Rick Rule - Gold is on Track to Become Money Again

Grow an actively managed portfolio of gold, silver, platinum, palladium, and rhodium with Octus Metals today. Historically, gold has traded well. I believe that in the period 2024 to the period 2034 that I expect the U.S. dollar to lose 75% of its purchasing power. If that happens, I would expect gold to maintain its purchasing power, which is to say I see the nominal price of gold increasing, say, threefold. Hello and welcome back to another edition of the Octus Edge. I'm your host, Patrick Vieira. Joining us today is a man with over 50 years of experience in natural resource investing. I'm speaking, of course, about Rick Rule. Rick, welcome back to the Octus Edge. How are you doing? Patrick, it's a pleasure to be back with you. Thank you for having me back. I'm doing very well, thank you. Glad to have you back on. A lot of things have happened since the last time we had you on. For yourself, as an investor. What's your take on what you saw this week with the elections, and what do you see going forward as far as the economic impact it may have? Interesting question. I remember when Mr. Trump was running for president for his second term, he promised us a smaller government, lower interest rates, and no war. It would appear on those promises he was 0 for 3. Uh... If you believe his vice president, most of the response was due to the war. I'm not sure that was the case. Some of it, I think, was due to Mr. Trump's own fairly abrasive personality. Uh... I don't think, when I look at the length and breadth of the Democratic candidates, that you had overwhelming support for the Democrats. I think you had a protest vote against Trump. In other words, I'm not sure the American electorate was voting for somebody. I think they were voting against somebody else. And that's ironic because I think Trump won the election, not because he was particularly attractive, but because Kamala Harris was particularly unattractive. So it would appear that American politics has descended into a circumstance where people vote their negative preference. Thank I think that the election of the Democrats and the policy announcements that you will you will see in the House and Senate will be such that very A number of American investors begin much. to be extremely concerned about American policy. I think over six months, that's probably good for the gold price. I know that fear among Republican business people during Democratic administrations is high. Whether or not the Democrats actually govern worse than the Republicans is a different question. But the fear index is higher. I think people would rather be governed by their own thief rather than by a different thief. And the consequence of that is that I suspect that Republican business people will express their concern about a Democratic administration. The optimist in me, and the truth is, at the bottom, I am an optimist, hopes that the ironic impact of a Democratic legislature and a Republican executive means that they're locked in two years of war and neither side gets anything done. There's nothing that I like to see in politics more than gridlock. In my 73 years on earth, I've seldom seen government do anything, one single thing that's good. And I've seen them do a lot of things that are bad. And so, although I have an odd take on things, I'm oddly optimistic about the prospect of gridlock. Gridlock will be frustrating for American voters who believe that they have the right to prevail. But the ultimate impact of neither side being able to get anything done is not an unappealing prospect for me. I also think it's important to note that despite the fact that the Democrats and the Republicans war at every opportunity, that they're in fact joined at the hip. Both Democrats and Republicans have a track record with regards to budget constraint that's unblemished by consent, by success. In other words, they both spend, they both borrow. They both ignore the will of the people, except for during elections. They both lie, and they both steal. The idea that the prevalence of either party over the other can make any lasting change, I think the probability of that is extremely, extremely low. I do, however, believe that the noise that will emanate from the Democrats and the noise around Republican vetoes probably will cause more concern in the market. Yeah, great points. I'm glad you see some optimism in there, but great points about, I think we're going to see a whole lot of vetoes. I think we're going to see a whole lot of executive orders coming in. And I think it's because two sides really, they're not going to be able to agree on much. So gridlock, like you said, absolutely agree. What they will agree on is higher spending. What they will agree on is more borrowing, greater debt, greater deficits. Neither of them, neither party, We'll deal with the insolvency of the U.S. entitlements system. Both sides will ignore the fact that according to the Office of Management and Budget, now the Congressional Budget Office, that the net present value of unfunded entitlements in the United States, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, military pensions, federal pensions, that number exceeds $100 trillion. Neither side's going to deal with that. Absolutely. No, they will not. Geez, I could stay on this forever. But I'll move on to where we recently had that FOMC meeting where we saw a hawkish hold on the effective Fed funds rate. Where do you see interest rates going, maybe bond yields moving towards the end of the year? I don't know between now and the end of the year, frankly. That's too short a time to think about. It looks to me like the Fed has lost control of the long part of the curve. I think they're able to manipulate it, but they have a big, big, big bout of refinancing coming. The Fed absolutely controls the short end of the curve. They can print and buy the short end, which they've been doing, quantitative easing, in effect counterfeiting. But they appear to have lost their ability to really control the long end of the curve. So you have a circumstance where the short end of the curve is still pretty cheap, really cheap. The long end of the curve is less cheap. Now, I think it's important, Patrick, to