Gold and silver coins for sale!

[planetaryjim]

http://www.vertoro.com/200K.htm

Is Your 401K Turning into a 200.5K?
Is Your IRA Providing for Your Retirement?
Save up to 40% of our fee when buying coins in volume!

A very good client recently came to me with a problem. Her Roth Individual Retirement Account (IRA) had lost seven percent in the month of January 2008. She was very concerned.

She was right. Losses like that are not sustainable. At that same rate, she would have lost 84% of her retirement account by the end of the year.

She was not in control. Her IRA was not self-managed. She had no desire to continue trusting the people who were managing it. She got out.

Even with the substantial penalty for early withdrawal, typically 10%, plus the state and federal income tax withholding, she was better off, in her view, taking her money out than leaving it in. So, what did she do with the money? She bought gold and silver coins.

In the six months since 3 September 2007 the price of gold has gone from $672 to $980. That increase is 46% over the period, or 92% per annum. So, which would you rather have? Gold coins that increase in value by 92% or an IRA that loses value by 84% per year?

The exact same trend may be seen in silver. Silver was $12.10 and is now $19.91. That increase is 65% for the period, or 130% per annum. Again, which would you prefer? To lose 84% of the value of your retirement fund, or see it grow by 130%?

I am not saying that the managers of these programs are bad or wrong. They may be doing their best. They have certain limits to what choices they are allowed to take by the legislators who set up the programs, by the regulators, and by the banks for which they work. Closed end funds might have been the way to go when the managers of your IRA set up the qualified plan needed to meet approval from state and federal legislators, regulators, and financiers. But, I am saying that you should look carefully at the writing on the wall.

It may be that you would be able to convert your 401K to a self-managed IRA. It may be that you would get adequate results from holding gold and silver in your name as shares of exchange traded funds such as GLD. However, if you also have concerns about currency controls, sudden shifts in tax policy as the deficits get worse, hyperinflation of the money supply, or other catastrophes, you might also feel better having gold and silver coins in your possession. Because, when it comes right down to it, you can't control the economy, you can't control the banking system, you have no idea how the stock market is going to end up this year, and you have no reason to expect the government to react calmly to crisis.

An alternative to managing your 401K or IRA, which does not involve cashing out at a significant penalty, is to use it as collateral for a low interest loan. Suppose your IRA is not losing 84% per annum? But, you still want to own gold and silver coins in your possession, as a hedge against inflation and for emergencies. You can use your retirement account assets to borrow money. Obviously, doing so for general spending purposes, like going on vacation or a new toy, would be very unwise. Gold and silver coins in your home are another matter, since these represent an investment. If the value of gold and silver continue to rise, you should have no problem selling a portion of your coins to repay the loan after a few months.

For the months of March and April 2008, Vertoro will reduce our mark-up on coins for any order over $25,000 by 20%, for any order over $50,000 by 30%, and for any order over $100,000 by 40%. Place your order on our buy page. We'll contact you with instructions and specifics on how many more coins you get.

[malachirc]

While I fully approve of buying gold and silver, it is a poor investment long term, as denominated by dollars at least.  It never expands, never pays dividends, etc.  It is a hedge, protection from the dollar losing value.  Yes, it's gone up spectacularly (and I curse myself for not buying at 600 like i meant to), it may not keep going up.  I doubt it will go up almost 100 percent per annum for any significant length of time.

[planetaryjim]

While I fully approve of buying gold and silver, it is a poor investment long term, as denominated by dollars at least.

It is an excellent way of holding cash, compared to dollars.

It never expands, never pays dividends, etc.

There are lots of way so of investing gold and silver to earn income.  It is also possible to buy gold and silver in the ground by investing in mining stocks.

You aren't going to suggest owning blue chip stocks long term, are you?

It is a hedge, protection from the dollar losing value.  Yes, it's gone up spectacularly (and I curse myself for not buying at 600 like i meant to), it may not keep going up.  I doubt it will go up almost 100 percent per annum for any significant length of time.

