示，今年第 2季後亞洲已大幅且快速自全球金融風暴中復甦，且帶動第 3季的全球景氣回溫，但是復甦之後仍面臨未來挑戰，包括亞洲及歐美景氣循環再度脫鈎(de-coupling)，以及美元大幅貶值所帶來的國際金融市場失衡問題。
劉憶如也提醒，石油、能源及黃金等商品價格大幅飆漲所引起的泡沫現象，可能造成傷害，美元利差交易的套利行為若持續下去，恐將引發亞洲金錢遊戲的盛行，值得繼續觀察。
APLMA為亞太地區各銀行組成之公會組織，總部設於香港，會員遍及20多國，APLMA台灣分會於前(2007)年成立。該會主要目標是在提供銀行業者之間一個專業資訊的溝通平台，透過制定各項標準化之合約等相關法律文件，促進國際間銀行之合作，進而活絡亞太地區初級及次級貸款市場之發展並提高流動性，同時每年在亞洲各地舉辦之研討會等活動，提供銀行間經驗交流及發展跨國合作情誼之機會。
鉅亨網記者陳慧琳 台北"
分類：國際黃金、白金價格最新資訊!
2009/11/20 11:38
為積極推動國際間銀行合作及專業資訊交流，中國信託商業銀行今年獨家贊助亞太地區貸款市場公會(Asia Pacific Loan Market Association，簡稱APLMA)主辦的「台灣聯貸市場研討會」，中信銀法金總經理陳佳文於致詞時指出，兩岸MOU(金融監理合作備忘錄)簽署將加深台灣銀行業發展與大陸金融市場之連結，雖然將開創更多商機，但也將面臨更多新挑戰，未來需仰賴國內及兩岸銀行間之合作，以提供企業全方位的金融服務。
「台灣聯貸市場研討會」今日假台北君悅飯店舉行，除了陳佳文總經理應邀於開幕式致詞之外，有鑑於各國經濟前景與金融活動息息相關，也特別邀請對全球經濟局勢有長期研究的中國信託首席經濟顧問劉憶如，以「金融風暴後亞洲經濟展望」為題發表專題演講，此次研討會吸引了超過30家來自香港、新加坡及上海等地飛抵台灣參與會議的外資銀行代表，國內也有逾15家銀行代表到場，共計100餘人出席，可說是海內外銀行界的重要盛會。
「台灣聯貸市場研討會」，除針對台灣聯貸市場未來發展趨勢進行討論外，適逢MOU簽署使兩岸銀行業發展邁向重要里程碑，更力邀大陸銀行業者與會，探討陸資銀行來台發展業務重點、台資銀行登陸發展契機及大陸相關法規對聯貸市場發展影響等重要議題。
中信銀法金總經理陳佳文指出，國內銀行因資金充裕，使台灣聯貸市場成為金融風暴後少數仍活絡發展的亞洲市場之一，過度競爭下致放款利率偏低，銀行業獲利微薄，如何制定合理放款訂價策略或是加強參與國際聯貸以提升銀行獲利能力，一直是中國信託思考之重要課題。
陳佳文表示，隨全球景氣逐漸復甦， MOU簽署勢必加深台灣銀行業發展與大陸金融市場之連結，雖然將開闢更多業務新契機，但同樣伴隨而來的將是市場大幅轉變和更多新挑戰，未來更需仰賴國內及兩岸銀行間之合作，以擴大金融版圖並提供企業便利且全方位的金融服務。
以「金融風暴後亞洲經濟展望」為題發表專題演講的中國信託首席經濟顧問劉憶如，則自不同面向深入剖析未來亞太各國之經濟動向。劉憶如教授指出，從各項經濟指標都顯示，今年第 2季後亞洲已大幅且快速自全球金融風暴中復甦，且帶動第 3季的全球景氣回溫，但是復甦之後仍面臨未來挑戰，包括亞洲及歐美景氣循環再度脫鈎(de-coupling)，以及美元大幅貶值所帶來的國際金融市場失衡問題。
劉憶如也提醒，石油、能源及黃金等商品價格大幅飆漲所引起的泡沫現象，可能造成傷害，美元利差交易的套利行為若持續下去，恐將引發亞洲金錢遊戲的盛行，值得繼續觀察。
APLMA為亞太地區各銀行組成之公會組織，總部設於香港，會員遍及20多國，APLMA台灣分會於前(2007)年成立。該會主要目標是在提供銀行業者之間一個專業資訊的溝通平台，透過制定各項標準化之合約等相關法律文件，促進國際間銀行之合作，進而活絡亞太地區初級及次級貸款市場之發展並提高流動性，同時每年在亞洲各地舉辦之研討會等活動，提供銀行間經驗交流及發展跨國合作情誼之機會。
鉅亨網記者陳慧琳 台北"
2009年11月20日 星期五
黃金看漲預期強烈牛市成色幾何?_鉅亨網新聞
"黃金看漲預期強烈牛市成色幾何?
鉅亨網新聞中心 (來源：財匯資訊，摘自：上海證券報)
2009 / 11 / 20 星期五
2008年，意外爆發的美國次貸危機將全球資產泡沫無情地刺破，大宗商品價格以近乎雪崩的方式大幅暴跌。人們發現，原本強烈無比的通脹預期，幾乎在瞬間消散得無影無蹤，緊隨而來的竟是久違的通縮擔憂。
2009年，在各國政府的共同努力下，全球經濟終於見到了復甦的曙光。不過，由極度寬鬆貨幣政策所引發的通脹預期再度抬起頭來。
截至2009年10月16日，當紐約黃金期貨價格收盤定格在1042美元/盎司，創出歷史新高的時候，全球投資者突然意識到，期待已久的黃金大牛市可能真的已經到來。
政府大量發行貨幣的救市行為最終會否令貨幣體系土崩瓦解？在新的貨幣單位出現之前，黃金是否將成為各路資金最後的避風港呢？
金價上漲與流動性以及避險情緒密不可分
主持人：年初至今，國內外黃金價格走勢異常凌厲。尤其自八月份以來，金價漲幅逐漸擴大，屢屢創出歷史新高。金價上漲背後的邏輯究竟是什麼？
朱斌：黃金作為貨幣已有幾千年的歷史，世界上沒有任何一種商品或者貨幣具有黃金般悠久的歷史和地位。然而1971年後佈雷頓森林體系崩潰後黃金似乎變成一踩百沉的「賤金屬」，自1980年創新高後連綿不絕地下跌了整整20年。原因很簡單，世界經濟發展平穩，美國成為世界標桿，美元成為世人追逐的對象，在耀眼的美元和美國的光環眩暈之下，沒有人願意為不是貨幣的金屬給出很高的價格，黃金甚至一度跌穿了絕對成本價。
但隨著新經濟泡沫的幻滅以及「9·11」戰爭的爆發，人們重新思索美元的價值，尋找新的貨幣來避險和保值，這開始直接導致了歐元的暴漲。事實上歐洲經濟相對於美國來說顯然沒有穩固的政治架構聯盟，甚至經濟也是乏善可陳，所以歐元也有極大局限性，故價格波動很厲害。由於日本經濟深陷衰退的20年中，世界第三大貨幣日元也只能作為套息工具使用。新興市場國家經濟發展雖迅速，但貨幣對外開放的步伐或者政治體制的不協調都無法解決投資者內心的困惑和擔心。
因此，人們把目光重新投向了黃金，黃金價格自2001年開始觸底反彈，但是黃金納入投資者甚至是央行的資產儲備中卻是近一兩年的事情。原因是亞洲國家大量儲備美元貨幣，而美元指數從120起一直跌跌不休讓持有美元資產的新興市場國家央行「深度套牢」，目前的美國經濟和宏觀政策都無法讓這些外匯大國看到希望，所以增持黃金行為將會此起彼伏。
胡燕燕：從黃金市場看，缺乏實質的利空因素，是導致金價連番技術性破位、持續保持強勢的根本原因。
全球最大的黃金ETFs基金STREET TRACKS GOLD SHARES持金量至今較2008年底增加了300餘噸。COMEX期貨黃金的總持倉較2008年底增加了77%。投資需求規模性增加的原因和結果值得推敲。
而投資者對黃金市場的判斷依據是什麼？黃金供應沒有超過預期的供應增長出現，甚至出現央行售金減少、央行購金增加的跡象，是淺層次的原因。由於全球性的寬鬆性貨幣政策和財政政策引發的通貨膨脹預期，以及全球經濟復甦尚未穩定實現的事實，是深層次的原因。儘管澳洲央行已經兩次升息，但11月美聯儲、歐洲央行以及英國央行均沒有做出升息的決定，這奠定了一個宏觀判斷基調：經濟沒有進入穩定復甦的階段，寬鬆政策繼續維持。經濟不穩定、政策寬鬆，意味著貨幣供應依然較大，通貨膨脹有發生的溫床，黃金符合投資者抵抗經濟危機和對抗通脹風險的要求。而至於市場普遍討論的美元因素，不過是通脹預期的變化載體。
張智勇：影響黃金價格的因素眾多。短期推動黃金價格上揚的直接動力源自美元貶值、礦業空頭平倉、央行與大型基金轉為淨買入方等因素；中期上漲的背景是充裕的流動性和超寬鬆貨幣政策的支撐；而黃金牛市的長期基礎則來自以美元為代表的全球貨幣體系的深層次問題為越來越多的投資者所關注，黃金作為國際硬通貨的重要性逐步回升。
2008年中金融危機的惡化導致的避險需求和投資者贖回壓力帶來了大量美元買盤，令美元指數自歷史低位70快速反彈至接近90。今年隨著金融市場的穩定和全球經濟反彈，美元指數跌破80至目前的75附近，這與我們一直堅持的2008年美元的上漲是大級別中期反彈，而不是反轉了2002年以來美元長期下跌趨勢的觀點相吻合。
美聯儲降息到0—0.25%之後，進入2009年以來，隨著經濟反彈，CPI環比逐月增加，預期11月後CPI同比將轉正，美國實際利率逐月收窄並將進入負利率時期。低成本的資金和貨幣貶值的壓力使得資金尋找投資渠道，而美國商業信貸依然下滑，實體經濟仍較低迷，所以大量資金流入了股票市場和大宗商品市場。當其他商品的價格上揚受限於低迷的實際需求時，「價格越漲，投資需求反而越旺」的黃金就成了規避通脹風險的最優選擇。
王舟懿：去年10月爆發的金融海嘯為世界敲響了警鐘，國際著名金融機構倒閉、各主要經濟體步入嚴重的衰退週期。包括逐月上升的失業率、大幅下滑的消費支出、貿易收支、開工率等在內的各項數據，導致大宗商品價格自高位跳水，黃金也未能倖免於難。
在悲觀的經濟預期以及艱難的復甦前景下，各國政府紛紛推出一系列的財政舉措，配合寬鬆的貨幣政策，力求將經濟形勢自崩潰邊緣拉回。歐美財政撥款的支持減緩了各行業的衰退進程；美聯儲在數次的利率決議中維持了幾近於零的基礎利率，歐洲、英國、亞洲各央行紛紛效仿降低利率，寬裕了貨幣的供應以及投資的環境。在經濟刺激政策的影響下，流動性逐漸增加。隨之而來的，則是日益膨脹的投資需求。
政府激勵投資的舉措，令固定資產投資升溫，對基礎原材料的需求首當其衝。反映於商品價格之上，可以看到基本金屬、工業品上半年漲幅甚巨。投資者全力傾注於基礎原材料，因而一度忽略了黃金這一傳統避險品種。
當前市場焦點，在於流動性變化帶來的階段性方向調整。風險偏好的上升、製造業的產能過剩，引導資金尋找新的投資方向。除資本市場外、交易興趣對商品市場的投資品種也在進行調整，結合對抗通貨膨脹的需求，黃金成為資金追捧的熱點。
強勢美元不再 各國央行紛紛增持黃金儲備
主持人：近期不時傳來各國央行或購入或出售黃金儲備的消息，我們應如何看待各國央行對於黃金儲備的態度？
朱斌：亞洲以及遠東素來有收藏黃金的喜好，歷史上亞洲和遠東擁有世界上最多的黃金，西方人更是形象地把亞洲和遠東稱為「黃金墓地」。因為黃金通過世界貿易流入亞洲就不再流出，西方人得到東方的絲綢和陶瓷，東方人得到西方的黃金白銀。現實是亞洲這些國家擁有最多的外匯儲備和最少的黃金比率，前10位最大的外匯儲備國家中前8個國家位於亞洲，所以增持空間巨大。
而在這些巨額外匯儲備的背後，亞洲國家央行對於美元貶值無能為力和深惡痛絕，貨幣的國際化和貨幣的話語權是發展中重要考慮的問題，而每個強勢貨幣的背後都是有很強的貨幣支撐，美國有8000噸黃金、歐元背後有5%的黃金儲備、瑞士法郎有25%的黃金儲備支撐，甚至出售黃金要實行全民公決。
持有大量美國國債的央行最有可能在未來幾年內增加黃金儲備，包括中國、日本、俄羅斯、印度、新加坡、巴西和韓國央行等。目前國際儲備中黃金所佔比例不到10%的央行具備增持黃金頭寸的動機。如果位於亞洲的前8個外匯儲備國家增持到5%，需求將會有4300噸，而如果增持到10％將會需要11600噸。這將是全球不消耗任何一盎司黃金的情況下整整5年的黃金新增產量。未來在全球貨幣的貶值態勢下央行增持預期很大，將會導致對黃金價格上漲預期極大。
央行的黃金出售對於黃金供應是僅次於礦產金和舊金回收的第三大來源，按照目前每年黃金產量與需求之間的差距，大約在200噸—400噸，如果央行從出售方轉入購入方將會導致供需不平衡的加大，黃金價格還要大幅度的上漲。
張智勇：全球央行正由過去十幾年的黃金淨賣出方轉為買入方。今年一季度IMF宣佈出售403噸黃金計劃時曾對市場構成了較大壓力，而現在隨著黃金在央行間市場成功售出(並且價格不低)，現貨市場的壓力大大減輕。11月4日IMF宣佈印度買入200噸IMF儲備黃金，均價在1041美元—1045美元/盎司；僅僅兩周之後，毛里求斯央行再購IMF2噸黃金，刺激金價上漲74美元至1115美元/盎司。在這樣的價格下，擁有最大外匯儲備的中國，購買IMF其餘待售黃金的變數增大，因中國更傾向於在國內採購。但中國將進一步地分散外匯儲備，提升黃金所佔份額的方向是明確的，這將帶來巨大的央行買盤。
事實上，中國是世界第一大黃金生產國，2008年中國自產了282噸，又進口了112噸，國內黃金現貨市場仍然出現了持續的供不應求。未來，隨著中國國內居民財富的增加和人民幣的升值，中國的民間黃金需求也將快速上升。
強勢的美元曾經在相當長的時間內替代了黃金的作用，減少了世界貿易與儲備對黃金的需求，而在目前及可預期的未來，黃金作為價值儲藏和價格尺度的功能正在重新被認識。10月19日芝加哥商品交易所CME發佈公告，可以接受以黃金作為一般等價物，用於所有大宗商品交易的保證金抵押。這些動作與擴大SDR(特別提款權)作用等等改革一樣，是黃金貨幣屬性的一種重新認識。
利空難覓 黃金看漲預期強烈
主持人：既然黃金長期看漲，那麼未來金價有望上漲到什麼高度？目前是否處於較好的投資區間？
胡燕燕：從全球市場的變化看，目前黃金市場最大的利空因素在於黃金市場投資需求的彈性。即投資需求可以推升金價，亦可以轉化為殺跌金價的動力。如果出現經濟真正步入穩定的復甦階段，實業投資恢復，商品市場投資需求增長等因素，則均將產生資金的分流作用，這對於黃金價格而言，在當前階段是可預見的利空。但這種利空對價格的負面作用可能是階段性的，金價會在這種利空下出現一定的調整，但趨勢恐怕無法改變。畢竟我們看到過2002年—2008年，在全球經濟增長週期中，黃金和商品在正常通貨膨脹因素下同步保持了上升趨勢，區別是黃金的上漲幅度遠遠小於大宗原材料。
可見，對於黃金市場而言，目前的確缺乏能夠真正引起市場轉變的利空基本面因素，而投資需求的膨脹具有技術性的特點(追漲殺跌)，慣性短期難以改變。觸發改變的因素，可能是利率的調整——升息。利率的變化，中短期將導致資金流的變化，從而導致上文中談到的資金分流作用。但同樣，升息的決定意味著通脹的來臨和經濟基礎的穩定，金價上升的趨勢仍難以改變。
朱斌：近一年來CFTC持倉報告中顯示非商業多頭占比接近50%，機構投資者對後市強烈看多。而在全球持續寬鬆的財政和貨幣政策的刺激計劃下，通貨膨脹已經在悄悄發生，澳洲央行等已開始加息。面對經濟在復甦進程中還搖搖欲墜的情況，G20國財長會議也明確發出目前不是緊縮政策的時機，美國經濟由於製造業持續衰退和金融業受到嚴重的打擊已經成為千夫所指，可以預期經濟基本面將會持續低迷，雙赤字將會依然嚴重而得不到很好的救贖，美元大幅度上漲遙遙無期，而這為貨幣貶值和大宗商品上漲提供了契機。
事實上美元正在不斷地下跌、不斷創出新低，而黃金則不斷創出新高。對於美國貨幣監管者，歷任美聯儲主席對黃金都是愛恨交加，格林斯潘認為黃金是不受政府剝奪權利的終極資產，而伯南克卻是在研究中提出誰先脫離黃金誰先走出復甦的明確觀點，認為金本位制度是導致美國在1929年大蕭條中捆住美國手腳的鐵鏈，以至於美國復甦滯後於很多西歐國家。然而事實上，每年全球近500噸的黃金銷售中沒有美聯儲的影子，近8000噸的黃金一直靜靜的沉睡在重兵把守的陸軍基地諾列斯堡和紐約西點。安保之嚴密就是「蒼蠅都不可能進入」。
黃金對抗通脹和重回貨幣地位在經濟危機中得到了強化，加上發展中國家央行的直接採購行為得到直接證明，而且根據世界黃金協會的報告，隨著全球經濟的復甦，黃金實物需求也得到了一定程度的提升，黃金的價值需要重估。根據我們的黃金預測模型顯示，未來12個月價格將調整為1260美元。從更長遠的估值按照黃金貨幣比率計算，黃金的合理比價為1750美元/盎司。
王舟懿：基於黃金的抗通脹及貨幣的功能，對於黃金走勢的判斷，我們認為應當把握時間窗口，抓住階段重點。商品屬性令投資者聚焦供給、需求、庫存及其變化趨勢等基本面因素的變動狀況。金融屬性則令利率、匯率、流動性等問題的關注度升溫。
對於黃金價格走向的把握，同一時刻往往彙集著各種因素，而多空交織的因果關係增加了方向判斷的難度。投資者不妨將影響因素進行分類，著重於市場熱點。比如2008年金融危機爆發引發的商品市場全線下跌，蓋過了價格低迷對印度采金需求的正面影響。又比如2009年11月上旬歐美央行的利率決議，暗示相關國家及區域匯率變動的可能性，拖累美元中長期走勢，蓋過了此前公佈的成屋銷售、營建支出、製造業採購經理人指數、耐用品訂單以及工廠訂單等一系列利多美元的數據，間接推高黃金。
前期黃金投資基金的增倉，證明了資金看多的動向。IMF以1045 美元/盎司的價格出售首批200 噸黃金的舉動，則是支撐金價的佐證。
既然經濟增長這一大方向得到確認，寬鬆的貨幣政策在中期將得以維持，且政府言論對財政刺激退出機制保持謹慎，那短期的調整將是建倉的時機。
張智勇：眾所周知，美元貶值是近期黃金價格上揚的重要推動因素，但是黃金對多種貨幣同時上漲則不單單是美元現象。再有3%左右的漲幅，以歐元計價的黃金也將創下歷史新高。長期來看，這是所有紙幣對硬通貨的貶值。
我們認為近期黃金價格的突破性上揚只是黃金自2002年以來的長期牛市運行過程中的一次跨越。金價在明年一季度前越過我們年初設立的目標位——1200美元/盎司的可能性較大，之後隨著黃金價格的中期超買，調整的風險也將增加，但隨著未來全球宏觀形勢的逐步演化，黃金價格在未來5到8年有望逐漸地向3000美元/盎司以上發展。
南華期貨研究所所長 朱斌
根據我們的黃金預測模型顯示，未來12個月金價將調整為1260美元/盎司。從更長遠的估值按照黃金貨幣比率計算，黃金的合理比價為1750美元/盎司。
國泰君安期貨研究所所長 張智勇
我們認為近期黃金價格的突破性上揚只是黃金自2002年以來的長期牛市運行過程中的一次跨越。未來5到8年有望逐漸地向3000美元/盎司以上發展。
光大期貨研究所副所長 胡燕燕
目前黃金市場的確缺乏能夠真正引起市場轉變的利空基本面因素，而投資需求的膨脹具有技術性的特點(追漲殺跌)，因此短期慣性上漲難以改變。
上海中期研究發展部副部長 王舟懿
既然經濟增長這一大方向已得到確認，寬鬆的貨幣政策在中期將得以維持，且政府言論對財政刺激退出機制保持謹慎，故金價短期的調整將是建倉的時機。"
鉅亨網新聞中心 (來源：財匯資訊，摘自：上海證券報)
2009 / 11 / 20 星期五
2008年，意外爆發的美國次貸危機將全球資產泡沫無情地刺破，大宗商品價格以近乎雪崩的方式大幅暴跌。人們發現，原本強烈無比的通脹預期，幾乎在瞬間消散得無影無蹤，緊隨而來的竟是久違的通縮擔憂。
2009年，在各國政府的共同努力下，全球經濟終於見到了復甦的曙光。不過，由極度寬鬆貨幣政策所引發的通脹預期再度抬起頭來。
截至2009年10月16日，當紐約黃金期貨價格收盤定格在1042美元/盎司，創出歷史新高的時候，全球投資者突然意識到，期待已久的黃金大牛市可能真的已經到來。
政府大量發行貨幣的救市行為最終會否令貨幣體系土崩瓦解？在新的貨幣單位出現之前，黃金是否將成為各路資金最後的避風港呢？
金價上漲與流動性以及避險情緒密不可分
