-
The above Banner is a Sponsored Banner. Upgrade to Premium Membership to remove this Banner & All Google Ads. For full list of Premium Member benefits Click HERE.
Bratnia
Content Type
Forums
Premium Membership
Dealer Directory
Wiki
Videos
Prize Draws
Posts posted by Bratnia
-
-
-
Anyone else buying?
Short term stock gain a little over £18K, closing that out and adding a £1K ... to buy 10 Britannia's i.e. writing off the short term gain is like having bought 10 ounces with a legal tender value of £1000 (£100/coin) for £100 each
-
30 minutes ago, Dalriada83 said:
I recall last August thinking an offer of a 1 Oz Gold Britannia at spot made me salivate but I just couldn't bring myself to shell out £1,500.00 on a single coin. Ah! The good old days!
Some say buy the dip (defined as to plunge briefly). Sitting in gold waiting to buy Pounds however and its more a case of a continual slide, so just buying Pounds at the times and to the minimum amounts I absolutely have to.
-
13 hours ago, Chronos said:
Expect More Inflation No Matter Who Wins The Election:
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/expect-more-inflation-no-matter-who-wins-election
Some hold bitcoins or suchlike, which I know relatively little about. Personally I hold McG's. McG's are my pet name and are simple enough, you open a "ewallet" such as a 212 or ii brokerage account and buy McG's, which for a British investor might be a 50/50 split of VMIG (a FTSE250 (MidCap) stock index accumulation fund) and Gold (which you may instead prefer to hold via gold coins/whatever). You'll have a regular cheque/bank account linked into that ewallet (brokerage account) and be able to transfer/exchange between (to/from) McG's and Pounds in order to pay for things in Pounds. More often I'll pay for things using my credit card and then at the end of the month sell enough McG's to pay off the credit card bill. If the gold value is higher than the stock value then sell some gold, otherwise sell some stock value (if saving then add new savings to the one that is the least value at the time).
Unlike Pounds that tend to buy less over time, with McG's they tend to buy more over time. Broadly prices of 'stuff' (priced in Pounds) has tended to decline at around a 6%/year rate (slope).
More inflation (higher prices) in Pounds can mean stuff becoming cheaper more quickly in McG's - perhaps something to celebrate.
-
1 hour ago, Russell said:
Received my Sigma investor and testing my stack today and love this piece of kit. The only one sovereign that does not pass the ping test has passed Phew! For Reference it is a 1892 Victoria Jubilee Head Melbourne Mint and it passed every test except the PING COIN app on my phone but the lines were just outside. Nice to verify its authenticity with the Sigma 😀
What are the main differences between the Pro, Investor and Mini-Pro? To me it looks like the Mini-Pro is the same as the Pro but where it just uses your phone for input/display instead of being on-board. The Investor seems to be just a midway sized unit between those two? Last time I looked months back and everywhere was out of stock, however prompted by your post I now see that https://trustimetrix.com/ have stock.
-
1 minute ago, Thelonerangershorse said:
Anybody have an explanation for today's rises?
Weekend global fear factor, park in gold until Monday morning?
-
Flog all of the gold to China before releasing a fusion reactor breakthrough - unlimited cheap energy - that can be used to manufacture inexpensive gold
More seriously - China forbids the export of gold and given 123 times more paper gold than physical gold those holding physical get to define how those paper claims might be settled. Progressive eastward migration of physical delivery of gold against paper gold relatively strengthens the east. Weaponised, where a simple gold-rush trigger that has many seeking physical deliver against paper-gold contracts could collapse the entire financial systems. More so if combined with EMP physical weapon that cripples electronics.
China is also exiting support of the US Dollar in favour of a gold/alternative international trade settlement currency given that the US weaponised the dollar (applied sanctions against Russian international trade settlement transactions).
-
-
13 minutes ago, Russell said:
Just started buying sovereigns this year and I am hooked 😀 When the gold-silver ratio becomes advantageous I will swap some of my silver stack out for gold.
Stick with gold and combine that with stocks, rebalance periodically the two back to 50/50 (whatever) weightings. Gold/silver ratio looks good on charts for potential rebalance benefits, but in practice doesn't tend to be as rewarding as stock/gold. Hindsight and the lows/highs of gold/silver ... easy. Timing those in practice is highly variable, you're inclined to miss out on continued gains as the gold/silver ratio further widens after you'd opted to swap between the two.
