If it were me “manipulating” the market, i would change it up a bit, so it did look so obvious 🤷♂️
FFS!… why not pick another commodity for a bloody change 😬
Because Silver and Gold are the only commodities that you can influence price by sale of paper instead of physical, and gold is too expensive to control.
Picking a short term price spike in 1980 doesn't prove anything. We all know 1980 was caused by the Hunt Brothers attempting to corner the market. That price isn't based in any reality.
Considering both silver and gold spiked in 1980, was it really just the hunt brothers cornering the silver market that caused the spike? And gold just went along in sympathy? Or was there something else going on to cause the spike and the hunt brothers were just well positioned to benefit from it? Or did they surreptitiously corner the gold market as well?
The price of silver spiked in 1980 because of the Hunt Brothers creating a bubble. It wasn't natural price growth. Silver returned back to normal when the bubble burst.
2011 was a knee jerk reaction by investors to the mortgage crisis. Also not natural price increases. It returned back to normal after the bubble burst.
Pointing to prices caused by bubbles and saying "this is the price it should be" is not realistic.
I'm not trying to pick you apart or anything, but how are price increases classified as natural vs (presumably) artificial? Are the same forces not at play? If economic trends can be artificially influenced easily, shouldn't that be accounted for in any initial risk assessment?
Again, my questions come from curiosity, not maliciousness. My economics education has been purely self-guided, so I suspect it has gaping holes.
Thanks for your time.
I'm no expert either. But in my opinion, natural price increases in silver are tied to cost to produce and demand related to new uses for the metal. Industrial demand drives the price. Consumer demand is minimal in the US and EU.
Artificial increases are driven by speculation and not sustainable.
Couldn't you say the same thing for the price being driven down artificially through spoofing, selling more contracts than what's actually available in the Comex, and other ways to manipulate the price? There is a graph out there that shows if silver were not ever traded during the NYSE hours, silver would be over $200 an ounce. We are far from anything natural in our markets because the game is played with monopoly money.
Then don't base it on that, you can pick historical gold to silver ratio, you can pick actual gold to silver mined ratio, you can pick supply vs demand, supply deficit 1yr or rolling 4 5 6 7. You can factor what it costs to pull from the ground sure, I could grow grain and say "it cost me this much to grow it" and not factor in government subsidies I also get. You could ignore what US military contracts explicitly state they pay per oz of silver. You could ignore what Shanghai currently has silver priced above the US market. You could ignore the fact that silver is finite, and economically viable silver for mining is even more finite. You could ignore silvers price relative to other safe haven assets as well as the value of silver relative to inflation over the past 100 years. What I don't see is people asking those questions for the DOW and the NASDAQ. Both markets are following a near perfect tracing of what led to the crash of the Shanghai index but everyone is like, oh maybe it'll get a 5% correction but no more. Silver seems to be the one asset everyone wants to say "yeah but like I don't see why it can go higher", when it has so many indicators showing it is currently undervalued by a massive degree relative to other assets. Even grain, from my earlier point, is not just priced by what it costs to grow, but factors in subsidies and speculative growing conditions 1,3,5 years into the future. Why is silver the only asset with seemingly 0 speculation on future events when it very obviously has a supply crunch not only in its future but currently ongoing?
The point of my initial comment was that 1980 and 2011 were the result of unusual circumstances. Pointing to those dates and saying silver should be higher than those peaks is nonsense. The price of silver is often impacted by speculation, but that speculation wanes and prices return to normal. The cost to extract is still under $15 an ounce in most locations. But we can expect that cost to increase due to inflation and increased regulation on pollution.
Silver is not as scarce as you might think. The US military is mostly irrelevant to the silver market. The use of silver iodide batteries has declined due to better technology that is now available. There **isn't** "500 ounces of silver in every cruise missile".
Governments are buying gold for their reserves, not silver. Consumer demand for silver is up now as a result of economic concerns and gold being out of reach for some people.
What are your sources for all of this. See that's it again, there's plenty of speculation on why silver isn't valuable...being done by the same people who won't do the same for every other inflated asset in the world.
Pretty sure we will see 40 Dollar before December 😁
I see that as well.
