coins and silver and gold futures

Discussion in 'Commodity Futures' started by zdreg, Nov 19, 2008.

  1. zdreg


    gold bullion coins are selling at a 10%+ premium spot to gold.
    junk silver is selling at a 40% premium to spot.
    what is the significance of these premiums.
    will exchanges fail to deliver?
  2. It just means that piker morons pay too much for small amounts.

    If you are willing to deal in 100 oz gold bars and 1000 oz silver bars you can buy all you want for small premiums over spot.
  3. zdreg


    what do u consider to be a small premium
  4. Look at a dealer like

    1000 oz silver bar for $0.59 over spot, about 6%.

    kilo (32.15 oz) gold bar for $14.95 over spot, about 2%.
  5. Mecro


    Tulving also has high minimum orders, so I would not use that as a good example. Also, any purchase you make with him goes on record with the Feds.

    There is a lot of disparity in the physicals due to heavy demand for smaller denominations. Coins are just ripoff, it's absurd.

    Small amounts & quick delivery are available, just gotta search around.
  6. A 1000 oz silver bar or kilo gold bar easily beats the minimum purchase requirement at Tulving.

    Small amounts are for pikers. I only care about industrial size bars as that is the real market.
  7. Mecro


    Looks like he will ship just one 1000oz bar. He runs a very efficient operation. Although a $0.59 is a significant mark up over something you can get at spot.

    Small amounts are LIQUID. 1000oz bar will have to be taken to a mint to re-smelt. That's why I like grain/shot.

    It seems like the trade is to sell coins and buy industrial grade.
  8. No problem with liquidity, there are plenty of dealers that buy and sell large gold and silver bars.

    If you don't want to pay a premium to spot, then stick with futures rather than bars.
  9. Present:

    Hannes Tulving: Warning

    And past:

    Hannes Tulving Rare Coin (X900050) A consent order was signed by the court on June 22, 1992. The financial records for this case show that the defendant complied with the order and made all payments between 1992 and 1997. There has been no payment activity since December 1997. As of 09/30/99, there was $245,309 in the account. According to the FTC attorney, because so little was collected relative to the value of the scam (estimated at $10 million or more), redress was never considered.

    Dunham & Associates sues coin dealer for $2.5 million; but local investment firm must defend another suit filed by coin investors

  10. nevadan


    Are you referring to taking delivery from a futures account here?
    Could you elaborate on this please? Tulving makes the statement on his website that he does not cooperate with the FBI, etc. I thought this statement was a little odd and perhaps designed to soothe the average conspiracy theorist. Is there more?

    I read the thread from the Kitco site and the concerns about his insurance (or lack of the same) do ring true with my experience. I recently bought a 1k bar which I knew would be shipped UPS. Since I knew I would likely not be home when the bar was delivered I ask him in an email if he could have UPS simply notify me that the package was at the local depot and I would then take delivery there. He replied that he was not able to make those arrangements so I assumed that would result in a day delay in taking possession since I would have to take the delivery attempt notice to the UPS office to get the package. Much to my surprise I found a box on the porch on delivery day without so much as a signature required. I assumed that UPS had made a mistake, but after reading the thread it could be that it was shipped without acknowledging the contents or value of the box. This certainly gives pause for thought on any future purchases.

    Edit: I just re-read Tulving's disclaimers. It says he DOES cooperate with FBI, court orders etc. My bad. Should have double checked before posting. I may have misread before, but it struck me as odd to have such a statement and it stuck in my mind, perhaps wrongly so.
    #10     Nov 21, 2008