note when we talk about interest being cheap or dear, that that really depends on your outlook with regards to inflation. If you believe the U.S. government statistics as expressed by the Consumer Price Index, the deterioration in the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar is cruising along somewhere below 3%. That isn't the experience that Americans are facing at the grocery store or at the pump. I would suggest to you, as I have before when you and I have interviewed, That the real rate of deterioration in the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar experienced by U.S. consumers is somewhere between 8 and 10 percent. And if the long interest rate, the 10-year rate, begins to reflect the deterioration in the purchasing power of the dollar, I'm not sure that the government will be able to control long-term rates. The government attempted to control long-term rates in the decade of the 70s. And I remember clearly, because I'm old enough, that at the end of 1975, the government began to allow interest rates to go higher to control inflation. Several lessons from history that gold bugs need to pay attention to. That reversion to some form of market interest rate caused the gold price to be cut in half. But the other thing that happened is that that interest rate rise staggered an already moribund equities market. Decimated the long bond market, hurt the housing market, and hurt the auto market. The consequence of that is that the voters demanded the politicians comply, complied, and they caused interest rates to fall again. They artificially manipulated interest rates lower. If we see first interest rates higher, and then we see a capitulation, quantitative easing, what will have occurred is that the political class in the United States We'll have announced to savers around the world that American politics are more important than the efficacy of the US dollar. And if that occurred, I think you'd see the gold price go absolutely crazy, much like you saw the gold price go crazy during the capitulation in the 1970s. You may not recall, Patrick, because you may not have been alive, but when the gold price fell from $200 an ounce to $100 an ounce in late 1975, the circumstance that occurred meant that They lowered the U.S. interest rate, and when that happened, the gold price rebounded from $100 an ounce to $850 an ounce, an eight-fold rebound in five and a half short years. Is past prologue? We'll see. Yeah, and Rick, I hate to disappoint you, but I was alive and well during 1975, and in fact, I had a job. 1975, my job was to... Crawl under our American Rambler station wagon with the hammer and knock on the starter. My mom could get that thing to turn on. And your compensation was your allowance, right? Right. Pretty much. A quarter for the whole week. That's what I got. But it had some silver in it back then, or some remains of silver. But it was good. But interesting, you spoke about how the Fed can control the short and long end a little bit more tough. Are those perhaps the reason why we saw the... Pretty much a Fed hire in some ways, Judy Shelton and I believe David Zervos. I mean, what do you think their job is to do, particularly with the long end? I suspect that Judy Sheldon in particular, that her job was simply to restore confidence. If you look at what Judy Shelton says, she makes an awful lot of sense. I'm not sure she'll be allowed to do what she says. But Judy Sheldon, I think, believes that we should begin to reestablish a free market and interest rates. I'm not sure that the political reality in the United States would allow that. We've become addicted to subsidized interest rates. But her appointment was certainly an interesting choice. I remember the decade of the 70s when there was an awful lot of economic and political pressure to continue to manipulate the interest rate lower. At the end of the decade of the 70s, When the interest rate was, well, let me rephrase that. When the bond vigilantes reasserted control of interest rates from the Fed, you saw 17% prime. You saw the U.S. 10-year rate at the 16.5% range up from, what, 3.5% at the beginning of that decade. These would be an interesting set of circumstances. You also saw, and Patrick, I guess you are old enough to remember. That the impact of a 16% 10-year rate was such that beginning in 1982, inflation was in fact tamed, and we decimated the gold quote. If past is prologue, gold bugs need to look at that and say that if the yield on the 10-year treasury ever again exceeds the rate of deterioration in the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar, if we ever see that again, you'll need to sell your gold. The reason to own your gold is gone. You own gold because the yield that you get on your savings is insufficient to protect you against the decline in purchasing power. If that circumstance changes the way it changed in 1981 and 1982, then your reason to own gold goes away and you should sell it. That's a great point. Definitely something to remember there. Rick, on this show, it was about last December. You said gold would suffer one or more 25% to 30% declines inside a 10-year bull market, and gold has fallen about 30% from where it was. Was that what you meant with this drawdown, or is there maybe even another leg coming? There could easily be another leg. If interest rates continue higher, particularly if interest rates continue higher in the absence of higher Real inflation. Uh, gold could easily get softer. Gold could easily get softer. I don't see the political will in the United States to allow the interest rate to reflect the true cost of capital, which is to say the rate of inflation. I believe that we may have higher interest rates in the near term, but I believe that the U.S. voter, and hence the U.S. politicians, will capitulate the same way they capitulated at the end of 1975. If you look at the impact of higher interest rates on consumer credit, On corporate credit, and in particular, on $40 trillion in on-balance sheet obligations of the United States, I don't think that free market interest rates are politically sustainable. My suspicion is that interest rates will drift slowly higher, which will cause the gold quote in the near term to be