Posts by quiettrucker12

It’s all just one big game right now. Gold keeps sliding toward the 1610-1625 range, the Dollar is tanking, and the stock market is somehow ripping higher... we'll see how this plays out. Personally, I'm watching to see if the Dollar hits 77 by February or March.

quiettrucker12 said:The DXY is carving out a double bottom and bouncing hard

That’s just a dead cat bounce. We won't see a real bottom until it dips below those September lows back in early January—and even then, I wouldn't expect much upward movement. This is all part of a downward trend toward roughly 77.

Patrick Moore3 said:Hey zvrk... 200-day is busted and we're staring down that 100-day.
What are the actual scenarios here? And how likely are they?

Nothing happens until the selling pressure lets up. This is a weird setup because everything is playing out against the backdrop of an expected Dollar slide. I’m guessing we see 1600-1625 at the earliest. There’s a slim chance it drops harder tomorrow only to claw back above the 100WMA by the close—that would be huge—but honestly, I doubt it's realistic.

Technically speaking, watching that 1526 floor hold (or fail) is interesting. Hypothetically, if that support snaps, the whole narrative shifts. It would mean the massive correction we've been recovering from actually isn't over yet. In that case, things could stall out somewhere below 1500.

The silver lining? Even the worst-case scenario shouldn't drag on forever. In my book, maybe 2-3 weeks tops.

I'm more interested in the "why." Maybe central banks (China...) decided to load up on gold following Obama's reelection and once it became crystal clear what the Federal Reserve was planning. Or maybe there's news floating around that hasn't hit the wires yet, but they already know.

Edit: Gold has an ace up its sleeve: physical demand. During dips like this, people buy in, and that demand eventually puts a floor under the price. It happens every single time as long as the bull market is alive.

The biggest opportunity here—now that we know May 5th wasn't actually the bottom—is that the market is essentially trying to manufacture one right now. It’s just a waiting game to see how far the floor needs to drop before investors actually react. Sure, there are more pessimistic scenarios on the table, but they feel less likely to me. If you want to look at the darker side, corrections like this rarely wrap up in a single day.

We'll see. Breaking below the 75 WMA isn't great news—it complicates the whole picture. It means that on May 5th, we either hit rock bottom or the price tanked instead of rallying (which is the worst-case scenario, though maybe unlikely). There’s a chance this is more than just some quick manipulation or hunting for stops. Right now, it looks like we won't even hold the 200 DMA. By dropping below that 75 WMA, a ton of new scenarios have opened up. If the 200 DMA gives way, we might see buyers stepping in at the stops set just below it, around $1655. Honestly, that feels like one of the more optimistic paths right now. Sentiment is incredibly low, so strictly speaking, it shouldn't go much lower; our final line of defense remains the 100 WMA at $1631.

I’m just wondering if the Dollar index can hang out below this zone for a bit before sliding down toward 77 by February or March. If we get a bounce after that, it could head even lower, potentially pushing gold toward that 1870-1880 target.

Robert Vaughn10 said:And what’s your take on those "miners" mentioned in my previous link regarding the gold coin sale?😂

😂

The USD stalled today, even though it really should have kept sliding. We'll see what tomorrow brings, but this is a massive line in the sand for the Dollar.

Gold is still stuck in this consolidation phase—it bounced off the lower trendline today—but silver is actually showing some life. I wouldn't be surprised if the 100 DMA puts a floor under the slide; honestly, I don't see it dropping below that level if the USD keeps losing steam:

silver 100 dma

My main focus is gold. I’m watching to see if it can hold above the 75 WMA like I’m expecting. As long as it stays north of that, we're fine. If it slips below, things get messy, but let's hope it holds steady.

Mining stocks showed a bit of muscle today, if you can even call it that.
🤷😂.

Robert Vaughn10 said:We'll have to wait and see how the market reacts once they finally resolve this fiscal cliff situation. I should probably add a disclaimer to my own outlook: if they actually decide to scrap the debt ceiling, gold might catch a bit of an upward trend. That said, I don't expect a massive spike in the short term—within the next few months to year, it's unlikely we'll see gold absolutely moon.

The debt ceiling is a non-issue. It’s all theater; the market has already priced it in.