-
2 hours ago, James32 said:
What age are you 12?
2 hours ago, Shuaib121 said:Don’t buy silver anymore , 36 ozs to go on gold, not too stressed, got another 56 odd years to go.
Perhaps 50, but assuming that biotech will extend life by 15 years every decade
Looking forward to the joy of when he'll start receiving the state pension at age 106
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
29 minutes ago, HerefordBullyun said:Breaking news.
Michael Burry has just added physical gold to his portfolio. This is massive and Very significant. Burry knows his stuff and orchestrated the big short in the financial crash of 2008. When burry buys pay attention.
Hes never normally wrong.
There's been a explosion of manufacturing buildings development across America, fundamentally its seeking to repatriate much of what is presently sourced from China. As part of that high tariffs against Chinese imported stuff will help kick start such domestic production. America is turning Japanese where instead of relying upon others (foreign) purchasing of its Treasury's its central bank will print/buy those bonds. Same as per Japan when large debts are held internally then they're not really a issue, they're just a internal money redistribution political matter.
Deglobalisation. Where capitalism is just used by around 25% of the global population, 75% who might instead align with Russia/China, and barriers between the two - until such time that that large majority without capitalism recognise that they live a relatively poor/low-quality life (but where the Russia/China governance imprisons them into that).
Yes many are starting to realise the benefits that including gold in a portfolio provides and particularly in reflection of more recent world events. Rising demand for gold is a upside price pressure factor. US debt expansion is within 'normal' limits in percentages/exponential terms, and with increased domestic manufacturing stocks might also be expected to do well. Fundamentally things are OK, just continue to buy/hold a combination/blend of both stocks and gold.
-
7 hours ago, ArgentSmith said:
$27k Gold, quite bullish! 😁
In Pounds, if stocks halved and gold gained 150% from 2024 start levels (to £4000/oz) then the stock/gold ratio would have risen to historic highest high levels. At the articles level of predicted gold price it would be valueless to most, social collapse where bullets, ammo, water, food, soap would be more highly valued.
-
9 minutes ago, sixgun said:
So if you wouldn't vote for any candidate, turn out and put 'I do not consent' across the paper.
Wouldn't gain any traction, are just read out as part of declaration and ... forgotten. As our abstentions just ignored.
All votes are logged. When you initially arrive the first person checks your ID and then passes a number to the next person so your numbered ID is associated with the numbered ballot paper you are allocated. After the election the ballots are bagged and stored, supposedly securely, but all too easy for those details to be data input into the state 'security systems' alongside all of the other profiling/records that are logged/recorded (movements/geolocation, financial transactions, calls, internet activities etc.). As are postal votes not checked to ensure they were cast freely by each individual, some communities process such votes. A pretense of a democracy but in name only.
-
3 hours ago, sixgun said:
The only vote is - I DO NOT CONSENT.
These so-called spoilt ballots are counted. They are declared. The people in Parliament are there on our say so, they represent us, they act on our behalf - i know they don't, i know they think they are in charge and have power; they think Parliament is sovereign (which it isn't - the people are sovereign). If we do not consent, we have said none of the above can represent us. If a big chunk of people who cast their votes, voted 'I do not consent', it would upend the apple cart. Staying at home does not count, that is consent to the current system. The psychopaths driving the world deeper into the cesspit can only do this b/c people don't dig their heels in. Don't ever think any of them will be able to do anything positive for us.
Given a certainty of either Blue Labour or Red Labour I suspect many wont vote and some will instead opt for the Slovak style. Already many are opting to leave politics in consideration of the risks to their families/themselves. Personally I wouldn't vote for anyone dumb enough to stand - primarily they're just in it for themselves (all of the business bribes etc.). Standard practice that they near all double up the MP's salary via 'expenses'.
-
6 hours ago, jultorsk said:
Sadly, a Labour win will bring unprecedented misery on everyone in the UK. The ramifications for the civic society won't be pretty I'm afraid.
