swissie

There is so much more to it: For decades, Government Statistics "prove" that the average wage earners are better off than ever. Really? My dad was the only provider, my mother never had to work. We had a good life, lacking nothing. Therefore, how come, that in todays Europe, mom and dad have to work to make ends meet? Same in Thailand. Have 2 stepdaughters, both married, having good jobs at the Bank and Industry. But mom and dad have to work, otherwise they could not afford to live in Bangkok. If in the olden days a single provider could "carry" a family. Today it takes 2 "earners". So how do Government Statistics derive their "better off than ever" from? Today we have to deal with "fake news". But long before we have appearantly and obviously been fed with "fake statistics". To "fine tune" and "adjust" the basket of consumer goods is paradise for government "statiscians", wanting to low ball annual inflation rates.

After the recent "setback" of the markets, investors ponder once more the all important question: - Was this just a technical correction or is the Bear knocking on the door? My 2 cents worth: The hopes of steadily declining interest rates for the rest of the year are in question (at least concerning the US). Next weeks earnings reports by big (tech) companies better be within (high) expectations. Disappointing results may well trigger more market "correction". This brings us back to square 1: At what point turns a "market correction" into a Bear Market? To anyone giving me a clue, I will pay a commission of a buck and a half plus give the phone number of my ex-wife.

All very well observed, not to forget, that before "tensions" between the US and China arose, China parked massive amounts of their "export surplus money" in US T-Bills/US T-bonds. Financing a good part of the US budget deficits. Absurdity total: Without the Chinese influx of "surplus money", the US defence of Taiwan would possibly have to be financed by tax increases by US citizens. No way, as no US polititian would be re- elected proposing something like that. (Another Vietnam, with a peaking inflation rate of 15 % in the middle of the 1970 ties?) To impose sanctions agaist China? Great idea! Meaning that the Chinese will even buy less US T-Bonds, and affordable Chinese consumer goods will no more enter the shores of the US. The consumer goods that the US Industry can produce (if at all possible) will cost 30% more than the Chinese imports, further accelerating the impoverishement of the "lower-class" of Americans. The future looks bright, unfortunately not for the US/European economical universe.

It's "swissie", for better or for worse. Question: Next to your valuables, have you locked your sense of humor in your safety deposit box as well?

I am so disthrought. If only you would read my posts more carefully. By doing so, you would have noticed that I used "Roulette" only within the context of "mathematics". I don't do roulette, but I do "ruthless trading" far away from any roulette table on occasion. (With playing money only). With regard to my post above: I would be interested to know what you store in your safety deposit box next to Gold. With the right "content" of your safety box, I might still want to "suck up to you". Come on, spill your guts. To verify: Is your handle truly "yellowtail"? If "yellowsnail", I would have to reconsider my generous offer.

What you pay for your safety deposit box at Krunsri is very reasonable. Congrats! Of course it's all relative. If only 1 oz of Gold is stored, the carrying charge would be close to 3%. -------------------------------- PS: In case you store 1 Mill $ worth of Gold in your safety deposit box, I would like to suck up to you. I make for a great pal, I sing and dance like Fred Astair. I tell funny jokes and sell snake oil on the side. I can mow your lawn and give professional massages to the female members of your family. We could sit together and wach the markets while sipping liberal amounts of beer. How's that?

Are you playing your cards right? = AND ???

It's more about what the "locals" think about the happenings of the world and how it could possibly affect them. With or without the support of Farangs. History shows, that Thailand has not been affected by any colonial "power plays". Thus making it possibe to stay away from "international disturbances", as they have done successfully in the past, possibly benefitting long term Farangs, if they play their cards right.

The wold in turmoil. (once more). As a long term Farang in the Isaan, how much attention you and your family pays to increasing "international disruptions"? Possibly, eventually affecting Farangs and their families in the Isaan? Especially if "international disruptions" would make it hard to transfer monthly funds to Thailand from the "old country"? Any plan b) or other remedies in such a case?