Robert Vaughn10 said:I agree with most of your conclusions, though not all. My take is that it’s unlikely gold will see significant growth over the next year or two, regardless of how much the money supply expands. We are currently stuck in stagflation; wages are stagnant, and there is actually a serious deflationary threat looming. That doesn't change the fact that we have massive monetary inflation, and eventually, it will catch up. I suspect gold is being manipulated; otherwise, I can't make sense of Greenspan's statement. How do you interpret it? He was the head of the Federal Reserve; he knew exactly what he was saying.
My view is that fiat currencies are constantly being misrepresented to look stronger than they are, which is how wealth is being drained. Once that reaches its limit, a new cycle begins.
As long as annual inflation rates remain low, gold won't react, just as my 1982–2000 example demonstrated. You can successfully suppress prices like this for quite some time.
However, the current expansion of the money supply is enormous, and it will eventually hit gold, and silver even harder. As for silver, supplies are thinning out, and without it, we can't run robots or computers—we'd be back in the Stone Age 😉 So, anyone who can set funds aside and wait at least five, maybe ten to fifteen years, should be saving in silver. Given the heavy corrections, it's unlikely the price will go much lower than it is now. In my opinion, it can only go up.
Just because someone is manipulating gold to drive down the price doesn't mean they aren't long on it. They know where gold is headed in the long run. Besides, it's worth asking who their customers actually are, at least in part...
Ultimately, they can buy it through various channels using currency printed out of thin air, as long as the price remains relatively low.
That simply means they are siphoning off profits through paper assets because margins are higher and it makes gold temporarily less attractive. Gold still doesn't interest many people right now.
On the other hand, look at the bond market; despite everything, people are still pouring money into it. A bubble like that has to burst, whether anyone likes it or not.
By the way, did you notice how the new CRB Index is "structured" in the link I sent? It isn't just gold and silver; they are trying to make all Commodities look worse than they actually are. It's obvious how much they favor fiat and paper assets in general. It's hard to imagine them going any further than this. Who knows how many more years they can keep this up.
Despite all this squeezing, we are in a bull market. I agree that all these moves will ultimately serve as extra fuel for Commodities, gold, and silver.
But again, looking at a one-to-two-year horizon, I don't see much room for growth. I would argue we are still in an accumulation phase within the second stage of a gold bull market, which explains the stagnation. Just look at how few precious metal dealers are operational here, and it’s been similar elsewhere in the Western Hemisphere. Meanwhile, in India, they are promoting "immaterial gold." Things are starting to creak...
Still, I expect this situation and these buybacks to persist for a while. If our local situation is any indication, it reflects the broader reality. As long as fiat currencies can keep going, this will continue, with the side goal of buying as much as possible from ordinary people.
As for a sharper deflation, I highly doubt it. That would cause tax revenues to drop, widening the deficit and increasing the need to print even more. But you never know; we'll see.

Thanks for the correction. So, the CRB Index was modified back in 2005, but they kept tracking the old version under the name CCI Index. It makes sense why they slashed the weight of precious metals in the new index, but when you consider they jacked up the share of oil (basically "energy")—which they can actually influence and control—it looks totally biased. You end up with this massive gap between the CRB and the CCI. If we stick to the old CRB Index, which holds more precious metals (I think about 18% vs. the new 9%) and way less "oil," then gold has grown 2.34 times more than that old index since 2000, rather than the 5x multiple I mentioned earlier. On the flip side, if we stripped precious metals out of the index entirely, the numbers would swing even harder in gold's favor.

CRB down from 80 to 2000

Right now, the gold:CRB ratio is heavily favoring gold at 5.76/1.1 (which is > 5). Back in February 2011, it sat at 3.85/1.1 = 3.5. Either way, we're looking at massive numbers, even during what looks like a "favorable" moment for Commodities.

Gold vs. Oil—basically Gold vs. "Black Gold":

1971–2012:

From 1971 through today (let's say up to 12/2012), oil climbed from $3.56 to $86.73. That’s roughly a 25x increase.

Gold was about $40 in 1971; today it's $1,697. That’s a 42.4x jump.

So, since the U.S. ditched the gold standard in 1971, gold has outperformed oil by a factor of 1.7.

----------------------------

1971–2000:

Oil: $3.56 in 1971 to $25.74 in 2000—a 7.2x increase.

Gold: $40 in 1971 to $250 in 2000—a 6.25x increase.

