Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oil and Gold Decoupling?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Oil and Gold Decoupling?

    I noticed today that oil took a hit, but Gold seemed to stay steady and even rebound. In the last few months, Gold's moves down either equaled or surpassed oil's.

    Does anyone think this means that the oil run is getting exhausted and it's time for a sector rotation back into gold?

  • #2
    Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

    Originally posted by skurla2000 View Post
    I noticed today that oil took a hit, but Gold seemed to stay steady and even rebound. In the last few months, Gold's moves down either equaled or surpassed oil's.

    Does anyone think this means that the oil run is getting exhausted and it's time for a sector rotation back into gold?
    Man, it's only one day. They don't always track in lockstep. I've posted this chart before... maybe it was in the select area, I forget. From a longterm perspective, don't see any compelling reason not to buy gold. It is cheap when priced in oil. Or oil is expensive priced in gold. But iTulip sez that the price of oil has been artificially suppressed for a long time. Now it is trying to get back up to where it should have been by now. Who knows when/if there will be a correction along the way in the price of oil? And how much... 10%, 20%? Meanwhile, probably no harm in buying gold instead... depending on one's tolerance for being jerked around by low-volume summer whipsaws by the big players.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

      OK, this is an unabashed silver bug article. I admit it.

      How cheap is "cheaper than cheapest?" Pretty darn cheap, huh?

      ________________

      Will Arabian investors do a Hunt to silver? - By: Peter J. Cooper




      The best-read article on this blog is about the selling of Hunt Petroleum for $4.2 billion recently and the possibility that some of this vast sum might be invested in the silver market, in some kind of a re-run of the Hunt Brothers’ silver pool of the later 1970s. That is pure speculation, but there is nothing speculative about the outlook for silver. If gold has bright prospects due to inflation over the next couple of years, then silver shines even brighter. For in previous periods of financial turmoil and high inflation silver has always out performed gold by a factor of more than two. It is only the volatility of silver prices which puts investors off. But that is increasingly seen as a small price to pay for out performance.

      In modern Arabia silver is often mixed with gold to create an alloy known as white gold, with a 25 per cent silver content, that is popular in local jewelry. Purer silver is used in traditional handicrafts such as Omani daggers and jewelry boxes. But the fact that silver costs less then one-fiftieth of the price of gold means that it is not often treated as a store of value or a financial instrument.

      The silver futures contract on the Dubai Gold & Commodities Exchange is one of the least traded contracts, and physical imports of Dubai totaling some $250 million are dwarfed by the 20 per cent of world gold production now believed to pass through the City of Gold as Dubai is known.

      However, silver is about to have its moment of glory. Worldwide inflation is mounting. The Chinese have just agreed an 85 per cent rise in iron ore. Oil prices are double their level a year ago. Food prices have soared. Consumer price inflation is up wherever you look.
      Investors and speculators are finding that the value of assets like real estate, company shares and bonds are all under pressure from inflation. House prices started from an inflated high and are now deflating as inflation drives mortgage costs up and disposable income down. Inflation hits company profits and therefore their share prices. Bonds provide fixed income and negative returns after allowing for inflation.

      In inflationary scenarios investors need an asset class with relatively fixed supply that will at least increase with inflation and is likely to attract speculative demand as a consequence. Precious metals fulfill this role with low annual production in relation to total supply, and become monetized as fiat currencies lose their value.

      But why should silver out perform gold in this environment? From a technical point of view there is a very large outstanding short position in the Comex futures pit. That means a sustained rise in the price of silver will be amplified by the shorts running for cover, and having to buy silver at whatever the price.

      There is also a more fundamental reason to be confident about silver: the market is considerably smaller than gold. The gold market is estimated to be worth something north of $4 trillion while the whole silver market is reckoned to be valued at between $16-25 billion. Therefore, it takes considerably less money to move the silver price higher than it does gold, and that is one reason for silver’s price volatility.

      Over time the long term silver to gold ratio is 15, that is to say gold is worth 15 times more than silver. Except not at the moment, the silver to gold ratio is 52, which means historic undervaluation. If you throw in the oil to gold ratio, which shows gold to be historically undervalued as well, then silver looks even cheaper. But silver has been catching up with gold and is up 283 per cent over the past five years, ahead of gold’s 156 per cent rise. It still looks cheap.

      In March a 1,000 ounce gold bar would have set you back more than $1 million, while the same amount of silver could be had for a mere $22,000. Silver has still not crossed its all-time high of $54 reached long ago in 1980 or even the average selling price of $24 an ounce 28 years ago. It is the most undervalued of all the commodities.

      Yet silver is actually consumed in vast quantities by many industrial processes and a vital material for electronic devices like mobile phones and personal computers.

      In fact, one of the most amazing facts about silver is that supply has outstripped demand for the past 18 years. Annual silver supply deficits have run at between 70 million and 200 million ounces. And it is because silver is consumed by industry that available stocks are just a tiny fraction of gold reserves which just pile up in bank vaults.

      A scarce resource with unique properties as a conductor of electricity and a traditional unit of currency, silver has a double hedge against inflation as both an industrial commodity and a precious metal. It ought to rise in value now for both reasons.

