REPRINTED FROM 11/15/2009

Gold Monthly (Log Scale)

Because Gold has decisively taken out the the A=C target of $1,025, this
model gains in viability. The targets are either $1,502 for a 162% of A=C,
or $2,187 for an A=C in % terms. The higher target would coincide with a
multi-decade long trend channel (log scale). 2187

C
1502
A
873
~ 38 months

Channel connected
through monthy closes.

~234 months
253
B

One high probability timing target for this C-Wave

would be December 2010 for (A+B)/2 = C-Wave
101 Gold begins to freely trade
duration, or 136 months.
in U.S. in 1976

Andy’s Technical Commentary__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 Gold Monthly Cash Settle

The Gold wave count on the previous page should have began in 1970. That was the year that the
world began to lose faith in the Dollar as a reserve currency and the Bretton Woods agreement was C
disintegrating. This was also the time period in which Nixon closed the gold window.

Previous attempts at longer term Gold counts have finished the B-Wave at the August 1999 absolute
low. This was probably an error. It’s more likely that the bull move in Gold began in the first half of
2001, when it was clear the secular bull move in equities was over and a new political regime had
come to power. The shocking events of September 11, 2001 was confirmation that Gold was a “safe
bet” in a world that was becoming more unstable.

A
<C>

The B-Wave
probably ended
in 1/H of 2001

Gold “peg” at
$35/oz ends here
<A>
B

<B>

Andy’s Technical Commentary__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 Gold Monthly (Log Scale)

Using these dates and prices, we have an A-Wave that lasted 9.5 years and was $838 in size.
The B-Wave lasted 21 years and finished around $260/oz. These dates give us a few targets for
the C-Wave conclusion: August 2012 for a C = B - A or May 2016 for a C = (A+B)/2. If we get
an A=C for duration, then the move would conclude in the next few months.

C
(Jan, 1980) C - Wave Price Targets:
$873
A $1,295 for 123.6% of A
$1,418 for 138.2% of A
$1,615 for 161.8% of A

(Nov, 1974)
$191
B
$260
(Feb, 2001)?

$101
(Aug, 1976)
$35
(Aug, 1970)
Andy’s Technical Commentary__________________________________________________________________________________________________
 Gold Weekly (Log Scale) REPRINTED FROM 11/15/2009
C
<V>
This is an update to the longer term count first presented on 6/16/09. If we don’t see a
dramatic reversal before $1,169, then this would have to be the model. Notice that the larger
degree Wave <IV>, while odd, is somewhat similar to the lesser degree Wave -IV-, which was
also counted as Double that ended with a contracting triangle (fractal?). This wave count
would likely mean higher prices through 2010. Given the similarity between the higher degree < III >
wave-4s here, it wouldn’t surprise to see a Wave <V> that has the same size and scope as -V- -X-
the lesser degree Wave -V-.

-Y-
< IV >
- III -
(X)
-W-
(Y)
- IV -
(W)

-I-

<I> - II -

Back in June, I had thought that the -X- wave here was the final Wave
<V>, believing it to be a terminal fifth (corrective pattern). This ended up
being an incorrect interpretation. The good news is we knew that idea
< II > was wrong when the market lapsed into a triangle.
B

Andy’s Technical Commentary__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 Gold Weekly (Log Scale)
C
<V>
When it comes to wave counting, it’s important to be honest with one’s self.
While this wave count from several months ago might the right one, and it has
certainly done a good job of predicting the 2010 strength, there are some issues
with it. < III >
-V- -X-
One of the problems is starting the count at the 1999 lows. It is unlikely that a
Wave-2 could last this long. It’s even unlikely that a b-wave could last that long.
Many Ellioticians begin the longer term count at that point, but it’s probably
incorrect. -Y-
< IV >
One of the other problems with the count is the “corrective” looking behavior - III -
between 2001 and 2005. Relative to the move that was to unfold, this doesn’t (X)
look “impulsive” at all. It’s certainly possible to derive an “impulse” count, but -W-
there are quite a lot of corrective patterns across this time period.
(Y)
- IV -
(W)

-I-

<I> - II -

A grinding “look” compared to what followed

< II >
B

Andy’s Technical Commentary__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 Gold Weekly (Log Scale) <Y>
-E-
Presented here is one possible explanation of all the price action we’ve seen.
-C-
The 2001 to 2006 move was an “expanding” triangle followed by a corrective x- (Y)
wave that concluded in August 2007. The price action since the Aug ’07 lows is
taking the form of a triangle. The -A- and -B- wave each lasted 31 weeks. The
-C- Wave that followed was A+B in duration and an EXACT 138.2% of the -A-.
-A- - D -?
Along with the fact that the -C- was a CLEAR corrective move, this is compelling (W)
evidence of a triangle formation.