主持人：年初至今，國內外黃金價格走勢異常凌厲。尤其自八月份以來，金價漲幅逐漸擴大，屢屢創出歷史新高。金價上漲背後的邏輯究竟是什麼？
朱斌：黃金作為貨幣已有幾千年的歷史，世界上沒有任何一種商品或者貨幣具有黃金般悠久的歷史和地位。然而1971年後佈雷頓森林體系崩潰後黃金似乎變成一踩百沉的「賤金屬」，自1980年創新高後連綿不絕地下跌了整整20年。原因很簡單，世界經濟發展平穩，美國成為世界標桿，美元成為世人追逐的對象，在耀眼的美元和美國的光環眩暈之下，沒有人願意為不是貨幣的金屬給出很高的價格，黃金甚至一度跌穿了絕對成本價。
但隨著新經濟泡沫的幻滅以及「9·11」戰爭的爆發，人們重新思索美元的價值，尋找新的貨幣來避險和保值，這開始直接導致了歐元的暴漲。事實上歐洲經濟相對於美國來說顯然沒有穩固的政治架構聯盟，甚至經濟也是乏善可陳，所以歐元也有極大局限性，故價格波動很厲害。由於日本經濟深陷衰退的20年中，世界第三大貨幣日元也只能作為套息工具使用。新興市場國家經濟發展雖迅速，但貨幣對外開放的步伐或者政治體制的不協調都無法解決投資者內心的困惑和擔心。
因此，人們把目光重新投向了黃金，黃金價格自2001年開始觸底反彈，但是黃金納入投資者甚至是央行的資產儲備中卻是近一兩年的事情。原因是亞洲國家大量儲備美元貨幣，而美元指數從120起一直跌跌不休讓持有美元資產的新興市場國家央行「深度套牢」，目前的美國經濟和宏觀政策都無法讓這些外匯大國看到希望，所以增持黃金行為將會此起彼伏。
胡燕燕：從黃金市場看，缺乏實質的利空因素，是導致金價連番技術性破位、持續保持強勢的根本原因。
全球最大的黃金ETFs基金STREET TRACKS GOLD SHARES持金量至今較2008年底增加了300餘噸。COMEX期貨黃金的總持倉較2008年底增加了77%。投資需求規模性增加的原因和結果值得推敲。
而投資者對黃金市場的判斷依據是什麼？黃金供應沒有超過預期的供應增長出現，甚至出現央行售金減少、央行購金增加的跡象，是淺層次的原因。由於全球性的寬鬆性貨幣政策和財政政策引發的通貨膨脹預期，以及全球經濟復甦尚未穩定實現的事實，是深層次的原因。儘管澳洲央行已經兩次升息，但11月美聯儲、歐洲央行以及英國央行均沒有做出升息的決定，這奠定了一個宏觀判斷基調：經濟沒有進入穩定復甦的階段，寬鬆政策繼續維持。經濟不穩定、政策寬鬆，意味著貨幣供應依然較大，通貨膨脹有發生的溫床，黃金符合投資者抵抗經濟危機和對抗通脹風險的要求。而至於市場普遍討論的美元因素，不過是通脹預期的變化載體。
張智勇：影響黃金價格的因素眾多。短期推動黃金價格上揚的直接動力源自美元貶值、礦業空頭平倉、央行與大型基金轉為淨買入方等因素；中期上漲的背景是充裕的流動性和超寬鬆貨幣政策的支撐；而黃金牛市的長期基礎則來自以美元為代表的全球貨幣體系的深層次問題為越來越多的投資者所關注，黃金作為國際硬通貨的重要性逐步回升。
2008年中金融危機的惡化導致的避險需求和投資者贖回壓力帶來了大量美元買盤，令美元指數自歷史低位70快速反彈至接近90。今年隨著金融市場的穩定和全球經濟反彈，美元指數跌破80至目前的75附近，這與我們一直堅持的2008年美元的上漲是大級別中期反彈，而不是反轉了2002年以來美元長期下跌趨勢的觀點相吻合。
美聯儲降息到0—0.25%之後，進入2009年以來，隨著經濟反彈，CPI環比逐月增加，預期11月後CPI同比將轉正，美國實際利率逐月收窄並將進入負利率時期。低成本的資金和貨幣貶值的壓力使得資金尋找投資渠道，而美國商業信貸依然下滑，實體經濟仍較低迷，所以大量資金流入了股票市場和大宗商品市場。當其他商品的價格上揚受限於低迷的實際需求時，「價格越漲，投資需求反而越旺」的黃金就成了規避通脹風險的最優選擇。
王舟懿：去年10月爆發的金融海嘯為世界敲響了警鐘，國際著名金融機構倒閉、各主要經濟體步入嚴重的衰退週期。包括逐月上升的失業率、大幅下滑的消費支出、貿易收支、開工率等在內的各項數據，導致大宗商品價格自高位跳水，黃金也未能倖免於難。
在悲觀的經濟預期以及艱難的復甦前景下，各國政府紛紛推出一系列的財政舉措，配合寬鬆的貨幣政策，力求將經濟形勢自崩潰邊緣拉回。歐美財政撥款的支持減緩了各行業的衰退進程；美聯儲在數次的利率決議中維持了幾近於零的基礎利率，歐洲、英國、亞洲各央行紛紛效仿降低利率，寬裕了貨幣的供應以及投資的環境。在經濟刺激政策的影響下，流動性逐漸增加。隨之而來的，則是日益膨脹的投資需求。
政府激勵投資的舉措，令固定資產投資升溫，對基礎原材料的需求首當其衝。反映於商品價格之上，可以看到基本金屬、工業品上半年漲幅甚巨。投資者全力傾注於基礎原材料，因而一度忽略了黃金這一傳統避險品種。
當前市場焦點，在於流動性變化帶來的階段性方向調整。風險偏好的上升、製造業的產能過剩，引導資金尋找新的投資方向。除資本市場外、交易興趣對商品市場的投資品種也在進行調整，結合對抗通貨膨脹的需求，黃金成為資金追捧的熱點。
強勢美元不再 各國央行紛紛增持黃金儲備
主持人：近期不時傳來各國央行或購入或出售黃金儲備的消息，我們應如何看待各國央行對於黃金儲備的態度？
朱斌：亞洲以及遠東素來有收藏黃金的喜好，歷史上亞洲和遠東擁有世界上最多的黃金，西方人更是形象地把亞洲和遠東稱為「黃金墓地」。因為黃金通過世界貿易流入亞洲就不再流出，西方人得到東方的絲綢和陶瓷，東方人得到西方的黃金白銀。現實是亞洲這些國家擁有最多的外匯儲備和最少的黃金比率，前10位最大的外匯儲備國家中前8個國家位於亞洲，所以增持空間巨大。
而在這些巨額外匯儲備的背後，亞洲國家央行對於美元貶值無能為力和深惡痛絕，貨幣的國際化和貨幣的話語權是發展中重要考慮的問題，而每個強勢貨幣的背後都是有很強的貨幣支撐，美國有8000噸黃金、歐元背後有5%的黃金儲備、瑞士法郎有25%的黃金儲備支撐，甚至出售黃金要實行全民公決。
持有大量美國國債的央行最有可能在未來幾年內增加黃金儲備，包括中國、日本、俄羅斯、印度、新加坡、巴西和韓國央行等。目前國際儲備中黃金所佔比例不到10%的央行具備增持黃金頭寸的動機。如果位於亞洲的前8個外匯儲備國家增持到5%，需求將會有4300噸，而如果增持到10％將會需要11600噸。這將是全球不消耗任何一盎司黃金的情況下整整5年的黃金新增產量。未來在全球貨幣的貶值態勢下央行增持預期很大，將會導致對黃金價格上漲預期極大。
央行的黃金出售對於黃金供應是僅次於礦產金和舊金回收的第三大來源，按照目前每年黃金產量與需求之間的差距，大約在200噸—400噸，如果央行從出售方轉入購入方將會導致供需不平衡的加大，黃金價格還要大幅度的上漲。
張智勇：全球央行正由過去十幾年的黃金淨賣出方轉為買入方。今年一季度IMF宣佈出售403噸黃金計劃時曾對市場構成了較大壓力，而現在隨著黃金在央行間市場成功售出(並且價格不低)，現貨市場的壓力大大減輕。11月4日IMF宣佈印度買入200噸IMF儲備黃金，均價在1041美元—1045美元/盎司；僅僅兩周之後，毛里求斯央行再購IMF2噸黃金，刺激金價上漲74美元至1115美元/盎司。在這樣的價格下，擁有最大外匯儲備的中國，購買IMF其餘待售黃金的變數增大，因中國更傾向於在國內採購。但中國將進一步地分散外匯儲備，提升黃金所佔份額的方向是明確的，這將帶來巨大的央行買盤。
事實上，中國是世界第一大黃金生產國，2008年中國自產了282噸，又進口了112噸，國內黃金現貨市場仍然出現了持續的供不應求。未來，隨著中國國內居民財富的增加和人民幣的升值，中國的民間黃金需求也將快速上升。
強勢的美元曾經在相當長的時間內替代了黃金的作用，減少了世界貿易與儲備對黃金的需求，而在目前及可預期的未來，黃金作為價值儲藏和價格尺度的功能正在重新被認識。10月19日芝加哥商品交易所CME發佈公告，可以接受以黃金作為一般等價物，用於所有大宗商品交易的保證金抵押。這些動作與擴大SDR(特別提款權)作用等等改革一樣，是黃金貨幣屬性的一種重新認識。
利空難覓 黃金看漲預期強烈
主持人：既然黃金長期看漲，那麼未來金價有望上漲到什麼高度？目前是否處於較好的投資區間？
胡燕燕：從全球市場的變化看，目前黃金市場最大的利空因素在於黃金市場投資需求的彈性。即投資需求可以推升金價，亦可以轉化為殺跌金價的動力。如果出現經濟真正步入穩定的復甦階段，實業投資恢復，商品市場投資需求增長等因素，則均將產生資金的分流作用，這對於黃金價格而言，在當前階段是可預見的利空。但這種利空對價格的負面作用可能是階段性的，金價會在這種利空下出現一定的調整，但趨勢恐怕無法改變。畢竟我們看到過2002年—2008年，在全球經濟增長週期中，黃金和商品在正常通貨膨脹因素下同步保持了上升趨勢，區別是黃金的上漲幅度遠遠小於大宗原材料。
可見，對於黃金市場而言，目前的確缺乏能夠真正引起市場轉變的利空基本面因素，而投資需求的膨脹具有技術性的特點(追漲殺跌)，慣性短期難以改變。觸發改變的因素，可能是利率的調整——升息。利率的變化，中短期將導致資金流的變化，從而導致上文中談到的資金分流作用。但同樣，升息的決定意味著通脹的來臨和經濟基礎的穩定，金價上升的趨勢仍難以改變。
朱斌：近一年來CFTC持倉報告中顯示非商業多頭占比接近50%，機構投資者對後市強烈看多。而在全球持續寬鬆的財政和貨幣政策的刺激計劃下，通貨膨脹已經在悄悄發生，澳洲央行等已開始加息。面對經濟在復甦進程中還搖搖欲墜的情況，G20國財長會議也明確發出目前不是緊縮政策的時機，美國經濟由於製造業持續衰退和金融業受到嚴重的打擊已經成為千夫所指，可以預期經濟基本面將會持續低迷，雙赤字將會依然嚴重而得不到很好的救贖，美元大幅度上漲遙遙無期，而這為貨幣貶值和大宗商品上漲提供了契機。
事實上美元正在不斷地下跌、不斷創出新低，而黃金則不斷創出新高。對於美國貨幣監管者，歷任美聯儲主席對黃金都是愛恨交加，格林斯潘認為黃金是不受政府剝奪權利的終極資產，而伯南克卻是在研究中提出誰先脫離黃金誰先走出復甦的明確觀點，認為金本位制度是導致美國在1929年大蕭條中捆住美國手腳的鐵鏈，以至於美國復甦滯後於很多西歐國家。然而事實上，每年全球近500噸的黃金銷售中沒有美聯儲的影子，近8000噸的黃金一直靜靜的沉睡在重兵把守的陸軍基地諾列斯堡和紐約西點。安保之嚴密就是「蒼蠅都不可能進入」。
黃金對抗通脹和重回貨幣地位在經濟危機中得到了強化，加上發展中國家央行的直接採購行為得到直接證明，而且根據世界黃金協會的報告，隨著全球經濟的復甦，黃金實物需求也得到了一定程度的提升，黃金的價值需要重估。根據我們的黃金預測模型顯示，未來12個月價格將調整為1260美元。從更長遠的估值按照黃金貨幣比率計算，黃金的合理比價為1750美元/盎司。
王舟懿：基於黃金的抗通脹及貨幣的功能，對於黃金走勢的判斷，我們認為應當把握時間窗口，抓住階段重點。商品屬性令投資者聚焦供給、需求、庫存及其變化趨勢等基本面因素的變動狀況。金融屬性則令利率、匯率、流動性等問題的關注度升溫。
對於黃金價格走向的把握，同一時刻往往彙集著各種因素，而多空交織的因果關係增加了方向判斷的難度。投資者不妨將影響因素進行分類，著重於市場熱點。比如2008年金融危機爆發引發的商品市場全線下跌，蓋過了價格低迷對印度采金需求的正面影響。又比如2009年11月上旬歐美央行的利率決議，暗示相關國家及區域匯率變動的可能性，拖累美元中長期走勢，蓋過了此前公佈的成屋銷售、營建支出、製造業採購經理人指數、耐用品訂單以及工廠訂單等一系列利多美元的數據，間接推高黃金。
前期黃金投資基金的增倉，證明了資金看多的動向。IMF以1045 美元/盎司的價格出售首批200 噸黃金的舉動，則是支撐金價的佐證。
既然經濟增長這一大方向得到確認，寬鬆的貨幣政策在中期將得以維持，且政府言論對財政刺激退出機制保持謹慎，那短期的調整將是建倉的時機。
張智勇：眾所周知，美元貶值是近期黃金價格上揚的重要推動因素，但是黃金對多種貨幣同時上漲則不單單是美元現象。再有3%左右的漲幅，以歐元計價的黃金也將創下歷史新高。長期來看，這是所有紙幣對硬通貨的貶值。
我們認為近期黃金價格的突破性上揚只是黃金自2002年以來的長期牛市運行過程中的一次跨越。金價在明年一季度前越過我們年初設立的目標位——1200美元/盎司的可能性較大，之後隨著黃金價格的中期超買，調整的風險也將增加，但隨著未來全球宏觀形勢的逐步演化，黃金價格在未來5到8年有望逐漸地向3000美元/盎司以上發展。
南華期貨研究所所長 朱斌
根據我們的黃金預測模型顯示，未來12個月金價將調整為1260美元/盎司。從更長遠的估值按照黃金貨幣比率計算，黃金的合理比價為1750美元/盎司。
國泰君安期貨研究所所長 張智勇
我們認為近期黃金價格的突破性上揚只是黃金自2002年以來的長期牛市運行過程中的一次跨越。未來5到8年有望逐漸地向3000美元/盎司以上發展。
光大期貨研究所副所長 胡燕燕
目前黃金市場的確缺乏能夠真正引起市場轉變的利空基本面因素，而投資需求的膨脹具有技術性的特點(追漲殺跌)，因此短期慣性上漲難以改變。
上海中期研究發展部副部長 王舟懿
既然經濟增長這一大方向已得到確認，寬鬆的貨幣政策在中期將得以維持，且政府言論對財政刺激退出機制保持謹慎，故金價短期的調整將是建倉的時機。"
2009年11月19日 星期四
《财经天下-陶冬》论人民币汇率烽烟_港股通
"财经天下-陶冬》论人民币汇率烽烟
来源：经济通 09年11月18日 10:58 港股通
《财经天下》在人民币汇率上烽烟再起.西方大国在G20会议上演出了一场逼宫闹剧，市
场上关于人民币一次过升值的传言兴起.
预期人民币升值，有一定的道理.自2005年7月汇率改革以来，人民币兑美元升值
20%，不过过去一年升值步伐几乎完全停顿.相反，由于美元的贬值，人民币兑一揽子货币在
金融危机中反而贬值8%.中国的银行体系在危机中较美欧同行损害轻许多，中国经济更在各主
要经济大国中率先复苏，人民币没有理由随同丧失国际信用的美元一起贬值.
压人民币升值，还有其不合理的一面.美欧相继陷入大萧条以来最严重的经济衰退，就业问
题严重.将矛头指向海外，是政客转移视线的惯用伎俩.于是，中国成了制造全球经济不均衡的
源头，人民币升值成了均衡贸易、增加需求的特效药.
笔者认为，人民币有一定升值的空间，但是希冀通过逼人民币升值而实现贸易均衡，拉动世
界经济，乃三流经济学家的蠢主意.在流动性泛滥、热钱肆虐的今天，人民币突然升值，势必造
成升值预期，导致热钱涌入中国，加剧国内的流动性失控，加速人民币资产价值的上升，引诱更
多的热钱流入.这种形势必然令已经处于两难中的宏观环境更趋复杂化，一旦资产价格进一步上
扬，迫使中国政府采取更果断、更严厉的调控政策，中国经济两次探底的风险便可能大增.
＊中国的最大贡献是稳定＊
在这场罕见的全球危机中，中国的最大贡献就是稳定.中国经济的稳定，带来了亚洲经济的
稳定，带来了商品市场的稳定，也避免了美国国债市场，以及其他金融市场的进一步波动.中国
是世界避免重蹈1929年式萧条的几个重要原因之一.一旦中国不稳，全球经济出现「W型」
二次探底的可能性大升.
中国必须为全球抗衰退、创增长做出自己的贡献.不过中国的主要贡献应该在制造新的内部
需求，而不是汇率大幅上扬.个别国家力逼人民币升值，是损人不利已的行为.
＊长远人民币不排除大升＊
长远来看，笔者判断人民币一定会升值，甚至不排除大升，但是这个过程应该出自自身利益
的需要和自主的决策.今后十年，中国的内需在经济中所占的比重会愈来愈大，出口的地位应该
不断下降.当经济结构发生变化后，政府对人民币升值的态度也会改变.人民币升值，不利于出
口竞争力，但是会增加消费者对进口产品、外来服务的购买力.总有一天，消费购买力会压倒出
口竞争力，成为中国经济中的最大诉求，随之而来的是汇率的一次强劲升值.
日本政府在过去的20年中，一直人为地压制日圆汇率，以保证出口.可是，当本届新政府
上台后，便表示日本人口老化严重，老年消费者需要更强的购买力，于是日圆一夜间进入了长期
升值的轨道.笔者相信中国也会有这一天，而且几年后也许就会出现.
中国的汇率政策其实在悄悄地变化着，相信2010年人民币汇率就会反映美元及其他主要
货币的走势.随着出口形势的改善，笔者估计人民币在2010年会兑美元升值5%.不过更重
要的是，预计至2020年，中国的资本项目可能达到90%至95%的自由兑换.3至5年后
随着内需的起步，人民币升值应该可以明显加速.《陶冬》
（本文为个人观点，并非任何劝诱或投资建议）"
来源：经济通 09年11月18日 10:58 港股通
《财经天下》在人民币汇率上烽烟再起.西方大国在G20会议上演出了一场逼宫闹剧，市
场上关于人民币一次过升值的传言兴起.
预期人民币升值，有一定的道理.自2005年7月汇率改革以来，人民币兑美元升值
20%，不过过去一年升值步伐几乎完全停顿.相反，由于美元的贬值，人民币兑一揽子货币在
金融危机中反而贬值8%.中国的银行体系在危机中较美欧同行损害轻许多，中国经济更在各主
要经济大国中率先复苏，人民币没有理由随同丧失国际信用的美元一起贬值.
压人民币升值，还有其不合理的一面.美欧相继陷入大萧条以来最严重的经济衰退，就业问
题严重.将矛头指向海外，是政客转移视线的惯用伎俩.于是，中国成了制造全球经济不均衡的
源头，人民币升值成了均衡贸易、增加需求的特效药.
笔者认为，人民币有一定升值的空间，但是希冀通过逼人民币升值而实现贸易均衡，拉动世
界经济，乃三流经济学家的蠢主意.在流动性泛滥、热钱肆虐的今天，人民币突然升值，势必造
成升值预期，导致热钱涌入中国，加剧国内的流动性失控，加速人民币资产价值的上升，引诱更
多的热钱流入.这种形势必然令已经处于两难中的宏观环境更趋复杂化，一旦资产价格进一步上
扬，迫使中国政府采取更果断、更严厉的调控政策，中国经济两次探底的风险便可能大增.
＊中国的最大贡献是稳定＊
在这场罕见的全球危机中，中国的最大贡献就是稳定.中国经济的稳定，带来了亚洲经济的
稳定，带来了商品市场的稳定，也避免了美国国债市场，以及其他金融市场的进一步波动.中国
是世界避免重蹈1929年式萧条的几个重要原因之一.一旦中国不稳，全球经济出现「W型」
二次探底的可能性大升.
中国必须为全球抗衰退、创增长做出自己的贡献.不过中国的主要贡献应该在制造新的内部
需求，而不是汇率大幅上扬.个别国家力逼人民币升值，是损人不利已的行为.
＊长远人民币不排除大升＊
长远来看，笔者判断人民币一定会升值，甚至不排除大升，但是这个过程应该出自自身利益
的需要和自主的决策.今后十年，中国的内需在经济中所占的比重会愈来愈大，出口的地位应该
不断下降.当经济结构发生变化后，政府对人民币升值的态度也会改变.人民币升值，不利于出
口竞争力，但是会增加消费者对进口产品、外来服务的购买力.总有一天，消费购买力会压倒出
口竞争力，成为中国经济中的最大诉求，随之而来的是汇率的一次强劲升值.
日本政府在过去的20年中，一直人为地压制日圆汇率，以保证出口.可是，当本届新政府
上台后，便表示日本人口老化严重，老年消费者需要更强的购买力，于是日圆一夜间进入了长期
升值的轨道.笔者相信中国也会有这一天，而且几年后也许就会出现.