Well, is six months significant? 

If we look at the inflation adjusted peak price of gold in 1980 dollars, at $850 or so, a couple of numbers come out.  Using the ever-changing Bureau of Labor Statistics value for consumer price index "inflation" the 2008 value of $850 1980 dollars is about $2300.  In which case, the inflation adjusted price of gold has a long way to go before it reaches the previous peak.  It could rise by 100% and still not quite get there.  (The price is about $1020/oz overnight.)

But, if you visit shadowstats.com and look at their calculation of inflation using the same methodology that had been used back in 1980 you find a much higher value, closer to $6300.  I believe that the government numbers on inflation are necessarily political.  Given that income taxes are collected based on inflation-adjusted exemptions and deductions, and given that government benefits are cost of living adjusted, the government is economically motivated to distort as much as possible the figure they present as "true" inflation.  I believe they are lying. 

I believe the dollar is collapsing.  Which means that the price of gold could do a lot more than double or sextuple.  The prices of gold and silver could go up by five quadrillion percent, if the USA merely reproduces the inflation of Yugoslavia in 1993-95. 

Sure, holding gold is not an income stream, and is "only" a hedge against monetary inflation.  But, it beats losing 84% of your portfolio per year.

I think you have to ask yourself what about the dollar you think worth holding in place of gold or silver coins.  What aspects of government policy contribute to a sound dollar right now?  Monetary policy is inflationary.  Just look at shadowstats.com for their calculation of M3 based on the published inputs.  Fiscal policy of deficit spending - when has the national debt been higher? - is inflationary.

Foreign policy? War is always inflationary.  Governments always print more money to make the cost of the war easier to bear in the short term.  Trade policy?  Current trade policies are very protectionist.  The USA is in violation of several World Trade Organization rulings, and is seeing all kinds of sanctions imposed on it.  Protectionism is inflationary. 

So, what would hold up the dollar?

Don't just take my word for it.  Check around.  Here's a headline from Monty Guild:

WE ARE WATCHING THE BIGGEST PANIC IN GLOBAL FINANCIAL MARKETS THAT HAS OCCURRED IN MY 65 YEARS OF LIFE AND 50 YEARS OF STOCK, BOND, AND COMMODITIES INVESTING

[alexspartan]

Whew.  Thanks Jim.  I was thinking about starting a Roth soon (I'm only 21, so I figured I'd get a head-start) so, how would the devaluing of the dollar affect my Roth?  Gold is a better way to hold cash, but what can I do to actually save for the future.  Is it worth it for me to open a Roth?

I should subscribe to your Indomitus Report.

[planetaryjim]

Whew.  Thanks Jim.  I was thinking about starting a Roth soon (I'm only 21, so I figured I'd get a head-start) so, how would the devaluing of the dollar affect my Roth?  Gold is a better way to hold cash, but what can I do to actually save for the future.  Is it worth it for me to open a Roth?

I should subscribe to your Indomitus Report.

I should definitely write more issues of that report.

So, I would say, no, you should probably not open a Roth IRA at your age.  You'd have to wait, what, 38.5 years before you could withdraw any money without penalty?  C'mon!  What if the dollar is worth one ten millionth of an ounce of silver at that point?

Since that money is out of your hands, and, even with a self-directed IRA, limited to certain types of investment, what can you do about it losing money?  Well, if you do have a self-directed IRA (and most 401K programs can be rolled into such) you can invest in certain types of gold and silver coins, and in exchange traded funds such as GLD.  But, you cannot have possession of the coins, they have to be held in trust.  To my knowledge, there is no way to get personal control over them without violating the terms of the IRA laws.

Which means that if there is a forced conversion to a new currency, from dollars to, say, Ameros, or bancors, or whatever the banking gangsters stick us with next, your IRA would convert at the official rate, less allowed conversion fees, at whatever point the government mandates the conversion.  Would that be as good as having physical possession of gold and silver coins and converting at the point when you think you are best off?  I would say decidedly not.