The takeaway? Between 1971 and 2000, oil beat gold by a mere 15%, which is basically negligible. In 2000, gold was the absolute bottom-of-the-barrel play right before the bull market kicked in.

--------------
2000–12/2012:

Oil: $25.74 in 2000 to $86.73 in 12/2012—a 3.37x increase.

Gold: $250 in 2000 to $1,697 in 12/2012—a 6.8x increase.

The takeaway? Gold outpaced oil by about 2x.

-----------------------------------

I don't get why people obsess over manipulation schemes targeting gold—the one asset that actually grows and that the "powers that be" haven't cared about since 1971. From 1980 to 2000, even gold bugs weren't interested. Makes sense, though; they got burned at the top of the parabola. Some still haven't recovered and are too terrified to buy again. They'll jump back in once we start heading toward the peak.

It seems to me that after the gold standard ended, gold just became irrelevant to them, so there’s zero incentive to manipulate it. If someone were actually trying to suppress gold prices since 2000, I'd thank them, because it would have killed this bull market a long time ago. Instead, we’re seeing the steady progress you expect in a bull market, which means we're headed very high. If anyone really wanted to kill or shorten a bull market, they’d try to spike the price at the perfect moment—like when we were at 1900—to force a parabolic move that burns everyone out.

A good example is what happened with silver in 2011. I don't think it was intentional, but it shows you what happens when an asset hits a parabolic move, even a small one. It'll probably take about two years to crawl back to $50.

Here’s some purely hypothetical math, dropped right when everyone is feeling extra bearish on gold:

Dow Jones Index

I don't see any issue with the Dow sliding down to 7,000 while gold climbs to 8,750, giving us a 1:1.25 ratio.

Think back to the 2014/2015 era. We hit $3,700, then a correction at 0.7 brings it to $2,600, followed by a final bubble—lasting about a year and a half leading up to 2017—multiplying by 3.4 to hit $8,750.

And all without the entire world actually collapsing.

If the Dow hits 6,000, we need $7,500 to maintain that 1:1.25 ratio... $3,150 x 0.7 = $2,200, then x 3.4 = $7,500.

The real question is how low the Dow can actually go before the world effectively "ends." :-)

Robert Vaughn10 said:This warrants a discussion...
In my view, the fact that the price grew over 5-6 times since 2000 isn't proof that there's no manipulation; rather, it suggests gold was severely undervalued. It's a logical conclusion because from the early 80s through 2000—say, 1982 to 2000—gold was practically flat. In both 1982 and 2000, the price sat around $300. During that same window, cumulative inflation was roughly 80%, which this calculator demonstrates clearly:

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/I...alculator.aspx

During that same stretch, the Federal Reserve's monetary base expanded from $200 billion to approximately $600 billion...

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&...EBSQXL-jEswXQA

So, gold essentially stood still while the Dollar lost massive amounts of purchasing power. In other words, gold became incredibly cheap...
By the way, I think you make an excellent point regarding Commodities. The fact that they’ve lost so much ground against gold suggests that, given the expansion of the monetary base—which will likely trigger a true bull run in Commodities—we’ve barely scratched the surface. We are nowhere near the peak.
It is also worth noting the following statement made not by just anyone, but by Alan Greenspan Federal Reserve back in 1998:
"Central Banks should lend increasing amounts of gold if its price rises."

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&...nOaxq3iBtgj9VA

The very same Greenspan who stated the following in 1966:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&...x34N_ToweZ_wkA

One has to wonder why anyone would bother lending gold if prices rise, effectively driving the price down in the process. Why? To me, it looks like a blatant attempt to suppress the price. It is worth reading the full text on gold leasing.
Look, I don't have hard evidence of manipulation, but plenty of indicators point toward it.
Who knows how many times the price of gold, or even other Commodities, would have surged further if capital wasn't constantly being diverted into paper assets, as described in that link about gold leasing.
The fact that gold outpaced other Commodities suggests, in my view, that gold was significantly undervalued until 2000, and even compared to Commodities. That is worth further investigation, but it doesn't change the fundamental reality regarding the price of gold.

Of course it was undervalued, just like stocks will be in a few years. When a parabolic move happens—like dropping from 850 down to 300—people develop a long memory and they start to "hate" the asset. My point wasn't that the 6.8x growth against the Dollar disproves manipulation. My point is that it grew over 5 times compared to Commodities (even with gold and silver making up about 15% of the commodity index). Commodities aren't fiat; they are physical goods too. Gold has been in a massive bull market this whole time. From a trader's perspective regarding the USD, I don't see how it could grow significantly faster without the bull market ending prematurely or the economy breaking down—unless you want everyone holding paper to start complaining loudly.