中国的汇率政策其实在悄悄地变化着，相信2010年人民币汇率就会反映美元及其他主要
货币的走势.随着出口形势的改善，笔者估计人民币在2010年会兑美元升值5%.不过更重
要的是，预计至2020年，中国的资本项目可能达到90%至95%的自由兑换.3至5年后
随着内需的起步，人民币升值应该可以明显加速.《陶冬》
（本文为个人观点，并非任何劝诱或投资建议）"
高房價、高空屋率 中國房地產面泡沫危機_鉅亨網新聞
高房價、高空屋率 中國房地產面泡沫危機
鉅亨網編譯呂燕智 綜合外電
2009 / 11 / 19 星期四 11:50
中國知名房地產業者周三提出警告，在政府信貸優惠方案的刺激下，中國房市的巨大泡沫正不斷擴大。
SOHO 中國 (0410-HK) 總裁張欣說，資產泡沫導致房地產市場出現大量浪費性投資，此舉將進一步損害中國長期經濟成長。
她表示，正常情況下，房產價格只有當人民確實想使用空間時才會上漲，不過目前看來中國各地的空屋率愈來愈高，明顯受到大筆資金從銀行進入房產市場的影響，這點銀行必須審慎看待。
中國央行貨幣政策委員會的樊綱呼應這項看法，表示北京、上海以及深圳的房價高昂，而且市場泡沫化的危機日益升高。
官方資料顯示，10 月份中國 70 個大型及中型城市的市區房價較去年同期增加了 3.9%，較前一個月的年增率 2.8% 來得高，顯示房價正加速攀升。
一級城市如北京、上海的房價上升速度更快。分析師表示，這主要是受到政府史無前例的銀行放款政策帶動。其餘的利多措施包含減稅、降低利率以及頭期款成數縮減等。
今年 1 至 10 月房地產投資金額較去年同期上升 18.9%，較 1 至 9 月的年增率 17.7% 為高。
張欣強調，這些看法無論對房地產市場，或國家整體經濟都是很嚴重的警告。
「在紐約曼哈頓，一旦空屋率來到 10-15% 人們就覺得天快塌下來了；但是在上海浦東即使空屋率達 50%，建商還是照樣繼續蓋摩天大樓，」她說。
張欣表示，從經濟成長率來看，中國似乎是帶動全球經濟的重要引擎；不過當你仔細了解到這些需求是如何被浪費性投資創造出來的，你就不會這麼樂觀了。"
鉅亨網編譯呂燕智 綜合外電
2009 / 11 / 19 星期四 11:50
中國知名房地產業者周三提出警告，在政府信貸優惠方案的刺激下，中國房市的巨大泡沫正不斷擴大。
SOHO 中國 (0410-HK) 總裁張欣說，資產泡沫導致房地產市場出現大量浪費性投資，此舉將進一步損害中國長期經濟成長。
她表示，正常情況下，房產價格只有當人民確實想使用空間時才會上漲，不過目前看來中國各地的空屋率愈來愈高，明顯受到大筆資金從銀行進入房產市場的影響，這點銀行必須審慎看待。
中國央行貨幣政策委員會的樊綱呼應這項看法，表示北京、上海以及深圳的房價高昂，而且市場泡沫化的危機日益升高。
官方資料顯示，10 月份中國 70 個大型及中型城市的市區房價較去年同期增加了 3.9%，較前一個月的年增率 2.8% 來得高，顯示房價正加速攀升。
一級城市如北京、上海的房價上升速度更快。分析師表示，這主要是受到政府史無前例的銀行放款政策帶動。其餘的利多措施包含減稅、降低利率以及頭期款成數縮減等。
今年 1 至 10 月房地產投資金額較去年同期上升 18.9%，較 1 至 9 月的年增率 17.7% 為高。
張欣強調，這些看法無論對房地產市場，或國家整體經濟都是很嚴重的警告。
「在紐約曼哈頓，一旦空屋率來到 10-15% 人們就覺得天快塌下來了；但是在上海浦東即使空屋率達 50%，建商還是照樣繼續蓋摩天大樓，」她說。
張欣表示，從經濟成長率來看，中國似乎是帶動全球經濟的重要引擎；不過當你仔細了解到這些需求是如何被浪費性投資創造出來的，你就不會這麼樂觀了。"
2009年11月16日 星期一
iThome online : : 英特爾為視障人士推出專用的電子書閱讀器
iThome online : : 英特爾為視障人士推出專用的電子書閱讀器: "英特爾為視障人士推出專用的電子書閱讀器
文/陳曉莉 (編譯) 2009-11-11
Intel Reader約是平裝書籍的大小，重約1磅，採用英特爾Atom處理器，可將印刷文字轉為數位文字，並大聲朗讀。
英特爾（Intel）於周二（11/10）發表了Intel Reader，這是專為具有學習障礙或視障人士所打造的電子書閱讀裝置，可將印刷文字轉為數位文字，並大聲朗讀。
Intel Reader約是平裝書籍的大小，重約1磅，採用英特爾Atom處理器，並具有一高解析度的攝影機，用法是先將鏡頭對準平面文字，拍攝，然後就可聽取該裝置唸出的文字。可用來拍攝的內容包括書籍、報紙或是餐廳的菜單等。
還可結合英特爾專為Intel Reader設計的可攜式拍照裝置（Portable Capture Station），該裝置能同時固定Reader及所要拍攝的印刷品，適用於拍攝大量的文字內容。
Intel Reader售價為1499美元，Portable Capture Station售價為399美元，英特爾估計美國市場約有5500萬名視障及具學習障礙的人口。（編譯/陳曉莉）"
文/陳曉莉 (編譯) 2009-11-11
Intel Reader約是平裝書籍的大小，重約1磅，採用英特爾Atom處理器，可將印刷文字轉為數位文字，並大聲朗讀。
英特爾（Intel）於周二（11/10）發表了Intel Reader，這是專為具有學習障礙或視障人士所打造的電子書閱讀裝置，可將印刷文字轉為數位文字，並大聲朗讀。
Intel Reader約是平裝書籍的大小，重約1磅，採用英特爾Atom處理器，並具有一高解析度的攝影機，用法是先將鏡頭對準平面文字，拍攝，然後就可聽取該裝置唸出的文字。可用來拍攝的內容包括書籍、報紙或是餐廳的菜單等。
還可結合英特爾專為Intel Reader設計的可攜式拍照裝置（Portable Capture Station），該裝置能同時固定Reader及所要拍攝的印刷品，適用於拍攝大量的文字內容。
Intel Reader售價為1499美元，Portable Capture Station售價為399美元，英特爾估計美國市場約有5500萬名視障及具學習障礙的人口。（編譯/陳曉莉）"
六大指標 診斷二度衰退 | 國際財經 | 全球觀察 | 聯合新聞網
六大指標 診斷二度衰退 | 國際財經 | 全球觀察 | 聯合新聞網: "六大指標 診斷二度衰退
【經濟日報╱編譯／余曉惠】
2009.11.16 03:47 am
儘管美國第三季國內生產毛額（GDP）由負轉正，創下3.5%成長年率，但市場仍憂心經濟會否二度衰退。經濟學家指出，股價、就業、零售、油價、汽車和房市等六大指標，可供判斷經濟是否出現W型衰退。
股市向來被稱為經濟領先指標，反映投資人對未來景氣榮枯的展望，也是重要經濟觀察指標。目前美股已自3月低點大幅反彈，不及衰退前水準。專家憂心，目前股市已超漲，企業股價也超出銷售和獲利的實質表現，如果現在股價大跌20%將重挫金融體系，衝擊仍顯疲弱的經濟。
第二項指標為就業市場。美國非農就業人口在今年1月劇減74.1萬人，10月減幅雖已縮小至19萬人，但仍高於2001年衰退期間每月的平均減幅。經濟學家預估，如果明年失業人口仍居高不下，恐使經濟二度衰退；但若就業市場改善，可望一舉帶動零售業、房市和汽車業成長。
第三為零售。零售銷售可以呈現民眾最近幾個月的生活水準，該數據近五個月中有四個月增加。據美國零售聯盟（NRF）預估，年底假期購物季銷售將比去年同期減少1%。經濟學家認為，占美國經濟活動70%的零售銷售扮演推動經濟復甦的關鍵角色，如果假期購物季的表現不如預期，恐使經濟再度下挫。
第四為油價。目前油價已自去年夏天每桶145美元的天價陡降75%，由於石油是很難省去的必需品，油價走升勢必排擠其他消費支出，並增加企業成本使其減少投資，因此油價將是觀察經濟的重要指標。
第五為汽車銷售。汽車業無疑是金融海嘯衝擊最大的產業，汽車銷售近幾個月來已見改善，10月在舊車換現金政策退場後的表現持平，業者第四季更增加產量回補庫存，前景可期。經濟學家預估，明年汽車銷售將溫和復甦，但假若失業率仍高、信貸依然緊俏，將使明年車市銷售不振，連帶衝擊整體經濟。
第六為房市。也是這波金融危機的導火線，房屋銷售和房價的止跌回升對復甦至關重要。目前房市表現已趨穩，但市場憂心房價相對於收入仍過高，而購屋優惠稅率政策也可能中止，使房市無法脫離險境。如果房市復甦短暫，經濟復甦恐怕只是曇花一現"
【經濟日報╱編譯／余曉惠】
2009.11.16 03:47 am
儘管美國第三季國內生產毛額（GDP）由負轉正，創下3.5%成長年率，但市場仍憂心經濟會否二度衰退。經濟學家指出，股價、就業、零售、油價、汽車和房市等六大指標，可供判斷經濟是否出現W型衰退。
股市向來被稱為經濟領先指標，反映投資人對未來景氣榮枯的展望，也是重要經濟觀察指標。目前美股已自3月低點大幅反彈，不及衰退前水準。專家憂心，目前股市已超漲，企業股價也超出銷售和獲利的實質表現，如果現在股價大跌20%將重挫金融體系，衝擊仍顯疲弱的經濟。
第二項指標為就業市場。美國非農就業人口在今年1月劇減74.1萬人，10月減幅雖已縮小至19萬人，但仍高於2001年衰退期間每月的平均減幅。經濟學家預估，如果明年失業人口仍居高不下，恐使經濟二度衰退；但若就業市場改善，可望一舉帶動零售業、房市和汽車業成長。
第三為零售。零售銷售可以呈現民眾最近幾個月的生活水準，該數據近五個月中有四個月增加。據美國零售聯盟（NRF）預估，年底假期購物季銷售將比去年同期減少1%。經濟學家認為，占美國經濟活動70%的零售銷售扮演推動經濟復甦的關鍵角色，如果假期購物季的表現不如預期，恐使經濟再度下挫。
第四為油價。目前油價已自去年夏天每桶145美元的天價陡降75%，由於石油是很難省去的必需品，油價走升勢必排擠其他消費支出，並增加企業成本使其減少投資，因此油價將是觀察經濟的重要指標。
第五為汽車銷售。汽車業無疑是金融海嘯衝擊最大的產業，汽車銷售近幾個月來已見改善，10月在舊車換現金政策退場後的表現持平，業者第四季更增加產量回補庫存，前景可期。經濟學家預估，明年汽車銷售將溫和復甦，但假若失業率仍高、信貸依然緊俏，將使明年車市銷售不振，連帶衝擊整體經濟。
第六為房市。也是這波金融危機的導火線，房屋銷售和房價的止跌回升對復甦至關重要。目前房市表現已趨穩，但市場憂心房價相對於收入仍過高，而購屋優惠稅率政策也可能中止，使房市無法脫離險境。如果房市復甦短暫，經濟復甦恐怕只是曇花一現"
2009年11月15日 星期日
鉅亨部落新世界 - 期貨好運到 的部落格
鉅亨部落新世界 - 期貨好運到 的部落格: "2009/11/15
海外所得課稅 5族群受衝擊
科技新貴、外派人員、未上市櫃公司股東、長期小額投資的中產階段，及二代保單規劃的「田僑仔、繼承大筆遺產」家庭等五大族群注意了，只要長期投資海外基金，恐將成為海外所得課稅直接受衝擊的高危險群。
一：科技新貴，中信銀表示，科技新貴因領有高額的員工分紅配股，這些新貴由於年齡較輕，可承受的風險也較大，因此，在投資海外基金部分，投顧業者通常會建議他們投資報酬率較高的基金如新興市場股票型基金。
假設陳姓科技新貴，平時每月以5萬元定期定額投資境外新興市場股票型基金，連續投資5年，以報酬率15％來換算，那麼獲利即高達148萬元。
若陳先生決定在明年結婚，且購買一間房子，需將海外基金贖回，在此同時，又公司另有分紅配股10張IC設計公司股票，也是在結婚當年有權處分，其可處分次日收盤價為510元，加上當然其綜合所得淨額為100萬元。
那麼該年度陳先生所繳的稅，就不再適用綜合所得稅，只以100萬當做所得淨額，乘以13％的稅率，並繳交10.13萬元。
而是應採最低稅負制，因為陳先生除了當年度所得淨額100萬元外，還有海外基金贖回獲利的148萬元海外所得，加上員工分紅配股大於面額金額500萬，因此，他的實際所得應該是748萬，再扣除600萬減免，那麼基本所得為148萬，乘以20％的稅率，那麼當年要繳的稅是29.6萬元，比原先綜所稅多了20萬元。
二：外派人員，中信銀指出，一般外派人員，其所得會比國內高出許多，假設王先生為長駐在海外第三地的金融從業人員，原先妻子在台灣申報所得淨額為100萬元，王先生300萬薪資屬於境外收入，過去並不須繳稅。
不過，夫妻兩人的所得都很高，且一直有投資境外基金，假設已投資了7-8年，境外基金為1,000萬，其獲利為50％，此時剛好王姓夫妻想買屋，並將基金全數贖回，獲利為500萬，再加上王先生的300萬薪資，那麼當年度的基本所得額應是300萬元，並繳交60萬元的稅，而不是過去只申報100萬的所得，並只需繳10.13萬元。
三：未上市櫃公司股東，中信銀說，其實國內有很多的人，會去投資長線看好的未上市公司，因未上市因此買進的成本通常會較低。假設李先生在5年前就打算換屋，因此，開始每月5萬元定期定額投資於中國市場單一國家境外金，若該基金的報酬率為20％，那麼贖回獲利則高達217萬元。
李先生除了贖回海外基金外，當年亦逢高賣出1年前持有的未上市股票100張，若以當時買進成本每股30元，賣出價為80元，其獲利為500萬元，若再加上100萬的綜合所得，那麼該年度的基本稅額是41.75萬元，比原先綜所稅要繳交的所得稅多了31萬。
四：長期小額投資的中產階段，假設一對新婚夫妻為換屋需求，每月僅定期定額2萬元於境外高收益債基金，其年報酬率為9％，20年後一次贖回購屋，其獲利為866萬元，也就是說，該對夫妻在計算其個人薪資得，光贖回該筆基金，當年至少就要課53萬的海外所得稅。
五：二代保單規劃的「田僑仔、繼承大筆遺產」家庭，中信銀說，國內有很多田僑仔的父母，因為變賣土地，變的很有錢，因此，會提早為子女規劃留學費用，假設李姓夫妻有1兒1女，平時為他們每月做10萬元定期定額基金投資。
另為確保子女生活保障，又以夫妻為要保人，二位子女為受益人的儲蓄壽險，到期後子女可以每年領100萬的保險金。
假設定期定額的年化報酬率為15％，5年後基金累積本利和扣掉成本後為594萬元，再加上領取的保險給付各100萬元，由於子女都未成年，而夫妻兩人的綜合所得淨額為100萬元，那麼該年度李姓夫妻所應繳的稅包括綜合所得淨額100萬元和594萬元的海外所得及200萬的保險給付，也就是當年的稅是894萬減去600萬元，乘以20％稅率，應繳稅為58.8萬元。
2009-11-15
# 工商時報"
海外所得課稅 5族群受衝擊
科技新貴、外派人員、未上市櫃公司股東、長期小額投資的中產階段，及二代保單規劃的「田僑仔、繼承大筆遺產」家庭等五大族群注意了，只要長期投資海外基金，恐將成為海外所得課稅直接受衝擊的高危險群。
一：科技新貴，中信銀表示，科技新貴因領有高額的員工分紅配股，這些新貴由於年齡較輕，可承受的風險也較大，因此，在投資海外基金部分，投顧業者通常會建議他們投資報酬率較高的基金如新興市場股票型基金。
假設陳姓科技新貴，平時每月以5萬元定期定額投資境外新興市場股票型基金，連續投資5年，以報酬率15％來換算，那麼獲利即高達148萬元。
若陳先生決定在明年結婚，且購買一間房子，需將海外基金贖回，在此同時，又公司另有分紅配股10張IC設計公司股票，也是在結婚當年有權處分，其可處分次日收盤價為510元，加上當然其綜合所得淨額為100萬元。
那麼該年度陳先生所繳的稅，就不再適用綜合所得稅，只以100萬當做所得淨額，乘以13％的稅率，並繳交10.13萬元。
而是應採最低稅負制，因為陳先生除了當年度所得淨額100萬元外，還有海外基金贖回獲利的148萬元海外所得，加上員工分紅配股大於面額金額500萬，因此，他的實際所得應該是748萬，再扣除600萬減免，那麼基本所得為148萬，乘以20％的稅率，那麼當年要繳的稅是29.6萬元，比原先綜所稅多了20萬元。
二：外派人員，中信銀指出，一般外派人員，其所得會比國內高出許多，假設王先生為長駐在海外第三地的金融從業人員，原先妻子在台灣申報所得淨額為100萬元，王先生300萬薪資屬於境外收入，過去並不須繳稅。
不過，夫妻兩人的所得都很高，且一直有投資境外基金，假設已投資了7-8年，境外基金為1,000萬，其獲利為50％，此時剛好王姓夫妻想買屋，並將基金全數贖回，獲利為500萬，再加上王先生的300萬薪資，那麼當年度的基本所得額應是300萬元，並繳交60萬元的稅，而不是過去只申報100萬的所得，並只需繳10.13萬元。
三：未上市櫃公司股東，中信銀說，其實國內有很多的人，會去投資長線看好的未上市公司，因未上市因此買進的成本通常會較低。假設李先生在5年前就打算換屋，因此，開始每月5萬元定期定額投資於中國市場單一國家境外金，若該基金的報酬率為20％，那麼贖回獲利則高達217萬元。
李先生除了贖回海外基金外，當年亦逢高賣出1年前持有的未上市股票100張，若以當時買進成本每股30元，賣出價為80元，其獲利為500萬元，若再加上100萬的綜合所得，那麼該年度的基本稅額是41.75萬元，比原先綜所稅要繳交的所得稅多了31萬。
四：長期小額投資的中產階段，假設一對新婚夫妻為換屋需求，每月僅定期定額2萬元於境外高收益債基金，其年報酬率為9％，20年後一次贖回購屋，其獲利為866萬元，也就是說，該對夫妻在計算其個人薪資得，光贖回該筆基金，當年至少就要課53萬的海外所得稅。
五：二代保單規劃的「田僑仔、繼承大筆遺產」家庭，中信銀說，國內有很多田僑仔的父母，因為變賣土地，變的很有錢，因此，會提早為子女規劃留學費用，假設李姓夫妻有1兒1女，平時為他們每月做10萬元定期定額基金投資。
另為確保子女生活保障，又以夫妻為要保人，二位子女為受益人的儲蓄壽險，到期後子女可以每年領100萬的保險金。
假設定期定額的年化報酬率為15％，5年後基金累積本利和扣掉成本後為594萬元，再加上領取的保險給付各100萬元，由於子女都未成年，而夫妻兩人的綜合所得淨額為100萬元，那麼該年度李姓夫妻所應繳的稅包括綜合所得淨額100萬元和594萬元的海外所得及200萬的保險給付，也就是當年的稅是894萬減去600萬元，乘以20％稅率，應繳稅為58.8萬元。
2009-11-15
# 工商時報"
2009年11月14日 星期六
前列腺癌 定期检查防漏诊
前列腺癌 定期检查防漏诊: "前列腺癌 定期检查防漏诊
作者：孔垂泽 生殖健康来源：健康报网 更新时间：2006-12-6
我今年56岁，去年体检时查前列腺特异抗原（PSA）为8.67ng/m l，FPSA/PSA低于0.15。盆腔MRI和前列腺经直肠B超均提示前列腺肥 大，大小约51mm×47mm。前列腺病理检查提示，前列腺组织未见癌， PET/CT检查报告结果也是这样。不久前又查，FPSA1.714ngml，PSA1 9.53ng/l，FPSA/PSA0.09。请专家对我的前列腺PSA和FPSA持续增高 的症状给予处理及治疗意见。
——广州患者周先生
前列腺特异抗原（PSA）是一种主要由前列腺上皮细胞产生的蛋 白分解酶，正常情况下被分泌入前列腺液或精液中，以有活性的游离 形式（f－PSA）存在，血清中的PSA主要以结合形式存在，通常以f－ PSA与结合PSA的和即总PSA（t－PSA）代表血清总的PSA水平。
PSA诊断特异性很强
血清PSA测定精确度高、稳定、重复性好，而且是无创的，有助 于前列腺癌早期诊断，监测治疗反应及判断预后。
在前列腺的腺泡和导管腔与血液循环系统之间，存在着明显的组织屏障，当患有前列腺癌时，由于肿瘤细胞的异常生长使该屏障受到 破坏，PSA大量渗漏于血中，造成血清中PSA水平的大幅度升高。故可 以通过测定血清中PSA水平对前列腺癌进行诊断监测，血清PSA的正常 值为0～4纳克/毫升。目前PSA被公认为前列腺癌最有价值的肿瘤标记 物，也是肿瘤学上最有效的瘤标。
PSA也可用于高危人群（50岁以上男性）前列腺癌的普查。血清 中的PSA绝大部分来源于前列腺，具有器官特异性，PSA是前列腺特异 性抗原，但不是前列腺癌的特异性抗原，正常及良性前列腺增生的前 列腺上皮均可分泌PSA，因此临床上对PSA升高患者应谨慎决策、区别 对待。
有研究表明，PSA的变化情况可以预测前列腺疾病的性质。良性 疾病患者的PSA水平呈降低趋势，每月下降0.5ng/mL，恶性疾病患者 的PSA水平呈上升趋势，每月增加0.14ng/mL。短期内PSA的变化与首 次血PSA水平具有同样的诊断价值。进行二次PSA检测更能增加诊断的 特异性。
近年来，我国随着生活水平的不断提高和寿命的逐渐延长，前列腺癌的发病率呈明显上升趋势。目前，PSA仍然是诊断前列腺癌的一 种主要方法，它具有很强的特异性。
一些因素可导致PSA升高
在临床应用中，PSA的一些不足也逐渐暴露出来：一些因素（如肛诊、治疗前列腺药物、年龄及前列腺的大小等）的影响，均可以使PSA升高。此外有报道称，前列腺发炎时PSA也可以明显升高。因此，近年来，一些与其相关的指标（如tPSA、fPSA、f/tPSA、cPSA、f/cPSA和PSAD等）也相继应用于临床。其中f/tPSA受其他因素影响较小，具有检测结果比较稳定的优点，是目前研究最多一个指标。研究表明，当以f/tPSA数值小于0.18时作为诊断前列腺癌的指标时，其诊断前列腺癌的灵敏度、特异度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、阳性似然比以及阴性似然比等指标均比较理想，是一个很有诊断价值的指标。
定期检查PSA防漏诊
结合广州该名患者具体就诊经历，2005年的相关症状及辅助检查结果应该提示“前列腺增生及前列腺炎”。2006年9月份复查FPSA、PSA均有不同程度增高，且FPSA/PSA明显减低，但这之前的PET－CT未提示恶性病变，因此前列腺癌的诊断尚不能成立。鉴于该患者的具体情况，可考虑如下治疗及处理：
▲生活起居规律，注意保暖，尽量少食辛辣食物，避免饮酒。
▲应再行前列腺穿刺活检，以免漏诊早期前列腺癌。如果活检未提示癌，但PSA仍持续升高，则必须每3个月复查一次，并建议每半年行一次前列腺穿刺活检。
▲可在定期检查PSA（1个月）的情况下，服用药物缓解症状。"
作者：孔垂泽 生殖健康来源：健康报网 更新时间：2006-12-6
我今年56岁，去年体检时查前列腺特异抗原（PSA）为8.67ng/m l，FPSA/PSA低于0.15。盆腔MRI和前列腺经直肠B超均提示前列腺肥 大，大小约51mm×47mm。前列腺病理检查提示，前列腺组织未见癌， PET/CT检查报告结果也是这样。不久前又查，FPSA1.714ngml，PSA1 9.53ng/l，FPSA/PSA0.09。请专家对我的前列腺PSA和FPSA持续增高 的症状给予处理及治疗意见。
——广州患者周先生
前列腺特异抗原（PSA）是一种主要由前列腺上皮细胞产生的蛋 白分解酶，正常情况下被分泌入前列腺液或精液中，以有活性的游离 形式（f－PSA）存在，血清中的PSA主要以结合形式存在，通常以f－ PSA与结合PSA的和即总PSA（t－PSA）代表血清总的PSA水平。
PSA诊断特异性很强
血清PSA测定精确度高、稳定、重复性好，而且是无创的，有助 于前列腺癌早期诊断，监测治疗反应及判断预后。
在前列腺的腺泡和导管腔与血液循环系统之间，存在着明显的组织屏障，当患有前列腺癌时，由于肿瘤细胞的异常生长使该屏障受到 破坏，PSA大量渗漏于血中，造成血清中PSA水平的大幅度升高。故可 以通过测定血清中PSA水平对前列腺癌进行诊断监测，血清PSA的正常 值为0～4纳克/毫升。目前PSA被公认为前列腺癌最有价值的肿瘤标记 物，也是肿瘤学上最有效的瘤标。
PSA也可用于高危人群（50岁以上男性）前列腺癌的普查。血清 中的PSA绝大部分来源于前列腺，具有器官特异性，PSA是前列腺特异 性抗原，但不是前列腺癌的特异性抗原，正常及良性前列腺增生的前 列腺上皮均可分泌PSA，因此临床上对PSA升高患者应谨慎决策、区别 对待。
有研究表明，PSA的变化情况可以预测前列腺疾病的性质。良性 疾病患者的PSA水平呈降低趋势，每月下降0.5ng/mL，恶性疾病患者 的PSA水平呈上升趋势，每月增加0.14ng/mL。短期内PSA的变化与首 次血PSA水平具有同样的诊断价值。进行二次PSA检测更能增加诊断的 特异性。
近年来，我国随着生活水平的不断提高和寿命的逐渐延长，前列腺癌的发病率呈明显上升趋势。目前，PSA仍然是诊断前列腺癌的一 种主要方法，它具有很强的特异性。
一些因素可导致PSA升高
在临床应用中，PSA的一些不足也逐渐暴露出来：一些因素（如肛诊、治疗前列腺药物、年龄及前列腺的大小等）的影响，均可以使PSA升高。此外有报道称，前列腺发炎时PSA也可以明显升高。因此，近年来，一些与其相关的指标（如tPSA、fPSA、f/tPSA、cPSA、f/cPSA和PSAD等）也相继应用于临床。其中f/tPSA受其他因素影响较小，具有检测结果比较稳定的优点，是目前研究最多一个指标。研究表明，当以f/tPSA数值小于0.18时作为诊断前列腺癌的指标时，其诊断前列腺癌的灵敏度、特异度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、阳性似然比以及阴性似然比等指标均比较理想，是一个很有诊断价值的指标。
定期检查PSA防漏诊
结合广州该名患者具体就诊经历，2005年的相关症状及辅助检查结果应该提示“前列腺增生及前列腺炎”。2006年9月份复查FPSA、PSA均有不同程度增高，且FPSA/PSA明显减低，但这之前的PET－CT未提示恶性病变，因此前列腺癌的诊断尚不能成立。鉴于该患者的具体情况，可考虑如下治疗及处理：
▲生活起居规律，注意保暖，尽量少食辛辣食物，避免饮酒。
▲应再行前列腺穿刺活检，以免漏诊早期前列腺癌。如果活检未提示癌，但PSA仍持续升高，则必须每3个月复查一次，并建议每半年行一次前列腺穿刺活检。
▲可在定期检查PSA（1个月）的情况下，服用药物缓解症状。"
2009年11月13日 星期五
The Coming Bubble of 2010 and How to Avoid It
The Coming Bubble of 2010 and How to Avoid It: "The Coming Bubble of 2010 and How to Avoid It
By Adam J. Wiederman
November 6, 2009 | Comments (62)
Even though it has been barely two years since the last investing bubble burst, bringing companies like American International Group (NYSE: AIG), Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM), and Freddie Mac (NYSE: FRE) to their knees, there's yet another bubble forming. And I believe it will burst in 2010.
Just ahead, I'll tell you how to completely avoid it -- and present an alternate investment strategy you can adopt instead of following the crowd into this bubble.
But first, a look at this bubble and how it formed.
All that glitters
Congress is spending billions of dollars in stimulus funds to jump-start the economy. It's funded almost entirely with debt. As the national debt level rises, the dollar becomes weaker because currency investors shy away from high-debt countries. This causes higher inflation, which everyone agrees is coming.
But the consensus right now is that the best way to counteract inflation is by investing in gold.
And the consensus is dead wrong!
The problem with gold is that it's a luxury commodity. It has no coupon rate or growth prospects, and it can rise in price only as much as demand for it grows.
It's also difficult to value. Some believe the price of gold per ounce should match the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Others believe it must reflect the price of a top-tier man's suit. Still others believe it must account for global supply and demand.
In spite of this inherent confusion, many prominent investors -- John Hathaway of the Tocqueville Gold Fund, Jim Rogers of Quantum Fund fame, and even hedge fund manager David Einhorn, to name a few -- believe gold can do well right now. What's more shocking: The recent Value Investors Congress was full of lectures on how to profit in precious metals.