One person recently contacted me about his Roth IRA saying that it was only appreciating in dollar (nominal) value because of the matching funds program from his company.  So, let's do an example program for 12 months, and try to project those results a ways into the future.

Let's say you earn enough money that you can have your employer set aside $100 per month.  And, your employer is sufficiently interested in your continued working there to match one for one the funds you put in.  So, that's like a $2400 per year savings program.

Now, let's set the WABAC machine to 17 March 2007 and see what we get.  We'll assume that the IRA is invested in a basket of stocks and bonds that earn a 10% return per annum.  But, starting in January 2008, that investment loses 7% per month.  You can run a simple spreadsheet calculation to figure the values.  I come up with the following:

date	start	You	Yer Employer	10%	End
03/17/07	0	100	100	0	200
04/17/07	200	100	100	1.66	401.66
05/17/07	401.66	100	100	3.34	605
06/17/07	605	100	100	5.04	810.04
07/17/07	810.04	100	100	6.75	1016.79
08/17/07	1016.79	100	100	8.47	1225.26
09/17/07	1225.26	100	100	10.21	1435.47
10/17/07	1435.47	100	100	11.96	1647.43
11/17/07	1647.43	100	100	13.72	1861.15
12/17/07	1861.15	100	100	15.50	2076.65
01/17/08	2076.65	100	100	-145.36	2131.29
02/17/07	2131.29	100	100	-149.19	2182.10
03/17/07	2182.10	100	100	-152.74	2229.36

               
Now, admittedly, that is a bit worse than my client reports.  The case shown above only increases in nominal value because of individual and employer contributions.  Then again, if your IRA were invested in Bear Sterns, what I've shown might be optimistic.

In comparison, if you had bought $100 worth of gold every month at the price of gold (see Kitco.com for historical prices) on the 17th of the month, you'd have about 1.75 ounces of gold at the end of the period.  (You can buy digital gold such as GoldMoney or Pecunix until you have enough to buy a quarter ounce coin.  I've assumed no load here.  Fees of 10% for converting to gold coins would be typical.)  At today's price, that's valued at around $1,784.  And, notice, that's without any employer contribution.  In other words, with your employer contributing $1200 you'd only be about $445 better off with the IRA.  And that's with only three months of losses.  By next year? Who knows?

The news with silver is usually better in a raging bull market for gold, and that is true this time, as well.  I ran the same calculation with silver and came up with $1949 in value. So, if you had bought silver coins - and you can get those right away without having to accumulate value - again assuming no load, your IRA would only be about $280 better off - even though your employer has sunk $1200 into it that you aren't putting into silver coins.

Does this make sense?  Does it make any sense to invest in an IRA, even with matching funds, when you:

• Don't control how the IRA is invested
• Don't have access to the funds until you are 59.5 years old
• Won't have the actual investment instruments in your possession, ever
• Are at the mercy of the bankers and the government on converting after the dollar collapses

Of these, you can control for the first.  You can self-direct your IRA.  But, you still cannot access the funds, and you cannot take possession of what you've invested in, and you can't be sure how the currency switch is going to affect you - but you have to expect to get burned.

Now, past performance is no guarantee of future results.  There's no way to know that gold and silver are going to continue up.  There's no way to know how fast nor how high.  And the stock market might turn around tomorrow. 

I wouldn't bet that way.  I am, in fact, eating my own advice here.  I'm completely divested of dollar-denominated stocks.  I'm significantly invested in gold and silver coins.  I have some stocks denominated in grams of gold.[/color]

[NoKnownPurpose]

It is an excellent way of holding cash, compared to dollars.

It depends - the spread on buy/sells can be pretty big.  Not to mention that gold is relatively thinly traded and as such is highly volitile.  For instance, those who bought gold back in the early 80s (the last time we faced stagflation) are still under water.  That is nearly 30 years with a negative return of around 50%.

