I think Sinclair's gold numbers are a crock of $hit. He basically listed dozens of price points leading up to $1650, which served no purpose. What, we didn't know that gold had to go through $682 to get to $887.50? (BTW, $887.50 was the biggest joke number of all. Resolution to a half a buck?) All those markers along the way had no significance. They showed no more or less resistance or support than any other numbers you could have picked randomly from a hat.

Even when he was predicting $1650 early on, dozens of other advisors, as well as everybody on this forum, expected as much, so what was so special about his prediction? I think he was actually woefully conservative, given his perspective. I've been calling for a gold top at $3200 since 2005, so his prediction actually looks quite lame. Even $1650 has no significance, since he's moved on to $1764. Props my a$$.