The above quote is Exhibit A, exactly the narrative I was referring to, and also the mask that veils the furphy.
The notion of an "insurance policy" that brings comfort and security is the fall-back position when metal prices head south. The use of this position ensures the stacker can never be wrong (essential to their psychological well-being).
If prices go down, they are said to be comfortable in their security.
If prices go up, the profits that follow are vindication that they were not wrong.
True.
The conundrum for the stacker, however, is that this net worth benchmark unit of measurement invariably reverts to fiat $ - inline and in reference to the spot price.
Ironically, this is the very unit of measurement they themselves veto as being worthless, yet have no trouble falling back to it's use when conveniently highlighting their "correctness".
I agree with you on these points, but to limiting degrees. PMs are like an algorithm with IF, AND or BUT statements.
If wealth preservation is a feature of PM's, then you can bet that it will be a reason for people to enter the space. As I said, I agree many are in here just for profits and see the point your making entirely. However, I don't agree that because the profit feature exists you can just dismiss the protection and security aspect - It serves multiples functions. To suggest people don't value the protection by calling it a furphy is grossly overstated IMO.
With all that said, I get that you are just generalising the majority. However, PMs offer a basket of value added features that I think add to the overall appeal of entering this space. If it were just profit potential, I don't think we'd see a fraction of Bullion demand or private holders of PM's. I doubt Central bank's and governments would have an interest in holding Gold either. You imply that there isn't anything more to it than profits, like that's the only reason people buy, hold and engage, converse and speculate over the price.