You aren't going to suggest owning blue chip stocks long term, are you?[/color]

Why not?  Over the last 200 years the stock market has outperformed gold.  When you buy quality stocks you're buying part of a business that can grow and earn profits.  Not so with gold.

If we look at the inflation adjusted peak price of gold in 1980 dollars, at $850 or so, a couple of numbers come out.  Using the ever-changing Bureau of Labor Statistics value for consumer price index "inflation" the 2008 value of $850 1980 dollars is about $2300.  In which case, the inflation adjusted price of gold has a long way to go before it reaches the previous peak.  It could rise by 100% and still not quite get there.  (The price is about $1020/oz overnight.)

There is no guarantee that the price of gold will continue to rise to meet it's old inflation adjusted high.  As I pointed out above, those who bought gold at it's peak made a terrible investment and would have done much better in stocks (or even treasuries).   

You may very well be right, I don't know (and nobody else does either.)  Certainly holding some precious metals/commodities may be a good hedge but I wouldn't put all my eggs in that basket.

[sbeckman]

For instance, those who bought gold back in the early 80s (the last time we faced stagflation) are still under water.  That is nearly 30 years with a negative return of around 50%.

Geez, this is always the example given by the "anti Gold" crowd.

Everyone who bought Gold always bought at the peak and held on to their losses forever? 

No one ever sold at a small loss when the parabolic rise eventually had to stop going up?

No one ever bought before the peak and sold at a gain past the peak?

No one ever bought early and sold at a profit?

Nope, always the example is the guy that bought on that one fateful day and still has that gold collecting dust in his desk drawer whining and moaning over his loss.

This example is no different than pointing out those that bought at the top of the market in 1929 and (if they held) waited decades to recoup their losses as the reason never to get into the stock market.

No different than those that bought the NASDAQ in 2000 and (if they held) are going to wait until Hell freezes over to recoup those losses.

Or those that bought the DOW at 15,000 a short while ago and will again likely wait until Hell Freezes over to recoup their losses,

And all of these are in nominal dollars only, completely discounting the effects of inflation.

Never is it mentioned the people who wisely bought into the PM market, got in early, properly scaling in and out.

Just like in any market.

Sorry, rant over. 

[NoKnownPurpose]

For instance, those who bought gold back in the early 80s (the last time we faced stagflation) are still under water.  That is nearly 30 years with a negative return of around 50%.

Geez, this is always the example given by the "anti Gold" crowd.

First off I am not "anti-gold" by any means.  A significant portion of my portfolio is in miners and physical metal(coins).  I also have large positions in domestic oil and gas.

and no, certainly everyone didn't buy at the peak....and of course many people have made significant returns by investing in metals.  My uncle is a huge gold bug and is doing very well at the moment.  But how can anyone be certain that we're not at or near another peak now?  Hint - you can't.  Just as I cannot accurately predict that gold is going to decline in price (if I could I probably wouldn't be holding any would I?)

My point was(is) that rushing into a concentrated position in any investment class is generally not wise.  You'll be wiped out far more often than you'll hit a home run.  Gold has had a tremendous run recently.  Will it continue?  I don't know.  So buy some if you like it but don't dump all your stocks, bonds and tulip bulbs to do it.

Personally I'm sitting on a pile of cash at the moment (about 50% of the portfolio).  If/When the credit mess starts to clear I'll

[planetaryjim]

It depends - the spread on buy/sells can be pretty big.

Not true.  The buy and sell spreads are very small for gold and silver.  Bid ask spreads on Kitco.com are fairly typical for the industry.  Currently bid is $1005.30 per ounce and ask is $1006.10.  This spread is $0.80 or 0.08%.

Fees for buying into a large position typically run one or two percent.  There are also small premiums for coin purchases, which go up as the size (and therefore usefulness) of the coins go down.

Not to mention that gold is relatively thinly traded and as such is highly volitile.

Gold is very mainstream and trades quite heavily, on many markets globally.  It now has a nearly continuous market Monday through Friday. 

