Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Gold Price - Where is it heading?

Ahoy there sailor, such is life-on the high seas.

Gold ( XAU/USD ) been a high of late but I think a correction is in order. Fell heavenly recently, signs of a change in momentum south. I say this because I don't think it will be able to uphold its current trend of riding on the 50ma. Or will it bounce again?

I',m trying to practice what I preach. And feel if it doesn't go south this week there will be further sideways action with a further push north. Who the bloody hell knows. Its a tosser, US economics are strong, but are those resources holding up, there end of Gold equity.
A bit sus I don't think I've got a clue?

1hr charts shows a push past 1d 50ma....

1707100777374.png
 
I',m trying to practice what I preach. And feel if it doesn't go south this week there will be further sideways action with a further push north. Who the bloody hell knows. Its a tosser, US economics are strong, but are those resources holding up, there end of Gold equity.
A bit sus I don't think I've got a clue?
No one knows what the market will do until it shows us, we all look for clues then wait to see what happens, eventually we learn which clues work better than others. A most important element is 'keeping an open mind' and you have that, so we will both gain a bit of extra knowledge from seeing what happens with gold.
 
Triangular behaviour continues


Quite an interesting reaction I would say, more triangular behaviour up here just below the resistance zone

Confluence of supply and demand makes consolidations like triangles, everybody is agreeing on the price, for now.

View attachment 170439

Good morning @InsvestoBoy

Most interesting stuff indeed.

If rcw1 could be so bold as to inquire with you on this further please.

What would the triangles signify if they were to be the other way around, the second triangle formation lower than the first triangle within a similar timeframe that has already existed?

Pardon rcw1 ignorance.

Kind regards
rcw1
 
Good morning @InsvestoBoy

Most interesting stuff indeed.

If rcw1 could be so bold as to inquire with you on this further please.

What would the triangles signify if they were to be the other way around, the second triangle formation lower than the first triangle within a similar timeframe that has already existed?

Pardon rcw1 ignorance.

Kind regards
rcw1

Consolidations generally occur when existing participants on both sides of the order book can have their supply and demand requirements met at and around the current price.

The size of the consolidation can vary from very tight (per above screenshots) to very wide (but still technically be a consolidation), generally speaking the tighter it is the shorter it will be. Wide consolidations can last a long time, weeks, months or years.

In liquid markets, if the consolidation is very tight and lasts for a long time, you are probably looking at a currency peg.

The consolidation will resolve when either new participants with different S/D requirements have business to conduct in the market or the S/D requirements of the existing participants changes.

It's just a record or story of what happened, whoever was in the market during the first triangle to buy was met with enough supply to keep them happy, at which point either the supply at that price was withdrawn or the amount of supply was no longer adequate for the level of demand, the price rose a bit seeking new supply then new supply was introduced or existing demand was met by the existing supply at that new level.

If the picture was as you describe, the story would simply be reversed, supply was matched with demand during the first triangle, at which point either new supply came on at that price or demand at that price withdrew, down to a new nearby point at which a new equilibrium was reached.

On the 1st Feb, I had a guess that the area that became the top of the current triangle would be where the demand that was driving price up would meet some existing supply, simply because that was where supply had most recently overwhelmed demand previously (ignoring the 5% range from 4th Dec because - as I wrote at the time - I believed that to just be noise from low liquidity Monday trading).

The thing is, you never know when new participants with different S/D requirements will enter the market, or when the S/D requirements of existing participants will adjust, so technicals are only ever certain to be a story of the past, only sometimes but not necessarily a story of the future. Tomorrow someone could invent a way to synthesise gold at a cost of $100/oz, or Goldfinger could make all the gold reserves radioactive. You don't know and the chart will never be able to tell you.
 
Consolidations generally occur when existing participants on both sides of the order book can have their supply and demand requirements met at and around the current price.

The size of the consolidation can vary from very tight (per above screenshots) to very wide (but still technically be a consolidation), generally speaking the tighter it is the shorter it will be. Wide consolidations can last a long time, weeks, months or years.

In liquid markets, if the consolidation is very tight and lasts for a long time, you are probably looking at a currency peg.