Even the best can be fooled
The average investor is blindly following these noteworthy men. That's why more than $12 billion of new money has been invested in the SPDR Gold Trust this year alone. I'm the first to admit that falling prey to other investors' moves is an easy pitfall -- but it can also set you up for disaster.
So what exactly are all these investors -- and their followers -- overlooking? These three facts:
1. When gold demand rises, supply does, too, which brings gold prices back down.
Fortune magazine reports that gold miners invested more than $40 billion into new projects since 2001, and they 'are now bearing fruit.' Bullion dealer Kitco 'predicts that these new mining projects will add 450 tons annually -- or 5% -- 'to the gold supply through 2014, enough to move prices lower.' The demand also brings out sellers of scrap gold, which adds even more to the supply.
All this while demand for gold has dropped 20% in the past year.
2. Gold is not just dollar-denominated.
Unlike oil, gold is bought and sold in local currencies throughout the world. The Wall Street Journal reports that 'gold remains well below last winter's peaks when priced in pounds, euros, yen, or Swiss francs.' This indicates that it is solely Americans speculating on gold's rise.
3. Gold is historically a poor investment.
Perhaps the most damning fact is that, from 1833 through 2005, gold and inflation had nearly perfect correlation, according to Forbes. This means that, after taxes, you would have actually lost money in gold.
Warren Buffett once quipped, 'It gets dug out of the ground ... Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head.'
In fact, the only way to make gold rise is to get other investors to buy into the idea -- like a giant Ponzi scheme. And as we know from watching the unraveling of Bernie Madoff's empire, this can't last forever.
Which is why buying gold today is a horrible decision -- and why investors would be better off looking elsewhere.
The absolutely best place to be looking
The best way to invest for inflation is to invest in high-yield dividend companies. Unlike gold, which has no coupon rate and no growth potential, you should be sending your investing dollars to companies that pay a dividend (which often rises) and also have both stable growth potential (which also often rises) and strong assets (in inflationary periods, assets are more valuable since they cost more to replace).
Here are four solid candidates that fit that bill, all of which have a long history of dividends -- through periods of inflation and deflation alike:
Company
Market Cap
Dividend Yield
5-Year Compounded Annual Growth Rate
of Revenue
Liabilities-to-Asset Ratio
Dividends Paid Since
ConocoPhillips (NYSE: COP)
$77.1 billion
3.8%
11.2%
60.7%
1934
Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO)
$123.4 billion
3.0%
7.3%
49.9%
1893
AT&T (NYSE: T)
$151.8 billion
6.3%
25.3%
63.2%
1881
Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG)
$168.3 billion
3.0%
9.0%
53.2%
1891
Data from Capital IQ and DividendInvestor.com.
These are exactly the sorts of dividend-paying stocks that former hedge fund analyst and current Motley Fool Income Investor advisor James Early looks for in his market-beating service. In fact, two of the stocks in that table are official recommendations of his.
In his newsletter, James has put together a 'core portfolio' of top dividend stocks, consisting of six dividend stocks he believes every investor should use as a platform to profitable dividend investing. You can see his portfolio completely free, with a 30-day trial to his newsletter as my guest today. Click here for more information.
Adam J. Wiederman owns no shares of the companies mentioned above. Coca-Cola is a Motley Fool Inside Value recommendation. Coca-Cola and Procter & Gamble are Motley Fool Income Investor recommendations. The Motley Fool owns shares of Procter & Gamble. The Fool's disclosure policy is outlined here.
2 Stocks You Must Buy Now
When Reagan signed his $750 billion stimulus plan into law in 1981, it snapped the U.S. out of a deep recession and ignited a high-tech boom... turning individual investors into millionaires overnight!
Barack Obama's stimulus plan is even bigger, laying the groundwork for the next economic boom. The Wall Street Journal calls it 'a major win for the high-tech industry.' Find out how you can profit in a free report from The Motley Fool called, 'Top 2 Stocks For Cashing In On Obama's Stimulus Plan.'
Click here to download this FREE report right now!
Comments from our Foolish Readers
Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.
*
Report this Comment On November 06, 2009, at 7:34 PM, akutach wrote:
Doesn't point number two reflect changing currency valuation from relatively strong dollar to weak over that same time period? The fact of gold-dollar peak valuation does not indicate uniquely American speculation, and the assertion is rather absurd.
If a significant imbalance of gold prices between any two currency values occurred, investors would buy gold in the cheaper currency and immediately sell in the other for a profit minus transaction prices, thus narrowing the imbalance.
The bubble will be evidenced by rising prices despite insignificant demand from physical buyers (point number 1).
How does '20% less than last year's demand' compare to the volume of speculative buying?
India and China seem to think gold is worth as much as their dollars at todays prices, and plan on buying much more than India did last week in the near future. Though their positions are probably about asset diversification rather than speculation or investment.
*
Report this Comment On November 06, 2009, at 7:49 PM, xetn wrote:
Unfortunately, you do not understand what gold is; it is not an investment, it is money, real money. The rise or drop in the dollar denominated price is really reflecting the change in value of the dollar or other currencies. As a matter of fact you state that a 5% increase in the amount of gold would cause the 'price' of gold to decline. I have to ask, just how much supply of dollars have you seen in the last 20 years? Just for a clue, since 1989 the value of the dollar has dropped over 74%. The reason that the value of gold stayed almost level (it actually only varied less that $2.00 from 1800 to 1913) is because the dollar WAS gold, silver, nickel and copper coins. It was not a bunch of worthless paper.
In a free market, money would fluctuate based on the old basic pricing system, supply and demand. In fact, the reason the value of the dollar has dropped by over 95% since the creation of the Fed is because of the continued inflation of the number of dollars since the creation of new money out of thin air; counterfeiting.
So, just to sum up, real money (for the last 5000 years) has been a commodity mostly gold whose value has been based on the supply and demand, just like all goods. Real money is nothing but a medium of exchange and will fluctuate by how much individuals value holding it vs spending it on some want or need. The reason why gold money has had a fairly stable value for most of its history is its limited supply on a yearly basis; it is not easily increased.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 11:59 AM, park94 wrote:
Jeez another gold fear monger, Gold is a mineral just like copper, titanium, silver. And No it does not have any super powers, it cannot fly and it might save you from inflation but it's more in the way an old stamp collection can, through rarety value.
Gold is industrially uselesss, and it's main use is jewelry. The thing is that it's basically controlled by a monopoly that owns all the gold mines, that puts it's own price on it's own assets. So they could pretty much charge whatever they wanted 100, 1000,3000$ but they also have to convince gullible people to pay for it, Hence, the kings used gold argument.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 12:47 PM, notafoollikeyou wrote:
I can see why fool is in the name of this site if your writers show their ignorance as is displayed in this article.
Any sane person will have gold and silver in their portfolio. Not an excessive amount, but as 22 of the top 24 hedge fund managers have personally bought gold this year so should everyone.
Gold has been money for thousands of years and will hold its value far better than worthless pieces of paper called stocks and FR$, especially when govt's are hell bent on debasing their fiat currencies.
Gold has increased in value by about 45% in the past ten years while the stock market at 10,000 in 2001 vs 10,000 today has lost 25% of its purchasing power. Which would you rather own?
I guess you think the Asians and especially Chinese are stupid for accumulating gold and even encouraging their citizens to buy it if they thought the value would decline? This demand alone would offset any paltry 5% increase in production (which I seriously doubt). At present mine production if every person on earth wanted just 1 oz of gold it would take 1,500 years to supply it.
You really should not be writing negatively about things you obviously have no knowledge of and quoting Buffet and Kitco (Nadler is beyond a gold bear and always wrong). hardly makes you an expert, but a true fool.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Anadultmale wrote:
Great article! Finally a writer gets his t's crossed and i's dotted. When everyone get's in the boat, it going to sink. Over 2 million ounces per month are sold. So go read Frank Holmes's part of Goldwatcher and know that industry uses gold alot (in tons per year) every year. Well the Chinese may not be totally stupid, because $15 million get 51% of Firstgold. Sure come December first is Chinese as the boss, where the gold bars will be rolling out the door and swinning to China. Where by Gold when you can buy the Gold mine. Real smart America and/or California. Give away the house it's empty anyways
It's the dollar slide that is part to blame. How much longer can the billions get pushed into Gold? I'll give it as a Christmas gift, a great big drop in price. Smarter players know which mining stock to play short. Look at the P/E and be shocked like I was. I've seen stock price moving wildly lately. Have you?
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 2:56 PM, ET69 wrote:
Boy! Emotional responses. Apparently Mr. Wiederman has touched a nerve ! Lets get a few facts clear about atomic #79 AU. First it has many industrial uses in dentistry and electronics and not just for jewelry. It is a transition metal and is very resistant to corrosion eg, nitric acid will dissolve silver but not gold- yet another reason it is more valuable.It is the most malleable metal. It can be argued that golds value is based as much on its industrial uses as on any psychological or scarcity value.
As an emergency holding of last resort in social chaos it is probably not as valuable as bottles of alcohol or food stuffs or guns and ammo. Silver is probably more useful as a trade medium. In short gold is over valued.
During the melt down last spring I bought the aforementioned as security and not gold. As far ar the argument that hedge manager bought it and therefore so should you ...well now THAT WOULD BE FOOLISH !
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 4:34 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
First off, I'm glad to see so many readers with such varying comments. I also wanted to add my own 2 cents to a few things...
xetn,
You said 'Unfortunately, you do not understand what gold is; it is not an investment, it is money, real money.'
Sure, it used to be, back in the times of the Romans and even when the dollar was pegged to gold... but no longer, I'm afraid.
And even 'doomsday scenarios' of the world going to hell and currencies becoming useless seem highly unlikely. Each country's government has a vested interest in maintaining its currency, and they will do all they can to continue generating demand for it, even if it is inherently worthless.
Secondly, people ARE 'investing' in gold, not just using it as money. They believe it is a reasonably safe spot for their cash (or as an alternative for their cash) and that it is likely to rise over time. That's an investment, plain and simple.
Bottom line, I don't think we're going back to gold as a real form of money anytime soon... so speculating in gold is not a smart move for long-term wealth generation.
notafoollikeyou,
You said 'as 22 of the top 24 hedge fund managers have personally bought gold this year so should everyone.'
That argument makes no sense at all.
Many hedge funds dabbled in CDOs and MBSs before the financial meltdown -- and you can see where that got them. Following the 'elite' as so many believe hedge fund managers to be is often a really dumb move. They're 100% fallible.
You also said 'At present mine production if every person on earth wanted just 1 oz of gold it would take 1,500 years to supply it.'
Do you have a source for that fact? Even assuming that fact is 100% correct, the thinking there is flawed because it fails to account for the astoundingly high amount of gold that already has been extracted from the ground. I decided not to mention scrap gold much in my article, but the number of people who choose to sell their scrap gold when gold prices rise skyrockets. So even if miners can't get the gold out of the ground quick enough (and, again, I'm not convinced you're 100% right about that lag time), if the demand for gold rises high enough, there will ALWAYS be those willing to sell gold they already have, thereby really making miners only slightly necessary to the supply/demand equation.
You also said 'You really should not be writing negatively about things you obviously have no knowledge of and quoting Buffet and Kitco.'
First, you misspelled Buffett's name... But typos aside, I have followed Buffett for years, am an investor in Berkshire Hathaway, and have studied his historic moves pretty closely, so I don't think you're warranted in making this statement.
ET69,
You said 'it has many industrial uses in dentistry and electronics and not just for jewelry.' That is certainly true and I'm not trying to deny it...
You also said 'It can be argued that golds value is based as much on its industrial uses as on any psychological or scarcity value.' Perhaps... but again, the bottom line is that it's a commodity whose value is contingent on supply and demand, whether demand be jewelry, or industrial uses... Real demand for gold has fallen (and shows no meaningful signs of reversing), while prices continue to rise.
Thanks again, everyone, for your comments... keep 'em comin!
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 4:38 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
And one last thing, I'm curious whether those who have commented (or those who will comment) actually have a vested interest in gold.
That is, do you own a gold ETF, etc.?
For full disclosure, I personally own no gold other than my wedding band. Which is probably not too surprising after reading the article.
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 5:33 PM, notafoollikeyou wrote:
Adam
There is little to be accomplished by trying to eduate you about investments since you are unwilling to educate yourself about various asset classes, but you should checkout Goldseek,com. Admittedly it is somewhat overwhelmed with gold bugs, but there is also tons of useful iformation and real facts about gold there.
I would never tell anyone to put all of their assets in gold, but a reasonable allocation makes a lot of sense and I hardly think you have more knowledge than most large hedge fund managers and what they do with their personal money.
How can you have such faith in worthless stock certificates that have a value detrmined by some market maker. Maybe you have already forgotten Oct 08 and March 09, but they will happen again and that can easily plunge big company stocks to zero like GM and many more.
I notice you also failed to explain why the DOW is down 25% in purchasing power over the last ten years and you apparently think that is a good investment compared to gold that has appreciated substantially during that time.
I also find it interesting that you own none of the stocks reco'd in your own article
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 7:50 PM, masterN17 wrote:
Wow, an anti-gold article from the Fool! Good read. Keep the diverse analysis coming.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 8:17 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
I have to say this is one of the most un-educated articles I have read on TMF. If one of your statements is false, they all may be false. As has been pointed out India bought 200 tons of Gold last week. I am pretty sure they are not a territory of the U.S. Nor is China. Nor is Sri Lanka. Not sure what you think is going to happen to the dollar, but a little lesson- as the dollar falls, gold goes up. Repeat after me, dollar falls, gold rises. And in the end, there is no place for the dollar to go but down. Short term- sure it may go up. But at the end of the day- when the Feds are done playing their games, the true value of things like real estate, gold, silver, stocks will become apparent. There is nothing natural about the market anymore. The government is doing everything it can to prevent the inevitable. Anyone who thinks otherwise will pay dearly. And I will sell you my gold that I have purchased every year for 6 years and will continue to do. And you can use your dollars that you so much believe in. And then- I will sell you my mining stocks when you finally come around. I assume you own life insurance, perhaps disability insurance..... why? that does not pay you back unless you have a whole life policy. Good luck- you will need it.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 8:30 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
Another point- please name a time when gold was not money? When you couldn't go trade your gold for U.S. Dollars? It has an exchange rate for a reason. As do currencies, other commodities, etc. There is a value to it. I don't see an exchange rate for my house, my t.v., my car. Please- tell us what is supporting the almighty dollar? Gold has history on its side- thousands of years. The dollar has history against it. Name one fiat currency that has survived and thrived forever? Think about it- gold is still as relevant today as it was 5000 years ago. Please please - keep waiting to buy gold- when mania buying hits, I will on my way out. Remember the tech boom, the real estate boom. There will be a gold boom and people will get crushed.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 8:40 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
Another point...:) You talk about supply and demand of gold like it is oil- like they just turn on the spigot....It is getting harder and harder to find mineable gold. Just because they find it does not mean it is profitable. They have every incentive right now to mine as much gold as they can- being that it is at record prices. But gold is still going up. But the easy gold is getting harder and harder to find. There are geographic issues, political issues, etc that you have no clue about. Mining is obscenely expensive. Guess what happens if the credit markets freeze up and mining companies can't get loans to continue exploration? That is one reason why gold got clobbered (in addition to liquidity issues for hedge funds, etc) last year. Most gold mines are worthless. You vastly underestimate the demand of gold during a monetary crisis. I strongly suggest you do your research about what was one of the most profitable stock sectors during the depression. Guess what??? gold mining stocks, which increased about 5-6 times in value. Ever wonder why gold was made illegal to own in 1933? Please answer that question for everyone- because GOLD = REAL MONEY. Otherwise it would not have been illegal. I could go own forever..
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 8:47 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
And comparing gold to Bernie Madoff?? You have clearly lost your mind..... And when did BuffeTT make that statement? Was it before its run up from $250/ounce to almost $1110/ounce? Do you think he would laugh at making four times your money in an 8 year period? By the way- Jim Rogers is not saying gold is the best value right now. He thinks it will likely hit $2000 an ounce in the next decade. He thinks sugar is a better deal now, silver, etc.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 10:36 PM, dc46and2 wrote:
''gold remains well below last winter's peaks when priced in pounds, euros, yen, or Swiss francs.' This indicates that it is solely Americans speculating on gold's rise.'
The logic of this statement is deeply flawed. If, as you posit, the rising dollar price of gold was wholly caused by American speculation, there would be arbitrage profits in buying gold in Euros et al, selling in Dollars, and then exchanging back to the original currency. This action would keep the price of gold in various currencies in approximately the same relation as the exchange rates for those currencies. The only thing that the quoted statement could logically indicate is the devaluation of the dollar.
Notwithstanding that flaw, I agree that viewing gold as an investment is foolish. Gold is not productive, it just sits there. In contrast, a good business produces things of value. Additionally, the business itself grows and becomes more valuable which will be reflected in the value of its stock.
Gold may, however, be useful to an investor, provided he doesn't have any illusions about what it is or what it is good for. Others have said that 'gold is money' and this view is more accurate than the view that gold is an investment. If you claim to have made a profit on gold, you must admit that it was either due to speculation or inflation. If it was speculation, then you ought to remember that speculative bubbles don't last forever. If it was due to inflation, then you have not really profited at all--the true value of the gold hasn't changed.
In a good business, intelligent men combine the power of their mind with wisely invested capital and create wealth. Gold is merely a medium of exchange or a temporary store of wealth. Use gold wisely, but don't stop investing in good businesses when the price is right.
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 12:36 AM, jennifergmd wrote:
i agree with your statement- however, you are discounting the gold manic phase of buying that will happen. in a rational world- i agree with you about it keeping pace with inflation. but a rational world it will not remain forever. if i am wealthier than i would have been with stocks over that same period, it is actually wealthier. and over the last 10 years- you would be wealthier for having gold. but you make the real money in gold stocks... that is where fortunes are made
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 12:47 AM, akutach wrote:
TMFDonauschwaben My question went unanswered if you'd be willing to take a shot at it. You said demand for gold was down 20% in the last year. I agree with your first point that when speculative demand significantly outstrips physical demand for gold then you have entered a true bubble. Was that 20% drop economic in nature because people stopped buying so much jewelry (I assume this is the bulk of the physical gold demand), or because prices went so high that jewelers knew they couldn't pass price increases onto customers? To answer this, what has happened to physical gold demand in the latest quarter? Is it thawing with the global economy or gone further down as you might suggest based on further increases in dollar denominated gold?
To answer your question I'm long GLD. I admit the position is speculative. I have a lot of faith in people's tendency to create bubbles, and my expectations of reward are not so high.
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 8:17 AM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
notafoollikeyou,
First off, no need to go down an insulting path, as fired up as you may be. No good comes from that.
Secondly, 'a reasonable allocation makes a lot of sense.' I still stand by my argument that it makes no sense -- it's a long-term money-losing venture.
You also said 'I hardly think you have more knowledge than most large hedge fund managers and what they do with their personal money' -- maybe, maybe not. We'll see who made the right call soon.
You also said 'How can you have such faith in worthless stock certificates that have a value detrmined [sic] by some market maker.' First off, as a shareholder in select companies, it's not the 'stock certificate' I own, but a share of a company's profits. And I firmly believe that the companies I own have a brighter long-term future in growing those earnings than speculators in gold have in driving up false demand in gold ETFs.
As for your comment about the Dow, what would you have said in 2007? There have been all sorts of times in stock market history when the ten-year trailing return is negative... and you know what? They turned out to be the best times to get into the market, not into gold.
And you're right, I don't own any of those stocks. But that doesn't lessen my argument at all.
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 8:24 AM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
jennifergmd,
It sounds like you've fully bought in to the whole doomsday economy scenario and the complete collapse of the dollar (I admit, the dollar will struggle -- but a complete collapse and fall of our currency and our country in general is an absurd idea) and there's not much convincing I can do to talk some sense into such an impassioned critic.
But yes, the whole gold as a solid investment right now amounts to more than nothing but a giant Ponzi scheme a la Madoff. Gold has been a useless investment for the past two hundred years, so why do you think that all of a sudden that is going to change? Costs of mining gold were expensive back then... it was a rare commodity back then... the U.S. was beginning to take on what seemed like momentous levels of debt back then... and yet still -- after taxes, investors in gold lost money.
But again, thanks for sharing your thoughts.
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 8:43 AM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
akutach,
Sorry I didn't answer your question earlier.
Just to restate, you said 'Was that 20% drop economic in nature because people stopped buying so much jewelry (I assume this is the bulk of the physical gold demand), or because prices went so high that jewelers knew they couldn't pass price increases onto customers? To answer this, what has happened to physical gold demand in the latest quarter? Is it thawing with the global economy or gone further down as you might suggest based on further increases in dollar denominated gold?'
Looking at the latest-available quarterly numbers right now. For Q2 09, jewelry consumption (the largest source of global gold demand) was down 22%, industrial and dental demand was down 21%... yet gold as an investment was up 46% -- driven most largely by people pouring money into ETFs (up 1,315%!). All of these numbers are from the World Gold Council, specifically this link: http://www.gold.org/assets/file/value/stats/statistics/pdf/D... You will have to register there to see that PDF, but I definitely recommend it if you're interested in following gold supply/demand trends in an easy manner.
And you're right to think that the diminishing demand for gold is in part because of the rising prices, as well as the overall economic condition. Which is part of the problem with a long-term gold investment... if the price of gold goes up ten-fold -- even five-fold from its price today, you can bet that demand for real gold usage (most largely driven by jewelry use) is going to plummet.
I also appreciate your disclosure about gold, 'I admit the position is speculative. I have a lot of faith in people's tendency to create bubbles, and my expectations of reward are not so high.' You sound like you know the risk/rewards nature, which makes you sound like the wisest and even-tempered gold investor that has commented so far.
Thanks for commenting!
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 11:06 AM, CoyoteMoney wrote:
People invented money because gold simply wasn't practical enough. When you think seriously about the problems supply, of security and of assaying, the disadvantages become pretty clear.
Not surprisingly, there was a big run up in gold as part of the 1980's recession as well. If you'd bought gold near that peak you didn't get your money back for a very long time.
People pay too much for a FatHead of their favorite althlete, brag about it, and in the end they get a big poster of a future has been. In the modern world gold is just a commodity, and this my fellow Fools is just another bubble.
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 12:55 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
When you talk about a decrease in gold demand of 20%- it sounds like you are only considering industral uses. You are not taking into account demand as a monetary or inflation hedge.
I am shocked that you think the dollar won't collapse at some point, whether it be 10 years, 20 years etc. You simply have little understanding of the economic situation at hand. I shorted GM from $50 a share down to the last penny. I don't recall you suggesting GM will likely go bankrupt. What do you think will happen with our debt situation? Our debt payments are huge right now as a country. What do you think will happen when interest rates rise? Inflation is a foregone conclusion down the road. What will our debt payments look like when that happens? It was the same thing with GM. They had to borrow money just to pay their operating costs for 20 years. Then when their credit rating was lowered and their borrowing costs increased- it was game over. The U.S. is in the same boat. They just have more room for error because the dollar is the world currency reserve.
I have spent 20 years studying as a physician. Most doctors make bad investors because they forget that it took years to become good at what they did and get cocky. I study the economy relentlessly. And I promise I study it more than you. Your complete lack of knowledge regarding the economy is appalling. And your ignorance about gold is even worse. Which would be fine if you didn't influence others.
You can just say that the dollar collapsing is absurd without offering any evidence to support it. Of course- buying at the peak of anything is a bad idea. But we are not at the peak of gold right now. You are talking historically about gold as an investment. Yet if you had accumulated gold over the last 8 years- you would have done quite well. If you had taken a little money each year and bought gold every year for the last 20 years, you would have done well with that.
Your blind spot is that thinking that something hasn't happened before means that it will never happen. We have had a depression before in this country. There is no reason to think it can't happen again. We are all under the impression that the Fed has the ability to stop a depression. That is the biggest fallacy out there. They just have the ability to delay it.
I am well invested in all sectors of the economy. I am just ready to pull it out when the time comes.
I encourage you to lose the ego you have of what you think is right. And start basing your investment ideas on sounder principles. Good luck to you.
Brian
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 1:03 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
Coyote Money
-Please understand- if you buy anything at the peak- it will be bad. Gold is not unique in that way. Think back to the tech or real estate bubble. The problem is that most people when it comes to investing are like lemmings. They follow the herd. It is the contrarians that figure this out much earlier. It is the contrarians that are already out by the time everyone else is jumping in. From 2005-2007, I wouldn't have touched real estate for all of the tea in china. And I certainly would not have taken equity out of my house to pay for anything that was not an emergency. Yet people continued to buy real estate and use their equity as an ATM.