London's market now represents about a quarter of world gold sales, according to some private estimates we've done.  London's published trading volume per day is 25 million ounces for January 2008.  So, I think global trading is running about 100 million ounces per day.  So, at current prices, that's about $100 billion per day.  Figure around 250 trading days a year, or $25 trillion a year in gold changing hands.  Doesn't seem thin to me.

Gold's price is not highly volatile.  It is really not volatile at all compared to many stocks, some bonds, and other commodities.  It is much less volatile than silver, copper, zinc, or nickel, in my experience.  The price of gold has been on a very steady upward trend since late 1999.

For instance, those who bought gold back in the early 80s (the last time we faced stagflation) are still under water.

Under water in what sense?  And what part of the early 1980s?  The last time we had stagflation was in the 1970s.  I know.  I lived through it.  The price of gold spiked in late 1979 and early 1980 due to global political events - the Iran embassy hostage crisis and the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union.  The freezing of Iranian assets by the USA caused a surge in gold buying throughout the Islamic world.  But, the peak prices were not long-lived.

A buyer in December 1983 at $400 per ounce would be in the black, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics calculation, ever since gold crossed above $833 in December 2007.

That is nearly 30 years with a negative return of around 50%.

I don't know anyone who bought gold in January 1980 and held it for 30 years.  I do know some people who bought Bear Sterns at $60/share, though. 

Are you planning to buy and hold any investment for 30 years?  If so, I have no guidance for you.  I think it is idiotic to buy anything and forget about it for three decades.  I would advise you only to look for more information and education on the topic of investing.

On the other hand, if you would reduce your time horizon to a decade, and look at the value of an investment in nominal dollars in, say, a basket of securities mirroring the Dow Jones Industrials in March 1998 and gold, guess which one would be better off?

18 March 1998 the Dow closed at 8,775.40.  Today, a decade later, it opened at 11,972.25.  An increase of 3,197 points.  An appreciation of 36.4% over the base.

On the same day in 1998, gold was $290.40.  At the moment, it is about $1005.  That's an increase of $714.60 or 246%.  Gee, I would have been better off holding onto gold coins and forgetting about the stock market.  For a decade.  (Do I recommend buying anything and holding it for ten years without thinking about it? Nope.)

18 March 1998 the price of silver was $5.80 per ounce.  Today it is $20.29.  That's an improvement of $14.49 or 250%.

Why not?  Over the last 200 years the stock market has outperformed gold.

Were you alive 200 years ago?  For the last ten years, the stock markets have not outperformed gold.  What does that mean?  It means that the purchasing power of the dollar has fallen faster than the bubble in stock prices has risen.  And, since that bubble has clearly lapsed, which would you rather hold?  Stocks of dubious merit denominated in a fiat currency which is being inflated at an ever increasing pace?  Or something which holds its value over the long term?

Past performance is no guarantee of future results.  Just because a long term trend exists in stocks generally does not mean it is a great time to jump in right now.  Moreover, how many of the stocks that were around 200 years ago are around now? Very few.  Maybe Rothschild's in London.  A very few other financial houses, on different markets around the globe.  It would be preposterous to suggest buying stocks in any companies around today and holding them for 200 years.

Look at 1722, for example.  I think that's actually very pertinent to our times because of a number of macro economic similarities.  At the bottom of that stock market crash about 90% of the companies that were listed went out of business.  Something like 95% of the value of remaining stocks was destroyed in the panic.  Stock prices in London and Paris did not recover their previous highs until 1782 - sixty years later.

So, if you invest in stocks now, such as a basket of finance industry stocks, say, what makes you think those stocks are going to be around next year, let alone five years from now?  Possibly not 30, and certainly not 200.

When you buy quality stocks you're buying part of a business that can grow and earn profits.

