will you please actually try to read this post - and then retain the information inside.
lets set some factual items in order
- No one had referred to CoT as a timing tool except you.
- I am an RSG l-tbuy and hold. Its easily - imo - the best value story on asx goldies. cautioning people that it would need to raise cash to fund the move u/g at syama and the multi pit operation for ravenswood is just about being rational.
As i said at the time i expected at least $90m would be needed to shift the Syama mining fleet to u/g
How was i wrong? mgt kept it close to the vest to ride the trend and get a good outcome by reducing share dilution at a higher sp. But all i was doing was cautioning people against the capital demand/
I guarantee there are some 2.35 buyers who wish theyd heeded what i said.
the hallmark of tiny minds is being unable to hear blemishes on stories they think are perfect. no such thing exists
- RE trendlines - you asked why i hadnt referred to them.
When i;d just referred to them. and had clearly posted last week the chart (ill repost in another post shortly)
...
...
...
- as for jim rogers/warren buffett - dont know. all i can tell you is what is my views.
and because i posted it at the time - not months later - i have no problem reminding people like yourself that - yes - I was correct in my view.
there is nothing 'know it all' about saying you said something - and it proved correct.
the fact you were the person - together with unclepanda - arguing against me at the time - should make it pretty clear to you in your mind what i said at the time i would have though
ringing throughout your posts is a strong line of 'i dont know so how can you unless you are a billionaire investor'
- its not only irrelevant, incorrect - but more importantly it misses the point - all i do is post my views. I ve no problem with people disagreeing.
what i have a big problem with people doing is asking for views - which i duly offer - then either ignoring or forgetting them - then asking for them again - and then insinuating that referring their lazy arses back to the original post is somehow 'hiding/defensive'
