The GOLD scream room
Moderator: Global Moderator
Re: The GOLD scream room
Ooh $1284.50 now
- buddtholomew
- Executive Member
- Posts: 2464
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 4:16 pm
Re: The GOLD scream room
Yup, and since your buy you’ve stunk it up...too bad.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:01 amSo if your stocks went down to 0 that would still be better than gold?buddtholomew wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 8:57 am We’ve been on the same hopium for a while now.
Even if equities tanked 100% I would still be way ahead of my gold position. Big mistake!
Wow, that is terrible!
Yet my 70/30 is up 340K YTD.
How’s your gold YTD?
Re: The GOLD scream room
I think gold has potentially a way to fall yet.
Harry Dent is thinking $700/oz down to $400/oz? Seems extreme, but who knows?
Harry Dent is thinking $700/oz down to $400/oz? Seems extreme, but who knows?
Don't agree with me too strongly or I'm going to change my mind
- buddtholomew
- Executive Member
- Posts: 2464
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 4:16 pm
Re: The GOLD scream room
That makes more sense to me as it’s pretty much useless.
I can see divesting away from precious metals and being successful, but this 25% allocation to Gold is awful. Almost anything but gold would be better.
Re: The GOLD scream room
Ok, if I did the math right, that means you, Buddtholomew, have about $12M in your portfolio, and yet you spend your time coming on here to whine about gold's poor performance over the last few years. I'd like to think that if I had that much in my portfolio, I would not be worried about money at all and would find plenty of other things to keep me busy. But, lest you forget so easily, gold saved the decade of 2000 to 2010 for those who held enough to make a difference (sadly not me).buddtholomew wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:38 amYup, and since your buy you’ve stunk it up...too bad.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:01 amSo if your stocks went down to 0 that would still be better than gold?buddtholomew wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 8:57 am We’ve been on the same hopium for a while now.
Even if equities tanked 100% I would still be way ahead of my gold position. Big mistake!
Wow, that is terrible!
Yet my 70/30 is up 340K YTD.
How’s your gold YTD?
- Cortopassi
- Executive Member
- Posts: 3338
- Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
- Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html
Re: The GOLD scream room
No shit, I was just figuring the same thing!stuper1 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 10:51 amOk, if I did the math right, that means you, Buddtholomew, have about $12M in your portfolio, and yet you spend your time coming on here to whine about gold's poor performance over the last few years. I'd like to think that if I had that much in my portfolio, I would not be worried about money at all and would find plenty of other things to keep me busy. But, lest you forget so easily, gold saved the decade of 2000 to 2010 for those who held enough to make a difference (sadly not me).buddtholomew wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:38 amYup, and since your buy you’ve stunk it up...too bad.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:01 am
So if your stocks went down to 0 that would still be better than gold?
Wow, that is terrible!
Yet my 70/30 is up 340K YTD.
How’s your gold YTD?
And the drop is likely a delayed reaction to what the dollar did yesterday. It was surprising it didn't do it in lockstep as usual.
- buddtholomew
- Executive Member
- Posts: 2464
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 4:16 pm
Re: The GOLD scream room
It’s actually closer to 14M.stuper1 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 10:51 amOk, if I did the math right, that means you, Buddtholomew, have about $12M in your portfolio, and yet you spend your time coming on here to whine about gold's poor performance over the last few years. I'd like to think that if I had that much in my portfolio, I would not be worried about money at all and would find plenty of other things to keep me busy. But, lest you forget so easily, gold saved the decade of 2000 to 2010 for those who held enough to make a difference (sadly not me).buddtholomew wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:38 amYup, and since your buy you’ve stunk it up...too bad.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:01 am
So if your stocks went down to 0 that would still be better than gold?
Wow, that is terrible!
Yet my 70/30 is up 340K YTD.
How’s your gold YTD?
I spend my time as I see fit, 3-4 hours at the gym and 4-5 on development.
