Patrick Karim and Kevin Wadsworth of Northstarbadcharts.com join the podcast to talk about charting, gold as money, and answer a rapid-fire question round. What is technical analysis? Why measure prices in gold? Is following your gut better than following a system?
=
Additional Resources
Earn a yield on gold, paid in gold
The Case for Gold Yield in Investment Portfolios
Podcast Chapters
[00:00:17]: Subscribe!
[00:01:11]: Military Meteorology
[00:02:25]: Applying Weather Forecasting to Price Charts
[00:03:53]: Chart Trading
[00:04:54]: Importance of Volume and Liquidity
[00:05:24]: Media Coverage and Its Influence
[00:06:30]: Does TA Negate Background Research?
[00:07:42]: Using Multiple Techniques
[00:08:38]: Significance of Liquidity, Spreads, and Volume
[00:48:32]: Swiss franc versus the dollar
[00:51:35]: Underrated asset classes
[00:58:57]: Bad ideas
[01:02:25]: Follow Badcharts!
Transcript:
Ben Nadelstein:
Welcome back to the Gold Exchange podcast. My name is Benjamin Nadelstein. I’m joined today by the founder and CEO of Monetary Metals, Keith Weiner, and our two guests for the day, Kevin Wadsworth, co founder of nordstarbadcharts.com. He’s got a background in military meteorology. Never heard of that before. We’re going to dive into that today. And co founder Patrick Karim. Folks, how are you doing We’ve got a nice big call with some of the finest experts, gold, silver, precious metals, and charting. Let’s start with you. Kevin, what the heck is a military meteorology?
Kevin Wadsworth:
I spend a lot of time of my career briefing pilots, the Royal Air Force here in the UK. And I guess a lot of people don’t realize when they switch their television sets on and see the weather forecast, the meteorologist standing there saying it’s going to be dry, wet, windy, whatever. But there are a lot of organizations that need a lot more detail than that. And the military are one of them. They use detailed forecasting to enable them to complete their missions, their sorties. Clearly, weather conditions at ground level and also high up in the atmosphere are very important for fast jet pilots, for bombers, for making raids into enemy territory and that thing. So turbulence, icing, really, that’s what led me to what I’m doing, actually, the technical analysis side of things, because I realized after 34 years of doing that and predicting the future by gathering evidence from the atmosphere, that you could do exactly the same with price charts for gold, silver, and as it turns out, anything, including cryptocurrencies, you apply the same evidence gathering technique. What you end up with is the same thing as a weather forecast. You end up with a probabilistic outcome that tells you what is most likely to happen, not what will happen, but what is most likely to happen.
So when I was standing there briefing the pilots, they wanted to know if it was likely to be suitable for them to complete their missions. And it’s the same as saying if gold is likely to meet its target near $3,000 or whatever. So that’s what that’s all about.
Ben Nadelstein:
And Patrick, let’s jump to you. I know you weren’t a military meteorologist, but what was your background? How did you come to charting?
Patrick Karim:
Goodness. Well, most of my career was as an IT specialist, Linux, AIX, Unix. And I totally retired from that maybe two years ago now. So with Kevin, we started nordstarbadchar. Com. But I’ve been chart trading since 2006. But right before that, I was like, Everybody, I had some money coming in, and then I just Google what to invest in. Of course, you find all the penny-stock scams and all the news-related type of advice. But if you go on Yahoo Finance and then you see charts for three months, the default, you couldn’t see anything. It was just like a miracle. I didn’t get wiped out multiple times. And then one day, I just read Stan Weinstein’s Secrets for Profiting in Bull and Bear Markets. He just had a way of saying, Look, it’s not the news. The news is often late. Look at the charts, analyze the price structures, and you’re going to probably get in when the insiders are starting to buy, they tell the secretary, Secretary started buying, and then starts cascading out. The price will start creeping, creeping upwards, and that’s when you get in. Often at the bottoms, there’s just no news or bad news.
At the top, that’s when you get all the good news, close to the top. Sometimes you get good news, the price still goes up a little bit, but it’s just a contrarian. Fade the news, but always make sure the price charts are aligned with you because sometimes in a bull run, you will have good news and good price action. But The day the price action starts falling down, then you have to bail. That’s why the charts are. I love the charts. It’s so simple. I know that I know nothing. I’ve realized anybody could look one year in the past and say, Oh, I’ve learned this. Oh, this thing I didn’t consider that may be moving the markets, some macro story or narrative. But if you know that you learned something that you didn’t know a year ago, then it’s dangerous going forward because if you’re going with what you know now, and you know what you know now, you’re missing some elements that you’ll learn later on. All that stuff for us, it’s in the charts. It’s discounted appropriately over time, and I just fell in love with it, so I do that all the time.
Ben Nadelstein:
Let’s jump into media coverage for a second. Kevin, I’ll start with you. Sometimes it feels like media coverage has an impact on an asset class by influencing the asset class. I’m thinking, let’s say, cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin. There’s an ETF approval. It feels like the media is pushing the asset class. And in other asset class, it feels like the other way around where the media just follows the trend. Asset class hits an all-time high, and the media is like, I guess we got to cover this. So do you see media following trends or influencing them? Kevin, we’ll start with you.
Kevin Wadsworth:
I’m very fortunate because technical chart analysis means that all of that stuff, really, I’ve able to block out of all of my decision making processes because, as Pat was alluding to there a moment ago, the price chart actually factors in everything that is known now about what is likely to happen. It factors in everything that is known about the people are expecting for the future. So what I’m trying to say here is that there’s a lot of stuff, a lot of information out there about, let’s say, Bitcoin that I don’t know, you don’t know, a lot of investors don’t know. There’s a lot of stuff that we do know. There’s a ton of stuff that we don’t. All of that is priced into the chart and means that we really don’t need to spend a lot of time researching the background narratives and the background stories. You can clearly identify, and I haven’t really got time to explain in detail in this particular interview, but there are a number of techniques, just like in weather forecasting. If you’re trying to predict whether it’s going to rain over your area a few hours from now, you have to gather the evidence, and the evidence comes from What’s the wind direction?
What’s the atmospheric pressure? What’s the humidity? What are the upper atmospheric drivers? And you put all that information, all that evidence together, and you end up with a likelihood of having a thunderstorm or rain or whatever over your location. And it’s exactly the same with price charts. You can bring momentum, you can bring volume, you can bring a whole host of indicators, trend indicators. You can use classical TA, you can use Fibonacci extensions and What I’m trying to say is there’s a million different techniques, and all of them are valid. None of them provide the magic answer or the magic bullet. But when you bring them together, what you end up with is a probabilistic determination of what’s going to happen. Now, there are times when the odds are 50/50, and you might as well flip a coin, in which case technical analysis at that particular point in time is less helpful. But there are points in time when everything aligns and you get a cluster of evidence and the price passes either upwards or downwards through that cluster of evidence. At that point, the evidence is very strongly in favor of either shorting or certainly not being long if it’s dropping, or the reverse, if it’s breaking to the upside and you take a long position.