The key in any investment is to be in before anyone else is and to get out as close to the top as possible.
Regarding gold- I consider it an ounce of prevention- quite literally. The pound of cure will be obscenely expensive.
By the way- I view gold as mainly as insurance. Silver on the other hand- will be where the money is at...
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 1:21 PM, wuff3t wrote:
'Your blind spot is that thinking that something hasn't happened before means that it will never happen.'
That's a reasonable point, but by the same token isn't it also possible that everyone could wake up one day and think 'Hey, why am I investing my money in this stuff that doesn't really DO anything...'
Yes, yes, I know gold has industrial uses but that's not why anyone invests in the stuff. As you yourself state, it's insurance; a hedge-bet. But underlying that is a self-fulfilling prophecy - that gold is valuable just because enough people say it is, and not because it has any intrinsic value. If tastes changed overnight (highly unlikely) it would be just as easy for the whole world to agree that actually gold was just a heavy, cumbersome waste of money and we'd all been mad to ever think it was otherwise. And this new mindset would be no more right or wrong than the current one.
When Cortes invaded South America the Conquistadores couldn't believe how much gold the Aztecs had lying around. The Aztecs, for their part, handed over as much of it as the Spaniards wanted. Previously they had largely ignored it, as they couldn't see any value in it, and they were startled that the Spanish did. I guess this is my blind spot as far as gold is concerned: it's not that I can't see why some people think it is a good investment, it just seems antithetical to me to try to value my other investments based on their fundamental, intrinsic worth - then invest in something that has so little intrinsic value.
Like I say, it's my personal blind spot, and I'm not even convinced I'm doing myself any favours by thinking this way! I just know what I feel comfortable with, and investing in something that people like just because it's 'all shiny' doesn't sit well with me.
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 3:54 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
jennifergmd,
You continue to cite the high debt load of the U.S. as the reason for future inflation, and why gold makes a smart play because of that…
I’m not arguing with you that the debt load of the U.S. is quite frightening. However, you're forgetting that there are countries on the other side of the equation... those to whom we owe the debt. They have a vested interest in the dollar NOT collapsing to the ground, since that is the only way they will get their invested money back. I agree with you that it doesn't seem like the U.S. dollar will be in high demand until the end of time, but I don't agree with you that any collapse is as imminent as you are convinced. Until we pay off all our foreign debtors, they still have an interest in seeing the dollar as a currency in reasonable demand.
Furthermore, if you have studied the economy as intensely as you are indicating, how do you account for all the other times in American history when the debt level was at unprecedented levels? When fear and panic were just as widespread as it was today? And the fact that our country and our economy did not collapse?
Let’s start with the Panic of 1819 which looks VERY similar to what we’re in today. It resulted in foreclosures, bank failures, high unemployment and a decline in both agricultural and manufacturing production. It was made worse by the high level of foreign goods we were importing. It looked like the new country of America was destined for failure. But 4 years later, the country had again found its footing and continued its journey to the top of the world.
The Panic of 1837 saw another bubble burst and ensuing years of inflation, but again… it did not slow America down.
Then we go to the Panic of 1857, which again began with a recession and led to more bank failures, and a stock market that dropped over 60%… British investors got nervous that the U.S. wouldn’t be able to repay its debt. What’s worse, the panic began to spread to Europe and throughout the entire world. But again, this did not slow America’s long-term trajectory down…
And it goes on and on, with the Panic of 1873, the Panic of 1893, the Great Depression, etc., etc…
One could argue that U.S. economic history has been nothing more than a set of bubbles forming, bursting, and then causing widespread panic. Fear of the U.S. not being able to repay its debts has accompanied every single panic, and yet we’ve still be able to continue trucking along, fighting off this fear, and grow to have the world’s highest GDP on a nominal and PPP basis!
So, what say you about that?
And again, I’m not trying to inject an “ego” into my rebuttal, as you continue to assert. I’m just putting the facts out there, Doc!
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 6:33 PM, notafoollikeyou wrote:
I must say I read many comments on here and am amazed at the lack of knowledge and insight of most posters. There are too many outlandish statements to rebut, but a few bits of reality are necessary.
Obviously everyone wants to believe that the US is strong and mighty and it is an economic powerhouse, but it is a dieing one. That means the currency must be devalued and when our debt faces default (or masive currency printing to avoid it) and we need to borrow trillions just to survive something has to give.
I almost have to laugh as people rip gold as a useless asset, which it is any many ways, but when is the last time you ate your stock certificates or put them in your car to make it run? What could be a greater ponz scheme than the US stock market? A company prints a piece of paper and sells it to an 'investor'. The investor rarely even sees his certificate (unlike gold cons in my safe). The companies rarely even pay dividends and it would take a long time to ever recover your investment even if they did. The only increase in value is to find another sucker to pay more for the stock than you did and it can easily go to zero value if no one wants to buy it. And then you have the nerve to say Gold is a risky asset class.
I won't even go into discussing the value of the US $ that has declined 94% in purchasing power over the last roughly 100 years and has much further to follow, but it is no different than any other worthless piece of paper if no one will accept and more countries want nothing to do with it.
I am no Greenspan lover, but even he gets the concept of gold now:
Greenspan said today at an investment conference in New York. Rising prices of precious metals and other commodities are “an indication of a very early stage of an endeavor to move away from paper currencies,” he said..What is being proven is the extent to which gold still holds reign over the financial system as the ultimate source of payment,” Greenspan said.
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 8:19 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
Adam,
To think that we have any chance of paying our debt back is crazy. It will never happen. There is no way it will ever be paid back. Not even if interest rates stay at nearly 0. You should do the math- calculate our debt payments at 0% interest, 1, 2,3 ,4, ...8% interest. Name one country that has ever spent its way out of this amount of debt. It can't and won't happen. Yes, our creditors have a vested interest in getting their money back. Creditors would like their money back from many companies that fail. That does not make it happen. Those who lent us money so that we could keep buying their goods will pay a price as well.
We went from the largest lender to the largest borrower nation in the world over a 30 year period.
I did not say the collapse of the dollar is going to happen next month, next year, etc . It may happen in 10 years, 20 years, etc. But collapse it will. And I also did not say I have all of my money in gold or silver. I have enough in silver and gold to protect myself against a depression or hyperinflation. I will also have other ways of protecting myself as well- such as ETFs that short long bonds, etc. Do dismiss precious metals as a ponzi scheme is misplaced. I would never have all assets in one category.
You mentioned that the demand for gold is decreasing. The IMF had 400 Tons of gold on the block. The fear was that this would flood the market. India stepped up and bought 200 tons. Please explain how that suggests a lack of demand. And why India would buy that much gold? Why wouldn't they buy more U.S. treasuries if gold is such a bad deal? It implies a loss of confidence in the U.S. dollar. Plain and simple. I doubt you understand the manipulative forces involved in the gold and silver market. For instance, which investment banking firm controls the majority of the gold and silver short contracts? Do you know how much above ground silver there is in the world?
I assume that you have life or disability insurance, correct? If you do- why do you own it? For me, gold is simply insurance. I can sleep at night knowing that if (or when) hell breaks loose, I will not have to worry. And you cannot deny we were on the verge of financial collapse last year. And now- we have paid a dear price to avoid a depression. What will happen if there is another crisis?
We have not reached a bubble in gold yet. I challenge everyone reading this post to go ask 10 people if they have personally bought gold or silver bullion- either in physical metal or ETf. I have asked at least 100 people- and not one has done so. How does that represent a bubble. Everyone had owned some tech stocks, or bought a house etc. But not more than 1 in 25 or less has actually bought gold or silver . And that does not even include the mining stocks. People will get slaughtered in the mining stocks when the bubble peaks. There are only a few decent ones out there. No offense- when the bubble forms and then pops- TMF will be contributing to it as well. Your company has sold advertising space at the top of their home page to a gold mutual fund.
I would never think of giving my patients half-baked advice. I hope you will do your homework and then report back to us.
Just answer one question- why did India buy gold? And the answer is not for jewelry or dental fillings I can assure you.
Hope you had a good weekend,
Brian
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 8:29 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
Here is the link to a company that pays part of your salary..... I would not want to buy a full position in gold at these prices. I would probably try to average in over the next few months or so depending on one's level of concern. But some gold at these levels is better than no gold. I am also not saying that there won't be a correction in gold or silver in the near term. But when you look at how much we lose each year in insurance, is it that big of a deal if gold drops 20% in the near term? It would just make me load up some more. I am also not arguing that a bubble in gold will not develop. It absolutely will. We are just not there yet. When your next door neighbor tells you about the gold mining stock he just tripled his money on- that will be a sign of a bubble about to burst.
http://www.usfunds.com/our-funds/our-mutual-funds/gold-and-p...
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 10:57 PM, notafoollikeyou wrote:
As an Add on for all of you investors, and especially Adam, that think stocks are a better investment than gold, I hope you are aware that you do not even own the stock you have paid for (unless you physically hold the certificate in your hands - not even allowed by many companies) and no where does your name appear on the companies records. You are totally at the mercy of The Depository Trust Company (DTC) and most investors do not know if they are solvent, will stay solvent, are honest and trustworthy, or worse yet if they have any record of you.
The DTC owns that bond or stock, not you. Rather than in your name, it's registered (as the legal Registered Owner or agent) in their 'street name', Cede & Company.
The DTC is the Registered Owner - holder - of your stock or bond. The DTC is the legal property-holder, share-holder, stock-holder, owner and purchaser. Your name appears nowhere on the book entry or certificate as the actual owner. Instead, you have been designated by the legal registered owner, the DTC, as the Beneficial Owner. This means that your lawful Rights in that stock or bond are confined to that of a successor or heir. The difference between an owner and a beneficiary is like night and day. Take the time to absorb and understand the definitions:
In these troubled times fraught with fraud, gov't intervention and Wall Street crooks this should be worrisome to most investors. Meanwhile I sleep well knowing my gold is in my safe.
*
Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 9:22 AM, jennifergmd wrote:
Adam,
The only point I needed to make about gold= money is:
If gold is not money, then why was the dollar backed by gold for so many years? It was not backed by flat screen tv's, hummers, oil, etc. It was not because of a lack of value that nixon took us off of the gold standard in the early 70's. It was so we could recklessly print our money and use the devalued dollar to allow our deficit spending. Prior to that time, trade deficits had to be settled up with gold.
I hope you have the courage to admit your lack of insight regarding the issue in which you tried to influence your readers. I believe you have a fiduciary responsibility here.
Best,
brian
*
Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 10:18 AM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
jennifergmd,
You just said 'For me, gold is simply insurance.' I think that sums up your argument pretty nicely -- and where we are at odds. Perhaps you've simply misunderstood my article from the beginning. After all, if gold is an insurance policy for you (which you claim it is), then ok, fine, that's what it is for you.
However, I don't consider purchasing an insurance policy investing... it's merely something you have purchased as a safeguard, with no assurance of making an above-average return on your capital.
However, the whole point of my argument and this article is that gold makes a horrible investment. You can't expect it to pay you regular dividends, and can't reasonably expect it to rise in value (unless you're speculating, which -- again -- is not investing).
You also said, 'I hope you have the courage to admit your lack of insight regarding the issue in which you tried to influence your readers. I believe you have a fiduciary responsibility here.'
I firmly believe that those individuals who are trying to 'invest' in gold are making a big mistake, and that is why I wrote this article, and I stand behind my opinion. Of course, any individual is free to disagree with my opinions. But I am entitled to have my beliefs just as you are entitled to have yours. Even though I don't believe your opinions are correct, there is still a possibility that your opinions turn out to make more money than mine... and even if you don't believe my opinions are correct, you must likewise accept that there is a possibility that my opinions will turn out to make more money than yours. Investing is never an adventure in certain outcomes (which is why there's a whole risk-reward trade off)... so neither one of us can be 100% certain our predictions will come to light.
I think you've made your point and your opinions pretty clear for whomever wishes to read it, so I don't think we need to continue our back and forth any more. I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors, most especially with your insurance policy of gold.
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 11:46 AM, Doccus wrote:
I think the facts speak for themselves. Rather than worry about who's 'right', the very fact that gold's going up solely because of investments, rather than use (and it DOES have some industrial uses), is worrying enough.
I got from the article, i think , what it was meant to convey.
Thank you...
*
Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 3:31 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
Point taken...I am sorry if I misunderstood your initial point....Passionate views can often be....well, passionate. I hope everyone can come out a winner .....
*
Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 6:25 PM, polomora wrote:
Just read this message posted to the Metals & Mining board here on the MF:
http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=28082319
*
Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 8:16 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
jennifergmd,
No worries -- it was a fun and lively debate! :-)
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 1:54 AM, joandrose wrote:
Jennifergmd
I retired early from corporate management. My income is now sourced entirely through my investments and like most, also suffered wounds over the past two years ! Big learning curve that .....
For what it's worth - think you have got a better understanding of the value of gold relative to fiat currency debate - than 90% of other correspondents. Well done - excellent contribution.
Joseph
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 2:05 AM, biofest wrote:
Thanks for commonsense on gold.You have a lot of patience to reply to people like 'notafoollikeyou' who seems both arrogant and insulting.To quote him -'There is little to be accomplished by trying to eduate you about investments'.
I have been investing for fifty years and have substantially outperformed gold although I must confess to having invested in gold mines from time to time.
My major investment theme is companies with substantial investment in R&D although I have a weakness for forest product companies with lots of land.
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 9:02 AM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
It's not often I find myself agreeing with Nouriel Roubini, but here's a recent interview that readers of this article would like find interesting: http://www.hardassetsinvestor.com/features-and-interviews/18...
Some good quotes:
'[S]ome of the increase—even in precious metals—is not justified by fundamentals. The supply looks excessive, and it looks like part of a bubble'
'But those people who delude themselves that gold can go to $1,500 or $2,000 are just talking nonsense. The fundamentals are not justified, and those people are just talking their books.'
Amen, Roubini!
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 11:48 AM, scherniak wrote:
'The market will fluctuate.' - J.P. Morgan
http://yieldpig.blogspot.com/
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 11:52 AM, c0ffeen0te wrote:
I personally don't like to trade / investment based on somebody else's view...lacking inherent utility (with apologies to the dentists and jewelers) the price of gold is dependent upon those who believe it has/will retain value. I myself had a brief/unhappy fling with gold stocks in the late 90's.
To protect myself against the decline in the dollar, I try to find reasonable investments in global or non-US based companies that I think have inherent value. Also inflation-linked bonds which sadly I entered much too soon...yeah everybody says we will have inflation but when? Tough to have inflation with tepid demand.
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 4:33 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
c0ffeen0te,
I agree with you that foreign companies (and U.S. companies with a global footprint) are a good way to diversify against any potential danger facing the U.S.
Thanks for your comments!
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 6:53 PM, montecorp wrote:
The question remains:
Why did India buy so much gold??
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 7:14 PM, stockmenot wrote:
We are in uncharted territory when it comes to our economy and it scares me. There are several ships about to collide, and one thing that is not being discussed is food and water.
I think montecorp's question is a good one....but for different reason's. When it comes to a worldwide slowdown, it doesn't matter how pretty gold is, you can't eat or drink it. And if we are all in the same trouble wolrdwide, there's no one to buy that gold. Gold then is only as valuable as paper. And Russian money during the depression was more valuable burned for heat.
What can we invest in that is absolutely fool proof....something we all need....food or water?
How can you safely invest, and in what?
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 10:20 PM, montecorp wrote:
Stockmenot, we're not all in the same trouble worldwide; the world's countries' problems are connected but not completely interdependent on each other. China has the largest manufacturing base and the largest population, as well as a much higher savings rate. They're also very smart and I'm sure they have a plan. An obvious one would be to focus their manufacturing capabilities toward Asia, India, Europe, Brasil, etc. and to stop financing our largess with their savings, to stop accepting our IOUs as anything of value and instead focus the fruits of their labor toward their own people. Give their people prosperity in the form of convenience (that we've come to expect as entitlement) as a value in exchange for part of their massive savings (note: NOT in exchange for DEBT).
The US could very well default on their IOUs. Really, how are we going to pay those trillions back? Seriously??? Then what? Short-term mayhem guaranteed and also long-term irreversible ramifications. AMERO, anyone?? (sure, it prob won't be called the Amero, but suffice it to say the dollar will be replaced with something else- or maybe someone is willing to suggest our current unprecedented situation will somehow magically end up without a currency failure? Adam, in all of your historical references, could you also please overlay the currencies that failed in our country's history? All of those were just freak incidents, right?
Back to Gold. Gold is the perfect medium of exchange, which is why it will always have value. It has all kinds of practical purposes for the storing of value.
Let's start from scratch, as if we were all on an island and had to create an economy (or if we suddenly found ourselves without a dependable fiat instrument to trade with each other).....
If I had pigs and you had grain, we could only trade if you needed pigs and I needed grain. That's called double-coincidental demand. If I didn't need grain and that's all you had, then I wouldn't trade you my pigs and you'd go without meat or find someone else who had a surplus of pigs and needed grain. But what about the guy down the street who has the best tomatoes and doesn't want either of our things? I want those tomatoes! Surely we can work out a deal here....
We would soon determine that we needed a medium of exchange that had a value we could rely on. It would preferably not rot, not be destroyed, not be faked, not be easily moved/stolen, not be replicated ad infinitum by someone whom I don't know nor did grant that authority, and so on.
We could use seashells or pebbles, but they're all different from each other in weight (no standardization, no divisability) and just lying around everywhere, and we certainly wouldn't want someone finding a beach full of seashells and then coming back and buying up all of our pigs and grain and basically becoming a central banker and enslaving us (or creating hyperinflation by their sudden flooding of currency in the marketplace, assuming they weren't able to totally monopolize the scene).
We'd try different things, but I assert to you that ultimately (if it were available) we would evolve into a gold-based currency system. It just fits the bill of all the needs that a dependable currency demands. Those demands are basically 1) store of value, 2) standard unit of measure, and 3) and agreed upon unit of exchange. You can't have an economy without those things. You can't save money, insulate yourself from this year's crop failure, or invest in new businesses, or borrow money to build a house/farm/water-treatment-plant/school, or feel secure that someone won't undermine your currency or all your hard work.
I can postulate further, but gold is more than just a shiny metal. It has intrinsic value in its ability to function as a currency and therefore enable economies.
I'm still curious, why did India buy all of that gold? Any of you big-heads should certainly have an idea that they could share.....
-Monty
*
Report this Comment On November 11, 2009, at 7:54 AM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
Pretty interesting chart: http://static.businessinsider.com/~~/f?id=4afaa8c40000000000...
Quite frankly, I think the fact that the largest gold ETF now outranks the largest EAFE ETF furthers my point...
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 11, 2009, at 7:53 PM, eekthecat wrote:
You people who are so unhappy about fiat currencies... gold IS a fiat currency. It has some value, yes, for industrial purposes. But its value now is much higher than its intrinsic value, and with the way you people are thinking of it, it is essentially the same thing as a fiat currency, because you are placing value in it that it doesn't really have. The simple act of using something as a means of exchange turns it into a fiat currency, because it is purely by fiat that gold becomes a means of exchange. Because look, what can I or you do with gold? I can't do anything with it. To me, it is totally useless. The only reason it has value is that there are some people who can do something with it (i.e. industry). But, the price these days has little to do with those people who have an actual use for it, as speculation and hedging against inflation and whatnot have driven the price up well beyond what utilitarian purposes would put it at. So, you are putting value into it via fiat. If the economy were to collapse entirely, which it seems a lot of gold lovers expect it to, there would be no reason whatsoever to consider gold any more valuable than paper currency, as its industrial value would be nil, and then its value would be purely fiat. Of course its supply is finite, unlike dollars, BUT... this does not really matter... the dollar may have lost lots of value of the years while gold has not, but the total supply of VALUE in the world has always increased (i.e. the economy has always been growing). The numerical values do not matter. The dollar may be worth much less than it used to be, but the standard of living is much higher now, so why should we care about numbers, which are imaginary? Your hatred of fiat currency and your love of gold are both silly.
*
Report this Comment On November 12, 2009, at 2:01 AM, BFil wrote:
I am not sure that the US is interested in an outsiders optimistic viewpoint but here it is.
The US economy remains three times larger than the next largest. 90% of its employees are still employed after the worst recession in 80 years (try this more often - 90% employed is often the right way to look at 10% unemployed)
Practically every industry on earth has one or more formidable US competitors and it is still less dependent on international trade than any nation except North Korea. You have everything to go for.
The national debt will not melt away quickly but it does not need to.
You have massive private financial resources, a growing population, exceptional higher education, plenty of risk takers and a tradition of philanthropy.
Against all this, hoarding gold and forecasting prolonged doom is a non-starter
*
Report this Comment On November 12, 2009, at 11:20 AM, tugcapt65 wrote:
Note that India bought 200 TONS OF GOLD LAST WEEK. (at $1,100/oz. that's about $17,600 a US pound @400,000 US pounds.)I thought it was interesting that they did. I see nothing wrong with diversifying your portfolio, whether it be a country or individual, although putting all of your eggs in one basket usually is unwise, unless you're hoarding cash or cash equivalents.
In a nutshell, use basic common sense when investing...spread the risk. Everybody has their own opinions about investing in gold.
*
Report this Comment On November 12, 2009, at 1:26 PM, mic510 wrote:
'...But the consensus right now is that the best way to counteract inflation is by investing in gold.
And the consensus is dead wrong!...'
No, Mr. Weiderman, it your consensus that is dead wrong!
*
Report this Comment On November 12, 2009, at 3:38 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
mic510,
Come on, man, at least toss some facts out there if you want to rebut my argument!
-- Adam
P.S.: My last name is spelled with the 'i' before the 'e'
*
Report this Comment On November 12, 2009, at 5:41 PM, stanton17 wrote:
BFil,
Thank you for your elegant and intelligent post.
*
Report this Comment On November 12, 2009, at 9:02 PM, vriguy wrote:
India bought gold because they had some excess dollars, and the Reserve bank of India is aware that any time in the future they can sell their gold to an increasingly wealthy Indian public - whose appetite for gold is larger than the world's entire current supply.
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 10:46 AM, Joelshann wrote:
The only articles that usually get this much scuttlebutt are those that mention Sirius.
Maybe Wiederman would like to write a follow-up article called 'The New Weimar Republic: How Satellite Radio will advance a lose fiscal policy and ruin Gold holders' Then he can slam both of those at the same time.
That would make for some interesting comments.
(Disclosure: long gold, no positings in SIRI)
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 2:36 PM, pcoppney wrote:
It is the wedding season in India. The government know the value of gold, even if only in India, will go up in the short run. Which makes it a better play than dollars now. Not necessarily forever, but for now.
Gold is a commodity used as a store of value, it happens to be the most visible of them, but it is only a commodity not a magical element.
I don't know the actual cost to mine an ounce but it has to be less than $1150 so eventually the price will come down, however it may go higher before it does. I think that would meet the definition of a bubble. That fact aside, the dollar is low and gold is high, assuming the whole United States does not go out of business, it is still better to by low and sell high, right? At some point in the not to distant future you may want to look at trading some of your gold for dollars. Even if you trade it for stocks of companies valued in dollars.
In the interest of disclosure, I am long on a small gold position, and long on multiple large positions of solid value companies both US based and international.
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 3:27 PM, aaoxenfree wrote:
Question for author and commenters:
What is your opinion on the effects that the CTFC enacting commodity limits would have on the price of Precious Metals? (or energy for that matter)
Currently there are enormously concentrated short positions in PM held by one or two banks...
I began researching precious metals a couple of years ago, have realized 70% profits on my investment in silver (in at 10, out at 17), and am now torn between the 'doomsday' and 'life must go on as it always has as its in every country's best interest' scenarios similar to those presented here in the comments thread.
Thanks for your input. (I am not being snarky, seriously interested in varying opinions).
Thanks!
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 3:28 PM, aaoxenfree wrote:
also, if another crash is imminent, which has been predicted by many who say the stock market is currently in a bubble, then isn't PM the best way to keep your value liquid so you can buy up cheap stocks when they hit bottom?
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 5:24 PM, Brigadoon22 wrote:
Nice article. I am not a professional investor. I'm an engineer, aka average Joe. I find that I agree with the post. I believe gold has the potential to be one of the next bubbles to burst. I have several friends that are hell bent on buying gold for two reasons.
1) They want to protect their savings.
2) They think they can make a killing when they sell it.
Gold appears to be a logical safe haven for investments. My friends are buying gold based on fear and greed. One thing I have observed is that logic breaks down when fear hits. If gold prices start to go down they will sell when their fears overcome their greed.
When the market was going down last year my friends sold their stocks. If a downward trend hits gold I can see the gold bubble burst when the average joe begins to sell their gold. I'd love to be proven wrong on this.
