Sorry, but there will not be GDP growth and "real jobs" ever again.

PsychoBenny and his vile FED bankster fellow-psychopaths have seen to that. It is WRIT LARGE.

Would you like your Big Mac flipped by a guy with a Master's or a gal with a Ph.D.?

http://bullionbullscanada.com/gold-commentary/26371-suicidal-tapering-signals-bernankes-demise

As Phil on Duck Dynasty says, "Happy, happy, happy!"

I realize you prefer to look for other reasons. I wish there were other reasons also.

However, that does not change reality. Investing/speculating even, must be reality-based.

The reality is this share is at the bottom of its peer group, did not rally in August, has gone down from almost $30 at its peak to a buck and change today, has manipulative trading patterns and its management has made more mistakes than their bios on their website suggest they should have.

Unless I see hard evidence of other metrics prevailing to explain this, share price rules to catalogue its past and more unfortunately, predict its future. All IMHO, of course.

It would be interesting to know what RR would think of this particular stock, would it not?

A discussion about the share price per se as evidence of company failure is senseless IMO.

Apparently, however, not in Richard Russell's opinion:

I always put the price action in the market first on my list of what to believe.

http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/KWN_DailyWeb/Entries/2013/9/5_Richard_Russell_-_Gold_Basing_%26_A_Key_World_Market_In_Trouble.html

While what you say is mostly correct, the last sentence is not if one of the management's errors is to deny there is manipulation. You yourself just referred to manipulation.

It has, I believe, generally been agreed to on this board that there has been manipulation in the price of this share. This manipulation, of course, is illegal but due to the failure of the regulators to regulate, this crime goes on unabated. Some posters have gone into this point in great detail. Therefore, the question follows logically, why does not the CEO see it?

Following on from there, if indeed there is manipulation and said CEO denys it, what would the average person/investor conclude?

So, you see, the share price in such circumstances would indeed be evidentiary and highly relevant in assessing that company's following through on its fiduciary responsibility to said shareholders, to wit, to take actions which would result in the share price going up and not down. When the down phase is all we have ever experienced for over two years, I think some questions should be asked.

I dissent. I see nothing delusional about GOLD888888's scenario and it feasibly explains everything we are seeing.

You want evidence? There is really only one towering metric that need be examined. Look at the absolutely disastrous SHARE PRICE action ever since this so-called "merger of equals" was announced, so that AUMN lies on the bottom of its peer group and showed no evidence of rising even after the silver price rose in August. The market spoke, aided by manipulation that everyone but the CEO sees. When this merger occurred, we were led to believe that he was a competent runner of mines. Has he proven to us that this is the case? Remember, we are using the share price as the measuring stick. We are not using hope, rationalization, luck or any other effete investment "strategy."

And incidentally, what exact value have the "50 other properties" to which you made reference added? And where exactly is the money to explore them??! It appears to me that was part of the bait, as was/is el Quevar. It may be mineral-rich or it may not be. Do you really know? What you, I and everyone else does or should know is that Argentina can be a treacherous place to do business and that does not fill me with a warm and fuzzy feeling.

I was born at night but not last night. By Occam's razor there is something really not right here and unless things begin to show definite signs of changing for the better that observation shall only be strengthened.

You can call those of us who have not drunk the Kool-Aid tin foil hat wearers, delusional, etc. all you want but what you can't change is the material history of this company's performance over the past two-plus years.

99921

I am not trying to create an argument with you or any other but I believe it is time you began to see this disaster for what it is insead of being critical of the messengers. Here we are down again today and the metals also when there is every reason to be up. I take it you do not find this odd either.

You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine. Prerhaps it would less offend your delicate sensibilities if I had said, "incompetent management." A rose by any other name would smell as sweet to quote the Bard of Avon. The result is the same. A plummeting stock price which has fallen and can't get up.

When it is so clear as a number of shareholders have pointed out, not just myself, that this CEO does not see anything wrong with the way his share is trading, I believe there is cause for great concern as no one here would agree with that statement, except perhaps yourself.

Couple that with a highly unusual number of errors in managerial actions, which it is my opinion have led to the share price now being equivalent to 6 cents, as has been previously catalogued and the failure of this stock to respond to a rebounding Ag price, and I believe most observant and concerned shareholders whose money is at stake, would wonder at the comments made by the CEO. Keep in mind that it has been all downhill since ECU got swallowed up by Golden. Golden, in fact, has fared about the poorest of all its peers. Another co-incidence?

If you call a CEO who does not see manipulation and has said so when it has been documented on the board by many obervers going too far, I would presume you did not care if your investment, if you have one, does well or not.

If you have been in the precious metals space for any length of time, you will understand that management is not infrequently the cause of the corporate ship foundering.

In one of the Seeking Alpha articles cited yesterday, this statement was made by the author:

"As I'll point out in this article, Golden Minerals might have some problems to re-open its Velardena silver mine in Mexico even though the silver price has slightly recovered to the current price of $24/oz. The company currently plans to mine the high-grade ore shoots first, but I think this is just a short-sighted temporary solution and makes things worse in the long run."

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1668782-golden-minerals-beaten-up-but-not-dead-yet

In his opinioin the company was about to make yet another mistake and was "short sighted." Do you find all of these errors co-incidental? If that is the case you are postulating a mathematically improbable set of events.

When exactly would you expect the CEO who works FOR US and not the other way around, to stop making errors and start doing that which makes us some profit on our investment?

If you wish to defend this sort of thing, go ahead. You have every right despite the fact I find that stance peculiar. But please don't tell me that if it looks like a duck, has webbed feet, and quacks, it is a pigeon.

As far as "going a little to far," I would opine that statement far better fits the fall in the share price than my drawing attention to it.

If Golden does not show some traction soon and its money runs out or it gets taken over by a bigger fish for a song, your investment (if you have one) is kaput. I recognize we all have different levels of tolerance of things gone awry. But from my viewpoint I am having a great deal of difficulty making all this make sense. At the beginning of this venture we were led to believe the CEO was effective and the merger the greatest thing since sliced bread. Where is the evidence of that now?