Red (more extremist) Labour seem to have a better prospect of entering number 10 than the existing Blue Labour. Fundamentally flawed. When votes were restricted Britain was strong. Once voting was opened up to all so the majority poorer (on benefits etc.) get to define where the public purse is loaded from and spent and where opening up migration floodgates is more inclined to swell that majority. Putin considers it to be invading via the back-door, mostly unopposed conquest.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
17 hours ago, HonestMoneyGoldSilver said:From the beginning of the monetary tightening cycle the situation has been as the CEOs of major banks understood it to be - for inflation to be truly tamed then rates had to be aggressively hiked. When inflation in the US and UK was edging 9%, the highest level in decades, our central rates should have risen to match - so rates could arguably be 8%+ in the UK and 8% in the US - Jamie Dimon was floating 8% as possibly how high the US needed to go to tame inflation
There is a flip side. Raise rates to 8% during an inflationary period while wage growth is lagging far behind and what you end up with is a spate of delinquencies, people struggling to meet their obligations, having their houses foreclosed, banking crises, recessions, etc. Of course in the modern era repossessing cars or foreclosing houses is racist, heaven forbid we ask people to adhere to the agreements they signed - just cite mental health, colonialism and the patriarchy as valid reasons to break the law. We know that when banks struggle - which they would if there were mass defaults - that the central planners will magic up another few $trillion, which would require further monetary tightening down the line
Ranting now, but the compromise we came up with was "higher for longer". I got moderately dissed for suggesting rates may be hiked again above 5.25% before they were cut. Rate hikes are unpopular with everybody except pension funds and anyone who lives within their means, which is nobody. My current hope/feeling is rates in the UK will stay at 5.25% until summer 2025. I'm reading constantly from the Evening Standard and several other newspapers how the BoE are making such a hash of things and need to cut rates immediately. Those are pay-to-play opinion pieces with zero grounding in economic reality. They want cuts before the elections.
If the BoE cuts before the Fed cuts it would be borderline suicidal for GBP. I hope we maintain rates above the US rate for long enough for GBP to go back to where it should be trading - in the $1.35-1.50 range, not $1.2-1.3
From the POV of gold it's shrugging off any rate pauses or hikes, gold is the cool kid who has no figs left to give. Gold is confident in its value and positioning regardless of what the central manipulators tell the public or do in practice. Gold has been on the march the entire time that rates have been rising and steady at 5.25%. That's incredibly bullish for gold. If gold can make stellar progress during headwinds, when rates flip to become a tailwind then gold is going to sail off over the horizon, exit earth's atmosphere and head to the moon
I've recorded/measured relative to RPI for years. Over recent months that has been considerably higher than CPI that has become the adopted 'standard'. In net real terms Gilts paying 5% have still been negative real in net terms, i.e. a large state debt is being eroded by inflation (a form of micro-taxation that is pushed to extremes). With RPI now falling into the fours (higher/mid 4%), 5% gross, 4.2% after 20% taxation of interest, from a state perspective needs to see yields being lowered (or inflation again rising). Supplementing that and allowances have also been frozen (or reduced such as CGT allowance being reduced from 12K to 3K), so even with a basic state pension a individual is close to being dragged into the taxable tranche/group.
In late 2022 RPI was up at 14% levels 10 year Gilt yields were in the 4% park 3.2% net of basic rate tax, -10.8% real.
Reported unemployed figures nowadays are near meaningless. Redirected into being in education, on zero hour contract or self-employed.
Regular government musical chairs, a parliament that constantly changes the rules, and a relatively dumb domestic workforce (even have to import plumbers) and the UK is unappealing for attracting inward investment/new stock listings. Once Labour are elected then that becomes a case of the majority on benefits/handouts get to define where the public purse is loaded from and spent, is inclined to make things even worse. Such negatived are typically good for gold (tendency for the Pound to relatively decline).
-
When short term interest rates are less than inflation, negative real yields, investors tend to bid up the price of gold. Otherwise the price of gold is more inclined to remain flat
As pensions, wage rises etc. are often associate to April inflation rates I expect that next months inflation figures will suggest 2% inflation rates, which is less than 1 year Gilt yields (positive real yield). Recent gold price increases might start to flatten off, perhaps until up to/after the General Election (perhaps November/December).