Robert Vaughn10 said:This warrants a discussion...
In my view, the fact that the price grew over 5-6 times since 2000 isn't proof that there's no manipulation; rather, it suggests gold was severely undervalued. It's a logical conclusion because from the early 80s through 2000—say, 1982 to 2000—gold was practically flat. In both 1982 and 2000, the price sat around $300. During that same window, cumulative inflation was roughly 80%, which this calculator demonstrates clearly:

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/I...alculator.aspx

During that same stretch, the Federal Reserve's monetary base expanded from $200 billion to approximately $600 billion...

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&...EBSQXL-jEswXQA

So, gold essentially stood still while the Dollar lost massive amounts of purchasing power. In other words, gold became incredibly cheap...
By the way, I think you make an excellent point regarding Commodities. The fact that they’ve lost so much ground against gold suggests that, given the expansion of the monetary base—which will likely trigger a true bull run in Commodities—we’ve barely scratched the surface. We are nowhere near the peak.
It is also worth noting the following statement made not by just anyone, but by Alan Greenspan Federal Reserve back in 1998:
"Central Banks should lend increasing amounts of gold if its price rises."

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&...nOaxq3iBtgj9VA

The very same Greenspan who stated the following in 1966:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&...x34N_ToweZ_wkA

One has to wonder why anyone would bother lending gold if prices rise, effectively driving the price down in the process. Why? To me, it looks like a blatant attempt to suppress the price. It is worth reading the full text on gold leasing.
Look, I don't have hard evidence of manipulation, but plenty of indicators point toward it.
Who knows how many times the price of gold, or even other Commodities, would have surged further if capital wasn't constantly being diverted into paper assets, as described in that link about gold leasing.
The fact that gold outpaced other Commodities suggests, in my view, that gold was significantly undervalued until 2000, and even compared to Commodities. That is worth further investigation, but it doesn't change the fundamental reality regarding the price of gold.

I agree on commodities. In the next cycle, crude should blast past its previous peak. The only difference this time—unlike the last "mountain climb"—is that the Dollar might actually run into some trouble, though we aren't there yet.

It’s totally possible the whole PM sector is just sitting on its hands, waiting for silver to finish this correction... might not even dip below this $32.30 mark.

dustyheron5 said:Look, my friend, I’d suggest heading down to JP Morgan... they have the best risk management teams in the world... and they'll give you some top-tier advice...😂

For instance, you could always buy some Coca-Cola bonds... or maybe look into Exelon... or even put more capital into Ingram.😁

🙂

We’re right in the middle of a massive showdown—outcome's anyone's guess, maybe 1685 or 1710—between the bulls and the bears.

Anthony Evans78 said:But when does that actually happen?
When are we ever going to resolve all these issues we've been debating endlessly here?
At this point, the whole game is about preserving what you have rather than growing it. If growth were the goal, banks and major corporations would actually be investing instead of sitting on trillions of dollars.

Not for years. Not until gold hits at least a 1:1 ratio against the dollar—actually, probably much more than that.

Anthony Evans78 said:They aren't even worth their weight in gold.
For instance, I have an original single dollar bill from the Franz Joseph era back in 1915.
A few years ago, I picked up a Millennial stock certificate from 1936 at a flea market for five bucks—it had a face value of 10,000 old dollars back then.
Do I really need to go any further?
Ownership in companies? Please. For years now, stocks have been nothing more than speculative instruments. Only the people holding massive stakes actually have any say in how those firms are run.
In the case of the US Government and ExxonMobil, they don't even have that much control. 🙂
You're right, though. It's spelled "since."

My bad, "since" works, but I still think it was a bit harsh to talk to our colleague like that regarding the shadow.

We've been stuck in this phase where stocks are problematic for years, but eventually, we'll hit that second stage shown on the graph where gold and stocks swap roles. At some point, gold will stretch too far, and capital will flow right back into equities.

Anthony Evans78 said:So you're comparing gold to stocks? Since when are stocks considered a "real" asset? At the end of the day, they're just pieces of paper or digital entries that can be multiplied in a heartbeat, devaluing everything in the process.