There are clearly identifiable points And what I’m getting at here is that by using technical analysis, it negates the need to do a lot of the background research, a lot of the digging beneath the surface to get the narratives and get the stories, and who’s the chief executive, and what’s going on with the company’s finances, and all that stuff. Yes, that’s part of the story, but that’s what’s driving the price, whether you know it or whether you don’t. All that information is built into the price chart. And for that reason, you can use mathematics and statistics and probabilities to give yourself an edge in trading and investing. And that’s what we do. So I’ve gone a long way around it, but my answer to your question is that I just park all of the narratives to one side and focus purely on the price chart, and it works very well for us.
Ben Nadelstein:
And, Keith, I always found that very interesting. When you see something like a price, like Kevin mentioned, you don’t even have to really know what’s going on in the background. I see that oil or gasoline prices have increased in my area. And I say, well, is that because the hoothies are blocking a certain channel in the sea? Is that because Biden is selling the strategic petroleum reserve? Is that because There’s an extra tax in my area. Who knows? I mean, right? You just see it in the price action. Keith, can you explain a little bit about like bid ask, how prices are formed? What happens when you see a price and what should we think about prices and how they convey information?
Keith Weiner:
Well, that’s a broad set of topics. I mean, obviously, when you see the price of gasoline moving up, I absolutely agree with what Kevin and Patrick were saying. Takes into account everything that happened. Well, maybe the hoofies are blocking oil going this way, but there’s a pipeline that takes it that way, and so it’s not neutral. Even though the news says, Oh, my God, they’re going to drive the price of oil up to… Or gasoline in California up to $15 a gallon, and it doesn’t happen because the media just overestimated it or whatever. But you make a really interesting point that in any live market, there It’s not one price, but two prices. There’s bid and offer. And the bid price is potential buyers that are standing ready. If they get their price, that’s what they want. And it’s not worth more to them than that for whatever reason. I suppose we’re talking about crude oil. Who’s the bid? It’s a marginal refiner that says, Okay, at this price, knowing what he’s going to sell the petroleum distillers for, this is what he’s willing to pay for crude right now. Until the price on his distillers move, his distillers markets move, then he doesn’t want to pay more or less.
The offer price is the marginal producer of crude who knows how much his inventory is, knows what his supply looks like, knows when the next, let’s say, ship, tanker is coming and says, Okay, I’m willing to do it. If you come to market and you need to sell right now, you’re going to hit somebody’s bid. If you come to market and you need to buy right now, You’re going to hit somebody’s offer or ask price. Then the counterintuitive thing is that the ask is actually formed by the competition amongst the buyers. Because every buyer who comes and hits an ask actually lifts the ask price or the offer price. Every seller who comes in the market, presses the bid price. It’s the competition between the marginal sellers that are pressing bids and the competition between the marginal buyers that are lifting offers. Then there’s the market maker that will tend to maintain a consistent spread. So if you’re pushing the bid, that will tend to pull down the offer as well, although obviously, it’s a little bit elastic and a little bit of lag there as well.
Ben Nadelstein:
How do you think about the significance of things like liquidity or spreads, and especially volume? Because obviously, certain asset classes have different levels of liquidity and volume. Does that really tend to matter? How should a layman or a retail beginner investor Or think about something like volume. Does it really matter or not so much?
Patrick Karim:
It definitely matters. It definitely matters. And on two aspects, of course, we’re not financial advisors, but often, when it comes to people’s attention and then to mind, penny stocks, oh, 10,000% gains. But the stuff starts from a penny. It goes up to a dollar. I don’t know, it’s 10,000%. It looks great. People always imagine, Oh, I’m going to put 100K there, and bam, I have a Lambo. But the liquidity in those stocks, the volume might make… So the spread between the bid and the ask, it’ll never get filled because if you don’t too much money and you really want to get in, then you’re going to consume all the ask. And after that, the price is going to go out. So you’re going to get slippage. You’re not going to get the price you wanted to. That could be a huge percentage. Also on the exits, if you’re in a small cap stock, which you have 100K, but after that, the daily volume, I don’t know, it transacts 10,000K, and there’s a problem and you want to sell, man, you might not even be able to sell at a click. You’re stuck there. You’re stuck, bam, bam.
It could be 30% lower by the time you get out. For noobs or for anybody, guys, just go for high liquid stocks. The highest liquidity, the ones where you could dump a million, 100,000, and you won’t even hurt the spread. You’re going to get filled instantaneously, pretty much at the price that you want. Just like the Forex market. I used to love trading Forex because that’s the most liquid market in the world. At four decimal points to the right, man, you get filled. It’d be like maybe the commission, depends on what broker you have, it’d be tiny. You get great fills in and out precision. The volume is super important just for the technical aspect of trading. You’ll see that you don’t make money off the percentage moves you do in the stock. People click bait you into thinking. Because an instrument goes up 100%, I can make as much money with an instrument that moves 3%. It’s all a question of position size, where you could anchor a sell to have a bigger position size and then your reward where your target is. Because look, if it be all about percentage moves in stocks, nobody would be playing Forex.
Forex barely moves, yet people are making tons of money because they have huge position size, highly liquid, able to go in and out with low spread. But also volume, or maybe Kevin is going to talk about this, is the volume, the amount of transactions you have. In TA, you have a lot of people in a base, the price is going to stay in a range for a long time, and that’s volume. We call that volume volume profiling. You’ll see on some of my charts, it’s like a mountain on the right-hand side. Often people see volume per candle, but I could have volume per price. That tells me something. Often it’s going to go, it’s going to look like a pyramid. As soon as a price starts sliding above that high volume node, It’s like the equilibrium that was maintained for 5 years, 10 years is starting to rupture, and the market’s trying to find, it’s going to try to slide to a new fair value somewhere else. We don’t know, probably at the next resistance level. The importance of volume is as soon as you start breaking out above volume by price per price, then that’s giving you clues that that volume node will become support and help you propel up.
On the contrary, if you have a huge topping pattern with a lot of volume and you’re buying and you’re hoping to have a target above that, it’s like you’re trying to go to cross through a freeway barefoot, you’re going to get trampled. There’s too much traffic and you’re going to get just pushed back down. That’s the two ways I think people could use volume is for liquidity and for for entry to make sure you’re above it, which is support in that case, not resistance. So you have a higher probability of having a successful trade.
