Quote from: realr0ach on January 15, 2018, 11:57:32 AM

Quote from: STT on January 15, 2018, 10:54:13 AM

Something like 1% is rational allocation

1% has never been a rational allocation to metals. The standard was 10% in the past, but most money managers are raising that to 30% lately because it's an obvious inverse bubble and asymmetric trade, along with all govts and monetary systems being disasters. If you believe the debt bubble implosion is imminent, then you would obviously go much higher. The whole purpose of random boomercucks hedging to metals is so that if your paper assets blow up, the metals act as insurance to make you whole again.

Depending on post-revaluation GSR, you would probably need something like 5% of your net worth in silver, or 10% of your net worth in gold. If GSR returned to old historical levels, then you might be able to get away with as little as 3% of net worth in silver.

For average person I say 1% because the correct time frame is ten years. People are impatient and also unrealistic, people gamble their revenue not profits when they know they have a big tax bill coming and actually alot of the bank balance is not theres come bill paying time.

Its coming upto 10 years since we thought all this would be over and its not. Gold hasnt been a bad place to store value over the last ten years but its not really blown up as expected either. Its not that Im bearish on the idea but liquidity is a problem for most and so the idea of 30% is a problem, its gambling which is oppisite to holding gold as a hedge to stability. It could force people to sell at the wrong price and thats why people think gold is outdated when its just very slow moving.

I did used to post on a forum with a silver bug, this was before it went to $50 and they were making reference to house pricing and how at the bottom you could exchange 1000 ounces for a family home. Theres all sorts of ratios, oil to gold, silver to gold, interest rates vs inflation and I think ratios probably says more then just one figure

The Dow in gold ounces is another one and today the Dow is 26000 and gold is not even 10% of that. So the bottom pricing there if I remember right, the lowest bearish scenario is 1 gold ounce to buy the Dow.
People immediately say or think well thats dam stupid and impossible, fools gold. Its likely to repeat and its happened in 'recent' history, I think 1980 we had this.

Big events Carter, fallout of Nixon, failure of the gold standard and a strange failing economy. And also gov debt rates in the double figures, so blood on the streets scenario. Now we're at the polar oppisite, I do agree it'll repeat.

The relevance to Bitcoin is to also consider it in ratios more I think, it increases accuracy and reigns in pointless hype. The 2008 housing problem could have been seen more clearly earlier if comparing house price to rental price as a ratio to show value, not presuming asset appreciation but considering value. Now for Bitcoin, I think value is Sat/byte in ratio to speed perhaps and then contrast it vs other crypto contenders and of course account for mass transactional volume. Does Visa beat Bitcoin for cost, speed and volume, I do think these are the measures to watch for an influence to macro moves in price and market interest.