Skip to comments.From Bad to Awful (Is Gold the Answer to Doom'n'Gloom)
Posted on 12/27/2003 1:32:38 PM PST by shrinkermdEdited on 04/22/2004 11:50:42 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
An Interview With Hugh Hendry -- As you enter the Odey Asset Management conference room in London, you'll see a large painting of a fog-enshrouded skiff that a lone figure is piloting toward a dull and faraway light. It goes a long way to explaining the firm's attitude toward investing. Hedge-fund manager Hugh Hendry happily concedes that he's an apostate from fundamentalism, uses technical analysis liberally, and hasn't met with a company management in "five years, thank God." The Scotsman with Glasgow working-class roots admits to having no friends beyond the Reuters mini-terminal he carries in his pocket. He eschews the focused-fund approach and what he calls Taliban-like fundamentalism in the market.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The stock market sees a bright future for cheap drugs. It sees a lousy future for expensive drugs.
Seems to me the market for 'cheap drugs' is flat or declining by definition; the future has to be in 'the next thing'.
A sick person with no other choice will choose the drug that works, price be damned.
Collector coins seem to go high when the various gold sellers promote the 'confiscation proof' story. Anything less than a MS 65 or 66 is really not of interest to serious collectors, even serious beginners usually wanting 63 and above. All that MS 59,60 etc. stuff is not really rare enough to sustain a high premium for long in a down gold market. I generally buy MS 65/66 stuff for my collection and low grade 'bullion' coins for gold as a metal. One of the better and often overlooked bullion coins is the Mexican 50 peso. 37.5 grams of gold (1.2 oz) and it usually sells for the same premium over spot as a 1 oz. ingot (which makes the premium less per ounce). They're really big, good looking coins. It's just plain fun to stuff a few dozen of them in your pockets and walk around jingling sometimes. Maples, Eagles, Pandas, Krugerands are all very good choices as well, of course. In any event, I suggest staying away from any of the minor coins, bullion medallions, etc if you think you may need to liquidate them in a hurry, since thay are not as readily recognized by anyone other than dealers. The minor coins and bullion medallions and ingots do make a nice collection if you are not worried about rapid (possibly black market) sale in an emergency, and generaly have a very low premium on them.
I find it incongruous that someone on "Free Republic", presumably knowing right and wrong about what is protected intellectual property, could just lift something from Barron's, in toto, on the very day that it's published and "give it away" to the world at large......that is, pure and simple, theft.. Maybe that's what they mean by "FREE" REpublic. Just take it and give it away free. It seems to me that Mr Free Republic, whoever that is, is facilitating a major copyright violation, and subjecting himself to legal sanctions, unless he (Mr FP) makes it OVERT that one mustn't do that on his site. Bad Freeper, no biscuit.
Maybe this illustrates the difference between conservatives and libertarians (the latter actually understanding the principle of private property)
SO I went to the WSJ Online and signed up for $79 a year so I could read it legally....(WSJ online gets one Barron's as well). I had this for a long time but I let it lapse a while ago). $79 a year is 22 cents a day....well within the reach of the average conservative.
Having written all these I see on the FRP site that LA Times and Wash Post sued for copyright infringement in the past, and won. Good for them. Obviously some of the people who are posting couldn't care less. If I were Mr Freep, I would care very much, and not just for legal liability reasons. After all, how can people prattle on about restoring the Constitution, etc, when they can't even follow a simple commonsense rule -- at the heart of a free society--don't take other people's property?
It bothers me that a paying subscriber to an online publication would post it to FR. Am I wrong in this judgement?
He does cut through all the flim flam and hype and just makes his point, doesn't he. I have to read the article again and see if I missed anything. Hope he isn't one of those darn "book readers".
If the policy of FR is not to include articles from the WSJ and Barron's, so be it. I have no problem with that. Perhaps it would be better for someone to contact Barron's and see what they want.
Remaining ignorant of important matters does not seem to be a protection of property to me. How can one claim ownership of a political position on the economy and gold when the same position is held by so many? Read any KITCO gold posting, Bill Murphy, Chapman, any of the free and paid gold newsletters and you will find the same information that the author posed. This was an unpaid (presumably) interview of a public figure (Hedge Fund Operator) and not a creative work of literary art.
I guess if Barron's and the WSJ wish to remain exclusive they will achieve this, but,again, to what end?
Personally I'm not a fan of numismatic coins. I've come across some people who got burned on gradings
I was a coin collector before anybody ever heard of coin collecting.
I stopped when standardized grading was getting started.
The problem is that "values" vary manyfold over grading differences that are not real or not reproduceable among independent graders.
I can easily grade, and tell the difference between, F-12, XF-40, and AU-50 for most coins.
For most rare American coins, the move from F-12 to AU-50 triples the value. So far, so good.
I can't, and I don't believe anyone else can either, reliably grade over MS-63 to MS-67. This "difference" can carry a price premium of tenfold or more.
Many, many people have lost lots and lots of money in "collectible" coin butcher shops, mostly over the difference between MS-63 and MS-65. To my eye and my educated opinion, there is no difference.
The problem with numismatic gold is worse. It is the same problem with gold stocks-if gold ever becomes money (possible, not probable)-it will be because markets that recognize surrogates have ceased to function.
The day your MS-65 1907 high-relief Roman numeral double eagle becomes money is the day its value will drop to whatever 0.91 oz fine gold is worth that day.
Numismatic gold is beautiful, but a very, very poor emergency plan.
Bullion, as you point out, is much better for a rainy day.