Ben Nadelstein:
Kevin, I want to ask you, let’s talk about volume, let’s talk about liquidity. So my understanding here is there’s lots of people in a trade in a way that creates a thick band, right? And you’re in the middle of a rubber band, and sometimes it pushes really hard. Once you break out, then maybe you’re in a different either volume pattern, you’re in a different area. So let’s Let’s let you talk a second or two about volume, liquidity, how you think that affects trading.
Kevin Wadsworth:
Yeah, you see, I look at it as Patrick does from a technical chart analysis point of view. I’ve got a scientific background. I’m trying to get the information out of the chart just the same way that I did with meteorology Actually, looking at satellite pictures and looking at radar images and looking at the significance of that data. Now, Patrick described there that the volume builds up. When price spends a long time in a trading range, there’s a lot of buying a lot of selling going on. The volume is shown clearly on technical analysis charts there. But it’s not just the volume that begins to define what’s going on at that point because you have a number of other technical indicators on the chart that you can display using the type of technical chart analysis tools that people use. Tradingview, for example, is one. There are many others. And you can identify those breakout levels as that volume builds and produces that volume node that Pat was talking about. You develop a horizontal zone of resistance. It’s like ice on a lake. Imagine somebody pushes a beach ball. You’ve heard the analogy, a beach ball underwater.
Well, imagine the water It’s just got a layer of ice across the top of it. Now, that’s the volume. That’s the volume resistance. And the longer price spends down below that level and retests it and goes back down and retests it and goes back down, then the thicker that ice layer effectively is, and you need more and more energy to push through it. But when that energy does build up to a sufficient degree and breaks through, then it really does release that potential energy. It’s all about physics. My background is in mathematics and physics, and it still surprises me to this day that technical chart analysis actually works in the same way that physics does. You can talk about potential energy, kinetic energy, measured moves, Very often, the depth of the downside move below that layer of ice, below that volume resistance, is matched by the move that occurs when it breaks through that volume resistance layer of ice, whatever you want to call it, and you get a measured move. And the number of times that the price moves up, the exact same amount, give or take, that it was compressed underneath that layer, it’s just incredible.
And very often, you can use a variety of techniques to identify where your target area is likely to be, Fibonacci is one. Fibonacci extensions. There are a lot of classical technical chart analysis techniques that do the same thing. And the important point, and I’ll stress this for anyone who’s starting out with looking at charts and stuff, is not to use one individual technique. Because if you start using one individual technique and you think, Oh, this works, or that works. It’s a bit like a game of golf. You work out what you’ve been doing wrong because you hit the ball decently once. And then you go on to the next shot and you do exactly the same as you did last time, but it goes off into the rough somewhere. It’s because it’s a combination of things that have to come together, a whole series of different inputs that have to come together to give you the confirmation that that target is realistic and it’s likely to be achieved. And that’s the way I look at volume, the same way as I look at all of the other aspects of a technical chart. It’s all about the evidence and bringing together multiple pieces of evidence into that jigsaw puzzle and accepting the fact that sometimes you have to walk away from that chart, walk away from the trade because there just isn’t enough evidence.
It’s not strong enough. Yeah, okay, it’s going to move up or down. Of course it will. But if you haven’t got enough evidence to tell you which way it’s going to go, then your confidence levels are low. And this is how weather warnings work. We don’t just issue a weather warning because we think bad weather is coming. We issue weather warnings based on the level of confidence that also comes along with that forecast. So I don’t know if in the United States, you have the same technique, but here in the UK, we use colours: yellow, ambour, and red. A yellow weather warning is there’s some pretty bad weather coming. Amber weather warning is going to be really bad. And red is life-threatening, and buildings are going to be destroyed and that thing. So that comes from a combination of likelihood and impact. What’s the impact going to be when the weather arrives? And how confident are you that’s actually going to happen? And that’s what results in the color grading for that weather warning. And it’s the same with technical chart analysis. What’s your target and how likely How easy is it to meet that target?
And you bring those two things together with risk and money management, and then you’ve got a winning formula there.
Ben Nadelstein:
Can you both share a time? We’ll start with you, Patrick, where you’re looking at a chart. The chart’s indicating, Hey, there’s a resistance level here, or it looks like the price might be finally breaking out from some band that you’ve seen. And your gut just went, That does not feel right to me. I see what the chart is saying, but the intuition, the gut felt something differently. Generally, do you guys have a value in saying, Hey, listen, I don’t follow the gut. I do what the chart says, and I just try to stick to that. Or have there been times you say, I’m going to follow my gut, and it’s worked out? Patrick, we’ll start with you. Goodness.
Patrick Karim:
Well, look, your gut feeling. I know when I knew nothing at the beginning, when I didn’t do charts, I did listen to my gut because I’d buy some crappy penny stock, and at night, and my heart was racing. And the next day I saw, because it’s like my subconscious telling you, Patrick, you’re doing something that you’re not comfortable with. You don’t have the whole evidence. I listened to myself, I exited. In the charts right now, if ever I have that gut feeling, we’re going to have to review the evidence. It’s not because my… It’s because maybe there’s a ratio chart that we didn’t look at. Or we saw another ratio chart two, three weeks back. Let’s say gold’s breaking out. On its nominal chart, it’s breaking out. It’s beautiful. Everybody’s happy. It’s breaking out. But then I remember two, three weeks ago, I looked at a chart and it wasn’t looked… Gold wasn’t looking too good against money supply. It wasn’t looking too good against SPX, but I forgot about it. That’s my subconscious. If I have a gut feeling, it’s my subconscious telling me, Yeah, but there was this ratio chart. Should I dismiss it?
Ignore it? Should I look at it? It forces us to revisit the evidence, repop up the chart. It’s free. Anybody could look at it. Then after that, you could either dismiss that feeling as, Okay, I have the objective evidence now. It’s good. That feeling is going to dissipate. If the evidence says, Okay, well, it’s more 50/50 chance now, we might decide not because of the gut, but because on the reviewed evidence, we’ll say, Okay, well, I rather an 80% chance than a 50% chance. Then we’ll just maybe not take the trade or maybe risk less than we would have normally would have done something. But you need to always review the evidence. If you have a feeling, then it’s better to see why. Don’t treat the symptoms. You can, but go at the root cause. Understand why you’re having that feeling, that gut feeling that you’re not quite sure about that situation. That’s how I’d answer that there. Find the root cause of why you’re not sure about that trade. Yeah, look, this is the best game in town. Once you understand the rules of chart trading, it’s like, I don’t have to swing at every pitch.
