Gold will take out the 2016 high in early 2017!

December 8, 2016

Founder and Editor of the Value View Gold Report Ned Schmidt shares his outlook for gold and metals in 2017. He provides his reasons why he thinks gold will take out the highs of this year in the first half of 2017.

Click download link to listen on this device: Download Show

    Dec 08, 2016 08:42 PM

    Much enjoyed! Thanks Cory.

      Dec 08, 2016 08:40 PM

      Agreed. Good to hear from Ned again.

        Dec 09, 2016 09:44 AM

        I’m not so sure about gold hitting it’s 2016 highs in early 2017 but anything is possible in the sea of change we’re witnessing politically.
        I don’t disagree with Ned’s outlook. Things will be bumpy for sure in gold one way or another. But overall I believe we’re headed towards and breaking $1000 at some point soon/2017.

        If capital outflows in Chona start to accelerate due to a U.S. interest rate hike and China eventually hints at some type of gold restrictions, look out!

        India, for now, is in the spotlight and in rarefied territory with over 1 billion pissed off citizens who won’t give up their gold easily.

        “Gold Headed Lower Under $1,000 into the Abyss”

        Posted Dec 9, 2016 by Martin Armstrong

        India is moving now to confiscate gold after going after the cash. Currently, each married woman is entitled to 500 grams, each unmarried woman 250 grams, and each […]

        READ MORE

          Dec 09, 2016 09:35 AM

          I’ve never liked or trusted Armstrong.

          Will he be right about sub-1000? I doubt it, but time will tell.

          Suppressing gold seems to be having the effect of raising its price in India, as it does with any black market item.

    Dec 08, 2016 08:37 PM

    I great to find myself in agreement with everything Ned had to say (including India’s politicians).

    Stocks are a screaming SELL in my book…

      Dec 08, 2016 08:00 PM

      It looks too spectacular. Too good to be true but this is a strong period and money is rushing in to buy the momentum up to the end of the year and then a big sharp correction could start at the beginning of January once people realize they have huge profits and it can’t go higher so they rush for the exits and it could last a few weeks and then a another good run Feb to April.

        Dec 08, 2016 08:10 PM

        I won’t argue that it can’t get more overbought, that’s for sure. And after the daily chart gets a little “reset” technically, it just might head even higher. What I am confident about, is that the miners will dramatically outperform conventional stocks next year.

          Dec 08, 2016 08:55 PM

          Gold should take off in January when the S&P falls hard from 2350 down to 2200 or lower.

            Dec 08, 2016 08:09 PM

            Thanks. I have to admit that I will be surprised if stocks can make it the next three weeks without a pretty good pullback.

      Dec 08, 2016 08:07 PM

      Did you see Rambus today at Goldseek? He thinks stocks will go much higher.

        Dec 08, 2016 08:13 PM

        No, I’ll have to take a look. Even if he’s right, I think there will be a pullback and/or sideways action first.

          Dec 08, 2016 08:49 PM

          Let me know what you think of Rambus’ charts, Matthew.

            Dec 08, 2016 08:03 PM

            I’d feel better about the breakout he shows on his first two charts if stocks weren’t so overbought and overvalued. It is probably also cause for concern that the action has been almost straight up and is happening in the middle of December. In addition, the bull market is about to become the longest on record and the coming rate hike will not be good for it.

            Dec 08, 2016 08:08 PM

            I think it was Art Cashin that recently pointed out that there has always been a recession following a two term president.

            As Stewart Thomson likes to say, fundamentals make charts, not the other way around so why own stocks when they are close to being as expensive as they’ve ever been.

            For stock pickers, of course there are exceptions and good traders can wring the most out of a move. But for the majority who don’t manage risk well, be careful.

    Dec 08, 2016 08:38 PM

    Another gold pumper with nothing but an OPINION.

    NED, you were supposed to go. Why are you still around?

    THE DAMN straight of it no one has any clue what gold or silver are going to do next year.

    And that’s just the straight up fact.

      Dec 08, 2016 08:29 PM

      “If you don’t own gold…there is no sensible reason other than you don’t know history or you don’t know the economics of it…” – Ray Dalio

      Dec 08, 2016 08:06 PM

      James is 100% without a clue. Ned is no pumper and was very conservative with his $1500 call for 2011. Ned is a pro’s pro.

      James also does not put his money where his whiny mouth is.

        Dec 08, 2016 08:19 PM

        I have listened to Ned Schmidt for many years via the FSN network and he is certainly no gold pumper.

          Dec 08, 2016 08:15 PM

          He’s fairly savvy on the Agricultural sector as well.

        Dec 09, 2016 09:15 AM

        James is a troll – reminds me of a fool Silver Fox from five years back.

      Dec 09, 2016 09:01 AM


      You need to get someone to explain to you the difference between an opinion and a fact. You have a lot of half baked opinions backed by no facts. And that’s a straight up fact.

    Dec 08, 2016 08:21 PM

    James, you were supposed to go. In fact you said you were going. Why are YOU still around?

      Dec 09, 2016 09:02 AM


      Because JTL is a straight up liar.