      Perhaps it is the history of the silver crash and the Hunt brothers pooling of the silver market in the 1970s that still hangs over the price of silver. But as investors becoming increasingly desperate to find an effective hedge against inflation there is surely going to come a tipping point when that Comex short position is challenged and a price surge creates a buying momentum of its own. Intriguingly the Hunt family recently sold their oil business for $4.2 billion, leading to speculation that they might planning to repurchase the family silver.

      You do not get many opportunities to make a fortune in a lifetime but buying and holding silver at these price levels over the next few years is almost guaranteed to be one of them. All it takes is a little imagination to see that all that glitters does not have to be gold.
      Peter J. Cooper

      http://arabianmoney.net/


      ___________________

      And an astonishing video of the view from the top of the Burj Dubai - during construction, hanging from scaffolding a half mile up in the air. I would refuse to climb up there even if I had a gun pointed at my head. No thanks! http://arabianmoney.net/2008/07/05/b...-from-the-top/




      Last edited by Contemptuous; July 21, 2008, 07:09 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

        I think they will both go up, but Gold and Silver will have a bolder move now that the ratio is around 7:1.

        http://www.mineweb.net/mineweb/view/...7077&sn=Detail

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

          Largo - iTulip suggests that oil is actually the broadest and deepest common denominator of "money" in the 21st Century. If so, your linked article gets the distinction wrong. The actionable advice however remains correct, that the oil / gold ratio is skewed way high in favor of oil at present, so that gold remains the 'value' play. But on the subject of distinguishing one as money from the other as commodity, what I've read around here suggests this article is percieving fundamental differences between gold and oil which don't exist, and of the two, oil is actually more "money-like" than gold in this decade.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

            Originally posted by Lukester View Post
            Largo - iTulip suggests that oil is actually the broadest and deepest common denominator of "money" in the 21st Century. If so, your linked article gets the distinction wrong. The actionable advice however remains correct, that the oil / gold ratio is skewed way high in favor of oil at present, so that gold remains the 'value' play. But on the subject of distinguishing one as money from the other as commodity, what I've read around here suggests this article is percieving fundamental differences between gold and oil which don't exist, and of the two, oil is actually more "money-like" than gold in this decade.
            There is at least one fundamental difference between the two: the amount of gold held by the world collectively is equal to about 50 years' worth of production; the amount of oil held by the world is equal to about 50 days worth of production. Thus, the price of oil is largely determined by the amount produced versus the amount consumed.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

              Thanks Mad Scientist for your comment. I was under the impression that Gold is the best proxy for oil. What happens the day when there is very limited to no oil left? The only hedge against inflation or real money would then be gold or silver no?

              Besides, the increase in price reduces demand of oil a lot more than gold no? Thus, forcing gold to "meet" oil?
              Last edited by LargoWinch; July 22, 2008, 06:50 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

                Charles, do you mind me asking were you got that data? That is a real eye openner!

                One thing for sure, I don't have space in my 580sf Toronto apt to store barrels of oil (yet...until they reach $1,000/brl maybe one will sit on my balcony as investment!)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

                  Originally posted by LargoWinch View Post
                  Charles, do you mind me asking were you got that data? That is a real eye openner!

                  One thing for sure, I don't have space in my 580sf Toronto apt to store barrels of oil (yet...until they reach $1,000/brl maybe one will sit on my balcony as investment!)
                  Gold:
                  http://www.grist.org/news/counter/2000/04/05/fools/

                  Oil:
                  http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/gifs/Fig11.gif

                  There are other sources I've seen that are close to these estimates.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

                    Charles, then what is the purpose of Gold (yeah baby with a big "G")?

                    Gold is only used in jewellry and some electronic components I believe, while oil is used in everything.

                    Why would ppl then put any $$$ in Gold? All the money should go in oil? (see my comment to LukeL.).

                    Ultimately, gold will play a role no?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

                      Originally posted by LargoWinch View Post
                      Charles, then what is the purpose of Gold (yeah baby with a big "G")?

                      Gold is only used in jewellry and some electronic components I believe, while oil is used in everything.

                      Why would ppl then put any $$$ in Gold? All the money should go in oil? (see my comment to LukeL.).

                      Ultimately, gold will play a role no?
                      The only value Gold has is the value people think it has - it basically has no utility - and so in this way it is a purely speculative play that people will trade their stuff for it in the future. This is not necessarily a bad bet though, as gold has been used as currency for thousands of years.

                      "It gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. 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." - Warren Buffet

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

                        Originally posted by CharlesTMungerFan View Post
                        The only value Gold has is the value people think it has - it basically has no utility - and so in this way it is a purely speculative play that people will trade their stuff for it in the future. This is not necessarily a bad bet though, as gold has been used as currency for thousands of years.

                        "It gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. 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." - Warren Buffet
                        Wonder what Martians use to keep their politicians from debasing their money to zero? Water, it seems.
                        Ed.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

                          Originally posted by LargoWinch View Post
                          Charles, then what is the purpose of Gold (yeah baby with a big "G")?
                          God made gold so the Arabs and Russians, who apparently have more oil than they know what to do with, have something to buy with their US $...:rolleyes:

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

                            Originally posted by LargoWinch View Post
                            Thanks Mad Scientist for your comment.
                            LargoWinch -

                            With all respect to you, I am not the "Mad Scientist".