Yes, sure, and that's a good idea in certain economic conditions.  It would have been a great idea in 1982, say, when the Fear Index was very low.  (The Fear Index is a measure of uncertainty in markets based on the price of gold, the USA gold supply, and the M3 money supply.  It has been rising dramatically in recent years.  Tough to track, though, because the publication of M3 was turned off in 2006.  I guess the Federal Reserveless doesn't want you to know.)

However, I took a cold hard look at the stocks I was holding in 1986, and got out of the market.  I was seeing 20 times earnings in the price of old line manufacturing companies like General Tire and Rubber (GenCorp).  A price to earnings ratio of 5 or 10 would have been sensible.  Even then, there was clear evidence of a market mania.

Not so with gold.

Holding gold is a hedge against inflation.  Holding stocks is not.

There is no guarantee that the price of gold will continue to rise to meet it's old inflation adjusted high.

There's no guarantee of anything.  There's certainly no guarantee that a company which has made profits for 30 years is going to continue to do so.  There's no guarantee in the stock market, either.

It is not guaranteed that the price of gold would continue in the future to rise until it meets or exceeds its previous high adjusted for inflation.  But, that would be the way to bet.

As I pointed out above, those who bought gold at it's peak made a terrible investment and would have done much better in stocks (or even treasuries).

But, your time horizon is completely off the wall.  If you are buying anything to hold for 30 years, you are quite mad.  Conditions in 1978 were vastly different.  Fax technology was not widespread.  Something like two million personal computers of any make or model had been sold altogether since 1975.  There were no cell phones.  Cable television was an exciting new idea.  Direct broadcast satellites were on the drawing boards.  The NASA boondoggle space shuttle had not yet flown, and guys like me thought it was a good thing.  It was a completely different economy.

You may very well be right, I don't know (and nobody else does either.)  Certainly holding some precious metals/commodities may be a good hedge but I wouldn't put all my eggs in that basket.

I would like you to point out where I have said that anyone should put all their eggs in one basket?  Or hold anything for 30 years?

If you are not willing to hold gold or silver in place of dollars, I think you'll be worse off next year.

I'd be willing to wager an ounce of silver that the inflation adjusted price of gold meets or exceeds the Bureau of Labor Statistics adjusted value ($2300) for its previous peak sometime in the next two years (by 18 March 2010).  My best guess is that it'll exceed its inflation adjusted peak using the 1980 methodology for calculating inflation during that time, too, or soon thereafter.  But, I don't have confidence in the number I've got for that second value.

Now, who wants some of that wager?

[sbeckman]

My point was(is) that rushing into a concentrated position in any investment class is generally not wise.  You'll be wiped out far more often than you'll hit a home run.

Sorry that I missed that point.  It is absolutely correct.

[NoKnownPurpose]

...

Jim, I am humbled by the sheer volume of your words...

[alexspartan]

Jim, and everyone else, thanks for discussing and explaining this for a newbie like me.  I have a much better idea of how to invest my money, methinks.

[planetaryjim]

Jim Turk of GoldMoney.com recently wrote about another reason to own gold.  I think the link is still up at Kitco.com.

His basic point is that in addition to being a hedge against inflation, gold (and silver, I believe) is a hedge against catastrophe.  Why is that?

As he points out, it is because physical gold in your possession has no counter-party risk.  You don't have to rely on anyone else, on any part of "the system" to have the value of those gold and silver coins you own.  You don't have to have a working phone system.  The electrical power lines could be down.  You might not have access to the Internet.

The banks could be closed due to a "national banking emergency" as they were from time to time in the 1930s.  The government could be fighting a major invasion, or insurrection, or revolution.  Sub-prime mortgages could be obliterating the asset values of major financial institutions.  Derivatives with enormous values could be hedged against price, and therefore not against counter-party risk, or they could be hedged against counter-party risk but nobody is holding the price risk - very rarely can both be hedged.  But, all these things going on in other parts of the world don't shake your confidence, because you have gold coins in your hands.

