Wikinvest Wire

Monday, May 29, 2006

Can Gold Go To $8000?

James Turk says yes in this week's Barron's Interview.

I'll preface this post by saying that I view the scenario of $8000 (or any number close to that) as being very unlikely. Some of the things that concern Mr. Turk concern me as well (things I have been writing about for a long time here) but the magnitude of the consequence does not seem to be correct to me.

As I read the interview Mr. Turk is concerned about increasing supply of dollars at a time of decreasing demand. This is troublesome. There has been visibility (to my way of thinking) for the dollar's role as world reserve currency to change. I think the dollar will share that role, perhaps with the euro.

Another concern is the message sent by denying foreign purchases of Unocal and the ports. He views that as protectionism. "Immediately after his comments about this he is asked for his target for gold and says "It is going much higher, and the $8,000 [per ounce] I mentioned a couple of years ago is probably as good a target as any."

He then says that gold could hit $2000 in the next six to twelve months. There was no real process shared for how her gets to either number, perhaps this is available on his web site, I did not check.

Since I don't find it plausible that we will see $2000 in his time period or $8000 in the next couple of decades it is worth understanding what the fallout could be if his predictions are correct. Gold tripling in a year, I would think, could only come about from sort of calamitous external shock, the likes of which we have never seen. While I concede all of the structural concerns that could weaken the dollar (actually I have client portfolios tilted to this belief) and push gold higher, this feels more like a big tanker turning instead of a little speed boat (that is someone else's analogy). I don't believe the deficit threats, as we know them now, can possibly cause the dollar to weaken so much that gold triples in a year.

It is in no one's interest for the dollar to get so weak that gold sky rockets in this manner. We account for something like 25% of the world's economy. I believe the start of a massive dollar decline would cause a large scale intervention by every economy on the planet to stem the decline. To be clear I am talking in the face of a massive decline not a 10-15% decline.

If $2000 gold does start to play out, it would probably make sense to buy more and more gold (and other commodities) on the way up, possibly not own any equities from any country and buy foreign currencies.

You can decide for yourself on this. In the past there have been comments left proclaiming fast swift moves up in gold and down in the dollar, in line with Mr. Turk's view and there will probably be more but his timeline is tough to see.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

With Chinese fortune cookies the game is to append "in bed" to the end and see if thge result is funny. With statements like Mr. Turk's I'll append "OOOGA! BOOOGA!" to the end and see if it's still scary.

I'm not scared.

Fred

Anonymous said...

A book was written in the late 90s or so titled "Dow 36,000". Sounds like gold at 8000. Speaking without having read the book, it's funny how quickly conventional widsom changes.

Scott

Market Participant said...

Part of Jim Turk's schtick is to make absurdly high predictions for gold. However that nonsense detracts from the strength of his core arguments about a weakening dollar.

Now that the gold miners ETF (GDX) is here, anyone who wants precious metals exposure can purchase that and have leveraged exposure to gold with the potential for capital growth as well.

Eye Doc said...

I think the point is that gold at 2,000 is only getting you back to the peak of 850 in 1980 in inflation adjusted terms. I have no idea where gold is going, but with a lot of petrodollars supposedly being turned into gold, a falling dollar, and a supposedly huge short position in gold , I think there's potential to go a lot higher over the next 2-3 years. But, like I said who knows. I'd own a little bit of the ETFs, but not get too carried away.

Roger Nusbaum said...

Eye Doc,

Personally I have some trouble with the adjusted for infaltion concept. I understand it, but I question the utility.

If the price of something goes up a lot today, I'm not sure it really matters how that compares to 25 years ago. It is interesting as a tertiary fact but not something I would build a thesis around.

Proud Member Of