(X)

<W>
-E-
$732

An expanding Triangle would explain the “corrective” looking -B-

price behavior between 2001 and 2005 which was followed <X>
by the explosive move into the $732 peak in 2006.
$643

The sideways corrective move following an

expanding Triangle must be an <X> wave.
-C- (X)
(C)

(A) (Y)
-D-
-A- (B) (W)
(C)

(A) -B-

(B)

Andy’s Technical Commentary__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 Gold Weekly (Log Scale) <Y>
-E-
We’ve seen plenty of strange “doubles” and “triples” that have not adhered to
good duration principles, but a Y-wave “should” be shorter in duration and price -C-
than the W-wave. In the model presented here, the <W> took 5 years (nice (Y)
Fibbo number). If the <Y> is going to <W> by 61.8%, then we should see a
three year move which would conclude in August 2010.
-A- - D -?
(W)

(X)
<Y> Wave Price Targets:
<W>
$1,218 for 61.80% of <W> (log scale) -E-
$732
$1,450 for 78.62% of <W> (log scale)
$1,387 for 61.80% of <W> measured from
-B-
the top of <W> (log scale)
<X>
$643

-C- (X)
(C)

(A) (Y)
-D-
-A- (B) (W)
(C)

(A) -B-

(B) Three Year

Five Year Move?
Move
B

Andy’s Technical Commentary__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 Gold Daily -E-
$1,296?
The -C- wave was 138.2% of -A-. The -D- wave was 38.2% of -B-. So, we’ve
seen good Fibonacci relationships in the alternating legs. If this is to continue, -C-
then the E-Wave targets would 1214 or 1293. The 1214 target has been (Y)
“e”
-E-
exceeded, but it’s still a viable one for the -E- wave because the final -E- $1,214?
maybe become a triangle itself, which would give a lower finishing
price than the absolute high. It should be noted that the $1,293
(B)
objective is very close to the $1,296 larger degree (D)
Target on Slide 3.

“c”
-A- (A) (E)

“a”
- D -?
(W) (C)
“d”

“b” The B - D line is EXTREMELY important for

Gold bulls. A break of this line would
indicate that this triangle has concluded.
(X)

- E - Wave Price Targets:

$1,214 for 23.6% of - C -

$1,293 for 38.2% of - C -

-B-
<X>
$643

Andy’s Technical Commentary__________________________________________________________________________________________________

 Gold Monthly (Log Scale)
A C-Wave that is NOT an impulse has some very interesting long term implications in terms of the very big picture. It
means that that we’re in later stages of a multi-decade Supercycle Triangle. This suggest that the next decline will only
be a D-Wave correction. The Gold Bugs may have all their wildest dreams come true when that E-Wave hits, especially
if we see an Expanding Triangle.

E?

C
$1,300-$1,400?
(Jan, 1980)
$873
A
<W>

<X> D

(Nov, 1974)
$191
B
$260
(Feb, 2001)?

$101
$35 (Aug, 1976)
(Aug, 1970)
Andy’s Technical Commentary__________________________________________________________________________________________________
 Here’s an updated look at the latest Commitment of Traders on Gold. The noteworthy item here is the
divergence between price and the Net length. This last move in Gold, while setting a new high, does not have
the same amount of conviction (net length) behind it.. Some technicians would suggest this bearish
divergence.

350000

300000
Net Speculative Length
250000 (Comex Futures Contracts)

200000

150000

100000

50000

-50000

-100000
1/2/01

1/2/03

5/2/05
9/2/05

5/2/07
9/2/07

1/2/10
5/2/01
9/2/01
1/2/02
5/2/02
9/2/02

5/2/03
9/2/03
1/2/04
5/2/04
9/2/04
1/2/05

1/2/06
5/2/06
9/2/06
1/2/07

1/2/08
5/2/08
9/2/08
1/2/09
5/2/09
9/2/09

5/2/10
Andy’s Technical Commentary__________________________________________________________________________________________________
 DISCLAIMER WARNING DISCLAIMER WARNING DISCLAIMER

This report should not be interpreted as investment advice of any

kind. This report is technical commentary only. The author is Wave Symbology
NOT representing himself as a CTA or CFA or Investment/Trading
Advisor of any kind. This merely reflects the author’s "I" or "A" = Grand Supercycle
interpretation of technical analysis. The author may or may not I or A = Supercycle
trade in the markets discussed. The author may hold positions <I>or <A> = Cycle
opposite of what may by inferred by this report. The information -I- or -A- = Primary
contained in this commentary is taken from sources the author (I) or (A) = Intermediate
believes to be reliable, but it is not guaranteed by the author as to "1“ or "a" = Minor
the accuracy or completeness thereof and is sent to you for 1 or a = Minute
information purposes only. Commodity trading involves risk and -1- or -a- = Minuette
is not for everyone. (1) or (a) = Sub-minuette
[1] or [a] = Micro
Here is what the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) [.1] or [.a] = Sub-Micro
has said about futures trading: Trading commodity futures and
options is not for everyone. IT IS A VOLATILE, COMPLEX AND
RISKY BUSINESS. Before you invest any money in futures or
options contracts, you should consider your financial experience,
goals and financial resources, and know how much you can afford
to lose above and beyond your initial payment to a broker. You
should understand commodity futures and options contracts and
your obligations in entering into those contracts. You should
understand your exposure to risk and other aspects of trading by
thoroughly reviewing the risk disclosure documents your broker is
required to give you.