Yes indeed, I was confronted with some obstacles, trying to access this site. Never heard about a Mr. Pritchard. But still interested. Seems to me, China is publizising it's Gold purchases quite openly. To support it's currency after the mayham followed by their invasion of Taiwan? I don't think they accumulate their Gold to shoot at the Taiwanese with golden bullets.

Compared to Gold, Silver is plentyful and therefore relatively cheap. Comperatively "little money" can move the price of Silver over proportionally. Always remembering the "Hunt Brothers", cornering the market with the help of the former broker "Prudential Bache". Unless somebody new corners the market again, I can not see the price of Silver hitting 50$ per ounce again during my livetime.

Here is a problem. One can not store Gold for free, unless one stores physical Gold under the matress. Be it futures, ETF's or other instruments, there is always a "carrying charge". Even storing Gold in a safety deposit box at the bank costs an annual fee. Just assuming that over the last 20 years an annual "carrying charge" of a modest 3% would have applyed, with compound interest and missed interest by other investements, (missed opportunity cost) the above quoted (theoretical) 394% gain of Gold would be greatly diminished. = Warren Buffet never liked Gold. The price of Gold doesn't follow financial/world events tick by tick. Lenghty periods of "dormancy" can be observed. Only to readjust on quick periodical strong "outbursts" on the upside. I believe such a corrective "outburst on the upside" is currently taking place. To be followed by a lenghty period of relative "dormancy" again.

Good enough. My (boring) investements produced satisfactory results over time.

The same mathematics would apply. But I limit my gambling to the greatest Casino that was ever invented: WALL STREET There I can appear as a "serious investor" (respected by everyone). But I can act as a ruthless gambler (with 10% of my liquid assets only) as well. My ruthless gambling in Commodities is legendary. Unfortunately, while my investements produced some nice returns (no complaints), my gambling netted only a measely 40'000 US$ over time. But must confess, the gambling was always more fun and exiting than investing. Something like having a wife for 40 years (=solid investing) and having an exotic dancer simultainiously (=trading) on the side. To dance on 2 different dance floors at the same time is possible, as long as the 2 different dance floors are strictly kept seperate.

Why all this? Back to the root of everything: "HOMO HOMINI LUPUS EST".

Quote: "If the stock goes down you keep buying more and more. At some point during the session the stock will go back up and you will be able to exit". The thing about "averaging down" is, that in order to stay close to the average price of the position, one would have to average down as follows: Original position buy 1 Stock @ 100$ add 2 " add 4 " add 8 " add 16 " Total= 31 Stocks It shows that even after averaging down only 4 times, the total exposure will have increased from 100$ to 3100$. If by then the stock shoulden't have reversed the downtrend, then it's strictly OUUUUPS! Also from a capital management point of view, averaging down can be hazardous. Here too, mathematics offer no free lunch. Quote: "A trader operates on weeks or months". No, a short term trader operates within a time frame of 30 seconds to 2 to 3 days. To remain on focus: This thread is about short term trading.

Thanks for your interest and participation. Your points work fine for long term investors, but not for short term traders. 1) The roulette table at Las Vegas offers a 50% chance of winning. The bid/ask spread and other "carrying charges/commissions" drop to below 50% for the trader operating on "the markets". 2) Dollar cost averaging works fine for long term investors, But not for short term traders. = Throwing good money after bad. A drop of 10% for a leveraged short term trader is absolutely a "main event". 3) see 2 4) Roulet gamblers and short term traders are subject to the same mathematical obstacles. As the las Vegas gambler only would stick to red or white. But no, they have to bet on individual numbers, thus abandoning the "natural" 50/50 chance.. 5) The 1% rule only applies to short term trading ONLY. 6) Leverage is a blessing. But mostly, in the long run, a course. As much as I appreciate your contribution, they are focused on "long term investing". But this is about short term trading and it's fundamental opportunities/pitfalls. Not to be confused with "long term investing". To compare long term investing versus comparing short term trading is comparing Oranges with Apples. ------------------------------------------ In a future post, I will outline why major Brokerage Houses rake in massive profits, whyle at the same time their "retail customers" lose money year after year. Once involved in "short term trading". As I worked for one of them in the "trading-room" for a few years. But that is another story. "Cost averaging" for long term investors with regard to the Japonese Nikkey 224 had to wait 30 years to break even. As a sidenote.

