Re: The GOLD scream room
Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:04 am
Ooh $1284.50 now
Permanent Portfolio Forum
https://www.gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/
https://www.gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4654
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!
That makes more sense to me as it’s pretty much useless.
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?
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?
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?
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?
Don’t be corto, I am a slave to my brain or lack thereof...
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.
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?
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 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.
+1
Haha, nice DS!
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.
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.
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!
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!