For what its worth, I see commercial realestate going down before gold. I live and work near many industrial parks. There are a lot of empty buildings around.
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 6:33 PM, OhMagnificentOne wrote:
The only fools around are those who don't own gold. I have read this same non-sense about not owning gold and it demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of why gold is rallying. Gold is not just a hedge against inflation: it is a hedge aginst times of uncertainty. The price of gold is not a bubble and will not reach bubble territory for quite some time. That doesn't mean there won't be corrections but the price trend for gold is up.The fact that there are l individuals still knocking gold as an investment means there is plenty of room for the price to move higher. When Adam J. Widerman says it's time to buy gold rest assured that will be the time to sell it.
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 7:08 PM, TWOTIMETUNA wrote:
After reading most of these comments, what is the best place to put money right now?
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 7:48 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
OhMagnificentOne,
I stand by my argument that gold, at these prices, is not a smart move.
Times of uncertainty don't last forever, and this whole 'own gold in times of uncertainty' philosophy you're operating under has popped up many times in American history. And those unfortunate individuals who fell for it at the exact wrong time have lost money.
So I hope you're well-enough diversified not to be burned like your forefathers in history have been.
TWOTIMETUNA,
As my article closed out, I think both dividend-paying companies and companies with a strong international presence are the best bets for your money right now.
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 7:49 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
OhMagnificentOne,
I stand by my argument that gold, at these prices, is not a smart move.
Times of uncertainty don't last forever, and this whole 'own gold in times of uncertainty' philosophy you're operating under has popped up many times in American history. And those unfortunate individuals who fell for it at the exact wrong time have lost money.
So I hope you're well-enough diversified not to be burned like your forefathers in history have been.
TWOTIMETUNA,
As my article closed out, I think both dividend-paying companies and companies with a strong international presence are the best bets for your money right now.
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 8:01 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
A comedic blog post about a reality of gold: http://paul.kedrosky.com/archives/2009/11/the_price_of_go.ht...
By Adam J. Wiederman
November 6, 2009 | Comments (62)
Even though it has been barely two years since the last investing bubble burst, bringing companies like American International Group (NYSE: AIG), Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM), and Freddie Mac (NYSE: FRE) to their knees, there's yet another bubble forming. And I believe it will burst in 2010.
Just ahead, I'll tell you how to completely avoid it -- and present an alternate investment strategy you can adopt instead of following the crowd into this bubble.
But first, a look at this bubble and how it formed.
All that glitters
Congress is spending billions of dollars in stimulus funds to jump-start the economy. It's funded almost entirely with debt. As the national debt level rises, the dollar becomes weaker because currency investors shy away from high-debt countries. This causes higher inflation, which everyone agrees is coming.
But the consensus right now is that the best way to counteract inflation is by investing in gold.
And the consensus is dead wrong!
The problem with gold is that it's a luxury commodity. It has no coupon rate or growth prospects, and it can rise in price only as much as demand for it grows.
It's also difficult to value. Some believe the price of gold per ounce should match the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Others believe it must reflect the price of a top-tier man's suit. Still others believe it must account for global supply and demand.
In spite of this inherent confusion, many prominent investors -- John Hathaway of the Tocqueville Gold Fund, Jim Rogers of Quantum Fund fame, and even hedge fund manager David Einhorn, to name a few -- believe gold can do well right now. What's more shocking: The recent Value Investors Congress was full of lectures on how to profit in precious metals.
Even the best can be fooled
The average investor is blindly following these noteworthy men. That's why more than $12 billion of new money has been invested in the SPDR Gold Trust this year alone. I'm the first to admit that falling prey to other investors' moves is an easy pitfall -- but it can also set you up for disaster.
So what exactly are all these investors -- and their followers -- overlooking? These three facts:
1. When gold demand rises, supply does, too, which brings gold prices back down.
Fortune magazine reports that gold miners invested more than $40 billion into new projects since 2001, and they 'are now bearing fruit.' Bullion dealer Kitco 'predicts that these new mining projects will add 450 tons annually -- or 5% -- 'to the gold supply through 2014, enough to move prices lower.' The demand also brings out sellers of scrap gold, which adds even more to the supply.
All this while demand for gold has dropped 20% in the past year.
2. Gold is not just dollar-denominated.
Unlike oil, gold is bought and sold in local currencies throughout the world. The Wall Street Journal reports that 'gold remains well below last winter's peaks when priced in pounds, euros, yen, or Swiss francs.' This indicates that it is solely Americans speculating on gold's rise.
3. Gold is historically a poor investment.
Perhaps the most damning fact is that, from 1833 through 2005, gold and inflation had nearly perfect correlation, according to Forbes. This means that, after taxes, you would have actually lost money in gold.
Warren Buffett once quipped, 'It gets dug out of the ground ... Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head.'
In fact, the only way to make gold rise is to get other investors to buy into the idea -- like a giant Ponzi scheme. And as we know from watching the unraveling of Bernie Madoff's empire, this can't last forever.
Which is why buying gold today is a horrible decision -- and why investors would be better off looking elsewhere.
The absolutely best place to be looking
The best way to invest for inflation is to invest in high-yield dividend companies. Unlike gold, which has no coupon rate and no growth potential, you should be sending your investing dollars to companies that pay a dividend (which often rises) and also have both stable growth potential (which also often rises) and strong assets (in inflationary periods, assets are more valuable since they cost more to replace).
Here are four solid candidates that fit that bill, all of which have a long history of dividends -- through periods of inflation and deflation alike:
Company
Market Cap
Dividend Yield
5-Year Compounded Annual Growth Rate
of Revenue
Liabilities-to-Asset Ratio
Dividends Paid Since
ConocoPhillips (NYSE: COP)
$77.1 billion
3.8%
11.2%
60.7%
1934
Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO)
$123.4 billion
3.0%
7.3%
49.9%
1893
AT&T (NYSE: T)
$151.8 billion
6.3%
25.3%
63.2%
1881
Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG)
$168.3 billion
3.0%
9.0%
53.2%
1891
Data from Capital IQ and DividendInvestor.com.
These are exactly the sorts of dividend-paying stocks that former hedge fund analyst and current Motley Fool Income Investor advisor James Early looks for in his market-beating service. In fact, two of the stocks in that table are official recommendations of his.
In his newsletter, James has put together a 'core portfolio' of top dividend stocks, consisting of six dividend stocks he believes every investor should use as a platform to profitable dividend investing. You can see his portfolio completely free, with a 30-day trial to his newsletter as my guest today. Click here for more information.
Adam J. Wiederman owns no shares of the companies mentioned above. Coca-Cola is a Motley Fool Inside Value recommendation. Coca-Cola and Procter & Gamble are Motley Fool Income Investor recommendations. The Motley Fool owns shares of Procter & Gamble. The Fool's disclosure policy is outlined here.
2 Stocks You Must Buy Now
When Reagan signed his $750 billion stimulus plan into law in 1981, it snapped the U.S. out of a deep recession and ignited a high-tech boom... turning individual investors into millionaires overnight!
Barack Obama's stimulus plan is even bigger, laying the groundwork for the next economic boom. The Wall Street Journal calls it 'a major win for the high-tech industry.' Find out how you can profit in a free report from The Motley Fool called, 'Top 2 Stocks For Cashing In On Obama's Stimulus Plan.'
Click here to download this FREE report right now!
Comments from our Foolish Readers
Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.
*
Report this Comment On November 06, 2009, at 7:34 PM, akutach wrote:
Doesn't point number two reflect changing currency valuation from relatively strong dollar to weak over that same time period? The fact of gold-dollar peak valuation does not indicate uniquely American speculation, and the assertion is rather absurd.
If a significant imbalance of gold prices between any two currency values occurred, investors would buy gold in the cheaper currency and immediately sell in the other for a profit minus transaction prices, thus narrowing the imbalance.
The bubble will be evidenced by rising prices despite insignificant demand from physical buyers (point number 1).
How does '20% less than last year's demand' compare to the volume of speculative buying?
India and China seem to think gold is worth as much as their dollars at todays prices, and plan on buying much more than India did last week in the near future. Though their positions are probably about asset diversification rather than speculation or investment.
*
Report this Comment On November 06, 2009, at 7:49 PM, xetn wrote:
Unfortunately, you do not understand what gold is; it is not an investment, it is money, real money. The rise or drop in the dollar denominated price is really reflecting the change in value of the dollar or other currencies. As a matter of fact you state that a 5% increase in the amount of gold would cause the 'price' of gold to decline. I have to ask, just how much supply of dollars have you seen in the last 20 years? Just for a clue, since 1989 the value of the dollar has dropped over 74%. The reason that the value of gold stayed almost level (it actually only varied less that $2.00 from 1800 to 1913) is because the dollar WAS gold, silver, nickel and copper coins. It was not a bunch of worthless paper.
In a free market, money would fluctuate based on the old basic pricing system, supply and demand. In fact, the reason the value of the dollar has dropped by over 95% since the creation of the Fed is because of the continued inflation of the number of dollars since the creation of new money out of thin air; counterfeiting.
So, just to sum up, real money (for the last 5000 years) has been a commodity mostly gold whose value has been based on the supply and demand, just like all goods. Real money is nothing but a medium of exchange and will fluctuate by how much individuals value holding it vs spending it on some want or need. The reason why gold money has had a fairly stable value for most of its history is its limited supply on a yearly basis; it is not easily increased.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 11:59 AM, park94 wrote:
Jeez another gold fear monger, Gold is a mineral just like copper, titanium, silver. And No it does not have any super powers, it cannot fly and it might save you from inflation but it's more in the way an old stamp collection can, through rarety value.
Gold is industrially uselesss, and it's main use is jewelry. The thing is that it's basically controlled by a monopoly that owns all the gold mines, that puts it's own price on it's own assets. So they could pretty much charge whatever they wanted 100, 1000,3000$ but they also have to convince gullible people to pay for it, Hence, the kings used gold argument.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 12:47 PM, notafoollikeyou wrote:
I can see why fool is in the name of this site if your writers show their ignorance as is displayed in this article.
Any sane person will have gold and silver in their portfolio. Not an excessive amount, but as 22 of the top 24 hedge fund managers have personally bought gold this year so should everyone.
Gold has been money for thousands of years and will hold its value far better than worthless pieces of paper called stocks and FR$, especially when govt's are hell bent on debasing their fiat currencies.
Gold has increased in value by about 45% in the past ten years while the stock market at 10,000 in 2001 vs 10,000 today has lost 25% of its purchasing power. Which would you rather own?
I guess you think the Asians and especially Chinese are stupid for accumulating gold and even encouraging their citizens to buy it if they thought the value would decline? This demand alone would offset any paltry 5% increase in production (which I seriously doubt). At present mine production if every person on earth wanted just 1 oz of gold it would take 1,500 years to supply it.
You really should not be writing negatively about things you obviously have no knowledge of and quoting Buffet and Kitco (Nadler is beyond a gold bear and always wrong). hardly makes you an expert, but a true fool.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 2:26 PM, Anadultmale wrote:
Great article! Finally a writer gets his t's crossed and i's dotted. When everyone get's in the boat, it going to sink. Over 2 million ounces per month are sold. So go read Frank Holmes's part of Goldwatcher and know that industry uses gold alot (in tons per year) every year. Well the Chinese may not be totally stupid, because $15 million get 51% of Firstgold. Sure come December first is Chinese as the boss, where the gold bars will be rolling out the door and swinning to China. Where by Gold when you can buy the Gold mine. Real smart America and/or California. Give away the house it's empty anyways
It's the dollar slide that is part to blame. How much longer can the billions get pushed into Gold? I'll give it as a Christmas gift, a great big drop in price. Smarter players know which mining stock to play short. Look at the P/E and be shocked like I was. I've seen stock price moving wildly lately. Have you?
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 2:56 PM, ET69 wrote:
Boy! Emotional responses. Apparently Mr. Wiederman has touched a nerve ! Lets get a few facts clear about atomic #79 AU. First it has many industrial uses in dentistry and electronics and not just for jewelry. It is a transition metal and is very resistant to corrosion eg, nitric acid will dissolve silver but not gold- yet another reason it is more valuable.It is the most malleable metal. It can be argued that golds value is based as much on its industrial uses as on any psychological or scarcity value.
As an emergency holding of last resort in social chaos it is probably not as valuable as bottles of alcohol or food stuffs or guns and ammo. Silver is probably more useful as a trade medium. In short gold is over valued.
During the melt down last spring I bought the aforementioned as security and not gold. As far ar the argument that hedge manager bought it and therefore so should you ...well now THAT WOULD BE FOOLISH !
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 4:34 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
First off, I'm glad to see so many readers with such varying comments. I also wanted to add my own 2 cents to a few things...
xetn,
You said 'Unfortunately, you do not understand what gold is; it is not an investment, it is money, real money.'
Sure, it used to be, back in the times of the Romans and even when the dollar was pegged to gold... but no longer, I'm afraid.
And even 'doomsday scenarios' of the world going to hell and currencies becoming useless seem highly unlikely. Each country's government has a vested interest in maintaining its currency, and they will do all they can to continue generating demand for it, even if it is inherently worthless.
Secondly, people ARE 'investing' in gold, not just using it as money. They believe it is a reasonably safe spot for their cash (or as an alternative for their cash) and that it is likely to rise over time. That's an investment, plain and simple.
Bottom line, I don't think we're going back to gold as a real form of money anytime soon... so speculating in gold is not a smart move for long-term wealth generation.
notafoollikeyou,
You said 'as 22 of the top 24 hedge fund managers have personally bought gold this year so should everyone.'
That argument makes no sense at all.
Many hedge funds dabbled in CDOs and MBSs before the financial meltdown -- and you can see where that got them. Following the 'elite' as so many believe hedge fund managers to be is often a really dumb move. They're 100% fallible.
You also said 'At present mine production if every person on earth wanted just 1 oz of gold it would take 1,500 years to supply it.'
Do you have a source for that fact? Even assuming that fact is 100% correct, the thinking there is flawed because it fails to account for the astoundingly high amount of gold that already has been extracted from the ground. I decided not to mention scrap gold much in my article, but the number of people who choose to sell their scrap gold when gold prices rise skyrockets. So even if miners can't get the gold out of the ground quick enough (and, again, I'm not convinced you're 100% right about that lag time), if the demand for gold rises high enough, there will ALWAYS be those willing to sell gold they already have, thereby really making miners only slightly necessary to the supply/demand equation.
You also said 'You really should not be writing negatively about things you obviously have no knowledge of and quoting Buffet and Kitco.'
First, you misspelled Buffett's name... But typos aside, I have followed Buffett for years, am an investor in Berkshire Hathaway, and have studied his historic moves pretty closely, so I don't think you're warranted in making this statement.
ET69,
You said 'it has many industrial uses in dentistry and electronics and not just for jewelry.' That is certainly true and I'm not trying to deny it...
You also said 'It can be argued that golds value is based as much on its industrial uses as on any psychological or scarcity value.' Perhaps... but again, the bottom line is that it's a commodity whose value is contingent on supply and demand, whether demand be jewelry, or industrial uses... Real demand for gold has fallen (and shows no meaningful signs of reversing), while prices continue to rise.
Thanks again, everyone, for your comments... keep 'em comin!
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 4:38 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
And one last thing, I'm curious whether those who have commented (or those who will comment) actually have a vested interest in gold.
That is, do you own a gold ETF, etc.?
For full disclosure, I personally own no gold other than my wedding band. Which is probably not too surprising after reading the article.
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 5:33 PM, notafoollikeyou wrote:
Adam
There is little to be accomplished by trying to eduate you about investments since you are unwilling to educate yourself about various asset classes, but you should checkout Goldseek,com. Admittedly it is somewhat overwhelmed with gold bugs, but there is also tons of useful iformation and real facts about gold there.
I would never tell anyone to put all of their assets in gold, but a reasonable allocation makes a lot of sense and I hardly think you have more knowledge than most large hedge fund managers and what they do with their personal money.
How can you have such faith in worthless stock certificates that have a value detrmined by some market maker. Maybe you have already forgotten Oct 08 and March 09, but they will happen again and that can easily plunge big company stocks to zero like GM and many more.
I notice you also failed to explain why the DOW is down 25% in purchasing power over the last ten years and you apparently think that is a good investment compared to gold that has appreciated substantially during that time.
I also find it interesting that you own none of the stocks reco'd in your own article
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 7:50 PM, masterN17 wrote:
Wow, an anti-gold article from the Fool! Good read. Keep the diverse analysis coming.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 8:17 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
I have to say this is one of the most un-educated articles I have read on TMF. If one of your statements is false, they all may be false. As has been pointed out India bought 200 tons of Gold last week. I am pretty sure they are not a territory of the U.S. Nor is China. Nor is Sri Lanka. Not sure what you think is going to happen to the dollar, but a little lesson- as the dollar falls, gold goes up. Repeat after me, dollar falls, gold rises. And in the end, there is no place for the dollar to go but down. Short term- sure it may go up. But at the end of the day- when the Feds are done playing their games, the true value of things like real estate, gold, silver, stocks will become apparent. There is nothing natural about the market anymore. The government is doing everything it can to prevent the inevitable. Anyone who thinks otherwise will pay dearly. And I will sell you my gold that I have purchased every year for 6 years and will continue to do. And you can use your dollars that you so much believe in. And then- I will sell you my mining stocks when you finally come around. I assume you own life insurance, perhaps disability insurance..... why? that does not pay you back unless you have a whole life policy. Good luck- you will need it.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 8:30 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
Another point- please name a time when gold was not money? When you couldn't go trade your gold for U.S. Dollars? It has an exchange rate for a reason. As do currencies, other commodities, etc. There is a value to it. I don't see an exchange rate for my house, my t.v., my car. Please- tell us what is supporting the almighty dollar? Gold has history on its side- thousands of years. The dollar has history against it. Name one fiat currency that has survived and thrived forever? Think about it- gold is still as relevant today as it was 5000 years ago. Please please - keep waiting to buy gold- when mania buying hits, I will on my way out. Remember the tech boom, the real estate boom. There will be a gold boom and people will get crushed.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 8:40 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
Another point...:) You talk about supply and demand of gold like it is oil- like they just turn on the spigot....It is getting harder and harder to find mineable gold. Just because they find it does not mean it is profitable. They have every incentive right now to mine as much gold as they can- being that it is at record prices. But gold is still going up. But the easy gold is getting harder and harder to find. There are geographic issues, political issues, etc that you have no clue about. Mining is obscenely expensive. Guess what happens if the credit markets freeze up and mining companies can't get loans to continue exploration? That is one reason why gold got clobbered (in addition to liquidity issues for hedge funds, etc) last year. Most gold mines are worthless. You vastly underestimate the demand of gold during a monetary crisis. I strongly suggest you do your research about what was one of the most profitable stock sectors during the depression. Guess what??? gold mining stocks, which increased about 5-6 times in value. Ever wonder why gold was made illegal to own in 1933? Please answer that question for everyone- because GOLD = REAL MONEY. Otherwise it would not have been illegal. I could go own forever..
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 8:47 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
And comparing gold to Bernie Madoff?? You have clearly lost your mind..... And when did BuffeTT make that statement? Was it before its run up from $250/ounce to almost $1110/ounce? Do you think he would laugh at making four times your money in an 8 year period? By the way- Jim Rogers is not saying gold is the best value right now. He thinks it will likely hit $2000 an ounce in the next decade. He thinks sugar is a better deal now, silver, etc.
*
Report this Comment On November 07, 2009, at 10:36 PM, dc46and2 wrote:
''gold remains well below last winter's peaks when priced in pounds, euros, yen, or Swiss francs.' This indicates that it is solely Americans speculating on gold's rise.'
The logic of this statement is deeply flawed. If, as you posit, the rising dollar price of gold was wholly caused by American speculation, there would be arbitrage profits in buying gold in Euros et al, selling in Dollars, and then exchanging back to the original currency. This action would keep the price of gold in various currencies in approximately the same relation as the exchange rates for those currencies. The only thing that the quoted statement could logically indicate is the devaluation of the dollar.
Notwithstanding that flaw, I agree that viewing gold as an investment is foolish. Gold is not productive, it just sits there. In contrast, a good business produces things of value. Additionally, the business itself grows and becomes more valuable which will be reflected in the value of its stock.
Gold may, however, be useful to an investor, provided he doesn't have any illusions about what it is or what it is good for. Others have said that 'gold is money' and this view is more accurate than the view that gold is an investment. If you claim to have made a profit on gold, you must admit that it was either due to speculation or inflation. If it was speculation, then you ought to remember that speculative bubbles don't last forever. If it was due to inflation, then you have not really profited at all--the true value of the gold hasn't changed.
In a good business, intelligent men combine the power of their mind with wisely invested capital and create wealth. Gold is merely a medium of exchange or a temporary store of wealth. Use gold wisely, but don't stop investing in good businesses when the price is right.
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 12:36 AM, jennifergmd wrote:
i agree with your statement- however, you are discounting the gold manic phase of buying that will happen. in a rational world- i agree with you about it keeping pace with inflation. but a rational world it will not remain forever. if i am wealthier than i would have been with stocks over that same period, it is actually wealthier. and over the last 10 years- you would be wealthier for having gold. but you make the real money in gold stocks... that is where fortunes are made
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 12:47 AM, akutach wrote:
TMFDonauschwaben My question went unanswered if you'd be willing to take a shot at it. You said demand for gold was down 20% in the last year. I agree with your first point that when speculative demand significantly outstrips physical demand for gold then you have entered a true bubble. Was that 20% drop economic in nature because people stopped buying so much jewelry (I assume this is the bulk of the physical gold demand), or because prices went so high that jewelers knew they couldn't pass price increases onto customers? To answer this, what has happened to physical gold demand in the latest quarter? Is it thawing with the global economy or gone further down as you might suggest based on further increases in dollar denominated gold?
To answer your question I'm long GLD. I admit the position is speculative. I have a lot of faith in people's tendency to create bubbles, and my expectations of reward are not so high.
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 8:17 AM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
notafoollikeyou,
First off, no need to go down an insulting path, as fired up as you may be. No good comes from that.
Secondly, 'a reasonable allocation makes a lot of sense.' I still stand by my argument that it makes no sense -- it's a long-term money-losing venture.
You also said 'I hardly think you have more knowledge than most large hedge fund managers and what they do with their personal money' -- maybe, maybe not. We'll see who made the right call soon.
You also said 'How can you have such faith in worthless stock certificates that have a value detrmined [sic] by some market maker.' First off, as a shareholder in select companies, it's not the 'stock certificate' I own, but a share of a company's profits. And I firmly believe that the companies I own have a brighter long-term future in growing those earnings than speculators in gold have in driving up false demand in gold ETFs.
As for your comment about the Dow, what would you have said in 2007? There have been all sorts of times in stock market history when the ten-year trailing return is negative... and you know what? They turned out to be the best times to get into the market, not into gold.
And you're right, I don't own any of those stocks. But that doesn't lessen my argument at all.
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 8:24 AM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
jennifergmd,
It sounds like you've fully bought in to the whole doomsday economy scenario and the complete collapse of the dollar (I admit, the dollar will struggle -- but a complete collapse and fall of our currency and our country in general is an absurd idea) and there's not much convincing I can do to talk some sense into such an impassioned critic.
But yes, the whole gold as a solid investment right now amounts to more than nothing but a giant Ponzi scheme a la Madoff. Gold has been a useless investment for the past two hundred years, so why do you think that all of a sudden that is going to change? Costs of mining gold were expensive back then... it was a rare commodity back then... the U.S. was beginning to take on what seemed like momentous levels of debt back then... and yet still -- after taxes, investors in gold lost money.
But again, thanks for sharing your thoughts.
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 8:43 AM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
akutach,
Sorry I didn't answer your question earlier.
Just to restate, you said 'Was that 20% drop economic in nature because people stopped buying so much jewelry (I assume this is the bulk of the physical gold demand), or because prices went so high that jewelers knew they couldn't pass price increases onto customers? To answer this, what has happened to physical gold demand in the latest quarter? Is it thawing with the global economy or gone further down as you might suggest based on further increases in dollar denominated gold?'
Looking at the latest-available quarterly numbers right now. For Q2 09, jewelry consumption (the largest source of global gold demand) was down 22%, industrial and dental demand was down 21%... yet gold as an investment was up 46% -- driven most largely by people pouring money into ETFs (up 1,315%!). All of these numbers are from the World Gold Council, specifically this link: http://www.gold.org/assets/file/value/stats/statistics/pdf/D... You will have to register there to see that PDF, but I definitely recommend it if you're interested in following gold supply/demand trends in an easy manner.
