Thread: What is this guy talking about

I had a lot of people tell me things just like that 6-7 yrs ago (not so nasty) now when i bring it up they just say things like just wait and see you'll lose long term. I bet the guy in the OP would have said the same things 6-7 yrs ago and been dead wrong.

Originally Posted by JCB1983

#3 Germany's way of paying off ww1 debt cornered and propelled their cause to begin ww2 in the first place.

Um sort of that was more of a nice benefit of starting ww2 but wasn't first and foremost on the NSDAP's mind when they ran for office in '37 or invaded poland in '39 but this isn't a history forum.
Getting back on point beyond the first two sentences it's a rambling rant. Even then he's a bit wrong as he mentions nothing of rhodium and it sits in the number 3 slot for price per ounce but the number 6 slot for use. I think if he had said understand what you are doing and when to get out to make a profit so you aren't left with bags or bars of precious metals when the prices eventually drop he would have been fine. Also he is sort or right about copper. Copper hasn't jumped like silver and gold and the big boys have nor will it give large gains and does have huge swings up and down. In the past 5 years its been as low as almost a $1/lb. and just as few months ago almost make $5/lb. and as of right now is just under $4. So yes you would have to have truck loads of it and would have had to buy it around $1 and sold it at around $4.50/lb.
The only upside to copper rounds and bars is unlike copper cents it can be melted at any time for any reason and made into anything copper. So if there was ever a mining shortage of copper for industrial uses, coin minting, plumbing then you could make some real serious dough selling to them for those reasons. Some nuggests of advice misguided and yelled instead of spoken and peppered with insanity IMO.

The man didn't tell you anything but an opinion. Nothing more nothing less. His bluster about the price of gold 1000 years ago is nonsense and doesn't substitute for lack of any relevant contemporary specific information now. Remember misery loves company and IMO it sounds more like sour grapes that he missed off on the rise of PMs.

Originally Posted by fatima

The man didn't tell you anything but an opinion. Nothing more nothing less. His bluster about the price of gold 1000 years ago is nonsense and doesn't substitute for lack of any relevant contemporary specific information now. Remember misery loves company and IMO it sounds more like sour grapes that he missed off on the rise of PMs.

Misery loves miserable company. I would run not walk away from any bet with this guy. TC

He's right in one regard. That PMs aren't technically a good investment, since they shouldn't actually go up in value as you generally want investments to. Instead, they simply protect against inflation in the long term. They're also a physical asset, unlike most paper assets that stand a very good risk of evaporating in an economic collapse.

What that means is I wouldn't pile all of my investment capital into PM. Instead, I put a portion of into them to diversify my investments. ...and because they're shiny.

Originally Posted by JCB1983

#3 Germany's way of paying off ww1 debt cornered and propelled their cause to begin ww2 in the first place.

Not true.

Germany's starting of WWII was their consistent violation of the Treaty of Versailles by instead of annexing the German areas of border countries to Germany, they annexed the entire border country.

I agree with him on one thing, you should never put all your eggs in the proverbial precious metals basket. It's always wise to carry a diversified portfolio. Aside from that, I think the way a person speaks with typed words is a complete reflection of his/her actual personality. In that case, what a ...

Originally Posted by JCB1983

I simply asked about investing in PM's and mentioned some of my reasoning behind it. Do you find his advice as accurate or is he just blowing steam? What is he getting at?


(joeyV)

What are you trying to accomplish?

First off there are only three (or perhaps four) precious metals that are traded - gold, silver, platinum and possibly palladium. Copper is not a precious metal ($3/lb) so anybody who is telling you that copper is a precious metal is an idiot and not worth listening to for more than time of day. Buying any other metal besides these is deeply nuts unless you are a pro buying an enormous pile.

He's right about copper not considered a precious metal, it's an ore much like iron. Something that popped up on the scene, at least here locally not sure where else, are these 10 oz copper rounds with the designs of the LMC, and Morgan dollar on them. The sellers are marketing these as sound investments. However, realistically, they are not sound at all.

Originally Posted by JCB1983

Second, all of these are wildly volatile investments. Buying them as your primary investment is nuts.

Both statements are correct. What will happen to everyone who went on a buying frenzy when silver spiked to over $40 an ounce if silver should drop say, another $15-$18 an ounce?

Big losses!

Originally Posted by JCB1983

In the meantime - about that bet? Let's do it - you could make some good money if you knew something.

Politely being derogatory towards you.

