Gold within a hair of new record high in $s (Metal of Kings)

I was thinking the same thing. A million-dollar block of silver would be about three cubic feet. Of course, as others have pointed out, it would be unwise for lucyray to tell us exactly how much value she's trying to store...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

If you study Mr. Graham's works on the stock market, the difference will be clear. Studying Graham's methodology is part of the "thorough analysis." You have to know how to do it, otherwise it is all guesswork. You are partially correct in saying that it is restrictive, which is the whole point of doing the analysis in the first place. But it is only "unduly" to the extent a superficial analysis is acceptable.

 

It might not take up much space, but you'd need a forklift to carry a block of silver worth $1 million, since it would weigh approximately 1000 avoirdupois pounds!

 

right. because so many people here have a million dollars worth of gold they walk around with.

 

Speculation or investing is a personal mindset depending on how much risk one can comfortably accept both financially and/or mentally. What is investing for one may be viewed as speculation by another.

 

Not if it was a stack of one-kilogram bars. But if I had seven figures worth of silver that needed moving around, I'd probably still spring for a forklift.

 

Are you kidding? I keep it in the trunk of the car. Who wants back trouble?

 

All metal markets are speculative ones in my opinion. I'm not particularly well acquainted with advances in the applications of precious metals, but it's my belief that the surge in price is not accompanied by a sufficient spike in industrial utilization, though I'd love to be informed otherwise. Gold is probably the first metal I'd attach "speculative" to.

 

I'm most sure you are all being facetious regarding carrying around metals..it is not even practical to walk in to ones bank of choice to get into a sdb with the weights of which you speak, even the 1000 oz at sixty plus pounds..are you all nuts? And as you speak of forklifts as if commonplace, where, pray-tell ate you moving this great weight to and fro?All facetious. Not really helpful at all.Gold, while not as space taking, also has a weight issue, all of which has no bearing on the intent of this thread.Lucy

 

I think they were just having fun Lucy. You are right gold is much better for storage than silver, with platinum being better yet. My quantity of silver never got to be too big a deal, just a little large SDB. Then again, I didn't have 6 figures worth either, (maybe now with prices the way they are(probably not though), but not back then).

You are right about the weight! I emptied my SDB in another state, and even though fit into a mint bag, weighed so much it felt like it would pull my arm off. Dang, PM is HEAVY.

 

Depends on the meaning of the word "speculative". It always boils down to the meaning.

I would agree with you since gold has the least percentage industrial usage it could be viewed as most speculative. However, it is more stable pricing due to the nature of it, so its much less volatile than most other PMs.

@Cloud, I have read Mr. Graham's work but like most such authors ties in definitions to his own preferred methodology. I would say that at least a understanding of a firm, (to the extent the investor wants or is capable), would be required for it to really be an "investment" and not speculation, but I refuse to be tied down to one author's opinion as to what that requires.

 

Yes, Lucy, we've gotten a little silly, and I'm sorry for my part in the threadjacking. But many of us have a hard time imagining "not having enough room for all our silver".

I suppose that it's an issue if you've accumulated a lot of silver -- say, enough to pay for a modest house -- and you're trying to get it into a small SDB. Or perhaps you're collecting silver proof sets or slabbed coins, which does increase the volume considerably. Or maybe you just hate clutter (although, in my experience, coins and clutter almost always go hand-in-hand).

Bottom line: yes, a given value of silver (at today's prices) weighs about 40 times as much as an equal value of gold, and occupies nearly 80 times the volume. But I imagine that most of us here would love​ to be in a position where that becomes a problem.

 

just think how much a million in Ikes would weigh

 

I think Ben's definition is more liberating than restrictive because it associates the definition to economic value, depth of knowledge, and portfolio strategy rather than just asset class. For me, the other definitions here are too restrictive to be useful, but that's just me.

 

This is because Oil is the only commodity that is directly tied to Gold. Oil, Gold and the USD form the trioka in which the modern economic world is currently based on. There is a simple reason for this. The US military absolutely assures that any nation that wishes to buy oil, can do so as long as they use the United States Dollar. This makes Oil directly convertable into USD and vice/versa. i.e. Oil can be used as currency. However, Oil does not have the intrinsic properties of a currency so central bankers and governments will hold Gold as a substitute which gives them a hard asset to acquire Oil and USD as needed. When the USD is debased by over printing or other means, the value of the other 2 legs of this troika rises to balance it out.

(Note don't confuse this with the $ being directly convertible into Gold because it isn't, however the central bankers don't use their own confetti to settle with each other. They know the folly of that. )

This is why gold will continue to rise. I take great note of the fact, which continues to be ignored here, that the safes of the central bankers and governments are not full of sugar, pork bellies, AND silver. They only hold Gold. While these other commodities may rise due to the bad economic policy of the USA, it's simply a fallacy to believe it is due to the fundamentals that affect gold.

I asked raise the issue before about Gold being held by the central bankers and governments, and it continues to be ignored. (except for the irrelevant one-liner that was posted). Anyone who honestly wants to understand the difference between Gold, Silver and pork bellies, would do themselves well to understand this.

 

there are many things more important than gold. shelter, medicine, a food supply, a water supply, guns, safety etc.
having some gold doesn't mean you can get those things when you need them.

 

I will just say that Central banks USED to hold other PM, but have sold those positions. The holding of gold is a more emotional issue, so they have been unable to dispose of those holdings, if they had wanted to.

I know you put additional weight behind the importance of gold Fatima, and we disagree to an extent. I do believe gold is a lower volatility PM, is very conveniently sized, and as such makes an excellent vehicle for portfolio risk diversification. I use it some for that, but bought more silver since I liked having lots of "coins" for my PM investment.

Chris

 

Bear in mind also that one of the reasons gold has risen so much is that the value of the dollar has eroded dramatically. Try traveling overseas and see what a dollar gets you!

 

Nope. The Federal Reserve, and you can look at their balance sheet yourself on their website, only lists several thousand tons of gold as the only PM hard asset to meet the obligations of the Federal Reserve act to balance out base currency against hard assets. They have never held silver.

The US Treasury did maintain a stockpile of silver to balance out the silver certificates that it once issued. However this was for public consumption. It had nothing to do with what I stated above. In any case, that ended more than 40 years ago. When I said the modern economic world, I meant from 1971 on.

 

I never said they had Fatima. I said that countries used to have stockpiles of other PM that they have sold off mostly, but haven't sold off gold, with one reason the emotionality of the subject.

I served at Ft Knox sir so I know about that aspect of the base.