I think a lot of people have their heads in the clouds concerning precious metals and particularly gold and silver (you don't hear many people ramping up the other metals so much). It will never go to the moon and what does that even mean anyway? are we talking 100% or 1000%. Do people have end plan, some people on here do, but Ive often bought from other people who are shocked at how little I offer because they price their coins wrong.
In my mind gold and silver offer different functions; yes they both cover counter-party risk but gold is the store of wealth and silver is its volatile little brother that I believe has more opportunities due to the collectibility of some coins. If you are buying just to store your wealth then silver is not your friend. You should buy as much as you can afford in gold as often as possible and you should be able to sell it in one go and have the same purchasing power, it shouldn't be treated as an investment class. It has the functions and characteristics as an insurance policy. If you are buying PM in order to profit then silver has tremendous upside if you know what you are doing and have the contacts in place. So the natural direction is from stacker to collector to flipper and those who are super successful dealer. For me this is fundamentally important to realise, you go from having a goal of making x percent to realising that as a flipper or a dealer you are essentially an entrepreneur and you will lower your expectations of what percentage you want to earn. A stacker has an end goal where a flipper and dealer will reinvest proceeds along the way. I am not saying one option is better than the other BUT to simply say its going to the moon is flawed and goes against the fundamentals of mathematics and the value of time money and also compound interest. Gold solves the problem of time value of money. Silver finds a solution (if done properly) for compound interest.
As for why you should buy into gold or silver (as there are many other asset classes also that could provide the function of gold or silver). I am going to be controversial and simply say bullocks to most of the points Paul raised (I have a lot of respect for Paul, make no mistake) lets make it simpler. Say you have 2 pies, cash is one pie and PMs are another pie. Lets say that a unit of money is a person and a unit of Pm's is also a person. Everytime a unit is added the pie gets smaller for you because someone else wants a slice. the question is simple, do you believe that the units of money will grow faster than the units of PMs? Thats very simple, lets add another dimension to it, imagine that you are in a canteen with these two pies and you have blue collar workers (money units) and white collar workers(PMs) coming in and out, and the canteen is in a constant state of flux. your slice of the pie is constantly changing but the likely hood is there are more unskilled workers than skilled workers, if you was to hold money the chances are your pie would be less in the long run. Now lets imagine for a second the canteen is actually in a bank and they have the ability the hire as many blue collar workers as imaginable but they have no control over hiring white collar workers because they are outsourced by a private company. As an individual you would maximise your needs and choose the pie for the white collar workers because its worth more to your utility than the pie for blue collar works. This is essentially how precious metals work at its most basic form.
As for Petes comment about tea leaves I simply don't agree with that, I have worked for/with people who have made millions forecasting because they are smart enough to exploit changes in the market. There is no such thing as an end game and to treat a forecast as so means you are not getting the best out of it. A lot of the gurus have a one sided agenda, forecasting should at least have various scenarios.
Just my ideas. you are welcome to cut them up and put them in the bin.