That all said, @Chronos prior post above, high/rising demand for gold from the Chinese, given the size of its population/demand !!!
-
-
- Popular Post
-
1 hour ago, martysov said:
In terms of exit strategy, well I just want to sell for more than I paid. I guess that is all anyone wants really isn't it
This is US data sourced from https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-asset-class-allocation?s=y&sl=1KMX0AtkPZeA8oPIZQ0Ro6 with the year end price of gold additionally added in
Values are comma separated, fields are ...
year, year end gold price ($), US inflation, 50/50 stock/gold gain/loss, portfolio value $, gold gain %, stock gain %, number of ounces of gold held.
1971,43.55,,,8710,,,100.00 1972,64.9,3.41%,33.32%,11612,49.02%,17.62%,89.46 1973,112.25,8.71%,27.39%,14793,72.96%,-18.18%,65.89 1974,186.5,12.34%,19.17%,17628,66.15%,-27.81%,47.26 1975,140.25,6.94%,6.51%,18776,-24.80%,37.82%,66.94 1976,134.5,4.86%,11.18%,20876,-4.10%,26.47%,77.61 1977,164.95,6.70%,9.64%,22888,22.64%,-3.36%,69.38 1978,226,9.02%,22.73%,28091,37.01%,8.45%,62.15 1979,512,13.29%,75.40%,49271,126.55%,24.25%,48.12 1980,589.75,12.52%,24.17%,61180,15.19%,33.15%,51.87 1981,397.5,8.92%,-18.37%,49939,-32.60%,-4.15%,62.82 1982,456.9,3.83%,17.72%,58788,14.94%,20.50%,64.33 1983,382.4,3.79%,3.18%,60656,-16.31%,22.66%,79.31 1984,308.3,3.95%,-8.60%,55442,-19.38%,2.19%,89.92 1985,326.8,3.80%,18.64%,65774,6.00%,31.27%,100.63 1986,388.75,1.10%,16.77%,76801,18.96%,14.57%,98.78 1987,484.1,4.43%,13.57%,87223,24.53%,2.61%,90.09 1988,410.25,4.42%,1.03%,88122,-15.26%,17.32%,107.40 1989,398.6,4.65%,12.64%,99261,-2.84%,28.12%,124.51 1990,386.2,6.11%,-4.59%,94701,-3.11%,-6.08%,122.61 1991,353.15,3.06%,11.92%,105986,-8.56%,32.39%,150.06 1992,332.9,2.90%,1.69%,107774,-5.73%,9.11%,161.87 1993,391.75,2.75%,14.15%,123025,17.68%,10.62%,157.02 1994,383.25,2.67%,-1.17%,121587,-2.17%,-0.17%,158.63 1995,387,2.54%,18.38%,143937,0.98%,35.79%,185.97 1996,369.25,3.32%,8.19%,155722,-4.59%,20.96%,210.86 1997,290.2,1.70%,4.79%,163186,-21.41%,30.99%,281.16 1998,287.8,1.61%,11.22%,181493,-0.83%,23.26%,315.31 1999,290.25,2.68%,12.33%,203875,0.85%,23.81%,351.21 2000,274.45,3.39%,-8.01%,187547,-5.44%,-10.57%,341.68 2001,276.5,1.55%,-5.11%,177964,0.75%,-10.97%,321.82 2002,347.2,2.38%,2.30%,182065,25.57%,-20.96%,262.19 2003,416.25,1.88%,25.62%,228711,19.89%,31.35%,274.73 2004,435.6,3.26%,8.58%,248340,4.65%,12.52%,285.06 2005,513,3.42%,11.87%,277821,17.76%,5.98%,270.78 2006,632,2.54%,19.03%,330689,22.55%,15.51%,261.62 2007,833.75,4.08%,17.97%,390120,30.45%,5.49%,233.96 2008,869.75,0.09%,-16.06%,327478,4.92%,-37.04%,188.26 2009,1087.5,2.72%,26.36%,413813,24.03%,28.70%,190.26 2010,1405.5,1.50%,23.18%,509744,29.27%,17.09%,181.34 2011,1531,2.96%,5.26%,536577,9.57%,0.96%,175.24 2012,1657.5,1.74%,11.43%,597887,6.60%,16.25%,180.36 2013,1204.5,1.50%,2.51%,612894,-28.33%,33.35%,254.42 2014,1206,0.76%,5.12%,644280,-2.19%,12.43%,267.11 2015,1060,0.73%,-5.19%,610845,-10.67%,0.29%,288.13 2016,1145.9,2.07%,10.28%,673658,8.03%,12.53%,293.94 2017,1291,2.11%,16.93%,787710,12.81%,21.05%,305.08 