2025-12-05 11:20:25

At a certain financial summit in Dubai in 2025, something rather ironic happened.

Someone asked gold enthusiast Peter Schiff, "Is that gold bar in your hand real?" The big shot paused and said, "I'm not sure either."

This answer says more than any theoretical analysis—when you're holding so-called "hard currency" but can't instantly prove it's real, shouldn't the reliability of that asset be questioned?

**The Awkward Situation of Verifying Gold**

The London Bullion Market Association once revealed a harsh truth: want to be 100% certain about gold's authenticity? There's only one way—melt it down entirely and perform a fire assay.

It's like saying you have to burn down your house to prove it's actually yours. Absurd, right?

What's worse, market data shows that 5% to 10% of the world's physical gold carries a risk of being fake. Behind every gold transaction, you're essentially betting that the miner didn't scam you, the transporter didn't swap it, the appraiser is trustworthy, and the vault is secure... If any link in this chain of trust fails, the "gold" in your hand could just be a gold-plated tungsten bar.

The cost of maintaining this trust system is outrageously high. Professional testing equipment can cost hundreds of thousands, plus armed transport, vault rental fees, cross-border charges... In the end, the holders have to pay for all of this. Even after spending a fortune on testing, high-quality gold-plated tungsten bars can still fool standard instruments.

Ultimately, unless you're willing to destroy your gold bar for a melt-and-assay test, you can never be completely at ease.

This "destroy first, verify later" paradox precisely exposes the fatal weakness of physical assets in the modern financial system—when the cost of trust is so high that you must keep adding intermediary institutions, its efficiency as a store of value is greatly diminished.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

21 Likes

Reward
21
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

AirdropAutomaton

· 4h ago

Haha, Schiff's response this time is just perfect—if you can't even be sure if the gold bars are real, how can you be a true believer? Wait, isn't this basically the gold version of "I don't even know if I've been scammed"? Seriously though, do you guys think it's a bit ridiculous that you have to melt gold to verify it's real? No wonder everyone says on-chain assets are the future—at least you don't have to destroy them to prove their authenticity. The gold-plated tungsten bar meme cracks me up; it really feels like the precious metals market is just a trust game now. Everyone's betting that the next person won't pull a fast one—honestly, isn't this even more thrilling than trading crypto? If you ask me, rather than trusting those intermediary institutions, it's better to hold something you can verify yourself. History is repeating itself—we're back to the same old "trust crisis." Finally, someone dares to say it out loud.

View OriginalReply0

SellTheBounce

· 16h ago

Even Schiff himself can’t be sure if his gold bars are real or fake—that says it all. Once the chain of trust breaks, gold becomes a hot potato. --- With a 5-10% counterfeiting rate, are you willing to bet yours isn’t among them? I’m definitely not. --- You have to melt it down to verify? How is that a hard asset? Sounds more like a faith-based game to me. --- Intermediaries take their cut—spread, inspection fees, storage fees... In the end, your returns aren’t enough to cover the losses. That’s the fate of the bagholder. --- LOL, Peter Schiff accidentally revealed the truth about physical gold this time. There will always be an asset with a lower trust cost. --- Instead of holding a gold bar you can’t even verify, might as well wait for a dip before considering it—not like you’ll miss out in the meantime. --- So at the end of the day, gold is just something whose price is supported by stories. Once trust cracks, it’s game over.

View OriginalReply0

VibesOverCharts

· 12-06 02:23

So Peter Schiff's answer was actually the most honest... Traditional assets aren't as solid as we think, either. If a single link in the traditional finance trust chain breaks, you're done for. It's all gambling anyway, so I might as well bet on something transparent on-chain. This logic is so convoluted—you have to destroy it to verify? Then why buy gold at all, just tokenize it on-chain. It's truly ironic... Spending a fortune on verification and still not getting results, with 5 to 10% counterfeits out there—who can really feel at ease? Stories about gold-plated tungsten blocks happen every year; it's just that no one wants to admit they might have been scammed.

