Loading ...winds of change?
they say t.a is not a crystal ball its more of a wind sock!
two weeks ago this site was semi bearish with FGC leading the pack.
now we have a new surge of optimism,for which i am trying to find
some foundation apart from a $ downtrend.it does seem to be that there is some life in the commodities space,but is for for real?
is a resumption of a commodity super cycle blowing in our back?
me i dont know.i spent month studying the K-wave years ago,and to no avail.so here is something to considerhttp://tsi-blog.com/
As your link indicates, there are times when commodities benefit from monetary madness, sorry policy, and there are times when stocks benefit and the same can be said for all other asset classes. Gold is somewhat unique though, because it has always had a role as a way of storing and exchanging wealth in a form that can fit in your pocket. If you look at my recent post you can see just how far the gold/debt relationship (or at the moment, non-relationship) has been stretched. You don’t need to over think it. It’s as simple as saying the balance will restore itself, no matter what anyone says or does.
i did look,and sure it looks promising,but then no one 5 years ago considered that the relationship will break that much.this correlation was a “golden rule” and it stoped working.will it play catch-up?.i sure hope so?will i gamble on it ? i need more evidence
Fair enough. There’s nothing wrong with waiting for a confirmed breakout of that massive symmetrical triangle which goes back 16 years.
Comment on that article:
I am not very impressed by it but here is my take anyway.
He says in the beginning that price on the index he is using should not have gone lower than it did back in 1999. But the thing is, he does not say where he sees the cycle starting himself or how long it is as he sees it.
And, the commodity supercycle is actually circa 15 years and the two lows he points out are actially circa 15 years apart, so…, where is the problem here really.
I mean, how can you try to bust something if you do not actually specify what you are trying to bust.
Also, why has every low has to be higher for the supercycle to be valid as he seem to argue? Of course they mustn´t. Within the Kondratieff wave, which lasts 54 years on average, the circa 15 year cycles can be of different length and they can also be bullish or bearish within the same Kondratieff wave; i.e. they can have lower/higher lows/highs.
I myself do not base my take on the 15 year commodity cycle or the Kondratieff wave on currency supply or on fundamentals that much. To me it does not really matter what the reasons behind the chart movements are, even if I although have covered the macro side pretty extensively going back. I mainly look at the charts. And if one looks at the charts in my big picture posts, the circa 15 year cycles are more than obvious I would say, see link below.
What he says really is that one can´t really use fundamentals in order to determine the cycles if one does not take the currency supply into account also. Well, as I see it, one does not really have to take any of the two into account, one just has to be able to read the charts.
My big picture posts, collected list:
https://goldtadise.com/?p=407909
thanks for your imput Graddhy.i do see your points.indeed the charts rule,but it is usefull to have some grasp of the macro/fundamentals/cycles/.what the charts are telling us has a context in the real world which is challenging to grasp.