GoldFinger1969

Well, nobody here is going to buy them in all likelihood if they are Details coins, so seems like alot of work for him to do if that's his goal. dPrince, what's your endgame ? You selling these ? Gonna submit them for grading ? What ?

The predictions may or may not come true....I find the price projections REASONABLE for the time frames indicated. That said....gold could also be $1,800 in 5-10 years, I freely admit. But I don't think so.

First, let me say I am happy to continue the discussion of stocks/bonds/investing in another thread if this gets too far off the "$3,000 Gold" topic though it is still somewhat tangentially tied to that since we are discussing the valuation of a competing asset class. Second, earnings are what you have to use. There are discrepancies at times with GAAP or Operating EPS, but by and large they have gone up 7% a year since 1960 and provided real growth that outstrips inflation and any other asset class. Free cash flow also backs this up. Earnings are real and when they go up, stocks go up. Third, while I respect Jon Hussman as very knowledgeable and he brings interesting thought-provoking ideas to the table, he has a TERRIBLE track record as a perma-bear. His main fund has returned about 3% over the last 10 years which is a lousy performance...without checking, it's probably had a more bullish bias than Hussman himself talks about because it does have to compete for $$$. Fourth, I agree that foreign markets offer some interesting valuation metrics but some of their companies just don't get it. As an example, BP and SHEL seem to think they work for the European Green Party and both cut their dividends in 2000 right at the worst possible moment. XOM and CVX continue to make them both look like fools. ROEs and ROICs for U.S. companies are among the best in the world. Europe is cheap -- but then again, so is a fixer-upper home. Labor markets, regulations, and energy policies are looking like a major headwind in Europe. A tariff war may also be coming as they try to "equalize" costs by hitting American and Chinese firms. Fifth, U.S. growth is not 100% dependent on the FRB's balance sheet. Yes, it helped with stock returns but companies here have real earnings growth. AI is a real thing and while I think NVDA is ahead of itself, the U.S. is a leader there, too. Quick...name 1 great European tech company ? Now....name 5 great U.S. tech companies ? I bet most people reading this can name the 5 over the 1 !!! Sixth, earnings are real. Over time they are not manipulable (is that a word ? ) . Dividends ARE real cash and the S&P 500 and many companies do pay out hard, real cash. NVDA is actually CHEAPER today than it was 6 months ago. The earnings are real....the P/E has DEFLATED not INFLATED because of easy money (whcih has been tight, anyway). Earnings determine the valuation level, free cash flow, CAPX levels, and dividend payouts. They DO matter and the U.S. has among the best accounting in the world. I've read Hussman and other perma-bears and they bring up some interesting stuff. But if you listened to them...you'd scare yourself out of the market for 3, 5, 10, 20 years or more. You can't do that. You'll lose out. You can't be like Charles Allmon in the 1980's and miss the 1987 Crash and stay in cash for 15 years. It doesn't work. Better to be in the market and the Crash and stay fully-invested. You know, the S&P 500 sold at 6x EPS in December 1974. Those days are gone. But there was a small-cap stock that sold for TWICE the market multiple, 12x EPS, at that time. At that time, selling for 2x the market multiple was considered super-rich (unlike the Go-Go late 1960's). Not many people wanted to pay 2x the S&P 500 P/E when they didn't even want to buy stocks at 6x EPS. In fact.....they should have been willing to pay 30x EPS...or 50x EPS...or even 100x EPS. They'd have done OK even if they paid 600x the company's earnings and done no worse than the S&P 500 for decades to come. The company's name ? Wal-Mart.

I don't know the exact numbers but I'd say maybe a 60% success rate, maybe 70%. Their timing is good....directions are easy for the most part since most stocks do go up over time. Their shorts stand out (aside from AMZN, which they totally blew).

Don't ASSUME that I am confined to a narrow niche. I can multitask multiple interests that are not tied to one another by any stretch. Even my 2nd word typed above has some significance though I doubt anybody here will get it unless they watched the ABC lineup in the early-1970's.

NGC seems to be the preferred grader for foreign/world coins.

Of course, but general investment guidelines provide a good starting point -- and sometimes a good ENDING point -- for a good portfolio. In many cases, the standard "60-40" portfolio might be best for most people at most points in time. In most cases, this isn't rocket science. But I do see too many people make decisions involving life savings, 5- or 6- or even 7-figure sums of money and spend LESS time researching what they are doing than the time they spend to buy new furniture, a Hi-Def TV, or new kitchen counter tops. "The goal of every individual should be to maintain or improve their personal financial circumstances, not maximize their return or beat some arbitrary benchmark. Using myself as an example, I'm hardly rich but I don't need to follow conventional thinking to accomplish what I want to achieve." Sure, no objections. And thanks to the rise in interest rates, it's alot easier. An 8% portfolio return can now be achieved with moderate risk. "That along with knowing this is the most overpriced market in history is why I don't follow conventional advice." Definitely not true, even with the rise in interest rates. Much more overvalued only 2 years ago let alone in 2000. On a straight P/E basis, we're elevated but not at bubble levels. See charts, below.