If you don’t like that pitch, don’t swing. It’s your money. You’re on the sidelines. It’s not a lost opportunity. Often the newbies, Oh, Patrick, you didn’t play whatever Bitcoin. It went up 10,000%. Yeah, well, I don’t care. I didn’t lose any money. I was out. I was maybe making money with uranium, with something else. There’s no FOMO. And stepping aside, there’s nothing wrong with that at all. Even if the price does go up after you step aside, it was still not wrong to exit because you could always reenter. There’s tens of thousands of instruments you could play, guys. So it’s like, if you’d be able to marry 100 women, you would, right?
Ben Nadelstein:
My girlfriend says no.
Kevin Wadsworth:
Not a great analogy, probably.
Ben Nadelstein:
If I’m not on the next Gold Exchange podcast, It’s because my girlfriend has killed me. Kevin, let’s jump with you. So let’s talk a bit about risk, intuition, because I know a lot of times we’ve talked with some other experts. Spencer Jakab from the Wall Street Journal has written some interesting books about retail traders and how generally they’re on the opposite sides of a lot of these trades that they really shouldn’t be. And sometimes to say, well, who’s on the other side? Who is taking these really bad deals, bad trades? Often it’s dentists. No offense, a dentist. My dad’s a dentist. But it’s people who think they know what they’re doing. They have no system whatsoever. How do you think about risk? Do you tend to say, Hey, listen, if you’re a value investor, stick with value investing. Write yourself a little note and say, I will never do X, Y, Z. Just have some objective standard. If you’re a momentum trader, be a momentum trader, but just taking a motion out of trading and managing your own assets and trying to have some objective rule, even if it’s different than someone else’s, trying to follow that plan.
How do you think about that?
Kevin Wadsworth:
The biggest mistake I ever made when I started trading and investing investing was trying to catch the bottom with everything, catching falling knives. Oh, it’s cheap. It’s great. It can’t get any cheaper. Wrong, wrong, wrong again. And luckily, I learned quite quickly because the background that I’ve got, it’s about the evidence. So in terms of when to invest and how to position yourself in terms of risk, there is a Okay, I’ll give you a scenario. Uranium, for example, post-Fukushima, started to tumble the spot price of uranium, and the uranium miners took a dive. And probably somewhere around about 15, 15, 16 even. A lot of people would have been saying, Look, uranium miners and uranium, they’ve been going down for years. They’re, I don’t know, 70 % down, 80 % down, whatever. This has got to be a good time to get into into uranium. Now, it wasn’t until 2019, 2020 when they finally bottomed. And having the technical chart to look at, this is where you talk about your gut, and your gut feeling sometimes comes from what you’re influenced by, what you hear, what you read, feelings that you get from the media and all that stuff.
Having a technical chart means that you can completely tune out of all of that because it It’s so clear back in 2019, 2020, that what was happening with the spot price of uranium and the uranium miners was a breakout. Now, the evidence doesn’t change overnight. It doesn’t change at the click of your fingers. It changes gradually. And as an investor, it’s down to your own personality and your own attitude to risk, at which point you want to start either scaling in or taking a position in whatever way you want to take your position all at once or bit by bit. But the evidence builds gradually, a little bit like a truck hurtling towards you from half a mile away. You can look at the truck when it’s half a mile away and think, well, okay, it’s coming in my general direction, but it’s probably not going to hit me. And then it gets closer and closer and closer. And at some point you’re like, oh, bloody hell, this thing’s going to hit me. It’s definitely going to hit me. The evidence is there. It’s 20 feet away from me and it’s going to mow me down.
And it’s the same with chart trading. The evidence builds gradually and it’s at what point you want to pull the trigger and act on that evidence. So all of these pieces of key evidence that I’ve spoken about, breaking above volume bases, breaking above resistance lines, breaking above the Ichimoku cloud, which is a very useful indicator, seeing the distance from moving average move back above the zero line. All of these things, they come together as a series of ticks that tell you when to… Checks in the box telling you when that particular stock is turning bullish again or that particular sector. So It’s a case of building the evidence. Then once it breaks out, you can catch the chunk of the move. You get the big move. As soon as it breaks out, you invariably get a significant move before it’ll hit a resistance level and then cool off again. That’s what happened in uranium. It had two and a half years or so pulling back, and the pullbacks were in excess of 50 %. And then we had a stage 2 continuation breakout, and that’s what’s just happened. The URA chart broke out again. It’s around about $24, and it’s now somewhere around about $30.
That’s the time I looked and progressing beautifully according to our expected projections. So it’s a question of your own personality, your own trading style, what risks you want to take. And also, I should mention, applying careful risk and money management. You need to have a system where you identify your target, identify an entry point, identify a stop loss, and your position size. If you don’t do that, if you’re not doing that, anyone watching this who wasn’t doing that, as I wasn’t right at the very beginning, really, I’m not a financial advisor, but I’d strongly recommend that you read and learn about risk of money management.
Patrick Karim:
That’s the most important part, Kevin. Look, it’s like a poker player, guys. If you go all in on every single hand, you’re bound to go broke. You will. It’s mathematical. You can’t go in all in every single hand. So minimize the defeats, the draw downs. Live to fight another day, guys. And that’s the hardest thing psychologically for somebody because they’ve married the narrative. They’ve married the chart. I did my due diligence on this company. It’s beautiful. Well, sometimes the capital flows are way more powerful than that company, so great management. But if it happens you’re in a bear market for whatever sector, it’s game over for you. I don’t care who you are. The chances are if a company does do well in a sector where the capital flows are not going into it, it’s a low probability event. You got lucky because most of the companies will track. There’s 80% of the companies in, let’s say, the material sector, they all look like those charts. Why do you think that is? They all have different CEOs. It’s because they’re tracking the capital flows from way above that’s overriding, practically. Or you can make a case that the decision making by all these CEOs and all that stuff, it’s practically symptoms of the capital flows.
They’re forced their hand to take these decisions to survive. They have to cut margins. They have to raise prices. That’s not coming from them there. They don’t want to do that. It’s coming from the higher forces, the inflation, purchasing power, and all that. Sorry, I stole a little bit of But risk management, money management is the number one thing, and nobody teaches that. Nobody. Cnbc doesn’t talk about it. Nobody tells you you shouldn’t risk more than 1% of your NAV on a trade. Nobody tells you that.
Kevin Wadsworth:
It was fascinating talking to Peter Brandt the other day, and we had a chat with him about this, and he’s a very long-time investor, of course. Something that a lot of people don’t realize is that you can have, let’s say, three out of four of your trades can not succeed. The one out of the four that succeeds covers more than covers the losses from those three. So you can have many, many more losses than victories and yet still be making gains on your portfolio. If you use careful risk of money management, it means effectively that saying that a lot of people repeat, which is true, cutting your losers and letting your winners run. You let your winning trades run to target and any trades that start to turn against you and move in a direction that you really didn’t want and really didn’t anticipate, then it with no more than, let’s say, a 1% NAV loss, perhaps at most a 2% NAV loss on any single trade. I think Peter uses even less than that. He’s spoken about using positions that have less than 1% NAV risk on his trade. So think about this really carefully, because if you stand to lose 5, 10% on a single trade because it’s not going the way you want it to, then you’re just doing that completely wrong.