2018,1279,1.91%,-3.60%,759364,-1.94%,-5.26%,296.86 2019,1514.75,2.29%,24.25%,943526,17.86%,30.65%,311.45 2020,1887.6,1.36%,22.84%,1159049,24.81%,20.87%,307.02 2021,1820.1,7.04%,10.72%,1283294,-4.15%,25.59%,352.53 2022,1812.35,6.45%,-10.19%,1152561,-0.77%,-19.60%,317.97 2023,2076.2,3.35%,19.28%,1374810,12.69%,25.87%,331.09Scan down that last column (field), number of ounces of gold held and note how without adding a single additional cent/penny it ended up with 3.3 times more ounces of gold being held than at the start. That can/does wax and wane, when stocks do well yearly rebalancing will tend to sell some stock shares to buy more ounces of gold and when gold goes well you sell some ounces of gold to buy more stock shares. The stock gains in the above are total returns, assumes all dividends were reinvested.
In addition to ending up with 3.3 times more ounces of gold, the price of gold also rose from $43.55/ounce at the start to $2076.20 at the end.
Additionally adding savings over many years into stocks/gold, spending/drawing over many years in retirement, is also another form of 'averaging', and generally the 'average' is good.
Noteworthy is that at the end of 1980 the price of gold was $589.75/oz and 51.87 ounces of gold were being held. At the end of 1999 the price of gold was $290.25/oz, down a lot compared to that $589.75 price in 1980, and down even more when you factor in inflation, however at the end of 1999 it held 351.21 ounces of gold, a lot more than the 51.87 ounces held in 1980, around 6.8 times more ounces of gold. So even though the price of gold had declined, the increase in number of ounces of gold in your safe more than compensated.
-
10 hours ago, kimchiflower said:
Do this.
I'd say a 1oz coin is the largest single piece of gold I'd want to hold in practical/cost terms, but I would choose sovereigns over fractional, or multiple sovs over 1oz Brit. If you compare approx equivalent weights, which would be 1/10th Brit & half sovereign, or 1/4 Brit & full sovereign, then the sovereigns would work out lower premium.
Cheapest dealer full sovs I've seen are Atkinsons, and for half-sovs I'd go with HGM. If you buy half sovs in orders of 10s or full sovs in 5s, you'd be paying somewhere around the premium price & total outlay of a 1oz Brit
Look at theses coins, costs, (premiums) as of this weekend:
1/10 Brit, £213.19 (13.1%)
1 Half sov, £232.82 (5.0%)
1 Sov, £454.39 (2.5%)
1/4 Brit, £510.27 (8.3%)
1oz Brit, £1926.41 (2.2%)
5 sovs, £2262.65 (2.0%)
10 Half sovs, £2314.92 (4.4%)
Aside from being cheaper, sovs in my opinion are more interesting, prettier, have more history.
Look at what you can afford each month and choose the option with the lowest premium. This is just the longer version of what @ArgentSmith said with some data added.
One thing we've not considered here is your exit or sale, but that's for another thread...
+1 (surprised to see sov < brit) 452.11 for 25+ at Tavex. / 0.2354 = £1920.60/ounce versus 1884.64 spot = spot + 1.91%
Perhaps a recent glut of sovs having been sold to dealers (looking to clear the over-stocked asap)?