Stocks... since when? They're one of the most fundamental asset classes out there. People work, they build things, and then you hold equity in those companies. That's what stocks are.

Historical cycles of gold vs. stock values

It’s pretty rich criticizing someone else's grammar when you're out here tripping over your own "since when."

Anthony Evans78 said:That bus analogy is completely off base.
You’re implying gold plays a role beyond just being money. What exactly is it?
As long as you view gold as a commodity rather than currency, you’re going to stay lost.
The evidence of price manipulation is everywhere, yet you won't budge. Do you honestly think naked shorting is standard practice? Or that it's perfectly fine to dump gold in the middle of the night when liquidity is at its lowest?
And it isn't just gold. If you actually bothered to look into it, you'd see how heavily oil is manipulated too.
Gold has been rigged since the Bretton Woods system, and it's so obvious that only the blind wouldn't notice.
It seems impossible for you to wrap your head around the idea of steady price growth over the last 13 years existing alongside manipulation. Just look at the gold price explosion in the late seventies. That was pure mania driven by the fear that the dollar would collapse.
Like I mentioned yesterday, this is just a combat deviation. If they had actually let the market breathe, the dollar and the euro would have been in the gutter a long time ago.
And for what it's worth, can we even call this a "market" when everything is dictated by Fed interest rates and the rhetoric from central bank chairs? Is that really supply and demand?

Maybe you took me the wrong way. I think my point was pretty clear. You’re underselling gold when you call it an inflation hedge. It’s like saying a backhoe is just for digging little holes for petunias. Sure, you can use it for that, but you can also dig foundations for skyscrapers with it. Use the right scale.

Anthony Evans78 said:That bus analogy is completely off base.
You’re implying gold plays a role beyond just being money. What exactly is it?
As long as you view gold as a commodity rather than currency, you’re going to stay lost.
The evidence of price manipulation is everywhere, yet you won't budge. Do you honestly think naked shorting is standard practice? Or that it's perfectly fine to dump gold in the middle of the night when liquidity is at its lowest?
And it isn't just gold. If you actually bothered to look into it, you'd see how heavily oil is manipulated too.
Gold has been rigged since the Bretton Woods system, and it's so obvious that only the blind wouldn't notice.
It seems impossible for you to wrap your head around the idea of steady price growth over the last 13 years existing alongside manipulation. Just look at the gold price explosion in the late seventies. That was pure mania driven by the fear that the dollar would collapse.
Like I mentioned yesterday, this is just a combat deviation. If they had actually let the market breathe, the dollar and the euro would have been in the gutter a long time ago.
And for what it's worth, can we even call this a "market" when everything is dictated by Fed interest rates and the rhetoric from central bank chairs? Is that really supply and demand?

I’ve said this a dozen times already: we’re looking at an asset sitting in the middle of a massive bull market. Once the hype hits its peak and things get overpriced, that value is going to bleed right into other assets—specifically blue-chip stocks that actually generate real value—regardless of what the dollar is doing.

Anthony Evans78 said:That bus analogy is completely off base.
You’re implying gold plays a role beyond just being money. What exactly is it?
As long as you view gold as a commodity rather than currency, you’re going to stay lost.
The evidence of price manipulation is everywhere, yet you won't budge. Do you honestly think naked shorting is standard practice? Or that it's perfectly fine to dump gold in the middle of the night when liquidity is at its lowest?
And it isn't just gold. If you actually bothered to look into it, you'd see how heavily oil is manipulated too.
Gold has been rigged since the Bretton Woods system, and it's so obvious that only the blind wouldn't notice.
It seems impossible for you to wrap your head around the idea of steady price growth over the last 13 years existing alongside manipulation. Just look at the gold price explosion in the late seventies. That was pure mania driven by the fear that the dollar would collapse.
Like I mentioned yesterday, this is just a combat deviation. If they had actually let the market breathe, the dollar and the euro would have been in the gutter a long time ago.
And for what it's worth, can we even call this a "market" when everything is dictated by Fed interest rates and the rhetoric from central bank chairs? Is that really supply and demand?

Sure, traders manipulate the market from time to time—it happens everywhere, whether they're pumping it up or dumping it. That’s not up for debate. But that’s a far cry from the big picture we've seen from 2000 to now. I already laid out how things actually stand, and I did it without even factoring in fiat currency.