Kevin Wadsworth:
It’s the second element to chart trading. The first element is identifying the probabilities of where that particular stock is going and having the probabilities slightly skewed in your favor. And you only need to skew them slightly in your favor. You don’t have to be a genius. You just need to, perhaps, push the odds 70, 30, even 60, 40 in your favor, as opposed to a coin flip. Then if you marry that with risk and money management, then you can grow your NAV substantially over a period of time.
Patrick Karim:
Kevin, everybody wants to bet everything to have the Lambo. That’s what’s happening on Twitter. You have to bet everything. Yolo. Remember Yolo? But anyways, that’s what we’re fighting against. If I want to tweet with little likes, talk about risk and money management. It’s a killer.
Kevin Wadsworth:
We talk about illiquid cryptocurrency going up at 10,000 %. You all get a million likes. It’s the world we live in, unfortunately.
Patrick Karim:
That’s why, Keith, I love your tweets there on Twitter on Bitcoin, the paradox. Everybody wants it to go up because they want to make money, but then it’s contradictory to being a stable fiat money because you’re not supposed to go up 80 % and down 80 %, right? I love when you tweet stuff like that, man. Oh, my goodness. He keeps snaling it perfectly.
Keith Weiner:
Is it money or is it going up to millions of dollars? Because they’re being exclusive. If it’s money, then it won’t be going up, and therefore, you don’t have a reason to buy. If it is going up, it precludes its use as money. You They never really engage with that. They say, Well, Bitcoin is living rent-free in your head, or there’s some way of turning it into a personal attempt of personal attack. But anyways, we’re not talking about that today.
Ben Nadelstein:
I do want to ask you about that because obviously we try to help people and say, Hey, listen, if something’s going up 200,000 %, is that really great for people who are holding it as money? People think, Well, this is a store of value, whatever that means, and it’s going up 2000 %. I mean, okay, so if I find a stock or a crypto that goes up 2100 %, is that a better store of value? I mean, these aren’t really great arguments. And like you guys mentioned, the % gain isn’t actually that important, right? It’s these underlying fundamental principles. It’s like, do you even want a high percentage gain? Does that mean the stock is volatile? Are you looking for volatility?
Keith Weiner:
If you’re trading it, sure. But I was going to say, when people say store value and Bitcoin going up 80,000% or whatever. I’m like, I always picture as a kid, you get bottle rockets or something like that, and it’s a little wooden stick, and you put it in a little tube, and you light the fuse, and you get back. Even when it’s going up, that’s not a store. A store is a boring thing. All the houses in New York where I lived had oil burners for a heat in the winter. There’s a tank underground, and then there’s a little the pipe that stuck up, and that’s where they’d fill it. That’s a store. It’s boring, it’s cold, it’s underground. Nobody ever thinks about it unless it’s leaking and there’s a problem. And it almost never leaks because they knew how to build a tank that didn’t have holes in it. And this thing that’s going up like that, even during that phase, that’s not a store, that’s something else. And of course, at least for fireworks on the fourth of July, you know what happens when it gets to the top. There’s a bang and then the stick and the leftover paper and whatever, rubbish, comes right back down.
Now, if you’re trading in and you can time that, if your chart tells you that’s going to happen, great, have at it. But don’t tell me this is money. Don’t tell me this is a store of value, don’t give me all the rubbish economics that the Bitcoiners give because none of that stuff is true. I guess getting back to what you guys were saying 20 minutes ago, it’s a narrative that people tell themselves to maybe be making them feel so better along the way. But there’s no validity to that. It’s just a narrative, nothing more.
Kevin Wadsworth:
And there’s something else that I’ll add to that. If you’re talking about gold You’re talking about currencies and you’re talking about currencies and you’re talking about the stuff that we all need to buy on a daily basis. I’ll just make a simple statement here which might drive the point home to a lot of people. House prices have gone up, right? House prices have gone up 1,000 % since 1975, at least 1,000 %. Wrong. No, they haven’t. House prices have not gone up 1,000 % since 1975. It’s the value of your paper currency that you’re purchasing that property in that is devalued, essentially. So let’s put it another way. House prices are the same as they were in 1975. What, Kevin? What are you talking about? House prices are the same as they were in 1975. House prices are currently 242 ounces of gold. House prices in 1975 were 242 ounces of gold. So what are you trying to tell me here? What’s the currency? Are you telling me this paper stuff that is handed out by the US government, the British government, the Eurozone? Is that our currency? Because if that’s our currency, then everything around us that we need to survive, whether it’s houses, food, clothing, all the utility bills, they’re seemingly going up and up and up and up.
But they’re not. It’s an illusion. It’s a complete illusion. Gold stands there throughout time, throughout history, throughout the centuries, and it just acts as… People call it a pet rock. Well, what you just said there, Keith, is very true. It’s boring, it’s tedious, it doesn’t do very much. But, hell, if you wanted to buy a house and you had gold back in 1975, you can get your house for the same amount of gold as it cost you back in 1975. So let’s have a proper conversation about what we mean about currencies and what should be a currency and what shouldn’t be a currency.
Ben Nadelstein:
Well, Kevin and Patrick, I’ll do the good news, which is that at Monetary Metals, we pay a yield on gold, paid in gold. So gold actually does do something. It is not a shiny pet rock anymore. Sorry, Warren Buffet. So with that yield on gold, obviously, if you were earning from 1975, you could probably pay for a house by now in those ounces that you earned. But I really do like that point. And we say that a lot on the podcast. Hey, you got to think about gold as the center of the monetary universe, all these other paper products. Like you perfectly mentioned, if you’re living in Venezuela, did your house really appreciate Appreciate 10,000 %? Or is it possible that the Venezuelan Boulevard is now pretty much worthless?
Keith Weiner:
Well, that’s the funny thing. If I can just jump in. When it comes to, I guess we’ll call it, Banana Republic currencies, everyone gets, you don’t measure gains in terms of boulevards with the Baboy dollars or these sorts of things, Turkish Lira, right? I mean, everyone gets. Attempting to use this as a unit of measure is the malicious. When it comes to the dollar, the euros, sterling, the people who know that about the boulevard and the Zimbabwe, forget that. They say, Well, gold went up. Well, did they? Then Then they say, buy gold, gold is going to go up because the dollar is going to be wiped out. Well, okay, is it gold going up or is the dollar being wiped out? You can think of lots of analogies of, okay, imagine you had to a brick over the edge of a cliff and you put a GoPro camera on the brick and you say it’s the top of the cliff where you’re standing. Are you going up? Everyone can see, no, it’s just the GoPro camera happens to be in freefall. But getting for people to invert that and say, Okay, but the currency you’re using to measure this is actually sinking.