-
22 hours ago, HonestMoneyGoldSilver said:
On relevant things check out this video below. Start at 5:20. It's super boring and conservative but 100% on the money IMHO. Pay attention to their predictions for gold and silver the rest of the year. Mirrors what I've been saying. This summer until late August/early September will be consolidation, not wild appreciation. If gold goes above $2400 it will fall back again until we get to September. The last 4 months of 2024 will be hot for gold and silver and will continue to remain hot until the end of 2025 at the earliest if not 2026. I predicted that in the middle of 2023 BTW and have consistently said the earliest I would sell would be late 2025, if at all
... for the US
Much capital flighted to the US due to uncertainties/wars. The S&P500 has been pulled up a lot by the Magnificent 7. As fear subsides so might capital flight out of the dollar to ... wherever 'better' returns might be seen to potentially be made. The UK's FT All Share index has lagged, its PE is around half that of the S&P500, as money leaves the US so might the price of gold in dollars rise, as might a strengthening Pound be additional rewards for US investors who bought Pounds to buy the UK's FT All Share. If a American gives 1.25 USD to buy a Pound, and the FTAS index they buy increases by 15%, and the Pound strengthens to buy 1.35 USD, then the Americans reward is over 24%
Historically stock price only (FT Composite/All Share) to gold ratio has broadly seen the two provide similar returns. Stocks obviously pay dividends on top, however we might use that price only / gold ratio as a input into Robert Lichello's AIM - which in turn provides a indicator of how much gold weighting to start each year with in a stock and gold asset allocation/portfolio
Historically that yielded better results than just simple 50/50 yearly rebalanced stock/gold, reduced the 30 year SWR risk and in some cases scaled up the rewards considerably.
In short, what might be a case of stocks down, gold up ... for American's, needn't be true for a British investor who could see stocks up, gold down. AIM had 2024 start with just 7% gold being indicated, i.e. is suggesting that stocks may start to do well, the price of gold in Pounds may presently be relatively high.
AIM has done a reasonable job in the past, for instance with reference to the second chart in the above image late 1960's was a relatively poor start date for retirees, stocks struggled, as was the late 1990's. AIM at those times was suggesting relatively high gold weightings. In the early 1980's after large gold gains and after which gold yielded relatively low/poor returns up to the late 1990's, AIM indicated relatively low gold weightings. Again more recently it is flagging relatively low gold weightings.
Perhaps by year end 2024 the Ukraine and Israel wars might have been resolved, fear being replaced with greed, stocks up, gold down. To recent the AIM indicated 7% year start gold weighting (so 93% stock) has been a relatively bad outcome, gold has done well, stocks have been flat, so obviously it is not a great indicator across all of time and time periods, but more broadly it does tend to do a OK job of indicating reasonable/appropriate allocation weightings.
-
-
8 minutes ago, PapaLazarou said:
The easiest way to think of the"interest/time-value" is to imagine yourself as an insurer. The price at which you sell the option (call in this case) is the insurance premium you receive. As long as the option expires worthless then you keep the entire premium.
If the option expires "in the money" then you are liable for potentially huge losses.
The allusion to insurance is not coincidental, hence selling an option is often referred to as "writing" that option.
Thanks PapaLazarou
We've been in a low interest rate era for many years now, in higher interest rate periods it was more common to eek out additional benefits/interest via the likes of Futures/Options, much less so since 2008/9 so its many years since I last looked at/traded Futures/Options. You clearly have much more insight that myself, guess you work(ed) in that field rather than me just being a regular investor. My use used to be having a pre-known price/amount of a asset that I'd be happy to sell at and then add on contracts to yield a bit more rewards/earn 'interest' on top.
In more remote places in India, not well served by regular banking systems, I believe its quite common for individuals to save using gold. There are also money lenders that will typically lend up to 70% of the spot gold value of a individuals gold, for a 7% type pro-rata rate of interest. So someone with some gold might deposit that with a money lender in return for cash, spend that cash on whatever, and then maybe a week later once they’ve been paid pay off that loan and get their gold back. Something like a 0.13% interest cost amount to have borrowed the cash for the week (borrow £100, pay back £100.13). Both parties happy, as the lender has gold and receives up to 7%/year interest on top, individual gets cheap access to cash, and if the borrower defaults the lender has more gold on their books in effect acquired at a 30% discount price.
Just methods to potentially make your capital work that bit harder.
Gold Monitoring Thread £ GBP only
in Gold
Posted
In the Islamic calendar it's 1445, many who follow that act that way as well.