                            This is a little moo-moo-cow-bell that FRED stuck on me this past weekend to get his jollies. Apparently the notion that inviduals identities around here are their own property is an idea FRED regards with genuine puzzlement. As I can't very well alter FRED's name (and as I'm quite good with word-puns I could come up with some other really comical alternatives), it seems I am currently stuck with his latest toying around with my new handle. However I will repost this text verbatim any time anyone calls me "Mad Scientist", until FRED gets tired of this game. Or maybe he'll just boot me off of these pages to show "who has the last word", which would be a real editorial tour-de-force. :rolleyes:

                            I have never liked any part of me being "owned" by someone else, even if it's just a name - it's an extremely minor point, but not inconsequential. FRED might try to understand that some of us have put forward contributions around here which the editorial line seems to have quietly adopted over time, and I for one have noted the customary "hat tip" seems a traditional courtesy which is dispensed somewhat arbitrarily. I've seen one or two ideas which were bitterly disputed around here a couple of years ago become thoroughly worked into the core of iTulip editorials, without a whisper of acknowledgment of where they were come by.

                            Now a couple of days ago, I made a simple request that the editor not feel entitled to attach to my posts any verbiage he finds entertaining, but which I don't wish to see attached to my name. That request has been ignored. One is left with the distinct impression, that the right to determine what one is named around here is regarded editorially as a "privilege", or maybe some sort of game, where if one ingratiates oneself with the editor one can "earn dispensations", to then be called by more grandiose circus-names, or maybe even win "hat tips", rather than get saddled with sillier circus-names, and not win any "hat tips". Pardon me therefore for expressing my reaction with a touch of acid. I find the editorial read of the protocols here questionable, arbitrary and unacceptable.

                            Can someone explain to me why I cannot choose my own name but must defer to this FRED for "guidance" on the matter?

                            "Hat tips on adopted broad theses are for iTulip chums", and "Circus-names are for the Editor to choose". Eh? Are we having enough fun with this yet?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Oil and Gold Decoupling?

                              Originally posted by Lukester View Post
                              LargoWinch -

                              With all respect to you, I am not the "Mad Scientist".

                              This is a little moo-moo-cow-bell that FRED stuck on me this past weekend to get his jollies. Apparently the notion that inviduals identities around here are their own property is an idea FRED regards with genuine puzzlement. As I can't very well alter FRED's name (and as I'm quite good with word-puns I could come up with some other really comical alternatives), it seems I am currently stuck with his latest toying around with my new handle. However I will repost this text verbatim any time anyone calls me "Mad Scientist", until FRED gets tired of this game. Or maybe he'll just boot me off of these pages to show "who has the last word", which would be a real editorial tour-de-force. :rolleyes:

                              I have never liked any part of me being "owned" by someone else, even if it's just a name - it's an extremely minor point, but not inconsequential. FRED might try to understand that some of us have put forward contributions around here which the editorial line seems to have quietly adopted over time, and I for one have noted the customary "hat tip" seems a traditional courtesy which is dispensed somewhat arbitrarily. I've seen one or two ideas which were bitterly disputed around here a couple of years ago become thoroughly worked into the core of iTulip editorials, without a whisper of acknowledgment of where they were come by.

                              Now a couple of days ago, I made a simple request that the editor not feel entitled to attach to my posts any verbiage he finds entertaining, but which I don't wish to see attached to my name. That request has been ignored. One is left with the distinct impression, that the right to determine what one is named around here is regarded editorially as a "privilege", or maybe some sort of game, where if one ingratiates oneself with the editor one can "earn dispensations", to then be called by more grandiose circus-names, or maybe even win "hat tips", rather than get saddled with sillier circus-names, and not win any "hat tips". Pardon me therefore for expressing my reaction with a touch of acid. I find the editorial read of the protocols here questionable, arbitrary and unacceptable.

                              Can someone explain to me why I cannot choose my own name but must defer to this FRED for "guidance" on the matter?

                              "Hat tips on adopted broad theses are for iTulip chums", and "Circus-names are for the Editor to choose". Eh? Are we having enough fun with this yet?
                              To FRED, first I'd suggest you delete the "Scientist" part and just go with "Mad." That leaves it to the readers to decide does "mad" mean crazy or does it mean "pissed off"" To me it makes little difference which one chooses as either more often that not seems to fit.

                              Secondly, FRED, you might PM Luke and suggest to him that if you receive a signed verifiable letter from his physician stating that he is back on his medications and has passed three random blood tests that at least through that point prove he is taking his medicines, then I would vote in Luke's favor that he be allowed to choose his own little name.
                              Jim 69 y/o

                              "...Texans...the lowest form of white man there is." Robert Duvall, as Al Sieber, in "Geronimo." (see "Location" for examples.)

                              Dedicated to the idea that all people deserve a chance for a healthy productive life. B&M Gates Fdn.

                              Good judgement comes from experience; experience comes from bad judgement. Unknown.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X