The consolidation will resolve when either new participants with different S/D requirements have business to conduct in the market or the S/D requirements of the existing participants changes.

It's just a record or story of what happened, whoever was in the market during the first triangle to buy was met with enough supply to keep them happy, at which point either the supply at that price was withdrawn or the amount of supply was no longer adequate for the level of demand, the price rose a bit seeking new supply then new supply was introduced or existing demand was met by the existing supply at that new level.

If the picture was as you describe, the story would simply be reversed, supply was matched with demand during the first triangle, at which point either new supply came on at that price or demand at that price withdrew, down to a new nearby point at which a new equilibrium was reached.

On the 1st Feb, I had a guess that the area that became the top of the current triangle would be where the demand that was driving price up would meet some existing supply, simply because that was where supply had most recently overwhelmed demand previously (ignoring the 5% range from 4th Dec because - as I wrote at the time - I believed that to just be noise from low liquidity Monday trading).

The thing is, you never know when new participants with different S/D requirements will enter the market, or when the S/D requirements of existing participants will adjust, so technicals are only ever certain to be a story of the past, only sometimes but not necessarily a story of the future. Tomorrow someone could invent a way to synthesise gold at a cost of $100/oz, or Goldfinger could make all the gold reserves radioactive. You don't know and the chart will never be able to tell you.
nice, thanks for that @InsvestoBoy, rcw1 gets it. Much appreciated bloke.

Kind regards
rcw1
 
Good morning @InsvestoBoy

Most interesting stuff indeed.

If rcw1 could be so bold as to inquire with you on this further please.

What would the triangles signify if they were to be the other way around, the second triangle formation lower than the first triangle within a similar timeframe that has already existed?

Pardon rcw1 ignorance.

Kind regards
rcw1
Oh bugger, another set of half conversations.
It seems I have been blocked by Investoboy.
Hard to participate when you only get half the discussion.
Mick
 
#MeToo not sure why. Maybe I moderated some trash he spat out.
I had a more proactive approach,😂: if I would not voluntarily share a table and engage in a conversation socially in the "real" life, why bother virtually?
I ignore.
It does not mean that all the individuals I ignore are dumb, clueless or anything: just a matter of arrogance, ethics, compatibility with own values.
And yes sometimes you miss technically good posts, like here or for me when "more carmin than carmin" post.
A personal choice which has costs ..
 
I was just thinking about Gold and I’ll use one of @Sean K ’s charts to illustrate my thinking.

View attachment 169459


A burst up to $USD3000 is on the cards as a medium to high possibility given the long length Gold has stayed at about $USD2000.

A fall to $USD1800 is possible but unlikely. A fall to $USD1600 is unlikely and highly improbable. I would be very interested at both those levels should they ever be seen again.

gg

I hope we never lose sight of one thing, It all started from buying Gold as a youth.

There are many reaching for the life rafts, and good on them should they need cash or goods to increase their enjoyment of life. As I mentioned in the post above there was always the possibility of Gold retreating from the $USD 2000 area. There have been so many attempts to breach.

We now have many central banks and institutions who have within the past 12 months stocked up on Gold. It is difficult to predict where their pain point will be. Places like Ukraaine and Israel where an existential risk exists will have sold Gold down, in the last 2 years in the former's case and in the last 3 months in the latters. War is an opportunity to accumulate and distribute the yellow metal.

The Gumnut trenches see little action from the Chinese cousins to the north. The Gumnuts also do not depend on a demented Sleepy Joe nor a mad Bronzed Loon for their future as do the unfortunate cousins in the Middle East and the EU and Ukraine. I can see a further fall in the price below $USD 1900 as the Israeli and Palestinian cousins dump whatever Gold is left in their coffers once Sleepy Joe abandons the debacle in the Middle East. The EU cousins will start dumping Gold this week from their treasuries.

It is hold on to your hat season. Short sellers will be out. After $USD 1900 there should be a halt at about $USD 1800. I cannot see it falling below $USD 1600. Then again ...

Gold is an upside/downsie game.



1707873411614.png
gg
 
Top