You don't need place to keep land. Though land is a by far more risky asset than gold. Internet and Hollywood are full of harrowing stories and movies about people investing in land and then going bust when their expectations didn't come true...
Not quite risky IMO. Actually any type of "investment" is risky. Best thing to do would be to choose one that has less risk than the other. Basically land will preserve less risk than gold though
I've never heard of anyone going bust with gold. Primarily because you can always sell it quickly, even with a discount or at a loss (and since gold is a money in itself). The same is not true with land, you may not be able to sell it at all. Don't take it too personal, but from what I've read in your posts, I can only conclude that in most cases your knowledge about the matter is superficial at best, that of a layman. I, for one, am neither engaged in such investments (I mean land), nor have deep understanding of it, but I do know that land (or real estate, for that matter) is a hell as an investment option...
Indeed you can sell your gold almost instantly but do note that I based this on my experience. I lived in one of the highest population country in the world, where "land" is a better asset than gold. You may live in a country where it is hard to sell a "land" but in my country, if you put up your land for sale, you can expect a phonecall less than 24 hours, much quicker if it is located in an urban area though. That is why I go bust with gold
As per I stated, Gold is not always a good option. That doesnt mean that real estate/land is the better option than gold though
I thought we were talking about the riskiness of an investment option. If you happen to live in Japan, should I remind you about Fukushima? In fact, I can only recall two events in the history of mankind that made gold significantly lose in value. The first was the Black Death pandemics that devastated Europe in the 14th century, while the second was the inflow of Inca gold in the 16th...
And yes, the recent decline in the price of gold from about 1,900$ an ounce to 1,200$ is actually a minor correction, given its previous rise from around 200$ per ounce
Guess again, Japan is not one of the country with the highest population in the world. Indeed we are talking about riskiness here, I just happen to counter your argument (bolded part) and I do based it from my own experience that real estate could be a better investment than gold in some part.
It doesn't matter, Japan is still a good example how land can become worthless in less than a jiffy, and which actually happens throughout the world now and then (even for less dramatic reasons). Still insist that land investments are less risky than gold?
Im not farmiliar with the other fukushima incident apart from the nuclear incident but if you are pointing it to that than of course it is a risk that you have to endure for putting in investment. Where you resident at is indeed matter, I stated my point on why do I think that land could be a better option than gold
P.S : I dont insist that land is less risky than gold, Im insisting that land could be a better option. That has different meaning
Honestly you left out this, if you ask me to choose wether gold or land , my answer is here
Either way investing in gold or real estate will be up to one's choice, every investment got its own risk. Im basically still on my first choice that safe deposits could be the safest as it is part of either both saving and investing