Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Dines' Picks

This article from last week identifies some of Jim Dines' picks and since it was published in a public domain I think it's fair to publish them here and now:



PETER BRIMELOW
Gold, uranium rises vindicate 'Original Bug'
Commentary: And Dines predicts commodities' prices will climb even higher
By Peter Brimelow, MarketWatch
Last Update: 12:01 AM ET Nov 5, 2007


NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- The Original Uranium Bug and the Original Gold Bug (they're the same James Dines) is breathing easier.

Dines, the octogenarian editor of The Dines Letter, was our Investment Letter Editor of the Year in 2006. See Jan. 1 column

More than 20 ago, he brilliantly reinvented himself as an active stock trader, after arguably staying a little too long with his first great insight: that the inflationary 1960s would doom the dollar and boost gold. (Hence Original Gold Bug).
Dines' reinvention worked. The Dines Letter is up 28.2% over the past 12 months vs. 15.1% for the dividend-reinvested Dow Jones Wilshire 5000, according to the Hulbert Financial Digest. And over the past 10 years, Dines is up an even more impressive 19.8% annualized vs. 7.4% for the total-return DJ Wilshire.

With spot gold back above $800 for the first time since 1980, Dines like many gold bugs could be pardoned for thinking that the conditions of his youth have returned. See Oct. 18 column

Indeed, Dines writes in his last letter, published in late October: "We would be very surprised if the gold price did not blast right through the old highs, and we reaffirm our old targets for gold of $3,000 to $5,000 an ounce (Plus silver over $100 an ounce) ... gold is not merely a colorful trinket but a monetary asset, and when mass fear strikes at the heart of paper money, the stampede to gold will be awesome."
What has really distinguished Dines in recent years, however, has been his advocacy of uranium. He argues that, ultimately, the only energy choice is between coal (resulting in global warming) and uranium.

When I last checked in with Dines, uranium had stumbled after a multi-year run. See Aug. 20 column

Dines was distressed but determined.

He now feels vindicated by the subsequent rebound, noting that many uranium stocks are back to the levels they achieved earlier this year.

He concludes: "Uranium action this year thus appears to be an example of an unusual "Major" consolidation, while the uranium market tries to figure out which path to take. We must remain stoically calm, and not allow our emotions to whip us back and forth ... Although stock market trends could change and force us to completely reassess the situation, events are proceeding as though an important bottom is behind us.""

Other Dines views: "Stock markets are getting a bit oversold here, and we are looking for a rally in the S&P 500 Index ($SPX)anytime, somewhere between the 1,420-1,495 areas, probably in November, paving the way for the traditional year-end rally."


But Dines still rates himself "long-term neutral" on stocks.

On bonds, Dines writes: "We are generally bearish, because bonds are overpriced. We would still avoid corporate or "junk" bonds, but instead stay with very short-term U.S Treasury paper or cash. We expect higher interest rates ahead ... This is not an enriching arena yet."

These stocks are rated "buys" in Dines' top-performing "Long-Term Growth" portfolio:

Pan American Silver Corp.
PAAS

Denison Mines Corp.
DNN

Laramide Resources Ltd.
LMRX.F

Fronteer Development Group Inc.
FRG

Mega Uranium Ltd.
MGAF.F

Paladin Resources
PALAF

Uranium One Inc
SXRZ.F

Arafura Resources I
ARAFF


3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Allan:

Given that your financial blog is so profitable and informative, why do you not charge to read it?

Also, why not set up a hedge fund that trades your picks and bring in investors?

We Greeks have a saying:

"If you can make a ton of money for yourself & others- do it!"

Leonidas
Southern Greece

Allan said...

Given that your financial blog is so profitable and informative, why do you not charge to read it?

I see a lot of financial blogs charging monthly subscription fees and these guys for the most part, can't trade their way out of paper bags. That's why they charge fees, to make money. But that's why I trade, to make money. See the difference? My techniques are profitable enough that I can share some with other traders without needing subscription fees to pay my bills. I guess it's a matter of principle...and self-confidence....and conviction.

Also, why not set up a hedge fund that trades your picks and bring in investors?

I do manage portfolios as well as manage a hedge fund for accredited investors. The security laws here in the States prevent me from publicly touting my services without registration with lengthly and periodic disclosures. I chose to do other things with my time, like write this Blog. Nonetheless, I think I am allowed to answer your question (my email address is around here somewhere) and if not, well, maybe you and some others can start a "Free Allan" movement. Hey, that's not a bad name for this Blog, "Free Allan."

As always, thanks for your input and participation, Leonidas.

A

Anonymous said...

Aha!

I did not know that, here in Southern Greece, the US SEC has, shall we say "limited powers."

I'm sure the hedge fund thing will pique your readers to write in to your email address for further info.

As for charging for the blog, I see your point. My wife doesn't charge me for her opinions either! Perhaps there is a connection!

Leonidas
Southern Greece