GOLD- the only true currency?

cloud_dog

Blah99 wrote: »

Quote:Here is something to sober you up. Alan !!!!!!, chartered financial planner at Forty Two Financial Planning says: "I don't believe gold should be held, period. It is a speculation, not an investment. Gold generates no income so the returns are purely from speculative price movements. This is more akin to gambling than investing and most individuals will end up getting badly burned."

I always like these quotes........... so is the finacial adviser is basically saying any investment where you do not receive income is gambling. Hmmmm, wonder how many stocks I / people hold that do not generate income for me?????

tradetime

cloud_dog wrote: »

Yes, but.............Asherton hasn't been around on this thread. :rolleyes:

No, seriously I didn't think this particular thread had had any (?) 'buy, buy, buy' posts?

He's busy hunting down those nasty conspirators who are forcing the price of gold back down :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Stavros_3

tradetime wrote: »

He's busy hunting down those nasty conspirators who are forcing the price of gold back down :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

PMSL :rotfl:

purch

So you trust these institutions then?

No.........not particularly

The Governments (and Central Banks who work for them) have their own agendas, so you don't necessarily take everything they say, and the figures they release as 100% correct.

My point is that those bloggers you refer to have their own agenda, and the stats they use are 'calculated' using their own agenda also.

purch

Now although his statement was 3 years ago, I'm more inclined to listen to this guy than some of the 'There's gold in them thar hills' prospectors on this website.

Brilliant............a Buffet quote.

Gold was $420 oz in 2005, now it's more than double that.

Equity's have done what ??

Buffets a 'frikkin' genius !!!!

tradetime

purch wrote: »

Brilliant............a Buffet quote.

Gold was $420 oz in 2005, now it's more than double that.

Equity's have done what ??

Buffets a 'frikkin' genius !!!!

Can't say I'm a Buffet fan, but I respect anyone who is good at what they do. Now I don't know whether the following is a fair comparison, or not, but I suspect it's as fair as that one.

$41 invested with Berkshire Hathaway's class A stock in 1970 would have bought one share.

$37.40 on the other hand would have bought you an ounce of Gold in 1970

So your $37.40 would now be worth around $945 and change at close yesterday, of course it has been as high as just over $1000

Meanwhile your $41 would have been worth $78,350 at close, mind you it was worth $141,600 at the end of 2007

As investments go I don't really think the two are in the same league.. I guess you could say he knows a little about investing, maybe.

Lol_UK_2

mike22 wrote: »

No. Of course not. In fact, you put your money into gold for mid- long-term investment, so you cannot say it's currency.

Unless, you lucked out in short terms. Like what most of us did during the last period - bought gold and sold it with small profit.

I would say hold on, do not try to repeat this short-term investment, because you , and no one, knows or can expect how the price will go up or down.

I am waiting now for the gold price to settle down, and this may take few months. It's too risky for me to buy gold again in the near future.

Well...the idea of starting this thread was to point out that without gold we would never have had fiat currency...that all paper money (that used to be backed by deposits of gold or silver) is essentially worthless, and that in extraordinary financial times like the current crisis, I can see a return to gold as the only real currency that holds it's value.

Define risk! We used to think property, pension plans, savings accounts, bonds, stocks and shares were 'safe'...that may no longer be the case!

Right now I'd rather hold 100k in gold than own a 100k house (I wish I had either!)..which do you think is more risky?

Lol_UK_2

tradetime wrote: »

Can't say I'm a Buffet fan, but I respect anyone who is good at what they do. Now I don't know whether the following is a fair comparison, or not, but I suspect it's as fair as that one.

$41 invested with Berkshire Hathaway's class A stock in 1970 would have bought one share.

$37.40 on the other hand would have bought you an ounce of Gold in 1970

So your $37.40 would now be worth around $945 and change at close yesterday, of course it has been as high as just over $1000

Meanwhile your $41 would have been worth $78,350 at close, mind you it was worth $141,600 at the end of 2007

As investments go I don't really think the two are in the same league.. I guess you could say he knows a little about investing, maybe.

Those figures are astounding- wish I'd been there for that kind of deal!!
However...right now, who can say that investing in Berkshire Hathaway today will out perform gold over the next year? Long term, of course, things may be very different but the boom times are over for now and it will be interesting to watch Berkshire Hathaway stock over the coming months!

Another point worth making...if we'd all invested in Berkshire Hathaway in late 2007 (looking at their long term previous gains) we'd have lost half of our money. If you'd bought gold in late 2007 (topped at around 840 USD) you'd be up on the deal!

purch

As investments go I don't really think the two are in the same league.. I guess you could say he knows a little about investing, maybe

No one would or could doubt that.

I was more referring to the continual use of Buffet quotes to justify investment decisions, when the user doesn't have the first clue what Buffet is actually investing in.

Randomly investing in Equity's in 2005 instead of Gold would have been a bad idea.

If you want to give your money to Berkshire Hathaway and let them invest it for you is probably a very good idea, just using random Buffet quotes to base investment decisions on, probably isn't such a good idea.

tradetime

purch wrote: »

No one would or could doubt that.

I was more referring to the continual use of Buffet quotes to justify investment decisions, when the user doesn't have the first clue what Buffet is actually investing in.

Randomly investing in Equity's in 2005 instead of Gold would have been a bad idea.

If you want to give your money to Berkshire Hathaway and let them invest it for you is probably a very good idea, just using random Buffet quotes to base investment decisions on, probably isn't such a good idea.

Can't disagree with any of that mate, know exactly what you are saying, particularly the "be greedy when everyone else is fearful" or whatever it is. That quote used in the context most people use it is just plain dangerous, it should have a "but not stupid" after the "fearful"