    Dec 08, 2016 08:23 PM

    I recon i got an idea where it wont go in the 1st 3 months of next year, and that is past this year high in the $1370 region. As a backer of pm fundamentals, it pains me to say that. Cant avoid the truth though just because it doesnt suit

      Dec 08, 2016 08:43 PM

      What about taking out this year’s highs by the 4th quarter of 2017?

      That seems like a reasonable position to me.

        Dec 08, 2016 08:02 PM

        Yeh by the 4th quarter is a better bet i recon. Looking 12 months ahead is fraught with danger though. Too many surprises and unforseen events unfolding or not. Who knows, gold be above 1500 this time nxt year (probably not at this stage). The question we need to ask, What factor could drive gold back to its bull market support area in the mid $1500 range?

          Dec 09, 2016 09:06 AM

          There are a few different drivers that could play into 2017:

          1) It may be the realization by the market next year, that after this Dec rate hike, and maybe the Fed can squeeze one more off in March, but after that, the debt load will not allow interest rates to go much higher than 1%. It may be at that point that the rest of the markets realize the central banks have painted themselves in a corner.

          2) The war on cash will keep some global investors interested in Gold, and crypto currencies as another place to store wealth.

          3) Europe will become more a train wreck next year and people may want a way of diversifying out of the Euro, so this may lift other currencies and Gold in tandem.

          4) The overly complacent market participants and the Wall Wtreet traders (many of whom are so young they may only remember the 2008/2009 correction and think it was a fluke) may finally experience fear if there is a general market sell-off next year. The question will be how the computer “circuit breakers” would act in a liquidation event.

          5) All this change may also break down patterns and correlations in a way where the algos and computer buying/selling zigs when it should zag. This will only confuse market participants, and add to the volatility.

          6) When the honeymoon phase with Trump is over and the US goes back into a recession, fear will enter the market again, and Gold & Silver may look interesting to have 5-10% of an allocation in for protection purposes.

          There are a few thoughts, but of course, nobody knows anything and nobody has a crystal ball. Based on longer term monthly charts though, it would not surprise me to see Gold reach new highs by the 3rd quarter of 2017, and this is in alignment with what Doc’s been discussing with us for some time.

            Dec 09, 2016 09:09 AM

            Wall Wtreet = Wall Street

            Dec 09, 2016 09:34 AM

            Excelsior, I think your first reason is most pertinent. With debt levels increasing at current rate, how can an increasing interest rate co-exist without repayment increase problems??!

    Dec 08, 2016 08:55 PM

    I don’t follow gold that much but it would need a long time to get to the last high maybe till September which is the strong period. It could easily go down to test 1100 first especially since the strong period is over.

    Dec 08, 2016 08:06 PM

    GH, I am back by popular request.

    There needs to be a balance here. If everyone was a gold to the mooner what would be the fun in that.

    Just ignore me.

      Dec 08, 2016 08:16 PM

      I agree diversity in viewpoints is good.

      It’s your style I object to. Long on opinion, sound & fury, short on evidence and reasoned argument, and ill-mannered to boot. Ned Schmidt, a seasoned pro, does us the courtesy of giving us some of his time, and you act like a jerk. If you acted at the racetrack the way you act here, I suspect you’d be a pariah.

      Dec 08, 2016 08:05 PM

      James just because your opinion isnt popular, doesnt necessarily mean its wrong. I hope it is but only time will. I think your thoughts, if nothing else, offer good perspective from someone who is not long pm’s. Both sides of the story are invaluable i believe

        Dec 08, 2016 08:24 PM

        I agree it’s valuable to have gold bears commenting.

        Again, it’s how it’s done.

        Dec 09, 2016 09:28 AM

        Ozibatla: Sorry to burst your bubble but JTL claims to be long PMs. It’s hard to know the truth because he tells a lot of tales.

        There are several guys here who predicted the PM bull in 2016 and got it dead right. For certain there are people here who do have a clue as to where gold is going in 2017. But it is not JTL, he claims he was buying silver at $4 in 1999 and we know that never happened.

        JTL is not a gold bear, he’s a troll. Big difference between the two.

          Dec 09, 2016 09:32 AM

          No bubble burst on my end Rob, dont worry. Whether James is legit or not wasnt my point. I was merely alluding to the fact that it is good to hear both sides of one story. After all, there are bulls and there are bears and they both shape any market. Just trying to get some perspective in this crazy world.

          Dec 09, 2016 09:44 AM

          At the end of the day I think most who comment here are in agreeance that the world cannot continue on its current economic path without disastrous ramifications. Precious metals are ultimately a bet or hedge against debt and inflation i believe.

          We all want to preserve what wealth we have as best we can right? I sincerely hope there can be an affective movement against our current monetary system guys. The worlds debt figure cannot be avoided, its mathematically certain. Just a question of whether we are alive to witness D-day

            Dec 09, 2016 09:25 AM


            I’m not sure gold and silver are quite that much a hedge against debt and inflation. If you look at a long term chart of gold, it’s expensive against everything. I can’t say I’m right but I think gold carries a big premium against chaos and government stupidity which we have in abundance. It’s an insurance policy that we hope we never use.