It’s actually in freefall. Maybe it’s not quite freefall, but it’s falling. Maybe it has a terminal velocity of only one meter per hour, but it’s going down. It’s very difficult to get people to really click in their mind.
Ben Nadelstein:
Keith, you mentioned this a lot with Bitcoin. You’ll say, Hey, Bitcoin people, just to really clear the air, do you really think that the value of all goods and services denies dominated in Bitcoin has suddenly had a hyper deflation today because the Bitcoin price changed? Probably not. You probably think that the price of Bitcoin has changed and not that everything around it is inflated.
Keith Weiner:
That’s one of those dichotomies where if I say, if I tweet and I say, Bitcoiners claim that everything should be measured in Bitcoin, and therefore, I get 100 Bitcoiners on the thread saying, You’re just straw manning us. I mean, no one’s really saying that, Keith. And then if I post and I say, Gold is the economic constant of Bitcoin, gets up and down, then they turn around and say, No, you should use Bitcoin as the measure and not gold. I don’t know if you guys know, but I debated Bitcoin Pierre, Pierre Rochard, the Soho Forum, which is sponsored by the Reason Foundation, invited us to debate gold versus Bitcoin, and it was hosted at the Mises Institute headquarters in Auburn, Alabama. And I started out, so I was pro, and the proposition was gold will continue to play an important monetary role, whatever it was in the next 100 years. And so being pro, I get to go first. And so I put up one chart. So it’s the only chart I’m going to put up the whole time. And it was a price chart of gold over the last 5,000 years. And it was a flat line at one, labeled one ounce.
The price of one ounce is one ounce. And I was like, no, no, this is not some stupid tautology. This is saying that gold has this unique property that the endth plus one ounce has the same value. People will accept it on the same terms as the nth ounce. And the proof is we’ve been accumulating gold so far as we know, actually, it’s not 5,000 years, it’s 6,500 years. Subsequent to that debate, I read about a find in a cave in Bulgaria of some warrior king that was buried with seven kilos of ceremonial gold that dates back to like 4,500 BC. At least 6,500 years and probably longer than that, we’ve been valuing gold. We’ve been accumulating it without any particular limit. I mean, think about wheat, think about copper, any other normal commodity. If you accumulate a certain bit, it’s called a glut. Then the price collapses until the glut is worked off. Production stops because you can’t make any money producing it anymore. Consumption is incentivized because you’d rather use that versus… Let’s say the price of copper collapses. Well, you’ll see more copper pipes and less plastic pipes until the copper price recovers and then people go back to whatever they’re doing.
But in gold, that’s not the case. No matter how much we accumulate, we’re always happy to accumulate more. And the miners produce 3,000 plus tons a year of more gold to add to what was already accumulated. And so the N plus once an ounce is not worth less than the nth ounce. The marginal utility of gold does not decline as the quantity goes up, which is unique. There’s no other thing, whether you’re talking about paper currency, whether you’re talking about shares in a company, whether you’re talking about any other commodity, or whether you’re talking about Bitcoin. I created somewhat of a stir in the audience when I said Satoshi, when he designed Bitcoin, was terrified that Bitcoin did not have this property, and thus the most important thing for him was to set a hard cap of 21 million units. He didn’t want to discover, he didn’t want to run the experiment. Would Bitcoin have a diminishing margin utility or not? And obviously, he believed that it would. But gold doesn’t. And there’s the proof. And that’s why gold is an economic concept. Because no matter how much anybody has, they’re happy to have more on the same terms.
And that’s been that way globally or as markets converted 5,000 years ago. It’s not a global market. But as gold was discovered, as gold was unilized and markets converged, that property has always been present for it. And that’s what makes gold the economic constant. So it is It’s appropriate to say if you can point to a particular house in Devon and say this house was 240, whatever, 2 ounces back in 1975. And then you go to that same house today, which is listed and that’s 242 ounces, regardless of whatever happened to sterling in the meantime, it is appropriate to say the value of the house hasn’t changed. It’s only the paper currency with which most people attempt to measure it. If the house did go up in gold terms from 142 ounces to 142 ounces, you can say, Well, there’s a net inflow of, I don’t know, wealthy Londoners who are looking for a seaside vacation home or whatever, Airbnb I don’t know, whatever people would be buying houses in Devon for. But you could say that, yes, there’s more demand for these than there was in the 1970s and the price has gone up as measured objectively versus as measured in Thurling.
Kevin Wadsworth:
Yeah, and it’s so clear when you look at the chart, actually. I mean, the price does, of course, fluctuate in ounces of gold. It goes up, it goes down, it goes up, it goes down. But the net effect over the 50 years is that it’s gone sideways. When you zoom out, the whole thing’s just gone sideways. So it’s clearly a different mechanism to what is going on with houses priced in US dollars, which is just a line going from bottom left to top right, much as anything priced in US dollars is. It’s a bottom left to top right chart, and it’s in complete contrast to the value of the house in gold. It’s exactly static going back 50 years, despite those fluctuations up and down. The fluctuations are very controlled. And as you say, they will be there because of particular demands at particular points in time or particular drops in demand, not because the government is coming along and printing gold out of thin air, which is, of course, what they’re doing with pounds and euros and dollars.
Keith Weiner:
So what’s It’s a topic that always comes up in this gold thing is gold going to go up more, equity is going to go up more. I wrote an article. You should probably refresh it, Ben. I don’t know if you remember the one, it’s probably eight years ago or something. It was way pre-COVID. It was looking at that issue now Assuming that gold is the economic constant. To say that gold is going up more than shares, basically is saying that shares are losing value. That’s not something anybody should be wishing for. If you want to live in modern civilization, you shouldn’t be wishing for the entire industrial base to be degrading. But a successful company is going up in money terms or should be. If it isn’t, there’s much greater problems. It gets back to, I think a lot of people say this, not just me, but hey, gold bugs, be careful what you wish for. If gold is $20,000 an ounce, you may feel you’re rich, but you may be living in a society where if anybody knew you had that gold, they would kill you for it. You can afford to buy a Ferrari, but you wouldn’t be driving around because they would trash it.
Ben Nadelstein:
I mean, look at the Bolivar, right? In Bolivar terms, gold has done incredibly well. But I can guarantee you anyone living in That country would much prefer that the currency or gold was much lower and their currency much more stable.
