Austrian economics, Banking, Board of Directors, Gold, Governance, International Finance, Mining, Silver, Yogi Nelson

I Wasn’t Always a “Gold Bug”: How Geopolitics Changed My Thinking About Money

by Yogi Nelson

I no longer have complete faith in the USA’s financial system. That is a significant statement from someone who spent years in the federal government as a bank examiner and compliance expert. What triggered the conversion—the ever-growing USA national debt. In other words, I wasn’t always a sound money guy nor a “gold bug.” My evolution has become a much deeper intellectual journey.

The journey began in 2022. As the war between Russia and Ukraine unfolded, one event in particular caught my attention: the decision by the United States and its allies to freeze $300B of Russia’s foreign exchange reserves. Whether one agreed with the war, or the response of the USA and its friends, it demonstrated that assets held within the USA financial system, or under the control of any third party, can be subject to geopolitical risk. Moreover, the geopolitical importance of critical minerals has become increasingly apparent as governments compete to secure resilient supply chains for technologies, defense, and industrial development. When I fully realized the facts, it caused me to think more seriously about owning tangible stores of value such as gold and silver and, eventually, investing in the companies that discover and produce them.

Like many investors, I quickly learned that buying shares of large mining companies is very different from buying physical gold or silver. It’s also not the same as buying gold or silver through an ETF. And it’s definitely not identical to purchasing shares of a junior miner. In the junior mining space, a company can have an outstanding deposit and still become a poor investment. Actually, to be fair, this can happen with large miners, but it is less likely. Conversely, an average deposit, managed by exceptional people with disciplined capital allocation, can create significant long-term value. At that point, I knew I had to study the mining industry more systematically. That’s when the education began in earnest.

I started by reading books such as The Art of Investing in Junior Miners, How to Invest in Gold and Silver, and Mining Is Dead. Long Live Geopolitical Mining, while also working through The Geology of Ore Deposits to deepen my understanding of the technical foundations of mineral deposits. The number of mining articles is too many to mention. And, in July, I attended the Rule Symposium in Florida; it was a fantastic event.

With a background in compliance and audits, I naturally gravitated to those issues within the mining sector. I find that I learn most when I am compelled to explain what I learned after reading about a topic. Hence, I decided to write a book on the topic of board governance in junior mining based on my extensive knowledge of governance issues and what I have learned thus far about mining companies. The book, Board Governance for Junior Miners: Discipline, Structure, Investor Alignment in High-Risk Ventures, is essentially a manual on what makes for great governance in junior mining.

While governance is essential, I came to appreciate that it represents only one dimension of evaluating a mining company. As a result, I began developing what I call the Mining SCOREcard™—a structured framework designed to evaluate junior mining companies across five dimensions:

  • Strategy & Stewardship
  • Commodity
  • Opportunity
  • Risk
  • Execution

The objective is not to predict share prices or recommend specific stocks. Rather, it is to create a disciplined, repeatable process for asking better questions before committing capital.

Over the coming weeks, I’d like to share some of the lessons I’ve learned while building this framework and studying the mining industry. Rather than focusing on market predictions, I’ll explore ideas that I believe remain valuable regardless of where we are in the commodity cycle.

The topics will include:

  1. Why Most Junior Mining Investors Lose Money
  2. The Difference Between Speculation and Analysis
  3. Why Great Deposits Don’t Always Become Great Investments
  4. Five Questions Every Mining Investor Should Ask
  5. Why I Began Developing the Mining SCOREcard™
  6. Lessons Learned While Building a Structured Mining Evaluation Framework

These articles are designed to encourage thoughtful discussion among investors, geologists, mining professionals, and anyone interested in the fascinating intersection of geology, finance, governance, and geopolitics. As always, I welcome your comments, questions, and differing perspectives. Some of the best ideas emerge from thoughtful conversation.

Sincerely,

Yogi Nelson

AI Agents, Artificial Intelligence, Blockchains, cryptography, Uncategorized, Yogi Nelson

Understanding AI Safety: Global Initiatives Explored

Artificial Intelligence, blockchain association, Blockchains, Yogi Nelson

Coinbase’s Political Mobilization of Crypto Owners: Analyzing the Strategy

Namaste Yogis. Welcome to the Blockchain & AI Forum, where your blockchain and artificial intelligence technology questions are answered! As a bonus, a proverb is also included. Today’s question, was submitted by Eduardo from Panama, and he wants to know why Coinbase has decided to enter American politics and what difference will it make?

Eduardo, you came to the right place. I’ll answer your questions as you presented them, beginning with why Coinbase decided to get political. Of course Coinbase is the largest centralized American crypto exchange platform. Think of Coinbase as the Charles Schwab of crypto asset trading.

Coinbase has learned two old lessons. First, businesses need friends in politics, especially if they intend to disrupt powerful entrenched interest and incumbents. Coinbase failed to recognize incumbents transform their economic power into political might and thereby prevent, minimize, and/or sabotage new entries into the market. Second, Coinbase neglected to mobilize their constituency into a political movement from day one. Instead Coinbase relied on business and legal strategies to win the competition and failed to recognize the war has three fronts—business, legal, and political. Coinbase is now playing catchup. Essentially, Coinbase jumped into politics out of necessity. Let’s now examine Coinbase’s political strategy?

Coinbase claims 52M Americans own crypto. Coinbase didn’t cite a source but let’s suppose their numbers are correct. Crypto owners are adults and therefore of voting age. In the 2020 presidential election, 155M votes where casted: 81M for Biden and 74M for Trump. Neither candidate was “pro-crypto”. Both were anti-crypto, and crypto was not an election issue.

In 2024 crypto will most likely be a third-tier national issue, behind the economy, war, taxes, environment, abortion rights, gun control, Supreme Court, etc. However, for crypto-fundamentalists it could be a first-tier issue or tiebreaker voting matter. The questions then become how many crypto-fundamentalists voters are there, do they live in swing states where 1-2% make a significant difference, and what is their propensity to vote?

According to Coinbase, “… we are launching an effort to mobilize 52M crypto owners—younger and more diverse than the US population as a whole—into a powerful force heading into the 2024 election with an intense effort on nine key states”. Let’s examine this strategy.

A focus on nine key states makes sense on the surface. However, the swing states population are not younger and more diverse. Hence, there is a disconnect in the strategy. Moreover, younger, and diverse voters favor the Democratic Party. However, Republicans are perceived as more crypto friendly, particularly after Trump’s recent speech in Nashville at the Bitcoin conference. Will young and diverse voters abandon the Dems in meaningful numbers over crypto regulations–extremely unlikely.

Coinbase wants crypto to be a non-partisan issue; that makes perfect business sense. Coinbase is motivated to mobilize younger and more diverse voters because those are their customers. Dem voters are also younger and diverse. Hence, the smart political maneuver is for the Dems to capitalize on the efforts of Coinbase by becoming crypto friendly and motivate voters that are proportionately more in the Dems camp. Dems have every incentive to become crypto friendly because their natural constituency is there waiting. Making the switch now blunts the trend of crypto becoming a wedge issue. Additionally, it stymies the Republican party from developing an advantage with younger voters via crypto now. Harris can start by distancing herself from the anti-crypto zealous, e.g., Elizabeth Warren, kicking Gensler off the team, and appearing before the crypto community to listen, not just talk.

I conclude with a proverb from Estonia: “What village dogs will not eat wolves will not eat either”.

Sincerely,

Yogi Nelson