RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:value"I totally agree with Stratocheif's perspective."
then are you taking his advice that it is "Time to get out of miners" now instead of when gold was at $2000?
i am just revealing how extremely negative biased their opinions are. i am not stopping them from posting nor is it possible to stop people from posting.
just like his comment that gcm only produces 200k is an attempt to dismiss anything positive of gcm to push a biased negative narrative. only a single asset producing 200k is very different from what gcm is, multiple assets that will go from 200k to 600k in 2 years (these are experienced mine builders. it is not like they can't build it). in the real world, additional long life tier 1 assets in the pipeline certainly matter a lot and increases the value of a company.
but because of extreme negative bias, all those other assets are conveniently omitted to push the 100% glass empty agenda.
all the facts are not put on the table, but only a select few to push the negative agenda. all the positive facts are conveniently omitted.
just like Brioche in his attempt put down management, he conveniently omits telfer who has a great track record with multiple successes. If management is so bad then why can't he name a single gold miner management team better than telfer+woodyer?
and his convenient omission of segovia+marmato+toro generating huge cash to fund soto, but instead he wants to sell the negative narrative that soto can only be funded by dilution and nothing else.
if they are allowed to push 100% negative narratives, then i and anybody else should be allowed to counter their negative narratives.
it is very normal for investors to post positive comments because the investor actually holds the shares and have a financial interest in the company. but when someone posts only 100% negative comments and nothing positive, trying to convince people to sell all their shares, it is highly suspicious why he is there at all. certainly not out of the goodness of their heart to help investors because investors would be more helped when they are told to sell shares at
extremely high sentiment when gold was at $2000 instead of
extremely low sentiment.
profittaker1 wrote:
I totally agree with Stratocheif's perspective. He is just talking from his personal experience and risk tolerance. That being said, gold stocks are either super cheap or the price of gold has to tank to catch up. Adjusting for the current price of gold, only a few periods in the last 25 years have gold stocks been this cheap and most were very short lived. Briefly in 2008, mid 2015-early 2016, briefly in 2020 and now for the last couple months. In 1980 with high inflation, when the Fed was in a rate hike cycle, gold hit its all time inflation adjusted high. There were geopolitical events which influenced things but there are geopolitical risks now too (Ukraine, Taiwan). As someone who has studied economics and the market a long time I am very curious to watch (and bet on) the outcome. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Gold could test $1600 next week depending on how seriously the market takes what Powell said though he has lost a lot of credibility. Nothing anyone says (except Powell and the Fed, maybe Eric Sprott) will affect the stock price. Let's keep the discussion going either way.