Avatar
Josh
467bc3afd936db78d8b1f59c80f827bd71fa32db67cc5cb4f5d4bccdcb4fddca
Just a dude playing a dude dressed as another dude

@theguyswann was right, perplexity.ai is awesome! Great UX/UI and imo search results are better and more relevant. Just say no to Google!

As usual, a great conversation with @Whitney Webb and @Natalie

Replying to Avatar Lyn Alden

Here's an example of why monetary verification is important (and can be expensive).

The gold price is currently $2075/oz.

If you buy a sovereign 1-oz gold coin, or a globally-recognizable privately-issued 1-oz gold bar, you'll generally pay something like a 3-5% markup to spot. This is basically the verification and distribution premium. Even if you buy a bunch of 1-oz items, you generally won't get the spread down too much. If there's a shortage, the premiums over spot go way up.

If you buy smaller sizes, that premium will be a bigger percentage. For example if you buy 1-gram gold coins, you'll be paying a >50% markup to the spot price, which is silly.

If you buy bigger sizes, like 1-kilo bars (which cost more than a typical car), you could get it down to a 1-2% premium to spot.

The bigger size you go, the less verification you have that the core of the item is indeed gold rather than tungsten. You have to trust the brand and supply chain, basically. The smaller size you go, the less possible and economic it is to insert tungsten into the item. And so on some level, it makes sense that the verification premium is bigger for smaller items- you're more assured that it is indeed gold to its core. The surface area to mass ratio is harder to forge, basically. Somewhere around 1-oz is probably the sweet spot.

Now, if you're buying gold in most U.S. states, including on a lot of popular online stores, you'll also pay sales tax, and you'll often have to pay the difference in terms of your payment method. So if your credit card costs the merchant 3%, then that would eat up the merchant's margin since it is razor thin, and so instead the customer often has to pay it. They could instead do a wire transfer for a sizable purchase to save some money, but many banks charge like $30 for a 1-day wire transfer.

And if you're buying online, there's a shipping fee. That's usually pretty low but then goes up a bit if you add insurance because you don't want to risk your expensive coins or bars getting lost in the delivery chain or stolen from your doorstep. From the time of order to the time of delivery, it'll generally take several days. This includes time for the merchant to process the payment (gold merchants are usually a bit more careful about chargebacks and other reversed payments than the average merchant) and ship you the items.

All together, including the verification premium, taxes, payment fees, and shipping, one generally pays 8-15% over the spot price to get 1-oz gold coins or bars. That means gold has to go up a pretty significant amount just to break even. And then you have collectible capital gains taxes on that price gain (which in the US is higher than the actual capital gains tax rate). If you take time (and time is money) to shop around and find ways to legally avoid sales tax and so forth, and figure out the cheapest/slowest payment methods, then you can push the premium down as close as possible to the verification premium and shipping costs.

And if you want to securely ship large amounts of gold long distances, especially internationally? Like imagine HNW investors, businesses, banks, or sovereign entities? You're going to pay a sizable amount. One does not simply ship millions of dollars worth of gold without robust security.

If you want someone to custody your gold, you're going to pay a fee. If you are fine with unallocated/mixed gold with multiple layers of counterparty risk, you could buy among the cheapest ETFs with annual fees below 0.2%. If you want to hold your gold in an allocated way by Brinks or something with fewer layers of counterparty risk, it'll generally cost over 0.5% per year. This goes toward the vault costs, salaries for people with guns, real estate costs, etc.

Basically, there's a pretty big inefficiency in the form of 1) routine verification, 2) secure transfer of ownership, and 3) secure custody, that all comes out in the form of high costs and slow speeds.

Bitcoin has fees, but they are very low in comparison. Nodes can verify bitcoin basically for free. Miners timestamp transactions to transfer ownership for a fee, and you can currently send ten million dollars worth of bitcoin globally for like $10 and have it confirmed within the hour. And you can custody bitcoin yourself, and bring it around with you globally, through ports of entry, across borders, in ways you can't realistically do with gold above a certain value threshold.

When thinking about periods of above-average bitcoin fees, it's useful to keep some of the alternatives in mind. Verifying and transferring ownership of other store-of-value assets like gold and real estate is slower and a lot more expensive, requires a lot more abstraction and permission, and comes with much less portability.

Very well laid out thought @Lyn Alden and it's the main reason I've never pulled the trigger on a gold purchase. Fees are high and continue to add up at every step and because of that you're already in the hole immediately after purchase. Also, the idea of incurring capital gains tax on the amount required just to break even is ridiculous.

COUNT ME IN!

#Nostronly2024

Pedal to the medal. Thanks Tony.

Just listened to @preston and @miljan discussing #nostr. What a great conversation boys, can't wait to see what the future brings for this amazing protocol!

#nostr

nostr:note1lx5e08vxn5n60s7mk26gngznsl4y4yv3m45l48znk2fd0accsgaqsutz7t

Merry Christmas Nostr family! So glad to be a small part of this.

πŸŽ… πŸŽ„βœŒβ€

Replying to Avatar Lyn Alden

When it comes to analysis, design, or management, a critical and recurring challenge is to be able to:

1) hold two or more competing thoughts in your head,

2) but then not get stuck with decision paralysis,

3) and thus to be able to form a view and take action.

It's easy to fail in either of the first two steps.

For the first step, many people can't steel-man their opponent's view, don't take time to seriously consider competing arguments. This represents tribalism and insufficient critical thought, and has a high likelihood of being wrong. People become easy to manipulate, and where their views end up largely depends on luck of their surroundings and who managed to convince them of something earlier.

For the second step, a smaller subset of people get past the first step but then get stuck in decision paralysis or cynicism. There are too many paths, too many compelling and contradictory points. It then becomes a problem of overthinking and thus inaction. It's easier to identify problems than to build solutions, so this valley of inaction is an enticing trap that feels intellectually stimulating but leads nowhere.

The narrow path beyond those two, and what we should strive for, is to be able to do enough critical thought to the point where it starts to venture into the realm of decision paralysis, but then find a way to weigh the probabilities and form a conclusion to start taking action on, with the willingness to pivot if evidence/probabilities mount toward a different direction.

Anyway, happy Christmas Eve.

Very well said Lyn. Thanks for all you do. Merry Christmas to you and yours!

#staybased

Merry Christmas to you and yours! @Gigi