View OriginalReply0

LayerZeroJunkie

· 12-05 11:45

Wait, Peter Schiff himself isn't even sure? Should I also get the gold bar I bought tested... This logic is wild—the cost of verifying it is higher than buying it, it's like total destruction and rebirth. Gold-plated tungsten bars, my god, it feels like every gold holder is playing Russian roulette. Compared to this kind of intermediary hell, on-chain is much clearer... at least everything on the blockchain is traceable. I really can't hold it in anymore, gold believers must be so embarrassed right now, haha.

View OriginalReply0

SocialAnxietyStaker

· 12-05 11:44

I can't fully verify your gold... That line made me laugh. Peter Schiff really just slapped himself in the face with this one. Blockchain can verify in seconds, but gold has to be melted down to prove it's real? That logic is way too outdated. The gold-plated tungsten bar joke hits hard. Feels like people holding physical gold are just playing a probability game—on-chain assets are way more transparent. Seriously, with trust costs this high, why do people still insist on hoarding gold? I really don't get it. Schiff's "uncertain" is more revealing than any debate—absolutely brilliant.

View OriginalReply0

0xTherapist

· 12-05 11:44

Wait, Peter Schiff isn’t even sure if his own gold bars are real? This guy better be careful, he might just be holding a gold-plated tungsten block. Seriously? You have to melt gold to verify it? I might as well just store it on-chain. A 5% to 10% counterfeiting risk—how many traditional gold believers would be scared to death by that statistic? If the cost of trust is this high, might as well put it on-chain. At least you don’t have to worry about getting swapped out. This is the real awkwardness of gold—the ceiling for physical verification is right there. Makes me think of those fake gold scandals a couple of years ago. Cross-border transport is a trust black hole, but Web3 is crystal clear. Spending hundreds of thousands to verify a single gold bar? I’d rather trust code than be lied to. So at the end of the day, the longer the chain of intermediaries, the less reliable the asset becomes. Isn’t that exactly why Web3 exists?

View OriginalReply0

SolidityJester

· 12-05 11:44

Haha, Peter Schiff’s answer is just hilarious—you have to burn a gold bar to know if it’s real? Who can accept that logic? The gold-plated tungsten joke killed me. What if there really are some lying in a vault somewhere? The trust cost for gold is so high, you might as well put it on-chain for transparency. At least I can verify it anytime. Wait, a 5 to 10% counterfeiting rate? Does that mean I have to burn my dad’s gold bracelet to verify it too? Haha. Intermediaries everywhere, but in the end it’s still us paying. No wonder more and more people are turning to digital assets.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-e19e9c10

· 12-05 11:43

Haha, even Peter Schiff himself isn’t sure now. This is going to trigger the gold believers. Wait, I’ve heard this gold-plated tungsten bar joke before—if it’s real, it can’t be faked, and if it’s fake, it can’t be real. Insisting on using gold to resist problems that blockchain can solve is just asking for trouble. This is the reality of physical assets—might as well put them on-chain. Fire assay testing requires destroying the item to verify it. That logic is just wild. The trust cost of gold is actually higher than BTC. Ironic, isn’t it? Who would dare touch a 5%-10% risk? I choose to pass. To put it bluntly, there are too many intermediaries and too much information asymmetry. On this point, crypto is actually more transparent.

View OriginalReply0

Trending TopicsView More
#JoinGrowthPointsDrawToWiniPhone17
281.41K Popularity
#DecemberMarketOutlook
76.89K Popularity
#PostonSquaretoEarn$50
12.2K Popularity
#LINKETFToLaunch
11.95K Popularity
#SharingMy100xToken
15.08K Popularity

Hot Gate FunView More

1
HLHuLI
MC:$3.53KHolders:1
0.00%
2
GCLOCKGClock
MC:$3.54KHolders:1
0.00%
3
GGPGGP Wallet
MC:$3.52KHolders:1
0.00%
4
FISTFIST TOKEN
MC:$3.52KHolders:1
0.00%
5
LUCKYLUCKY TOKEN
MC:$3.53KHolders:1
0.00%

Sitemap