Today is the 6th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist acts in 2001. So it might seem an appropriate date to discuss the relationship between the price of Gold and geopolitical risks.
In general I tend to favor the liquidity factor as an explanation for high gold prices, as well as the link with the oil price, but ironically last week took place the most spectacular rise in the price of gold that I have witnessed since 2006.
Was it related to the anniversary of 9/11.
My first instinct was to relate it to the weakness of stock markets (with some lag), the crisis of liquidity and the particularly weak jobs statistics in the US on Friday.
But many see a relationship with geopolitical risk, and from there you might even create whole conspiracy theories about the price of Gold and the manipulation of the market by the central banks.
I think it is fun, and partly true in the short run. But in the long run, the gold price is dependent on more fundamental factors.
11 September 2007
05 September 2007
When "Peak Gold" joins Peak Oil
A very interesting posting in today's "Seeking Alpha", here
It seems to me that it's a very valid argument in favor of Gold.
Tangible things (and Gold is the ultimate tangible asset ) get more and more difficult to find and extract, whereas intangibles (money, credit and even technology) are commoditized.
The miners, the farmers and maybe even the industrial workers of the world might get some advantages after all.
In the long run, technology is going to be redirected toward real and tangible things, that used to be all important before the dot com revolution.
I remember for example that when we studied Geography (along with History) in High School, we used to examine the natural ressources of a country, along with its climate and lanscapes.
And we could how greatly it determined its economy and even history.
It seems to me that it's a very valid argument in favor of Gold.
Tangible things (and Gold is the ultimate tangible asset ) get more and more difficult to find and extract, whereas intangibles (money, credit and even technology) are commoditized.
The miners, the farmers and maybe even the industrial workers of the world might get some advantages after all.
In the long run, technology is going to be redirected toward real and tangible things, that used to be all important before the dot com revolution.
I remember for example that when we studied Geography (along with History) in High School, we used to examine the natural ressources of a country, along with its climate and lanscapes.
And we could how greatly it determined its economy and even history.
Interesting...
"Those concerned about the worst-case scenario recalled that large put contracts were placed on airline stocks, notably American, a unit of AMR and United Airlines, in the weeks leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks. "
This is an extract of this article
This is an extract of this article
04 September 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)