Yeah, I've been reading them since the mid-1980's and they've made some great Cover Calls. Probably the best over that time was the March 2000 cover story on how the Dot.com's were bleeding too much cash. NASDAQ went down 75% next 2 years, lots of the bubble stocks lost 90-100%.

Conversely...once the Stock Market crashed....economies fell....and the gold standard was targeted and then exited.....this explains why the 1929 Saint is pretty much the last of The Fab Five (1929, 1930-S, 1931, 1931-D, and 1932) to be exported in any quantity such that some mini-hoards could be found in Europe. All the others are just stray foreign finds or domestic coins only. As RWB wrote in his book: "Out of 4,666,000 double eagles, worth $93,320,000, manufactured from 1930 through 1933, not one coin was released to a Federal Reserve Bank for ordinary circulation or international trade."

Sure, most of us here spend more than that and if we don't we still maintain heightened interest in the sector which makes us more likely to fork it over.

If you spend that much time and effort into doing research and following stuff, I think that makes you a numismatist.

If they mint so few, chances are you won't get one. The mintage for the 2009 UHR Saint recreation was sufficient that everybody could get one without paying idiotic premiums.

Rawhide, Season 4, Episode 2 "Incident Of The Sendoff"....at the 30:30 mark, you see Gil Favor (Eric Fleming) talking to Hadley (Darren McGavin) saying that he would pay the $150 owed to Hadley with 8 Double Eagles. This was the TV series that launched Clint Eastwood. I never realized until the last year how many TV stars of the 1970's and 1980's I grew up with were on these Westerns of the late-1950's and early-1960's.

Someone tell NYIMC show !!

So the true DDO condition has to be clear and material, like Sandon's coin's "LIBERTY" which is clear even to a mediocre grader like me ? These other conditions -- while unique -- clearly don't have the magnitude of the "doubling" so they're not worth anything -- is that it ?

Is he the defensive end for the Lions ?

Never have, WC. But for non-dealer collectors who submit a few times a year (figure 20-30 coins), my understanding is total per-coin costs for grading are about $35 ?

The problem with raw auctions is that unless BOTH the (ultimate) buyer and seller are knowledgeable about grading, you have a very wide moat of uncertainty as to the coin's condition. This is increased by the fact that the buyer/bidders do not have the actual coin in hand but are going by photographs which may or may not be distorting (deliberately or accidentally) the appearance/condition of the coin.

I guess eBay isn't an efficient market with knowledgeable coin dealers moving the price reasonably close to FMV. At least for some coins, mostly lower-priced. I will say that I have never seen any high-priced Morgan's or Saints go for anything close to 50% below FMV. I bought a nice Morgan that should have sold for about $400 and got it for like $350. But there were like 3 or 4 of us still bidding at or above $300, let alone $200 (which would have been 50% of FMV).

Why wouldn't the price just have risen from $0.01 or even $1.00 ? I see 4 and 5-figure coins all the time on HA and GC start out at $1 and approach FMV down the line. The only thing is you see a dozen or more "stink bids" before you even approach FMV.

It's not only for grading, registry, or sales reasons....many people want the holder to preserve the coins and/or easier handling.

Ok, cleared up as I posted above to WC. But again...forget my coins....the ones that take up MOST of the dollar-volume...the more expensive coins (and I mean $50 and up)....the ones featured at most coin shows....the ones attracting the most interest in online auctions....for these coins having a TPG grade is probably best OVER TIME.

Yes, true...but not even the ones I buy....let's say any coin over $50, $100 tops....which most every collector of any series would have to probably buy a few of these over time IF they were a serious collector who wanted a complete set OR a few nice "trophy" coins. Forget my bullion (DEs, MSDs) targets.

Surprised they rendered a verdict on the 1st day and after "only" 4 hours. Congrats to the jury....I was afraid something this complex might confuse 1 or 2 and result in a hung jury. Personally, I probably would have needed 15 minutes to convict. You can NOT steal from clients. The mixing of customer funds with Alameda accounts (the hedge fund) is a huge no-no.

The overhead for NYC has to be much more than Nashville. I wonder how much they each took in $$$-wise.