To trade or not to trade, that is the question. According to Shakespeare. Just considering mathematics alone, this time around. a) Most short term trades produce a loss (Broker statistics, retail traders). b) Given that, even recovering a 10% loss is hard to do. c) Improve the odds by: Limiting your losses to 1% per trade. One can lose 10 times in a row. A single profit of 10% will keep you in the game. Not so, if one loses 10% 10 times in a row. Then, you are out of the game. For short term traders, mathematics is a merciless master. Having said that, trading "highly leveraged" with regard to "capital base" will eventually lead to "game over". - Often have I come accross Farangs, determined to settle in Thailand, planning to make a living in Thailand by trading the markets. By strictly adhering to the maximum 1% loss rule, a capital stock of around 200'000 US$ would be required. Any amount below would force a trader to "leverage" his trades in order to make a "possible living" in Thailand. But: "Leverage" and mathematics are not your friend. --------------------------------------------- When it comes to make a living in Thailand I can not recommend "trading the markets". Rather: As a viral, witty, charming and flamboyant Farang, it should be possible to conquer the heart of a financially well established Thai female. A much more relaxed lifestyle awaiting, instead of having to watch NVIDIA, tick by tick, 24/7.

More than that. Even minor banks and financial institutions today have their "financial experts". Guiding their "financial sheep" tru todays financial djungle. Thousands of "experts" giving daily advice on the internet for their "investor sheep", making good use of the fact that humans are "herd animals". Soon, the "financial experts" will outnumber the "investor sheep". When things turn south, the commom explanation will be (as usual) "nobody has seen it coming", while having collected fat bonuses before things went south. Easy for me to find a thousand "experts" recommending to buy Gold, versus a thousand "experts" recommending to sell Gold. Needless to say that I don't like "financial experts". The old joke comes to mind: "Look at all the yachts of the financial experts. But where are the yachts if their customers"?

Nobody does it for free. That's where the bid/ask spread comes into play. But 10% below?

Usually, "refugees" have limited financial resources. Running out of money, not allowed to work. Next step: Turning to criminal offences to make ends meet. The same thing happens in Europe and the US. Anything new?

Thais have their "Thai-Gold". They don't go by "Ounces". Example: A couple of years ago I wanted to sell some 1 oz gold bars and some Kruegerrand coins to my Thai Bank. Against a receipt, they took in the merchandise for "assessement". A week later, the amount was credited to my Thai account. At a discount of 10% below bid/ask spread in New York or Zuerich. Conclusion: Whatever is denominated in Ounces, or not considered "Thai Gold" don't sell it in Thailand.

Currency exchange rates do matter. I don't observe "currency baskets" much. But I do constantly watch 2 "hard currencies". The US$ versus the Swiss Franc. Since the beginning of the year, the "hard currency" (Swiss Franc) has collapsed against the US$. US$ from 0.83 to 0.90. Signaling that the US$ universe is perfectly intact and above any doubt. Granted, the swiss national bank has eased interest rates by 1/4%, ahead of anyone else, but the collapse of the Swiss Franc started before that. Conclusion: Official statements issued by central banks is one thing, but what they actually do in "the markets" is another thing. For private investors, it's another "enigma". More and more "enigmas" seem to emerge globally. PS: Swiss investors have not made any money by investing in the US stock market lately. Truly, currency exchange rates DO matter.

Unfortunately you are right. I would not recommend to be part of any "western womans liberation army". Especially as the "Isaan- spirit" has not yet been affected by the "Bankkok Ways" in a meaningful way. Inspite of a hundred western NGO's, that tell Thai Females that the time to "awaken" is here. Remarkably, most rural Thai Females still don't know from what they sould be awaken from.

There are so many official and private statistics available that prove that the "Central-Banks" are the main buyers of Gold. I would like to know why in such a situation "private investors" rather sell their Gold, instead of following "the central banks policy" of accumulating gold, instead of selling it. Again: I called this thread "The Enigma of Gold". With good reason.