Keith Weiner:
I can’t imagine driving a Ferrari around in Caracas. I mean, you’re going to get carjacked at gunpoint. Horrible, horrible things will be going on. Yeah. Okay, sure. The gold is worth a lot in both of ours. But is that the world you want to be in?
Ben Nadelstein:
Right. So guys, I want to end the podcast with some rapid fire questions. There are a bunch of disparate topics. We’ll start with Patrick, we’ll go to Kevin, and we’ll end with Keith. I’ll fire them out. You can give as long or as short as an answer to the question as you want. So Patrick, we’ll start with you. Swiss franc versus the dollar. Which do you think will depreciate relative to gold the most in 2024?
Patrick Karim:
In 2024? Goodness. Why did you put such a short time frame like that?
Ben Nadelstein:
You can change the time frame if you like. I’m happy with that.
Patrick Karim:
Longer time frame, definitely the US dollar will depreciate more versus gold. According to the chart I’ve had now. I think I even put that on one of tweets and replies. 2024, it all depends if we have a market event, because if we have a market event, GFC, the Gold Silver Racial jacks up, the DxY jacks up, and But I’m not even sure about that because even during the drawdowns, the Swiss franc is able to hold pretty much its power versus gold, but it does better when gold is outperforming the US dollar, the Swiss franc holds its purchasing power better. But for 2024, right now with the technical chart breakdown we have for the US dollar versus the Swiss franc, I would say the Swiss franc is going to outperform the US dollar, so it will hold its value in gold than the US dollar. Until that breakdown is overridden, that’s my final answer. Did I win? What’s the prize? A gold coin?
Ben Nadelstein:
I hope. One day when I’m rich enough, I’ll hand out gold coins for fun guesses. And okay, Kevin, fun guess. What do you think? Swiss franc, dollar, who’s going to depreciate more relative to gold?
Kevin Wadsworth:
I think everything Pat has just said there is perfectly correct. It’s not all the time that Pat and I have exactly the same views, but I can’t find anything in what Pat just said there that I particularly disagree with. So I’ll go with exactly the same answer that Pat’s given there.
Ben Nadelstein:
Keith, you might be an interesting one.
Kevin Wadsworth:
Sorry, Pat, I am cheating.
Keith Weiner:
Yeah, so I certainly agree that in the next crisis, which I think the seeds of which were already baked into the cake, but the only question is timing, which I certainly couldn’t predict. It feels like a crisis is brewing for 2024, but sometimes these things can linger longer than you expect. But overall, as an economist, looking at this and not looking at charts necessarily, but looking at a broader thing. I mean, all the paper currencies are dollar derivatives. I mean, that’s the nature of the dollar being the global reserve currency. All the other currencies are dollar derivatives. In the end, the derivatives can’t survive the collapse of the underlying. But post-2014, the franc has increasingly become a Euro derivative, which is a dollar derivative. And so increasingly, it’ll be subject to the forces of the Euro. And I wouldn’t necessarily say 2024, But I think the trend of the broader trend and the broader forces on the franc will be driving it down relative to the dollar.
Ben Nadelstein:
Okay, next rapid fire question. Which asset class do you think is more underrated Patrick, we’ll start with you. Precious metals or commercial real estate.
Patrick Karim:
My goodness. It’s so weird. I’m trying to flash back. I did a chart of real estate priced in gold, and seriously, there was a huge crash for gold versus real estate. Real estate went up, and now it’s at halfway mark. Honestly, I think right now, I’m not even looking at the charts, I think it’s almost a historical fair value where it’s either gold that’s going to appreciate versus real estate or the inverse. So right now, I think it’s like it’s a wash. There’s room. They’re fair value now. I’m just visualizing my head their 20 or 30, 40-year chart that I’ve done in the past few months. So I think everything It’s perfectly balanced right now.
Ben Nadelstein:
I like it. A tie. Okay, Kevin, what do you think? Commercial real estate, precious metals.
Kevin Wadsworth:
I saw the chart that Pat was talking about, and he’s right. It is pretty much fair value. But if you’re looking at under value, I’m tempted to say silver, precious metals. Gold is buck at all time highs, and it’s looking to make a big move one way or the other. It’s consolidating above $2,000. It’s got itself an opportunity to have a move up of $7,000 or $800 here. That would be the measured move. But the gold to SPX ratio is giving us cause for concern. It’s not breaking to the upside. And in fact, on a shorter time frame, it’s slightly breaking to the downside. Silver, anywhere below $25 is exceedingly good in inverted commas value. And you would expect that over the next several months to maybe 18 months, something like that, that silver will have its day in the sun and make that big move that everyone’s waiting for towards the $50 area and then beyond that in years to come. But the technical chart analysis shows that silver hasn’t made that critical breakout beyond the 26 to 28 level, which is crucial. But under value and potential for a quick 100% move, I would say silver and gold’s move perhaps somewhere over the order of maybe 70%, 60% when the breakout is finally confirmed, but we do need that gold to SPX ratio to really show signs of life.
Kevin Wadsworth:
At the moment, capital is… And there’s ratio charts, by the way, for people perhaps wondering what we’re talking about with ratio charts. It’s just comparing one asset against another to track capital capital flows. So if capital is flowing disproportionately towards stock markets, then that’s going to suck some of the life and some of the energy out of precious metals. And you can watch these ebbs and flows between things like even Bitcoin and uranium. You can do a Bitcoin to uranium ratio, and you can see the way capital ebbs and flows between those two markets. It doesn’t mean they’re particularly correlated in any meaningful way. It just means that you can spot when one market is outperforming the other and when capital is disproportionately flowing into one market versus the other. And gold to SPX is giving us some headaches at the moment. It’s a little bit of a concern, and we won’t be happy, really, until it gets above 0.5 on the gold to SPX ratio.
Ben Nadelstein:
Keith, I want to send it your way. Most underrated asset class. Do you feel in real estate or do you think maybe the precious metals are underrated right now?
Keith Weiner:
I think if we’re talking commercial real estate, you got to break it down in different sectors. So I think warehouses may do pretty well because there’s There’s a lot of logistics stuff going on for more and more consumer, let’s say, package delivery. But the flip side of that is retail, which I think is headed for a train wreck, and office space. Here I am, Monetary Metals headquarters. We’re in a building here called the Scottsdale Galleria, which had been in retail at one time, but didn’t work. It was completely redone as a giant commercial office thing. It’s mostly dark. I mean, the parking lot is almost entirely empty. How long can this go? I think right now there’s still major corporations that are tenants that just haven’t figured out how much to downsize their footprint, what’s the reality of how many people want to come to the office versus work at home. But when all that gets sorted through, the need for commercial office real estate is surely 50% at most of what it was in 2019. I don’t think people really are grappling with what that means. The owners of the properties are all in debt, which means they’re all going to default.