I also believe the poster is correct in many of his assertions. My only disagreement would be how PM is going down for 1000 years. He IMHO is a little misled. It has been going down in terms of real value to vertain degrees for a few hundred years due to both new supplies, (CA gold rush, Comstock lode, etc), as well as advancements in technology. To ignore those factors and simply say its in general been going down for 1000 years is misleading at best.

As for his tone, he sounds like a jerk, but to be honest I don't know what your post was before his response Jason. That is why I won't throw him under the bus, I am only hearing one snippet of a conversation and there are conversations here that if you just take one snippet I would sounds like a righteous SOB. Without context, I do not know why he was being so rude.

My take at least.

Chris

Originally Posted by BUncirculated

Not true.

Germany's starting of WWII was their consistent violation of the Treaty of Versailles by instead of annexing the German areas of border countries to Germany, they annexed the entire border country.

That is the direct reason, but I would argue those nations enforcing such rules enacted in the Treaty of Versailles and the treaty itself, (cough**France**cough), were the reasons for the Weimars inability to keep a person like Hitler from power. When people are put into deperate situations they make desparate choices in leadership many times.

Thankfully we learned this lesson and did not impose such treaties to end WWII, and have had many decades of peace because of it, (Soviet Union is a different issue).

Originally Posted by medoraman

That is the direct reason, but I would argue those nations enforcing such rules enacted in the Treaty of Versailles and the treaty itself, (cough**France**cough), were the reasons for the Weimars inability to keep a person like Hitler from power. When people are put into deperate situations they make desparate choices in leadership many times.

Thankfully we learned this lesson and did not impose such treaties to end WWII, and have had many decades of peace because of it, (Soviet Union is a different issue).

I'll agree with that.

+1

Thank you for all of the replies. I didn't take offense to his comments, and I thought they were kind of funny. He is a top contributor on yahoo answers in the investing category. I jokingly stated that because of inflation I would be a billionaire at a younger age than he would, and he has responded as a militant ever since. His usual tactics are attacking my lack of grammar. I'll inquire about the 1,000 year PM value and see what his insights are.

Originally Posted by JCB1983

Thank you for all of the replies. I didn't take offense to his comments, and I thought they were kind of funny. He is a top contributor on yahoo answers in the investing category. I jokingly stated that because of inflation I would be a billionaire at a younger age than he would, and he has responded as a militant ever since. His usual tactics are attacking my lack of grammar. I'll inquire about the 1,000 year PM value and see what his insights are.

If he wants to get too "historical", I will go down that path with him if you wish Jason. Dude better have a pretty nice library if he wants to make that bet with those odds with me.

Not trying to brag, sorry it its sounds like that, I just have many references on Chinese, ancient Roman, and medieval monetary policies and what affects bullion shortages/surpluses had on their economies over many centuries. Its kind of a specialized area, so I am doubting he is as versed as he thinks he is, that's all I meant.

Chris

Originally Posted by JCB1983

Thank you for all of the replies. I didn't take offense to his comments, and I thought they were kind of funny. He is a top contributor on yahoo answers in the investing category. I jokingly stated that because of inflation I would be a billionaire at a younger age than he would, and he has responded as a militant ever since. His usual tactics are attacking my lack of grammar. I'll inquire about the 1,000 year PM value and see what his insights are.

There's really no way he, or anyone else for that matter, would be able to gauge the value of PMs 1000 years ago. Countries in Europe, Asia,and the African continent used gold and silver as a monetary system, and there was also coinage of those times at some point, but remember one thing, the U.S. is not that old.

Originally Posted by BUncirculated

There's really no way he, or anyone else for that matter, would be able to gauge the value of PMs 1000 years ago. Countries in Europe, Asia,and the African continent used gold and silver as a monetary system, and there was also coinage of those times at some point, but remember one thing, the U.S. is not that old.

If you want to look at it in general, you don't have to go back 1000 years. Lets just go back 150 years! People hoarded the real value (gold and silver) and got rid of the paper as fast as they could because most people didn't trust it and didn't want it.

150 years later you have a guy that's been born and raised on paper, who lives and dies by it and thinks he's the end all source of historic information on the value of PMs. He's too sophisticated to care about PMs. I think he is shallow minded and not seeing big picture. Paper can be created out of thin air and manipulated. There's no easier way to lose everything than to just own paper.

Not saying gold and silver is the end all be all, but he's certainly not giving them the credit they are due.