Anthony Evans78 said:That bus analogy is completely off base.
You’re implying gold plays a role beyond just being money. What exactly is it?
As long as you view gold as a commodity rather than currency, you’re going to stay lost.
The evidence of price manipulation is everywhere, yet you won't budge. Do you honestly think naked shorting is standard practice? Or that it's perfectly fine to dump gold in the middle of the night when liquidity is at its lowest?
And it isn't just gold. If you actually bothered to look into it, you'd see how heavily oil is manipulated too.
Gold has been rigged since the Bretton Woods system, and it's so obvious that only the blind wouldn't notice.
It seems impossible for you to wrap your head around the idea of steady price growth over the last 13 years existing alongside manipulation. Just look at the gold price explosion in the late seventies. That was pure mania driven by the fear that the dollar would collapse.
Like I mentioned yesterday, this is just a combat deviation. If they had actually let the market breathe, the dollar and the euro would have been in the gutter a long time ago.
And for what it's worth, can we even call this a "market" when everything is dictated by Fed interest rates and the rhetoric from central bank chairs? Is that really supply and demand?

You’ve got to learn how to tell the difference between temporary market manipulation—whether they're pumping it or dumping it—and an actual, sustained bull market. One is a trap; the other is the real deal.

Anthony Evans78 said:Gold has always been—and will always be—at least a hedge against inflation. History proves it every single time, and we're seeing it happen right now.
As for your other point, your premise is flawed from the jump. Which Commodities are we talking about? You can't just lump them all into one basket using some arbitrary index.
Besides, that doesn't mean gold isn't being manipulated. Gold is climbing because of the endless printing of fiat currency...

In a sense, sure, but that’s like saying you need a city bus just to walk to the corner store. I mean, you could technically use it, but it’s wildly overkill for such a simple trip. Gold is sitting in a massive bull market right now.

Anthony Evans78 said:Gold has always been—and will always be—at least a hedge against inflation. History proves it every single time, and we're seeing it happen right now.
As for your other point, your premise is flawed from the jump. Which Commodities are we talking about? You can't just lump them all into one basket using some arbitrary index.
Besides, that doesn't mean gold isn't being manipulated. Gold is climbing because of the endless printing of fiat currency...

The CRB index is basically a cocktail of about 20 different commodities. You've got wheat and similar stuff sitting at 15%, followed by another 15% for oil and gas. Then you throw in 15% for precious metals, 15% for industrial raw materials, 15% for meat, and finally, about 20% for coffee and sugar. Simple enough.

The whole point of an index is to actually be representative. It gets even more interesting when you consider that... Gold and silver included in that bundle. So, if that CRB index hadn't shifted, the spread would have been even wider in gold's favor.

Anthony Evans78 said:Gold has always been—and will always be—at least a hedge against inflation. History proves it every single time, and we're seeing it happen right now.
As for your other point, your premise is flawed from the jump. Which Commodities are we talking about? You can't just lump them all into one basket using some arbitrary index.
Besides, that doesn't mean gold isn't being manipulated. Gold is climbing because of the endless printing of fiat currency...

Gold has surged over five times in twelve years—and I’m not even talking about its value against the Dollar. I mean compared to a basket of about twenty different commodities. And yet, people still claim gold is being manipulated? I just stripped the fiat currencies out of my equation entirely to run a pure comparison between physical assets versus other physical goods.

The weakening Dollar and the systemic need to wipe out debt by devaluing the currency is a fundamental driver for a gold bull. But being a gold bull is about way more than just hedging against inflation. Look at the numbers: gold is outperforming everything. It’s up five times more than general commodities—we're talking 2.7x compared to oil, 2x compared to wheat, and so on.

The math is pretty straightforward here: that whole "you can't cram commodities into a single index" argument doesn't hold any water. It’s a total non-starter. If we just break them out individually, the gap actually widens because you're looking at gold and silver separately. Simple as that. Engaged. Check the CRB index.

Look, after running all the math—where we strip fiat out of the equation entirely and just compare physical assets against physical reality—concluding that someone is pulling the strings on gold prices is just plain illogical. If you can't manipulate something, then it's gold. Period.

If someone tried to manipulate prices during a massive gold bull run, they’d fail. It wouldn't last. You can't fight the momentum; the market just snaps back to where it belongs. That's just how this game works.