            Dec 09, 2016 09:28 AM

            Couldnt agree more Rob on the government stupidity statement. We may hope to never use, but I think it is inevitable. Governments will continue to spend till they are no more.

            Dec 09, 2016 09:01 AM

            Yes, but inflation IS government stupidity and gold perfectly protects long term savings from its effects despite what guys like Armstrong want people to believe. That is a fact.

            Gold is relatively unattractive right now, as Robert stated, but not when compared to U.S. government debt — which includes the dollar.

            Dec 09, 2016 09:41 AM


            I don’t often disagree with you but if you chart the long term price of gold against all commodities you will realize that actually gold has gone up a lot more than inflation therefore it cannot be a hedge against inflation, it already has been more than a hedge. There has to be some other factor.

            Dec 09, 2016 09:43 AM

            Robert, it is definitely true that gold leads and lags both money supply increases and the resulting price inflation, but over the long haul, the correlation is clear.

            Something that is missed by even most gold bugs is the fact that the dollar should not buy what it did 100 years ago, it should buy more. And sound money does just that. The impact of technology or even incremental improvements that have nothing to do with tech are deflationary — and that, as YOU know (and most others don’t) is a good thing. I can see why people like Ron Paul don’t bother pointing this out since people like JTL won’t be moved by the fact that the dollar is down more like 99% not 96% (this means that the dollar would have to quadruple to get up to minus 96%).

            In addition, if gold were just a hedge against government stupidity that is separate from money creation, then it’s price should be expected to slide back to its starting point after each bout of stupidity has past and the governments actions have returned to their baseline level of stupid.

            Dec 09, 2016 09:12 AM

            One more point. If gold is up as much as it is since 2000 because it is a hedge against stupidity, then why is copper, oil, and commodities in general also up substantially? Real GDP peaked in 1999 so it can’t be due to real, inflation-adjusted demand.

            Yes, gold is up more than most commodities but that can be explained by the fact that demand for it goes up exactly when demand for the economy-driven commodities goes down. It is due to this that holding just 15% of ones funds in gold can provide the protection that it does.

            Gold (and prices in general) always eventually reflect money supply growth.

            Dec 09, 2016 09:29 AM

            In a big economic bust, gold blows away commodities because cash is king in an economic contraction and gold is cash. Savers get rewarded naturally in a bust, as they should. The central banks undermine the natural order by getting people to believe that the paper claims (debt) that they emit is money and the cash that should be held as savings.

            The better the economy, the more gold is likely to underperform. When risk-taking is getting rewarded, people spend their money in order to take risks.


            Dec 10, 2016 10:44 AM

            Matthew, I’ve been making comments on local talk in Md and other sights for several (3-5) years disparaging the $USD and calling it the ” Ivory Snow Dollar “, meaning virtually as the 60s-70s commercial portrayed, 99.44% pure gone in relation to its purchasing power.
            Some of the old farts here will remember.

          Dec 10, 2016 10:51 AM

          Silver low in 1999 was $4.44 in May

    Dec 08, 2016 08:09 PM

    I don’t put my money where where my whiny mouth is?

    You have no clue and you know it.

    I offered a bet against the swamp creature and he is hiding in the tall weeds

      Dec 08, 2016 08:12 PM

      All you do is talk gold and silver down but you refuse to sell your substantial holdings. Am I missing something?

      Dec 08, 2016 08:14 PM

      Imagine what people would think of me if I had spent the bear market talking gold/silver up while staying net short the entire time?

      You’re a joke or worse, James.

      Dec 09, 2016 09:30 AM


      I’ve already shown that you could’t possibly have bought silver at $4 in 1999 so if you are not going to lie about the bet as well, send AL a check for $1000 because while you claimed to have bought silver in 1999, you didn’t even know when it hit it’s low.

    Dec 08, 2016 08:14 PM

    I found Ned’s comment on the Nasdaq 100 ($NDX) interesting. I’ve always followed $COMPQ. Can anyone shed any light on the differences and relative advantage of following one versus the other?

    That’s two Raff regression channels, in green and black, and a rising wedge in blue.

      Dec 08, 2016 08:38 PM

      I think that looking at the top 100 will give you a better idea about the true overall health of the sector but I would probably look at both. Divergences and confirmations can be useful.
      I noticed that $COMPQ took out its 2008 low in early 2009 before going higher while $NDX did not, and the same thing happened with the 2015/16 lows. It makes sense that the biggest and best of the sector would be less volatile and would see more buying interest sooner during a retest of what had been a scary low.

        Dec 08, 2016 08:25 PM

        That makes sense. Thanks, Matthew.

    Dec 08, 2016 08:15 PM

    Ned Schmidt is a gem. If you are talking him on the weekend show, please ask him if he has any opinion on Input Capital. It is the first and as far as I know only agricultural streaming company. They recently announced a dividend and trade at a value far below the price to cash flow of the precious metals streaming companies.

    Dec 08, 2016 08:49 PM

    Gold giving up the ghost


    Dec 08, 2016 08:59 PM

    If if and buts were candy and nuts oh what a party we’d have

      Dec 09, 2016 09:46 AM

      You’re certainly a nutter.