Re: Notice more green and more volume?
in response to
by
posted on
Jul 13, 2013 03:24PM
CUU own 25% Schaft Creek: proven/probable min. reserves/940.8m tonnes = 0.27% copper, 0.19 g/t gold, 0.018% moly and 1.72 g/t silver containing: 5.6b lbs copper, 5.8m ounces gold, 363.5m lbs moly and 51.7m ounces silver; (Recoverable CuEq 0.46%)
I am a trader. I've stated that many times. You seem to think what I say here swings the price?? Lol, are you kidding? There's not enough retail to make an impact.
You don't read any of the other writers who have opined on the demise of the TSX. If you did you would have as more informed opinion. Then you wouldn't resort to little digs about my blog readership. You'd also be looking for ways to take advantage of a new exchange coming on line and be more savvy to the retail movements that will bring. In the near term, there will ne no impact. I was not bringing it to our attention for that day's activity. It is something that MUST be minded. The purpose of the post was a general favor to the general investor and not specifically to you. I would have pm'ed you instead.
There are plenty of people here who are not able to make those connections simply because they lack the historical perspective or don't have time to sleuth these things out. In fact, most of what I post here is just for them. Sometimes I blog stuff but that's for a broader audience. Sometimes I expand on my blog what appears here. Since I don't get paid for the blog nor sell advertising on it what difference does it make if 1 person reads it of 100,000? (Yes, more than a million page veiws so I must be writing something worth reading).
Am I a lone voice in the wilderness calling for the tsx crash? Nope. This list has grown since I sounded the alarm. Most of the major letters have now covered it and I suspect that they will continue to do so. You just have to accept that sometimes I am quite a bit ahead of the herd.
Was I wrong about Reuters? Nope. Will I be wrong about what I wrote about HFT's lurking in the dark of a dead tsx? I don't think so and that's why I predicted a path the tsx would take to try sweep this under the carpet. The problem is, they are trying to hide an elephant under it. Remember this:http://www.advancedtrading.com/algorithms/panelists-sound-off-on-high-frequency-tr/220600700 How about this:http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/19/us-futures-hft-idUSBRE94I0DG20130519
For a more indepth look: http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/high-frequency-trading-making-joke-markets-124446937.html posted 16 hours ago.
I think the biggest problem people are having with understanding the big picture is in taking all the peices together and understanding what is possible. It requires ruling out the impossible of course. And that can get pretty blurrry. When you put it into summary form and ask yourself what are the possible outcomes for the tsx none look good. When you test the crowd concensus and factor that in the remaining options look bad. Then factor in that the tsx boss is in damage control and fibbing at such an early stage, it sure makes my predictions look bullet proof.
Now for something trulely reaching. Take a map of the sunken USA (more than one sleeping prophet has drawn a map) and overlay a fracking map. That's an eye opener indeed.