And you're right to think that the diminishing demand for gold is in part because of the rising prices, as well as the overall economic condition. Which is part of the problem with a long-term gold investment... if the price of gold goes up ten-fold -- even five-fold from its price today, you can bet that demand for real gold usage (most largely driven by jewelry use) is going to plummet.
I also appreciate your disclosure about gold, 'I admit the position is speculative. I have a lot of faith in people's tendency to create bubbles, and my expectations of reward are not so high.' You sound like you know the risk/rewards nature, which makes you sound like the wisest and even-tempered gold investor that has commented so far.
Thanks for commenting!
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 11:06 AM, CoyoteMoney wrote:
People invented money because gold simply wasn't practical enough. When you think seriously about the problems supply, of security and of assaying, the disadvantages become pretty clear.
Not surprisingly, there was a big run up in gold as part of the 1980's recession as well. If you'd bought gold near that peak you didn't get your money back for a very long time.
People pay too much for a FatHead of their favorite althlete, brag about it, and in the end they get a big poster of a future has been. In the modern world gold is just a commodity, and this my fellow Fools is just another bubble.
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 12:55 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
When you talk about a decrease in gold demand of 20%- it sounds like you are only considering industral uses. You are not taking into account demand as a monetary or inflation hedge.
I am shocked that you think the dollar won't collapse at some point, whether it be 10 years, 20 years etc. You simply have little understanding of the economic situation at hand. I shorted GM from $50 a share down to the last penny. I don't recall you suggesting GM will likely go bankrupt. What do you think will happen with our debt situation? Our debt payments are huge right now as a country. What do you think will happen when interest rates rise? Inflation is a foregone conclusion down the road. What will our debt payments look like when that happens? It was the same thing with GM. They had to borrow money just to pay their operating costs for 20 years. Then when their credit rating was lowered and their borrowing costs increased- it was game over. The U.S. is in the same boat. They just have more room for error because the dollar is the world currency reserve.
I have spent 20 years studying as a physician. Most doctors make bad investors because they forget that it took years to become good at what they did and get cocky. I study the economy relentlessly. And I promise I study it more than you. Your complete lack of knowledge regarding the economy is appalling. And your ignorance about gold is even worse. Which would be fine if you didn't influence others.
You can just say that the dollar collapsing is absurd without offering any evidence to support it. Of course- buying at the peak of anything is a bad idea. But we are not at the peak of gold right now. You are talking historically about gold as an investment. Yet if you had accumulated gold over the last 8 years- you would have done quite well. If you had taken a little money each year and bought gold every year for the last 20 years, you would have done well with that.
Your blind spot is that thinking that something hasn't happened before means that it will never happen. We have had a depression before in this country. There is no reason to think it can't happen again. We are all under the impression that the Fed has the ability to stop a depression. That is the biggest fallacy out there. They just have the ability to delay it.
I am well invested in all sectors of the economy. I am just ready to pull it out when the time comes.
I encourage you to lose the ego you have of what you think is right. And start basing your investment ideas on sounder principles. Good luck to you.
Brian
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 1:03 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
Coyote Money
-Please understand- if you buy anything at the peak- it will be bad. Gold is not unique in that way. Think back to the tech or real estate bubble. The problem is that most people when it comes to investing are like lemmings. They follow the herd. It is the contrarians that figure this out much earlier. It is the contrarians that are already out by the time everyone else is jumping in. From 2005-2007, I wouldn't have touched real estate for all of the tea in china. And I certainly would not have taken equity out of my house to pay for anything that was not an emergency. Yet people continued to buy real estate and use their equity as an ATM.
The key in any investment is to be in before anyone else is and to get out as close to the top as possible.
Regarding gold- I consider it an ounce of prevention- quite literally. The pound of cure will be obscenely expensive.
By the way- I view gold as mainly as insurance. Silver on the other hand- will be where the money is at...
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 1:21 PM, wuff3t wrote:
'Your blind spot is that thinking that something hasn't happened before means that it will never happen.'
That's a reasonable point, but by the same token isn't it also possible that everyone could wake up one day and think 'Hey, why am I investing my money in this stuff that doesn't really DO anything...'
Yes, yes, I know gold has industrial uses but that's not why anyone invests in the stuff. As you yourself state, it's insurance; a hedge-bet. But underlying that is a self-fulfilling prophecy - that gold is valuable just because enough people say it is, and not because it has any intrinsic value. If tastes changed overnight (highly unlikely) it would be just as easy for the whole world to agree that actually gold was just a heavy, cumbersome waste of money and we'd all been mad to ever think it was otherwise. And this new mindset would be no more right or wrong than the current one.
When Cortes invaded South America the Conquistadores couldn't believe how much gold the Aztecs had lying around. The Aztecs, for their part, handed over as much of it as the Spaniards wanted. Previously they had largely ignored it, as they couldn't see any value in it, and they were startled that the Spanish did. I guess this is my blind spot as far as gold is concerned: it's not that I can't see why some people think it is a good investment, it just seems antithetical to me to try to value my other investments based on their fundamental, intrinsic worth - then invest in something that has so little intrinsic value.
Like I say, it's my personal blind spot, and I'm not even convinced I'm doing myself any favours by thinking this way! I just know what I feel comfortable with, and investing in something that people like just because it's 'all shiny' doesn't sit well with me.
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 3:54 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
jennifergmd,
You continue to cite the high debt load of the U.S. as the reason for future inflation, and why gold makes a smart play because of that…
I’m not arguing with you that the debt load of the U.S. is quite frightening. However, you're forgetting that there are countries on the other side of the equation... those to whom we owe the debt. They have a vested interest in the dollar NOT collapsing to the ground, since that is the only way they will get their invested money back. I agree with you that it doesn't seem like the U.S. dollar will be in high demand until the end of time, but I don't agree with you that any collapse is as imminent as you are convinced. Until we pay off all our foreign debtors, they still have an interest in seeing the dollar as a currency in reasonable demand.
Furthermore, if you have studied the economy as intensely as you are indicating, how do you account for all the other times in American history when the debt level was at unprecedented levels? When fear and panic were just as widespread as it was today? And the fact that our country and our economy did not collapse?
Let’s start with the Panic of 1819 which looks VERY similar to what we’re in today. It resulted in foreclosures, bank failures, high unemployment and a decline in both agricultural and manufacturing production. It was made worse by the high level of foreign goods we were importing. It looked like the new country of America was destined for failure. But 4 years later, the country had again found its footing and continued its journey to the top of the world.
The Panic of 1837 saw another bubble burst and ensuing years of inflation, but again… it did not slow America down.
Then we go to the Panic of 1857, which again began with a recession and led to more bank failures, and a stock market that dropped over 60%… British investors got nervous that the U.S. wouldn’t be able to repay its debt. What’s worse, the panic began to spread to Europe and throughout the entire world. But again, this did not slow America’s long-term trajectory down…
And it goes on and on, with the Panic of 1873, the Panic of 1893, the Great Depression, etc., etc…
One could argue that U.S. economic history has been nothing more than a set of bubbles forming, bursting, and then causing widespread panic. Fear of the U.S. not being able to repay its debts has accompanied every single panic, and yet we’ve still be able to continue trucking along, fighting off this fear, and grow to have the world’s highest GDP on a nominal and PPP basis!
So, what say you about that?
And again, I’m not trying to inject an “ego” into my rebuttal, as you continue to assert. I’m just putting the facts out there, Doc!
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 6:33 PM, notafoollikeyou wrote:
I must say I read many comments on here and am amazed at the lack of knowledge and insight of most posters. There are too many outlandish statements to rebut, but a few bits of reality are necessary.
Obviously everyone wants to believe that the US is strong and mighty and it is an economic powerhouse, but it is a dieing one. That means the currency must be devalued and when our debt faces default (or masive currency printing to avoid it) and we need to borrow trillions just to survive something has to give.
I almost have to laugh as people rip gold as a useless asset, which it is any many ways, but when is the last time you ate your stock certificates or put them in your car to make it run? What could be a greater ponz scheme than the US stock market? A company prints a piece of paper and sells it to an 'investor'. The investor rarely even sees his certificate (unlike gold cons in my safe). The companies rarely even pay dividends and it would take a long time to ever recover your investment even if they did. The only increase in value is to find another sucker to pay more for the stock than you did and it can easily go to zero value if no one wants to buy it. And then you have the nerve to say Gold is a risky asset class.
I won't even go into discussing the value of the US $ that has declined 94% in purchasing power over the last roughly 100 years and has much further to follow, but it is no different than any other worthless piece of paper if no one will accept and more countries want nothing to do with it.
I am no Greenspan lover, but even he gets the concept of gold now:
Greenspan said today at an investment conference in New York. Rising prices of precious metals and other commodities are “an indication of a very early stage of an endeavor to move away from paper currencies,” he said..What is being proven is the extent to which gold still holds reign over the financial system as the ultimate source of payment,” Greenspan said.
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 8:19 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
Adam,
To think that we have any chance of paying our debt back is crazy. It will never happen. There is no way it will ever be paid back. Not even if interest rates stay at nearly 0. You should do the math- calculate our debt payments at 0% interest, 1, 2,3 ,4, ...8% interest. Name one country that has ever spent its way out of this amount of debt. It can't and won't happen. Yes, our creditors have a vested interest in getting their money back. Creditors would like their money back from many companies that fail. That does not make it happen. Those who lent us money so that we could keep buying their goods will pay a price as well.
We went from the largest lender to the largest borrower nation in the world over a 30 year period.
I did not say the collapse of the dollar is going to happen next month, next year, etc . It may happen in 10 years, 20 years, etc. But collapse it will. And I also did not say I have all of my money in gold or silver. I have enough in silver and gold to protect myself against a depression or hyperinflation. I will also have other ways of protecting myself as well- such as ETFs that short long bonds, etc. Do dismiss precious metals as a ponzi scheme is misplaced. I would never have all assets in one category.
You mentioned that the demand for gold is decreasing. The IMF had 400 Tons of gold on the block. The fear was that this would flood the market. India stepped up and bought 200 tons. Please explain how that suggests a lack of demand. And why India would buy that much gold? Why wouldn't they buy more U.S. treasuries if gold is such a bad deal? It implies a loss of confidence in the U.S. dollar. Plain and simple. I doubt you understand the manipulative forces involved in the gold and silver market. For instance, which investment banking firm controls the majority of the gold and silver short contracts? Do you know how much above ground silver there is in the world?
I assume that you have life or disability insurance, correct? If you do- why do you own it? For me, gold is simply insurance. I can sleep at night knowing that if (or when) hell breaks loose, I will not have to worry. And you cannot deny we were on the verge of financial collapse last year. And now- we have paid a dear price to avoid a depression. What will happen if there is another crisis?
We have not reached a bubble in gold yet. I challenge everyone reading this post to go ask 10 people if they have personally bought gold or silver bullion- either in physical metal or ETf. I have asked at least 100 people- and not one has done so. How does that represent a bubble. Everyone had owned some tech stocks, or bought a house etc. But not more than 1 in 25 or less has actually bought gold or silver . And that does not even include the mining stocks. People will get slaughtered in the mining stocks when the bubble peaks. There are only a few decent ones out there. No offense- when the bubble forms and then pops- TMF will be contributing to it as well. Your company has sold advertising space at the top of their home page to a gold mutual fund.
I would never think of giving my patients half-baked advice. I hope you will do your homework and then report back to us.
Just answer one question- why did India buy gold? And the answer is not for jewelry or dental fillings I can assure you.
Hope you had a good weekend,
Brian
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 8:29 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
Here is the link to a company that pays part of your salary..... I would not want to buy a full position in gold at these prices. I would probably try to average in over the next few months or so depending on one's level of concern. But some gold at these levels is better than no gold. I am also not saying that there won't be a correction in gold or silver in the near term. But when you look at how much we lose each year in insurance, is it that big of a deal if gold drops 20% in the near term? It would just make me load up some more. I am also not arguing that a bubble in gold will not develop. It absolutely will. We are just not there yet. When your next door neighbor tells you about the gold mining stock he just tripled his money on- that will be a sign of a bubble about to burst.
http://www.usfunds.com/our-funds/our-mutual-funds/gold-and-p...
*
Report this Comment On November 08, 2009, at 10:57 PM, notafoollikeyou wrote:
As an Add on for all of you investors, and especially Adam, that think stocks are a better investment than gold, I hope you are aware that you do not even own the stock you have paid for (unless you physically hold the certificate in your hands - not even allowed by many companies) and no where does your name appear on the companies records. You are totally at the mercy of The Depository Trust Company (DTC) and most investors do not know if they are solvent, will stay solvent, are honest and trustworthy, or worse yet if they have any record of you.
The DTC owns that bond or stock, not you. Rather than in your name, it's registered (as the legal Registered Owner or agent) in their 'street name', Cede & Company.
The DTC is the Registered Owner - holder - of your stock or bond. The DTC is the legal property-holder, share-holder, stock-holder, owner and purchaser. Your name appears nowhere on the book entry or certificate as the actual owner. Instead, you have been designated by the legal registered owner, the DTC, as the Beneficial Owner. This means that your lawful Rights in that stock or bond are confined to that of a successor or heir. The difference between an owner and a beneficiary is like night and day. Take the time to absorb and understand the definitions:
In these troubled times fraught with fraud, gov't intervention and Wall Street crooks this should be worrisome to most investors. Meanwhile I sleep well knowing my gold is in my safe.
*
Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 9:22 AM, jennifergmd wrote:
Adam,
The only point I needed to make about gold= money is:
If gold is not money, then why was the dollar backed by gold for so many years? It was not backed by flat screen tv's, hummers, oil, etc. It was not because of a lack of value that nixon took us off of the gold standard in the early 70's. It was so we could recklessly print our money and use the devalued dollar to allow our deficit spending. Prior to that time, trade deficits had to be settled up with gold.
I hope you have the courage to admit your lack of insight regarding the issue in which you tried to influence your readers. I believe you have a fiduciary responsibility here.
Best,
brian
*
Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 10:18 AM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
jennifergmd,
You just said 'For me, gold is simply insurance.' I think that sums up your argument pretty nicely -- and where we are at odds. Perhaps you've simply misunderstood my article from the beginning. After all, if gold is an insurance policy for you (which you claim it is), then ok, fine, that's what it is for you.
However, I don't consider purchasing an insurance policy investing... it's merely something you have purchased as a safeguard, with no assurance of making an above-average return on your capital.
However, the whole point of my argument and this article is that gold makes a horrible investment. You can't expect it to pay you regular dividends, and can't reasonably expect it to rise in value (unless you're speculating, which -- again -- is not investing).
You also said, 'I hope you have the courage to admit your lack of insight regarding the issue in which you tried to influence your readers. I believe you have a fiduciary responsibility here.'
I firmly believe that those individuals who are trying to 'invest' in gold are making a big mistake, and that is why I wrote this article, and I stand behind my opinion. Of course, any individual is free to disagree with my opinions. But I am entitled to have my beliefs just as you are entitled to have yours. Even though I don't believe your opinions are correct, there is still a possibility that your opinions turn out to make more money than mine... and even if you don't believe my opinions are correct, you must likewise accept that there is a possibility that my opinions will turn out to make more money than yours. Investing is never an adventure in certain outcomes (which is why there's a whole risk-reward trade off)... so neither one of us can be 100% certain our predictions will come to light.
I think you've made your point and your opinions pretty clear for whomever wishes to read it, so I don't think we need to continue our back and forth any more. I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors, most especially with your insurance policy of gold.
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 11:46 AM, Doccus wrote:
I think the facts speak for themselves. Rather than worry about who's 'right', the very fact that gold's going up solely because of investments, rather than use (and it DOES have some industrial uses), is worrying enough.
I got from the article, i think , what it was meant to convey.
Thank you...
*
Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 3:31 PM, jennifergmd wrote:
Point taken...I am sorry if I misunderstood your initial point....Passionate views can often be....well, passionate. I hope everyone can come out a winner .....
*
Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 6:25 PM, polomora wrote:
Just read this message posted to the Metals & Mining board here on the MF:
http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=28082319
*
Report this Comment On November 09, 2009, at 8:16 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
jennifergmd,
No worries -- it was a fun and lively debate! :-)
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 1:54 AM, joandrose wrote:
Jennifergmd
I retired early from corporate management. My income is now sourced entirely through my investments and like most, also suffered wounds over the past two years ! Big learning curve that .....
For what it's worth - think you have got a better understanding of the value of gold relative to fiat currency debate - than 90% of other correspondents. Well done - excellent contribution.
Joseph
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 2:05 AM, biofest wrote:
Thanks for commonsense on gold.You have a lot of patience to reply to people like 'notafoollikeyou' who seems both arrogant and insulting.To quote him -'There is little to be accomplished by trying to eduate you about investments'.
I have been investing for fifty years and have substantially outperformed gold although I must confess to having invested in gold mines from time to time.
My major investment theme is companies with substantial investment in R&D although I have a weakness for forest product companies with lots of land.
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 9:02 AM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
It's not often I find myself agreeing with Nouriel Roubini, but here's a recent interview that readers of this article would like find interesting: http://www.hardassetsinvestor.com/features-and-interviews/18...
Some good quotes:
'[S]ome of the increase—even in precious metals—is not justified by fundamentals. The supply looks excessive, and it looks like part of a bubble'
'But those people who delude themselves that gold can go to $1,500 or $2,000 are just talking nonsense. The fundamentals are not justified, and those people are just talking their books.'
Amen, Roubini!
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 11:48 AM, scherniak wrote:
'The market will fluctuate.' - J.P. Morgan
http://yieldpig.blogspot.com/
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 11:52 AM, c0ffeen0te wrote:
I personally don't like to trade / investment based on somebody else's view...lacking inherent utility (with apologies to the dentists and jewelers) the price of gold is dependent upon those who believe it has/will retain value. I myself had a brief/unhappy fling with gold stocks in the late 90's.
To protect myself against the decline in the dollar, I try to find reasonable investments in global or non-US based companies that I think have inherent value. Also inflation-linked bonds which sadly I entered much too soon...yeah everybody says we will have inflation but when? Tough to have inflation with tepid demand.
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 4:33 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
c0ffeen0te,
I agree with you that foreign companies (and U.S. companies with a global footprint) are a good way to diversify against any potential danger facing the U.S.
Thanks for your comments!
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 6:53 PM, montecorp wrote:
The question remains:
Why did India buy so much gold??
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 7:14 PM, stockmenot wrote:
We are in uncharted territory when it comes to our economy and it scares me. There are several ships about to collide, and one thing that is not being discussed is food and water.
I think montecorp's question is a good one....but for different reason's. When it comes to a worldwide slowdown, it doesn't matter how pretty gold is, you can't eat or drink it. And if we are all in the same trouble wolrdwide, there's no one to buy that gold. Gold then is only as valuable as paper. And Russian money during the depression was more valuable burned for heat.
What can we invest in that is absolutely fool proof....something we all need....food or water?
How can you safely invest, and in what?
*
Report this Comment On November 10, 2009, at 10:20 PM, montecorp wrote:
Stockmenot, we're not all in the same trouble worldwide; the world's countries' problems are connected but not completely interdependent on each other. China has the largest manufacturing base and the largest population, as well as a much higher savings rate. They're also very smart and I'm sure they have a plan. An obvious one would be to focus their manufacturing capabilities toward Asia, India, Europe, Brasil, etc. and to stop financing our largess with their savings, to stop accepting our IOUs as anything of value and instead focus the fruits of their labor toward their own people. Give their people prosperity in the form of convenience (that we've come to expect as entitlement) as a value in exchange for part of their massive savings (note: NOT in exchange for DEBT).
The US could very well default on their IOUs. Really, how are we going to pay those trillions back? Seriously??? Then what? Short-term mayhem guaranteed and also long-term irreversible ramifications. AMERO, anyone?? (sure, it prob won't be called the Amero, but suffice it to say the dollar will be replaced with something else- or maybe someone is willing to suggest our current unprecedented situation will somehow magically end up without a currency failure? Adam, in all of your historical references, could you also please overlay the currencies that failed in our country's history? All of those were just freak incidents, right?
Back to Gold. Gold is the perfect medium of exchange, which is why it will always have value. It has all kinds of practical purposes for the storing of value.
Let's start from scratch, as if we were all on an island and had to create an economy (or if we suddenly found ourselves without a dependable fiat instrument to trade with each other).....
If I had pigs and you had grain, we could only trade if you needed pigs and I needed grain. That's called double-coincidental demand. If I didn't need grain and that's all you had, then I wouldn't trade you my pigs and you'd go without meat or find someone else who had a surplus of pigs and needed grain. But what about the guy down the street who has the best tomatoes and doesn't want either of our things? I want those tomatoes! Surely we can work out a deal here....
We would soon determine that we needed a medium of exchange that had a value we could rely on. It would preferably not rot, not be destroyed, not be faked, not be easily moved/stolen, not be replicated ad infinitum by someone whom I don't know nor did grant that authority, and so on.
We could use seashells or pebbles, but they're all different from each other in weight (no standardization, no divisability) and just lying around everywhere, and we certainly wouldn't want someone finding a beach full of seashells and then coming back and buying up all of our pigs and grain and basically becoming a central banker and enslaving us (or creating hyperinflation by their sudden flooding of currency in the marketplace, assuming they weren't able to totally monopolize the scene).
We'd try different things, but I assert to you that ultimately (if it were available) we would evolve into a gold-based currency system. It just fits the bill of all the needs that a dependable currency demands. Those demands are basically 1) store of value, 2) standard unit of measure, and 3) and agreed upon unit of exchange. You can't have an economy without those things. You can't save money, insulate yourself from this year's crop failure, or invest in new businesses, or borrow money to build a house/farm/water-treatment-plant/school, or feel secure that someone won't undermine your currency or all your hard work.
I can postulate further, but gold is more than just a shiny metal. It has intrinsic value in its ability to function as a currency and therefore enable economies.
I'm still curious, why did India buy all of that gold? Any of you big-heads should certainly have an idea that they could share.....
-Monty
*
Report this Comment On November 11, 2009, at 7:54 AM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
Pretty interesting chart: http://static.businessinsider.com/~~/f?id=4afaa8c40000000000...
Quite frankly, I think the fact that the largest gold ETF now outranks the largest EAFE ETF furthers my point...
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 11, 2009, at 7:53 PM, eekthecat wrote:
You people who are so unhappy about fiat currencies... gold IS a fiat currency. It has some value, yes, for industrial purposes. But its value now is much higher than its intrinsic value, and with the way you people are thinking of it, it is essentially the same thing as a fiat currency, because you are placing value in it that it doesn't really have. The simple act of using something as a means of exchange turns it into a fiat currency, because it is purely by fiat that gold becomes a means of exchange. Because look, what can I or you do with gold? I can't do anything with it. To me, it is totally useless. The only reason it has value is that there are some people who can do something with it (i.e. industry). But, the price these days has little to do with those people who have an actual use for it, as speculation and hedging against inflation and whatnot have driven the price up well beyond what utilitarian purposes would put it at. So, you are putting value into it via fiat. If the economy were to collapse entirely, which it seems a lot of gold lovers expect it to, there would be no reason whatsoever to consider gold any more valuable than paper currency, as its industrial value would be nil, and then its value would be purely fiat. Of course its supply is finite, unlike dollars, BUT... this does not really matter... the dollar may have lost lots of value of the years while gold has not, but the total supply of VALUE in the world has always increased (i.e. the economy has always been growing). The numerical values do not matter. The dollar may be worth much less than it used to be, but the standard of living is much higher now, so why should we care about numbers, which are imaginary? Your hatred of fiat currency and your love of gold are both silly.
*
Report this Comment On November 12, 2009, at 2:01 AM, BFil wrote:
I am not sure that the US is interested in an outsiders optimistic viewpoint but here it is.
The US economy remains three times larger than the next largest. 90% of its employees are still employed after the worst recession in 80 years (try this more often - 90% employed is often the right way to look at 10% unemployed)
Practically every industry on earth has one or more formidable US competitors and it is still less dependent on international trade than any nation except North Korea. You have everything to go for.
The national debt will not melt away quickly but it does not need to.
You have massive private financial resources, a growing population, exceptional higher education, plenty of risk takers and a tradition of philanthropy.
Against all this, hoarding gold and forecasting prolonged doom is a non-starter
*
Report this Comment On November 12, 2009, at 11:20 AM, tugcapt65 wrote:
Note that India bought 200 TONS OF GOLD LAST WEEK. (at $1,100/oz. that's about $17,600 a US pound @400,000 US pounds.)I thought it was interesting that they did. I see nothing wrong with diversifying your portfolio, whether it be a country or individual, although putting all of your eggs in one basket usually is unwise, unless you're hoarding cash or cash equivalents.
In a nutshell, use basic common sense when investing...spread the risk. Everybody has their own opinions about investing in gold.