The banks will become the owners, and that will cause huge amounts of distress in the banking sector, as you can imagine. Then when that gets sold back to the market, the new developers will own these things at a much lower price. That might be a great time to buy in, but I can’t Can you imagine owning this asset right now with that damochelees hanging over your head. Now, the charts may not say that. This may not be imminent. The Fed certainly, and the Treasury, and the regulators certainly have lots and lots of tricks up their sleeves There’s lots of ways of sprouting tentacles to plug the holes in the dyke, extend and pretend, kick the can down the road, whatever term you’re going to use. But there’s a train wreck coming versus precious metals, which I think are You know, underappreciated, under talked about. It’s not at all like it was in 2009 to 2011, the last time we had priced over $2,000. Everybody was talking about it. It was the proverbial, you get in a taxi in the Shushan boy is telling you hot gold tips. Nowadays, it’s like under mentioned, under discussed, barely appreciated.
And here we are, $2,000. But the main thing is if you own precious metals, you’re not dependent on a counterparty to perform. If you own any security or for that matter, commercial real estate, you’re dependent on a tenant to actually make enough money to pay the rent. If your tenant can’t, if you own a security and the party on the other side can’t perform, then what’s the value of the thing you own? Well, it can go to zero. And so owning precious metals with no counter party risk versus owning something with a counter party on the other side. Again, I can’t I can’t say this is 2024. I can’t say it’s 2025, although my gut is telling me it’s relatively imminent. But when that happens, you’d much rather own gold or silver. I think I agree that there’s upside in silver relative to gold. I think the gold-silver ratio at some point is going to want to snap back to its mean. A mean reversion means not quite a double, but call it a 60 to 80 % gain in silver relative to gold. So obviously, that would be a big move in the silver price.
Ben Nadelstein:
Okay, final rapid fire question. Patrick, we’ll start with you. You get one idea. You get to completely wipe off the face of the Earth No one knows about it. No one’s ever heard about it ever again. People were thinking, oh, my gosh, Patrick’s the dumbest guy ever. You can just wipe that idea completely off the face of the Earth. Any idea you get to pick, what would you choose?
Patrick Karim:
Trading related? Anything?
Ben Nadelstein:
Anything.
Patrick Karim:
Something that it’s like the invention of lie there. Nobody knows how to lie. Yeah, totally. Well, maybe that’s a good one there. Goodness. I’m not sure I would eliminate anything. Seriously, it’s because that’s what I understand it, because if I debalance something, then what I think is good now might not be there. It’s like I’m going to be affecting the balance of everything, the butterfly effect or anything. I probably have to say for better or worse, I would just probably just Just keep everything like it is now there. I don’t know what philosophy you could attach to that there. College is good, I guess. Often in my life, I’ve seen the kids, they could have done that, and then it would change. But I look at myself, there’s these tiny decisions that happen that lead me today that I’m talking to you guys. And if I were to remove one of those things, Kevin is my worst enemy in an alternate universe, right?
Ben Nadelstein:
Patrick, we wouldn’t want you anywhere but here on the Gold Exchange podcast. Kevin, we’re happy that in this universe, you guys are friends and that you’re on the show. What’s an idea you might say, you know what? We could live without that?
Kevin Wadsworth:
Social media. There you go. Social media. A double-edged sword that comes back to haunt us all the time. Seriously, I mean, social media is a great thing, but it’s also a breeding ground for some real nasty, almost like evil people out there on the Internet. The Internet is and social media is… I don’t know. I’m old enough to I remember times before internet, before social media, and I hark back to that sometimes where people really had to converse more, talk more, read more, spend more family time. So many distractions. But then Like Pat said, you take it away in butterfly effect, and you can end up causing more.
Keith Weiner:
Back to you guys wouldn’t be here on the podcast if it were.
Kevin Wadsworth:
Exactly. So there you go. And some people might be very pleased about that. So they’ll be saying, Yeah, thank My goodness for that. It’s hard to think of something that you would definitely want to get rid of. But social media, or at least the bad side of social media. If you could have social media without all the bad stuff that goes with it and the damage that it does, that would be an ideal world in a way, but it ain’t going to happen. You have to accept the bad with the good.
Ben Nadelstein:
Well, all the people who are awesome on social media never post a nasty comment and just love charting gold, precious metals. You know who to follow. Keith, let’s go with you. What’s an idea maybe you want to say, We could probably go without that?
Keith Weiner:
As soon as you ask the question, it’s obvious what I want to say to that, which is this pernicious idea that monetary policy can make anything better that by screwing around with the definition of a kilogram to benefit sellers or buyers of products, of screwing around with the definition of a meter to somehow make building, engineering, construction better, screwing around with the economic unit to make the economy better. This idea of monetary policy and central planning, if we can get rid of that. Yeah, there’ll be a lot of ripples, a lot of butterflies, but all of them good. We’re in a much better world.
Ben Nadelstein:
Guys, I want to thank you so much. Before we end, where can people find more of your work? Patrick, we’ll start with you and then jump to Kevin.
Patrick Karim:
Nordstarbadcharts.com. But on Twitter, it’s the Wild Wild West, guys. So if you want all the fun stuff, go on Twitter. If you want more, nordstarbadcharts.com.
Ben Nadelstein:
Kevin, I know that people are going to love you on social media. Where can they find you?
Kevin Wadsworth:
Yeah, it’s @northstarcharts on Twitter, and you can find me on LinkedIn as well. All Star charts. And as Pat said, the same website, of course, because we are business partners.
Ben Nadelstein:
Guys, I want to thank you so much for coming on the Gold Exchange podcast. It was really fun. And we’ll make sure we’ll check the charts, but we’re pretty sure we’re going to have to see you again.
Kevin Wadsworth:
That’s right. Good stuff. Thanks for having us on. Really appreciate it.
Patrick Karim:
We’re so meeting you guys again.
Additional Resources for Earning Interest in Gold
If you’d like to learn more about how to earn interest on gold with Monetary Metals, check out the following resources:
In this paper, we look at how conventional gold holdings stack up to Monetary Metals Investments, which offer a Yield on Gold, Paid in Gold®. We compare retail coins, vault storage, the popular ETF – GLD, and mining stocks against Monetary Metals’ True Gold Leases.
The Case for Gold Yield in Investment Portfolios
Adding gold to a diversified portfolio of assets reduces volatility and increases returns. But how much and what about the ongoing costs? What changes when gold pays a yield? This paper answers those questions using data going back to 1972.
© Monetary Metals 2024