- Cortopassi
- Executive Member
- Posts: 3338
- Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
- Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html
Re: The GOLD scream room
budd, congrats, I am jealous.
-
- Executive Member
- Posts: 5994
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
Re: The GOLD scream room
If you are 70% in stocks and your stocks went down 100%, that would mean you would lose 70% of your portfolio.buddtholomew wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:38 amYup, and since your buy you’ve stunk it up...too bad.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:01 amSo if your stocks went down to 0 that would still be better than gold?buddtholomew wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 8:57 am We’ve been on the same hopium for a while now.
Even if equities tanked 100% I would still be way ahead of my gold position. Big mistake!
Wow, that is terrible!
Yet my 70/30 is up 340K YTD.
How’s your gold YTD?
Obviously math isn't your strong suit.
- buddtholomew
- Executive Member
- Posts: 2464
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 4:16 pm
Re: The GOLD scream room
Don’t be corto, I am a slave to my brain or lack thereof...
I focus less on the things that money can resolve and more on the things that any amount of money can’t resolve.
Always something for me to worry about.
- buddtholomew
- Executive Member
- Posts: 2464
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 4:16 pm
Re: The GOLD scream room
I would still have 30% in fixed income which is LTD +.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:38 amIf you are 70% in stocks and your stocks went down 100%, that would mean you would lose 70% of your portfolio.buddtholomew wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:38 amYup, and since your buy you’ve stunk it up...too bad.Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:01 am
So if your stocks went down to 0 that would still be better than gold?
Wow, that is terrible!
Yet my 70/30 is up 340K YTD.
How’s your gold YTD?
Obviously math isn't your strong suit.
Gold is LTD -ve.
Last edited by buddtholomew on Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:56 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Full Member
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2018 3:30 pm
Re: The GOLD scream room
That explains a lot. At least multi-million dollar market fluctuations are something I'll never have to worry about.buddtholomew wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 11:05 amIt’s actually closer to 14M.stuper1 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 10:51 amOk, if I did the math right, that means you, Buddtholomew, have about $12M in your portfolio, and yet you spend your time coming on here to whine about gold's poor performance over the last few years. I'd like to think that if I had that much in my portfolio, I would not be worried about money at all and would find plenty of other things to keep me busy. But, lest you forget so easily, gold saved the decade of 2000 to 2010 for those who held enough to make a difference (sadly not me).buddtholomew wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:38 am
Yup, and since your buy you’ve stunk it up...too bad.
Yet my 70/30 is up 340K YTD.
How’s your gold YTD?
Re: The GOLD scream room
$14M in the bank, and you still come on here to make the rest of us miserable? Come on, man, have a little decency. If you're going to come on here, bring some kind of uplifting quote about the rewards of working hard or living in a great country or something.
-
- Executive Member
- Posts: 5994
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
Re: The GOLD scream room
No, all he has to share is bile and spite.stuper1 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 12:07 pm $14M in the bank, and you still come on here to make the rest of us miserable? Come on, man, have a little decency. If you're going to come on here, bring some kind of uplifting quote about the rewards of working hard or living in a great country or something.
I've blocked him for that reason. Maybe if no one responds to his vitriol, he'll take the hint and leave.
- buddtholomew
- Executive Member
- Posts: 2464
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 4:16 pm
Re: The GOLD scream room
I've blocked you...funny how you respond to all my posts (hmm).Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 12:10 pmNo, all he has to share is bile and spite.stuper1 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 12:07 pm $14M in the bank, and you still come on here to make the rest of us miserable? Come on, man, have a little decency. If you're going to come on here, bring some kind of uplifting quote about the rewards of working hard or living in a great country or something.
I've blocked him for that reason. Maybe if no one responds to his vitriol, he'll take the hint and leave.
I don't make you miserable, you decide to be miserable on your own.
I am an immigrant and old habits die hard when you arrive in the US with a family of 6 and 8K total.
I don't owe any of you shit and will be as cordial as you are to me.
Read or don't read my posts I don't care.
It's for me anyway.