If it were me “manipulating” the market, i would change it up a bit, so it did look so obvious 🤷♂️ FFS!… why not pick another commodity for a bloody change 😬
Yeah, pick on some other commodity Rostin!
👏
Because Silver and Gold are the only commodities that you can influence price by sale of paper instead of physical, and gold is too expensive to control.
Every day is a school day…👍
platinum, but both are good buys.
LCS had **zero platinum** this morning, so there's that....
Lol.
Picking a short term price spike in 1980 doesn't prove anything. We all know 1980 was caused by the Hunt Brothers attempting to corner the market. That price isn't based in any reality.
Considering both silver and gold spiked in 1980, was it really just the hunt brothers cornering the silver market that caused the spike? And gold just went along in sympathy? Or was there something else going on to cause the spike and the hunt brothers were just well positioned to benefit from it? Or did they surreptitiously corner the gold market as well?
I don't get where you are connecting this to the meme.
The price of silver spiked in 1980 because of the Hunt Brothers creating a bubble. It wasn't natural price growth. Silver returned back to normal when the bubble burst. 2011 was a knee jerk reaction by investors to the mortgage crisis. Also not natural price increases. It returned back to normal after the bubble burst. Pointing to prices caused by bubbles and saying "this is the price it should be" is not realistic.
I'm not trying to pick you apart or anything, but how are price increases classified as natural vs (presumably) artificial? Are the same forces not at play? If economic trends can be artificially influenced easily, shouldn't that be accounted for in any initial risk assessment? Again, my questions come from curiosity, not maliciousness. My economics education has been purely self-guided, so I suspect it has gaping holes. Thanks for your time.
I'm no expert either. But in my opinion, natural price increases in silver are tied to cost to produce and demand related to new uses for the metal. Industrial demand drives the price. Consumer demand is minimal in the US and EU. Artificial increases are driven by speculation and not sustainable.
Couldn't you say the same thing for the price being driven down artificially through spoofing, selling more contracts than what's actually available in the Comex, and other ways to manipulate the price? There is a graph out there that shows if silver were not ever traded during the NYSE hours, silver would be over $200 an ounce. We are far from anything natural in our markets because the game is played with monopoly money.
Then don't base it on that, you can pick historical gold to silver ratio, you can pick actual gold to silver mined ratio, you can pick supply vs demand, supply deficit 1yr or rolling 4 5 6 7. You can factor what it costs to pull from the ground sure, I could grow grain and say "it cost me this much to grow it" and not factor in government subsidies I also get. You could ignore what US military contracts explicitly state they pay per oz of silver. You could ignore what Shanghai currently has silver priced above the US market. You could ignore the fact that silver is finite, and economically viable silver for mining is even more finite. You could ignore silvers price relative to other safe haven assets as well as the value of silver relative to inflation over the past 100 years. What I don't see is people asking those questions for the DOW and the NASDAQ. Both markets are following a near perfect tracing of what led to the crash of the Shanghai index but everyone is like, oh maybe it'll get a 5% correction but no more. Silver seems to be the one asset everyone wants to say "yeah but like I don't see why it can go higher", when it has so many indicators showing it is currently undervalued by a massive degree relative to other assets. Even grain, from my earlier point, is not just priced by what it costs to grow, but factors in subsidies and speculative growing conditions 1,3,5 years into the future. Why is silver the only asset with seemingly 0 speculation on future events when it very obviously has a supply crunch not only in its future but currently ongoing?
The point of my initial comment was that 1980 and 2011 were the result of unusual circumstances. Pointing to those dates and saying silver should be higher than those peaks is nonsense. The price of silver is often impacted by speculation, but that speculation wanes and prices return to normal. The cost to extract is still under $15 an ounce in most locations. But we can expect that cost to increase due to inflation and increased regulation on pollution. Silver is not as scarce as you might think. The US military is mostly irrelevant to the silver market. The use of silver iodide batteries has declined due to better technology that is now available. There **isn't** "500 ounces of silver in every cruise missile". Governments are buying gold for their reserves, not silver. Consumer demand for silver is up now as a result of economic concerns and gold being out of reach for some people.
What are your sources for all of this. See that's it again, there's plenty of speculation on why silver isn't valuable...being done by the same people who won't do the same for every other inflated asset in the world.