*
Report this Comment On November 12, 2009, at 1:26 PM, mic510 wrote:
'...But the consensus right now is that the best way to counteract inflation is by investing in gold.
And the consensus is dead wrong!...'
No, Mr. Weiderman, it your consensus that is dead wrong!
*
Report this Comment On November 12, 2009, at 3:38 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
mic510,
Come on, man, at least toss some facts out there if you want to rebut my argument!
-- Adam
P.S.: My last name is spelled with the 'i' before the 'e'
*
Report this Comment On November 12, 2009, at 5:41 PM, stanton17 wrote:
BFil,
Thank you for your elegant and intelligent post.
*
Report this Comment On November 12, 2009, at 9:02 PM, vriguy wrote:
India bought gold because they had some excess dollars, and the Reserve bank of India is aware that any time in the future they can sell their gold to an increasingly wealthy Indian public - whose appetite for gold is larger than the world's entire current supply.
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 10:46 AM, Joelshann wrote:
The only articles that usually get this much scuttlebutt are those that mention Sirius.
Maybe Wiederman would like to write a follow-up article called 'The New Weimar Republic: How Satellite Radio will advance a lose fiscal policy and ruin Gold holders' Then he can slam both of those at the same time.
That would make for some interesting comments.
(Disclosure: long gold, no positings in SIRI)
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 2:36 PM, pcoppney wrote:
It is the wedding season in India. The government know the value of gold, even if only in India, will go up in the short run. Which makes it a better play than dollars now. Not necessarily forever, but for now.
Gold is a commodity used as a store of value, it happens to be the most visible of them, but it is only a commodity not a magical element.
I don't know the actual cost to mine an ounce but it has to be less than $1150 so eventually the price will come down, however it may go higher before it does. I think that would meet the definition of a bubble. That fact aside, the dollar is low and gold is high, assuming the whole United States does not go out of business, it is still better to by low and sell high, right? At some point in the not to distant future you may want to look at trading some of your gold for dollars. Even if you trade it for stocks of companies valued in dollars.
In the interest of disclosure, I am long on a small gold position, and long on multiple large positions of solid value companies both US based and international.
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 3:27 PM, aaoxenfree wrote:
Question for author and commenters:
What is your opinion on the effects that the CTFC enacting commodity limits would have on the price of Precious Metals? (or energy for that matter)
Currently there are enormously concentrated short positions in PM held by one or two banks...
I began researching precious metals a couple of years ago, have realized 70% profits on my investment in silver (in at 10, out at 17), and am now torn between the 'doomsday' and 'life must go on as it always has as its in every country's best interest' scenarios similar to those presented here in the comments thread.
Thanks for your input. (I am not being snarky, seriously interested in varying opinions).
Thanks!
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 3:28 PM, aaoxenfree wrote:
also, if another crash is imminent, which has been predicted by many who say the stock market is currently in a bubble, then isn't PM the best way to keep your value liquid so you can buy up cheap stocks when they hit bottom?
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 5:24 PM, Brigadoon22 wrote:
Nice article. I am not a professional investor. I'm an engineer, aka average Joe. I find that I agree with the post. I believe gold has the potential to be one of the next bubbles to burst. I have several friends that are hell bent on buying gold for two reasons.
1) They want to protect their savings.
2) They think they can make a killing when they sell it.
Gold appears to be a logical safe haven for investments. My friends are buying gold based on fear and greed. One thing I have observed is that logic breaks down when fear hits. If gold prices start to go down they will sell when their fears overcome their greed.
When the market was going down last year my friends sold their stocks. If a downward trend hits gold I can see the gold bubble burst when the average joe begins to sell their gold. I'd love to be proven wrong on this.
For what its worth, I see commercial realestate going down before gold. I live and work near many industrial parks. There are a lot of empty buildings around.
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 6:33 PM, OhMagnificentOne wrote:
The only fools around are those who don't own gold. I have read this same non-sense about not owning gold and it demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of why gold is rallying. Gold is not just a hedge against inflation: it is a hedge aginst times of uncertainty. The price of gold is not a bubble and will not reach bubble territory for quite some time. That doesn't mean there won't be corrections but the price trend for gold is up.The fact that there are l individuals still knocking gold as an investment means there is plenty of room for the price to move higher. When Adam J. Widerman says it's time to buy gold rest assured that will be the time to sell it.
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 7:08 PM, TWOTIMETUNA wrote:
After reading most of these comments, what is the best place to put money right now?
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 7:48 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
OhMagnificentOne,
I stand by my argument that gold, at these prices, is not a smart move.
Times of uncertainty don't last forever, and this whole 'own gold in times of uncertainty' philosophy you're operating under has popped up many times in American history. And those unfortunate individuals who fell for it at the exact wrong time have lost money.
So I hope you're well-enough diversified not to be burned like your forefathers in history have been.
TWOTIMETUNA,
As my article closed out, I think both dividend-paying companies and companies with a strong international presence are the best bets for your money right now.
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 7:49 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
OhMagnificentOne,
I stand by my argument that gold, at these prices, is not a smart move.
Times of uncertainty don't last forever, and this whole 'own gold in times of uncertainty' philosophy you're operating under has popped up many times in American history. And those unfortunate individuals who fell for it at the exact wrong time have lost money.
So I hope you're well-enough diversified not to be burned like your forefathers in history have been.
TWOTIMETUNA,
As my article closed out, I think both dividend-paying companies and companies with a strong international presence are the best bets for your money right now.
-- Adam
*
Report this Comment On November 13, 2009, at 8:01 PM, TMFDonauschwaben wrote:
A comedic blog post about a reality of gold: http://paul.kedrosky.com/archives/2009/11/the_price_of_go.ht...
末日博士Roubini：資產價格大跌為時不遠 不信黃金還會大漲-鉅亨吧 - 鉅亨網
末日博士Roubini：資產價格大跌為時不遠 不信黃金還會大漲-鉅亨吧 - 鉅亨網:
"末日博士Roubini：資產價格大跌為時不遠 不信黃金還會大漲
10/26 23:29
分析師Nouriel Roubini相信，大筆的資金正追逐著
所有的資產，然而一旦經濟使得預期大失所望，各類資
產價格便將大幅下跌。
對這位末日博士而言，黃金並非理想避險處所。
他指出，儘管此時暫時出現了資產泡沫，其實卻仍
是一片通貨緊縮景象。一旦經濟成長停滯，各類膨脹的
資產價格便將下跌。
Roubini指出，黃金並不可信賴。黃金僅有二種上漲
理由。一是通貨膨脹，然而這卻是一個嚴重通貨緊縮的
世界，因為產能過多，需求疲弱，而且勞工市場不振，
在所有先進國家，失業率均突破10%。所以，沒有通貨膨
脹，短期內，也不會有。
在通貨緊縮情況下，黃金要走高的唯一另一項理由
，便是大蕭條。但是這項風險，已經規避。
所以那些說黃金會上漲至1500或2000美元的分析師
，全是癡人說夢。沒有通貨膨脹，或沒有大蕭條，黃金
根本難以上揚。
的確，黃金可以突破1000美元，但是要再上漲20%至
30%，則需有通貨膨脹或另一次的大蕭條提供支撐。暫
時，這兩種可能性均不存在。
或許三年或四年後，這兩種可能性又重新出現。但
是短期內絕無可能。"
"末日博士Roubini：資產價格大跌為時不遠 不信黃金還會大漲
10/26 23:29
分析師Nouriel Roubini相信，大筆的資金正追逐著
所有的資產，然而一旦經濟使得預期大失所望，各類資
產價格便將大幅下跌。
對這位末日博士而言，黃金並非理想避險處所。
他指出，儘管此時暫時出現了資產泡沫，其實卻仍
是一片通貨緊縮景象。一旦經濟成長停滯，各類膨脹的
資產價格便將下跌。
Roubini指出，黃金並不可信賴。黃金僅有二種上漲
理由。一是通貨膨脹，然而這卻是一個嚴重通貨緊縮的
世界，因為產能過多，需求疲弱，而且勞工市場不振，
在所有先進國家，失業率均突破10%。所以，沒有通貨膨
脹，短期內，也不會有。
在通貨緊縮情況下，黃金要走高的唯一另一項理由
，便是大蕭條。但是這項風險，已經規避。
所以那些說黃金會上漲至1500或2000美元的分析師
，全是癡人說夢。沒有通貨膨脹，或沒有大蕭條，黃金
根本難以上揚。
的確，黃金可以突破1000美元，但是要再上漲20%至
30%，則需有通貨膨脹或另一次的大蕭條提供支撐。暫
時，這兩種可能性均不存在。
或許三年或四年後，這兩種可能性又重新出現。但
是短期內絕無可能。"
2009年11月11日 星期三
貝萊德董事長：泡沫說可以休矣
貝萊德董事長：泡沫說可以休矣: "
美國資產管理公司貝萊德(BlackRock Inc.)董事長勞倫斯•芬克(Laurence Fink)表示﹐人們對股市泡沫正在形成的話題說得過多﹐並稱現在經濟正處在穩定期。
Gabe Palacio for The Wall Street Journal
貝萊德董事長勞倫斯•芬克
在《華爾街日報》最近一期“視點：高管早餐”(Viewpoints)系列報道中﹐芬克對副總編阿蘭•默里(Alan Murray)說﹐我認為形勢在正常變動﹐現在有空前數量的資金被投入運作﹐最近甚至有大量資金流向了對沖基金。他對有關泡沫的說法不以為然。
他說﹐如今報紙上有關泡沫的文章太多了﹐而危機的發生是不會有預警的。
芬克說﹐金融系統需要改變﹐包括加強披露﹐讓衍生品更多地在場內交易﹐監管也要改革。他還說﹐雖然貝萊德對商業地產行業出現了誤判﹐但它將重新關注這一領域﹔另外資產管理行業正在發生極大的變化。
芬克還表示﹐他沒想到美元的跌幅會如此之劇﹐不過相對於人民幣、巴西雷亞爾等貨幣﹐美元還是會貶值。他說﹐我不知道這是好是壞﹐但願美元走軟會讓更多公司願意在美國生產。
芬克認為﹐在危機方面﹐金融系統需要對社會負起比現在多得多的責任﹐並確保危機不再發生。他說：需要大幅度提高風險對投資者的透明度﹐我覺得現在的情況也的確如此。
芬克說﹐金融系統正大幅降低風險、收縮槓桿。他說﹐還需要讓更多衍生品在場內交易﹐確保每項業務都在表內展開。但芬克認為﹐監管改革也要有序進行﹐他呼籲全球在監管和風險管控方面保持一致。
芬克說﹐有一個需要問的問題是﹐明年為美國提供支持的資金將來自哪裡？他說﹐奧巴馬政府的理論是﹐如果讓利率保持在低位﹐銀行就有可能開始在抵押貸款領域放貸。
他說﹐我預計私營部門將會進場﹐但他指出﹐由於第一留置權人權利不明﹐目前投資者有些不願意購買抵押貸款證券。
他還說﹐要讓私營部門進一步參與抵押貸款市場﹐就需要實行一種新的評級制度。
芬克為抵押貸款證券化產品辯解﹐說它是好東西﹐只是到這個世紀才變壞了。他說﹐30年來﹐抵押貸款證券化產品為美國房主省下了250個基點（的房貸）﹔引起問題的不是其結構﹐而是其承銷和風險接受過程。
在商業地產方面﹐芬克表示﹐貝萊德此前對地產市場走向的觀點或許過於熱情﹐畢竟在2006年以前﹐地產行業經歷了數十年的成功。
他說﹐商業地產並沒有反彈多少﹐而如果低息差和高收益率繼續存在﹐並且美國經濟只能以大約每年2%的速度增長﹐那麼商業地產市場的復蘇將是緩慢的。
不過他說﹐這個領域是貝萊德要重新進入的﹔一年來首次有投資機構出資讓貝萊德投資商業地產﹐因為他們認為現在的估值誘人。
芬克表示﹐資產管理行業正在被重新定義﹐尋求全面建議的客戶越來越多﹐傳統指數掛鉤型產品的運用也越來越多。
他說﹐貝萊德幫助客戶管理其投資組合中的很大一部分投資時﹐差不多像一種受托人外包。
Daisy Maxey"
美國資產管理公司貝萊德(BlackRock Inc.)董事長勞倫斯•芬克(Laurence Fink)表示﹐人們對股市泡沫正在形成的話題說得過多﹐並稱現在經濟正處在穩定期。
Gabe Palacio for The Wall Street Journal
貝萊德董事長勞倫斯•芬克
在《華爾街日報》最近一期“視點：高管早餐”(Viewpoints)系列報道中﹐芬克對副總編阿蘭•默里(Alan Murray)說﹐我認為形勢在正常變動﹐現在有空前數量的資金被投入運作﹐最近甚至有大量資金流向了對沖基金。他對有關泡沫的說法不以為然。
他說﹐如今報紙上有關泡沫的文章太多了﹐而危機的發生是不會有預警的。
芬克說﹐金融系統需要改變﹐包括加強披露﹐讓衍生品更多地在場內交易﹐監管也要改革。他還說﹐雖然貝萊德對商業地產行業出現了誤判﹐但它將重新關注這一領域﹔另外資產管理行業正在發生極大的變化。
芬克還表示﹐他沒想到美元的跌幅會如此之劇﹐不過相對於人民幣、巴西雷亞爾等貨幣﹐美元還是會貶值。他說﹐我不知道這是好是壞﹐但願美元走軟會讓更多公司願意在美國生產。
芬克認為﹐在危機方面﹐金融系統需要對社會負起比現在多得多的責任﹐並確保危機不再發生。他說：需要大幅度提高風險對投資者的透明度﹐我覺得現在的情況也的確如此。
芬克說﹐金融系統正大幅降低風險、收縮槓桿。他說﹐還需要讓更多衍生品在場內交易﹐確保每項業務都在表內展開。但芬克認為﹐監管改革也要有序進行﹐他呼籲全球在監管和風險管控方面保持一致。
芬克說﹐有一個需要問的問題是﹐明年為美國提供支持的資金將來自哪裡？他說﹐奧巴馬政府的理論是﹐如果讓利率保持在低位﹐銀行就有可能開始在抵押貸款領域放貸。
他說﹐我預計私營部門將會進場﹐但他指出﹐由於第一留置權人權利不明﹐目前投資者有些不願意購買抵押貸款證券。
他還說﹐要讓私營部門進一步參與抵押貸款市場﹐就需要實行一種新的評級制度。
芬克為抵押貸款證券化產品辯解﹐說它是好東西﹐只是到這個世紀才變壞了。他說﹐30年來﹐抵押貸款證券化產品為美國房主省下了250個基點（的房貸）﹔引起問題的不是其結構﹐而是其承銷和風險接受過程。
在商業地產方面﹐芬克表示﹐貝萊德此前對地產市場走向的觀點或許過於熱情﹐畢竟在2006年以前﹐地產行業經歷了數十年的成功。
他說﹐商業地產並沒有反彈多少﹐而如果低息差和高收益率繼續存在﹐並且美國經濟只能以大約每年2%的速度增長﹐那麼商業地產市場的復蘇將是緩慢的。
不過他說﹐這個領域是貝萊德要重新進入的﹔一年來首次有投資機構出資讓貝萊德投資商業地產﹐因為他們認為現在的估值誘人。
芬克表示﹐資產管理行業正在被重新定義﹐尋求全面建議的客戶越來越多﹐傳統指數掛鉤型產品的運用也越來越多。
他說﹐貝萊德幫助客戶管理其投資組合中的很大一部分投資時﹐差不多像一種受托人外包。
Daisy Maxey"
Roubini Versus Rogers Is Right Debate for 2010: William Pesek - Bloomberg.com
Roubini Versus Rogers Is Right Debate for 2010: William Pesek - Bloomberg.com: "Roubini Versus Rogers Is Right Debate for 2010: William Pesek
Share Business Exchang
Commentary by William Pesek
Nov. 9 (Bloomberg) -- It’s a, well, golden opportunity.
Investor Jim Rogers thinks gold will double to at least $2,000 an ounce. Economist Nouriel Roubini says that’s “utter nonsense.” As these well-known market personalities duke it out, they’re doing us a favor by highlighting a critical debate: Which is the bigger threat -- inflation or deflation?
Inflation, though not to the extent many fear.
Saying this opens me up to a rebuke from the National Inflation Association. It chided Roubini last week for arguing there’s no inflation to drive gold that high. The group said he “doesn’t understand inflation and deflation.”
Then again, who really does these days? If you’re looking at economics and markets through traditional lenses, very little makes sense. Many concepts that seemed like rock-hard truths two years ago are looking shaky.
Just ask John Reed, who helped engineer the merger that created Citigroup Inc. Reed last week apologized for his role in building a company that has taken $45 billion in direct U.S. aid, and said banks that big should be split up. Turns out, the 1999 repeal of the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act separating consumer banking from those involved in capital markets was a terrible idea after all.
Up has become down, and down has become up. Amid such disorientation, the risk is that policy makers will apply old ideas and relationships to new and diverse challenges. One such error would be prematurely taking away the stimulus that’s only now stabilizing growth.
Inflation Risks
Only a fool would dismiss inflation risks at a time when the Federal Reserve, Bank of Japan and Bank of England are holding short-term rates near zero and the European Central Bank isn’t far behind. Central banks are starting to unwind emergency measures introduced to stave off disaster, and that’s appropriate.
The risk is that policy makers go overboard looking for exit strategies. That, in a nutshell, is Roubini’s shtick and it’s hard to refute the views of the New York University professor. Yes, inflation must be contained, but so must the forces of deflation in the short run.
To me, Roubini’s worries are more persuasive than Rogers’s bet on gold. That also goes for Roubini’s view that bubbles pervade rallies in emerging-market stocks. They do.
$2,000 Gold
As 2010 approaches, there are widespread expectations that gold will continue rising. India’s recent purchase of $6.7 billion worth of the precious metal focused attention on the trend.
Yet the global economy is turning Japanese more than those fixated on inflation may realize. In a world awash in liquidity traps, price pressures aren’t the usual threat.
That’s not to say inflation won’t perk up, particularly in emerging markets. The Fed’s ultra-low rates are likely to result in inflation in China, Indonesia and Thailand before they do in the U.S. Bank lending is locked in neutral, at best, even though monetary-base growth in the U.S. has increased exponentially over the past year. Oddly, the main beneficiary of the Fed’s liquidity is emerging-market stocks.
At the same time, highly indebted U.S. households will be spending even less now that unemployment is above 10 percent. Weekend news reports about the jobless rate climbing to a 26- year high were a huge consumption killer.
Too Big to Fail
Couple that with Washington’s enthusiastic embrace of the too-big-to-fail doctrine. Fannie Mae, for example, is looking for yet another public bailout -- $15 billion this time. Executives at Citigroup, American International Group Inc. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. all know the government won’t let them go the way of Lehman Brother Holdings Inc.
That encourages reckless decisions and will slow the process of clearing imbalances in the commercial real-estate market and other sectors. All this suggests that Japan’s experience these past 20 years is more relevant to the U.S. than many admit. Japan is still grappling with deflation.
The key difference between Japan and the U.S. is the concentration of financial distress. In Japan, bad debt was concentrated in the corporate sector; in the U.S. it’s in households.
The U.S. may be sowing the seeds of yet another bad-loan crisis by expanding homeownership anew. How encouraging those who may be better off renting to buy homes in a weak economy is good policy is beyond me. It’s all a bit too Japan-like for comfort.
Japan Lesson
Another lesson Wall Street hasn’t learned from Japan is the power of “I’m sorry.” Reed’s utterance of those very words in an interview with Bloomberg News reporter Bob Ivry was extraordinary because bankers have avoided taking blame.
When rationalizing the crisis, bankers point to everything from too little regulation to too much regulation to low-income Americans fudging mortgage applications. What they haven’t done is look in the mirror and acknowledge the role of their own greed. Nothing dramatizes that more than the fat bonuses bankers are again paying themselves.
They will regret that strategy if markets falter anew. The trick for policy makers is to take some of the froth out of asset prices without going too far, too quickly, and ushering in global deflation.
(William Pesek is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)
Click on “Send Comment” in the sidebar display to send a letter to the editor.
To contact the writer of this column: William Pesek in Tokyo at wpesek@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: November 8, 2009 14:00 EST"
Share Business Exchang
Commentary by William Pesek
Nov. 9 (Bloomberg) -- It’s a, well, golden opportunity.
Investor Jim Rogers thinks gold will double to at least $2,000 an ounce. Economist Nouriel Roubini says that’s “utter nonsense.” As these well-known market personalities duke it out, they’re doing us a favor by highlighting a critical debate: Which is the bigger threat -- inflation or deflation?
Inflation, though not to the extent many fear.
Saying this opens me up to a rebuke from the National Inflation Association. It chided Roubini last week for arguing there’s no inflation to drive gold that high. The group said he “doesn’t understand inflation and deflation.”
Then again, who really does these days? If you’re looking at economics and markets through traditional lenses, very little makes sense. Many concepts that seemed like rock-hard truths two years ago are looking shaky.
Just ask John Reed, who helped engineer the merger that created Citigroup Inc. Reed last week apologized for his role in building a company that has taken $45 billion in direct U.S. aid, and said banks that big should be split up. Turns out, the 1999 repeal of the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act separating consumer banking from those involved in capital markets was a terrible idea after all.
Up has become down, and down has become up. Amid such disorientation, the risk is that policy makers will apply old ideas and relationships to new and diverse challenges. One such error would be prematurely taking away the stimulus that’s only now stabilizing growth.
Inflation Risks
Only a fool would dismiss inflation risks at a time when the Federal Reserve, Bank of Japan and Bank of England are holding short-term rates near zero and the European Central Bank isn’t far behind. Central banks are starting to unwind emergency measures introduced to stave off disaster, and that’s appropriate.
The risk is that policy makers go overboard looking for exit strategies. That, in a nutshell, is Roubini’s shtick and it’s hard to refute the views of the New York University professor. Yes, inflation must be contained, but so must the forces of deflation in the short run.
To me, Roubini’s worries are more persuasive than Rogers’s bet on gold. That also goes for Roubini’s view that bubbles pervade rallies in emerging-market stocks. They do.
$2,000 Gold
As 2010 approaches, there are widespread expectations that gold will continue rising. India’s recent purchase of $6.7 billion worth of the precious metal focused attention on the trend.
Yet the global economy is turning Japanese more than those fixated on inflation may realize. In a world awash in liquidity traps, price pressures aren’t the usual threat.
That’s not to say inflation won’t perk up, particularly in emerging markets. The Fed’s ultra-low rates are likely to result in inflation in China, Indonesia and Thailand before they do in the U.S. Bank lending is locked in neutral, at best, even though monetary-base growth in the U.S. has increased exponentially over the past year. Oddly, the main beneficiary of the Fed’s liquidity is emerging-market stocks.
At the same time, highly indebted U.S. households will be spending even less now that unemployment is above 10 percent. Weekend news reports about the jobless rate climbing to a 26- year high were a huge consumption killer.
Too Big to Fail
Couple that with Washington’s enthusiastic embrace of the too-big-to-fail doctrine. Fannie Mae, for example, is looking for yet another public bailout -- $15 billion this time. Executives at Citigroup, American International Group Inc. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. all know the government won’t let them go the way of Lehman Brother Holdings Inc.
That encourages reckless decisions and will slow the process of clearing imbalances in the commercial real-estate market and other sectors. All this suggests that Japan’s experience these past 20 years is more relevant to the U.S. than many admit. Japan is still grappling with deflation.
The key difference between Japan and the U.S. is the concentration of financial distress. In Japan, bad debt was concentrated in the corporate sector; in the U.S. it’s in households.
The U.S. may be sowing the seeds of yet another bad-loan crisis by expanding homeownership anew. How encouraging those who may be better off renting to buy homes in a weak economy is good policy is beyond me. It’s all a bit too Japan-like for comfort.
Japan Lesson
Another lesson Wall Street hasn’t learned from Japan is the power of “I’m sorry.” Reed’s utterance of those very words in an interview with Bloomberg News reporter Bob Ivry was extraordinary because bankers have avoided taking blame.
When rationalizing the crisis, bankers point to everything from too little regulation to too much regulation to low-income Americans fudging mortgage applications. What they haven’t done is look in the mirror and acknowledge the role of their own greed. Nothing dramatizes that more than the fat bonuses bankers are again paying themselves.
They will regret that strategy if markets falter anew. The trick for policy makers is to take some of the froth out of asset prices without going too far, too quickly, and ushering in global deflation.
(William Pesek is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)
Click on “Send Comment” in the sidebar display to send a letter to the editor.
To contact the writer of this column: William Pesek in Tokyo at wpesek@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: November 8, 2009 14:00 EST"
訂閱：
意見 (Atom)