Re: The GOLD scream room
Ok, Budd, time for you to inspire us a bit with some of your backstory. Trust me, you owe us this after having to read your griping for years. Tell us a little more about you and how you were able to amass $14M. Where did you immigrate from, how old were you, what was your career path, what were the keys to your success, anything else?
Re: The GOLD scream room
Yeah, I'd be curious to hear the back story as well. I don't really mind the griping though as I think we all have a mini budd sitting on our shoulder thinking about what could have been.
A few thoughts...
budd, you are familiar with the sunk cost fallacy, correct? Maybe you are just a Boglehead through and through and should just go to something like 60/40 and call it a day. It seems like that would ease your mind a bit and you haven't really lost all that much by holding 7.5% in gold. Sure, it might be a lot in dollars, but I would think relatively little in percentage terms.
One could even argue that at 7.5% you are at the very low end in terms of holding a slice of an asset that can really drive your portfolio forward when it is time for that asset to perform. Maybe ask yourself what the impact to your portfolio would be if gold were to, say, quadruple in price over a five or ten year period while stocks were struggling to keep up in real terms.
Gold is kind of supposed to perform like crap when stocks are on a tear as they have been for nine years now. But most of us around here are at least somewhat concerned about sequence of returns risk (having recently retired, with a decent nest egg but not a huge abundance, I know that I am). It sounds like you have amassed enough money that you could withstand a pretty extreme stock/bond downturn and still be OK. In my case, I just figure that with me being on the bubble with about 25X expenses (and hoping to live another 30-40 years), I'm likely to see gold do well, and carry my portfolio, another time or two in my lifetime. Of course I might have to wait another ten years for that to happen but I'll be OK with that as long as something in my asset mix is doing well.
I believe Machine Ghost once wrote something on here along the lines of "Stocks are the engine of the PP and everything else is just some kind of hedge." My own version is "How high of a stock allocation can I have before I start to worry about a stock market crash?" For me that number seems to be somewhere around a third. When I add everything up (LTTs, Cash Gold & Stocks) across all accounts, I look at my roughly 33/67 allocation as a conservative cash-heavy Boglehead portfolio with, hopefully, better inflation & deflation protection.
Again, just some thoughts.
A few thoughts...
budd, you are familiar with the sunk cost fallacy, correct? Maybe you are just a Boglehead through and through and should just go to something like 60/40 and call it a day. It seems like that would ease your mind a bit and you haven't really lost all that much by holding 7.5% in gold. Sure, it might be a lot in dollars, but I would think relatively little in percentage terms.
One could even argue that at 7.5% you are at the very low end in terms of holding a slice of an asset that can really drive your portfolio forward when it is time for that asset to perform. Maybe ask yourself what the impact to your portfolio would be if gold were to, say, quadruple in price over a five or ten year period while stocks were struggling to keep up in real terms.
Gold is kind of supposed to perform like crap when stocks are on a tear as they have been for nine years now. But most of us around here are at least somewhat concerned about sequence of returns risk (having recently retired, with a decent nest egg but not a huge abundance, I know that I am). It sounds like you have amassed enough money that you could withstand a pretty extreme stock/bond downturn and still be OK. In my case, I just figure that with me being on the bubble with about 25X expenses (and hoping to live another 30-40 years), I'm likely to see gold do well, and carry my portfolio, another time or two in my lifetime. Of course I might have to wait another ten years for that to happen but I'll be OK with that as long as something in my asset mix is doing well.
I believe Machine Ghost once wrote something on here along the lines of "Stocks are the engine of the PP and everything else is just some kind of hedge." My own version is "How high of a stock allocation can I have before I start to worry about a stock market crash?" For me that number seems to be somewhere around a third. When I add everything up (LTTs, Cash Gold & Stocks) across all accounts, I look at my roughly 33/67 allocation as a conservative cash-heavy Boglehead portfolio with, hopefully, better inflation & deflation protection.
Again, just some thoughts.
