Russian warship carrying £100 Billion of gold found off S. Korea

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by Dougmeister, Jul 18, 2018.

  1. Dougmeister

    Dougmeister Well-Known Member

  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Gregg

    Gregg Monster Toning

    Why would you put 100 billion in gold on a warship and then take that ship into battle?
     
  4. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    Cajones.
     
  5. LA_Geezer

    LA_Geezer Well-Known Member

    RAC! (riendo a carcajadas)
     
  6. -jeffB

    -jeffB Greshams LEO Supporter

    I'm pretty sure there's never been a flotilla that would require 100 billion pounds for pay, port expenses, and so on.

    I suspect the original statement was 100 million, not billion, never mind British billion (US trillion). Filtered through the Express's editors, though, I'm surprised it wasn't reported as 100 billion tons of gold. :rolleyes:
     
  7. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    Ooh, good old media accuracy commentary! Gotta love it.
     
  8. -jeffB

    -jeffB Greshams LEO Supporter

    Well, the Express certainly fits the old "neither rare nor well done" characterization...
     
  9. Treashunt

    Treashunt The Other Frank

    realize that it was worth far less back then
     
  10. Treashunt

    Treashunt The Other Frank

    Figure: $100,000,000,000 / $average of $1300 an ounce =
    76,923 ounces
    time #+$21, value of one ounce in 1905= $1,615,384.61
     
  11. COCollector

    COCollector Well-Known Member

    One of my pet peeves is media reporting temperatures in unit-less degrees.

    For example, I heard reports that global surface temperature is expected to rise 1.7 degrees in the 21st century. Fahrenheit, Celsius, Kelvin units?

    Yes Virginia, it makes a difference.
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2018
  12. COCollector

    COCollector Well-Known Member


    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2018
    Stork, -jeffB and CoinCorgi like this.
  13. Michael K

    Michael K Well-Known Member

    It says 100 billion English pounds of gold.
    So you need different calculations as the pound is worth $1.30
    So that would be 130,000,000,000 in US dollars, divided by 1300 ounce
    that's 100 million ounces x 21 an ounce is 2.1 billion.

    Your number of 79,000 is way off.
    79,923 x 1300= 103,899,900. That's only 104 million.

    1300 is roughly 65x more than 21 ( 20 an ounce)
    And 2 billion is roughly 65x less than 130 billion.
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2018
  14. COCollector

    COCollector Well-Known Member

    I also think Treashunt misplaced some zeroes. :)
     
  15. Cheech9712

    Cheech9712 Every thing is a guess

    What does that mean
     
  16. Cheech9712

    Cheech9712 Every thing is a guess

    Yeah. That ship would sit pretty low in the water. Not to believable
     
  17. Cheech9712

    Cheech9712 Every thing is a guess

    Russian foke news
     
  18. NumisNinja

    NumisNinja Active Member

    If it weighed a hundred billion pounds the ship would sink.
     
  19. V. Kurt Bellman

    V. Kurt Bellman Yes, I'm blunt! Get over your "feeeeelings".

    Not weight, pounds sterling. Money.
     
    CoinCorgi likes this.
  20. CoinCorgi

    CoinCorgi Tell your dog I said hi!

    yeah maybe it was 100 billion stones worth of sterling pound gold ounces.
     
    -jeffB likes this.
  21. CoinCorgi

    CoinCorgi Tell your dog I said hi!

    the ol' avoirdupois vs troy thing ya know
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page