Mr. Turk then makes the claim that holding gold or silver in a GoldMoney holding is not subject to counter-party risk, but only to performance risk.  That's possibly true, since the terms of the agreement with GoldMoney make it clear that the gold and silver in your holding is your property, not theirs.  But, performance risks can be substantial.  No Internet? No access to your holding.  Banking system holiday? No way to cash out of your holding if you need cash.  Government order or court order to seize the value in your holding? Nothing you can do to stop it.  Government seizure of all the gold held in London (see the closing of the Exchequer under King Charles II) is force majeure, and you probably cannot afford the insurance to cover it.

So, it is not the same thing.  There is, simply, nothing just like gold in your physical possession.  Even gold you mistakenly put in a bank's safety deposit box is not available if the bank is closed.

Now, do catastrophes happen every day? No, of course not.  Sometimes an entire year goes by without a major world war, typhoon, tsunami, tornado, earthquake, or other incident.  Most days, you can access electricity, phone service, the Internet, even that wireless router down the street. 

But, if you cannot, you just might want to have some gold and silver coins. 

Regards,

Jim
http://vertoro.com/

[NoKnownPurpose]

I wholeheartedly agree that gold/silver coins are a good hedge against catastrophe, preferably in some recognizable form (I like Silver Eagles myself).  Gold could be used for larger purchases but silver will be much more manageable for day-to-day purchases.  (i.e. buying the weeks groceries would be difficult if all you have are 1 oz gold coins.)  Many preparedness types recommend pre-1965 US "junk" silver coins.  They are 90% silver and typically available at a discount to silver's spot price.

Also agree that you need to have physical possession in order for them to be a viable hedge.  Be sure you protect it by storing it in a secure location.  (theft is a risk that needs to be accounted for as well and this is another cost to consider)

Consider the nature of the catastrophe you're preparing for when making decisions.  If you are preparing for a earthquake, hurricane, blizzard or some other temporary (days or weeks) breakdown then cash should be fine (and even preferable since it is recognized and accepted by everyone.)  If you're preparing for war or insurrection where the entire country/gov't and banking systems might be incapacitated then I'd consider silver/gold coins (and probably food and ammunition too (beans and bullets ).

I suspect if you want to buy gold/silver it will likely be cheaper in the next few weeks/months.  (just a hunch on my part, as always I could be (and likely am) wrong.) 

[planetaryjim]

If you prepared for a crisis in the finance industry seven months ago you were not too soon.  Then, you could have bought gold for $650 an ounce, or so.

I don't know what the price of gold is going to be in six months, nor in six years.  But, I have heard this theory that it is near its peak and about to be cheaper.

I heard it when gold hit $300.

I heard it when gold hit $400.  Robert Prechter told an audience in 2004 at the New Orleans conference, a big gold bug show, that the price of gold was going straight down to $200.

I heard it when gold hit $500, and even saw it on a mainstream news show.

I heard it when gold hit $600.

I hadn't seen a lot of that idea since gold crossed $800, though, because that was not so long ago.

If you postulate a lower price to gold (and presumably silver, as well) you have an opportunity to tell me what it is about the price of gold that you think is so high.

Another, and I think better, question to answer is: what is it about the value of the dollar that you think is going to make a sudden dramatic shift up?

Yes, gold could be much lower next week.  By much lower, I mean it could go back down to $886.   There are a number of technical reasons to think it won't drop below $850.  But, if it does, that would be a huge buying opportunity which would not soon recur.

Seriously, though, what is it about the dollar that makes you think it is going to improve?  Trade policy? Fiscal policy? Foreign policy?  War policy? Monetary policy?  I can't think of a single fundamental factor that makes the dollar improve against gold or silver.

This week my buddy Jim Turk has written not only about the dollar price of gold, but its price against other currencies, here:
http://goldmoney.com/en/commentary.php

Gold is rising against the dollar, the euro, the pound, and the Swiss franc.  We are seeing a global trend here which has been firmly in place for about a decade.

The trend is your friend.  Yes, take advantage of dips.  Buy gold chips on the dips. 

But don't expect the dips to last.