- Cortopassi
- Executive Member
- Posts: 3338
- Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
- Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html
Re: The GOLD scream room
Barrett, well said.
Budd, I’m with stuper, I’d like to hear your story. Sounds like quite a ride.
Budd, I’m with stuper, I’d like to hear your story. Sounds like quite a ride.
- dualstow
- Executive Member
- Posts: 14308
- Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
- Location: synagogue of Satan
- Contact:
Re: The GOLD scream room
I found the wiki page with all the backstory you need. Just took a bit of googling.
- buddtholomew
- Executive Member
- Posts: 2464
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 4:16 pm
Re: The GOLD scream room
Haha, nice DS!
Nohing magical...
UCLA, AEC, Biotech, eCommerce industries as a Director of Business Intelligence/Big Data
Married a Dr.
Inheritance
Save 20-25% annually.
Invested in 2008/2009 and biotech was bought out in 2011.
Lucky and hard work!
Re: The GOLD scream room
I wonder if Budd's gold slice is too big for a $14 M portfolio. It all depends on what is his "amount that he can't afford to lose". If he's trying to keep 7.5% and it makes him miserable, that means his implicit PP allocation is 30%, or $4.2 M. It seems high to me, if I had $14 M I think I'd consider my "can't afford to lose = PP allocation" to be $2 M. Maybe Budd has just too much gold. Maybe he should be at 4%.barrett wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:17 pm One could even argue that at 7.5% you are at the very low end in terms of holding a slice of an asset that can really drive your portfolio forward when it is time for that asset to perform. Maybe ask yourself what the impact to your portfolio would be if gold were to, say, quadruple in price over a five or ten year period while stocks were struggling to keep up in real terms.
-
- Executive Member
- Posts: 5994
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
Re: The GOLD scream room
I don't think it is gold that he has too much of.ochotona wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 8:06 amI wonder if Budd's gold slice is too big for a $14 M portfolio. It all depends on what is his "amount that he can't afford to lose". If he's trying to keep 7.5% and it makes him miserable, that means his implicit PP allocation is 30%, or $4.2 M. It seems high to me, if I had $14 M I think I'd consider my "can't afford to lose = PP allocation" to be $2 M. Maybe Budd has just too much gold. Maybe he should be at 4%.barrett wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 3:17 pm One could even argue that at 7.5% you are at the very low end in terms of holding a slice of an asset that can really drive your portfolio forward when it is time for that asset to perform. Maybe ask yourself what the impact to your portfolio would be if gold were to, say, quadruple in price over a five or ten year period while stocks were struggling to keep up in real terms.
- dualstow
- Executive Member
- Posts: 14308
- Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
- Location: synagogue of Satan
- Contact:
Re: The GOLD scream room
Very interesting! I've always been curious, too.buddtholomew wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:56 am
Nohing magical...
UCLA, AEC, Biotech, eCommerce industries as a Director of Business Intelligence/Big Data
Married a Dr.
Inheritance
Save 20-25% annually.
Invested in 2008/2009 and biotech was bought out in 2011.
Lucky and hard work!
- buddtholomew
- Executive Member
- Posts: 2464
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 4:16 pm
Re: The GOLD scream room
I’ve always followed the book career wise and saved as much as possible at the expense of spending frivolously.dualstow wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 9:50 amVery interesting! I've always been curious, too.buddtholomew wrote: ↑Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:56 am
Nohing magical...
UCLA, AEC, Biotech, eCommerce industries as a Director of Business Intelligence/Big Data
Married a Dr.
Inheritance
Save 20-25% annually.
Invested in 2008/2009 and biotech was bought out in 2011.
Lucky and hard work!
Continue to battle emotional demons (fear of loss is the major one) as I had it all, then lost it when we immigrated and now have built a future for my family once more. They would be fine without me as both my wife and I come from a good background with both sides (father and father in law) Fortune 500 CFO’s.
Like I said nothing really magical, just well rounded, a good saver and most importantly lucky to be employed since 1996 without any disruptions.