soft. And then you will see an overt political capitulation, where the Fed tries to reassert control over the interest rate, much like they did in 1976. And if I'm right, you will see the same type of price response in gold that you saw in the last half of the decade of the 1970s. Now, in order for your listeners to implement every part of my thesis, they have to agree with it and they need to decide whether the circumstance that I've described is more likely than not to come true. I agree with just about everything you say, because I also want to point out the fact that, correct me if I'm wrong. You sold about 80% of your physical silver at about 80 bucks, I believe, before it ran to that 121 and it's since about half since then. What is a specific signal that tells you maybe silver is starting to become hated again and is it worth buying back? I don't think silver is hated. I think the people who bought it for 100 hate it. Good. But I think if you looked at all the silver purchased over the last 20 years, or 10 years for that matter, that the majority of silver that was purchased was purchased for substantially lower prices. Jesus. Uh, I think you still have hope in the silver market. I think you have people who are saying now that silver is cheap at $50. Remember, silver has only been above $50 for 14 months. So on a historic basis, one can't say that silver is expensive. Uh, my own reasons for selling it were different. I owned silver because six or seven years ago, silver was hated. It was below $20 an ounce. Uh, and I believe that all silver had to do was become unhated, just unhated, not loved for it to go up in price. Uh, I also said to anybody who would listen, including to you several times on your show, that the condition precedent for a silver bull market was a gold bull market. That. Precious metals bull markets were always led by gold, and when the momentum established by gold attracted generalist investors into the precious metal space, the leadership changed from gold to silver. That began to occur in October of 2025 and reached, as you will recall, a crescendo in January of 2026. I'm old enough now, Patrick, that whenever I see a hyperbolic up move in a market, I sell. By the way, whenever I see a hyperbolic down move, I'm likely to buy, provided that I consider the asset to be cheap. Those two circumstances occurred simultaneously in January of 2026. Gold was no longer hated, or pardon me, silver. It was loved. The condition precedent was that price leadership in precious metals had changed from gold to silver, something I look for as demonstration, and we had a hyperbolic chart. Uh, even after I sold the, and I think I averaged about $75 an ounce, the silver price continued higher, which doesn't surprise me. Uh, but I've learned at my age, uh, I think it was Bernard Baruch that said the only guy who bought at the bottom and sold at the top was a liar. It didn't happen. Uh, and I was happy to take my fat slug out of the middle. Did I buy silver at the bottom? No. Did I silver at the top, uh, sell, sell silver at the top? No. Uh, I, I got the move between 20 and 65. Which is a pretty damn good move, particularly given the risks I ran buying it at 20 and the fairly short time frame between my purchase and my sale. That's a great point. Try to keep in mind those three things that you just pointed out there. Thank you, Sarah. But Rick, you know, with so much movement in the metals, I want to ask you about Battle Bank. Battle Bank, I believe, lends against physical metal. How did a 30% gold fall and a 50% silver fall test the valuation of the collateral? Thus far, it hasn't. We've had no margin calls at Battle Bank. We lend people 50% of the value, or rather, we establish a credit facility at 50% of the value of the metal. It's important to note that most of the people who have borrowed from Battle Bank, rather than taking down all the money, well, let's look at it differently. We thus far have advanced less than 40% of the credit facilities, which is to say a customer of ours that has deposited, let's say, $250,000 worth of gold and therefore had a $125,000 credit line. The average customer with a $125,000 credit line has borrowed less than $50,000 against it, which is to say they have an awful lot of room left on their credit line. The majority of the people who have established credit lines with Battle Bank have done so to provide working capital to their businesses. They've learned that they can borrow that working capital from Battle Bank secured by their gold for substantially less than they could obtain that similar credit through a commercial bank secured by their business. So as an example, a farmer that has seasonal needs for planting and inputs in the spring in anticipation of proceeds from crop sales in the fall, that person could obtain that working capital secured by gold and silver cheaper from Battle Bank than they can a commercial facility at a bank. Secured by their farm. Uh... So I think there's been a difference in terms of borrowers. There are retail precious metals dealers who also lend against physical precious metals. They have an incentive. Normally, they don't do credit facilities. They do term loans. And they often do term loans as a way to incent people to buy more physical precious metals, which is to say that their customers are 100% leveraged. Uh, one can understand the motivation of a salesman, a customer has purchased a hundred thousand dollars worth of gold from them for a four or four and a half percent commission. They're getting perhaps a hundred basis point of 1% storage fee of which the salesman probably get 25%. If the salesman can then cause them to borrow another $50,000 secured by the hundred, uh, and use that to buy another $50,000 worth of metal for a 4% commission and store it. The incentive for the salesman is to max out the customer's credit position and also max out their precious metals position. That's not Battle Bank's business. We're providers of capital to prudent borrowers. I've been lending, Patrick, not through Battle Bank, but personally, to precious metals investors for 25 years, and I have never in 25 years experienced one consumer default. What I've learned is that for prudent investors, one definition of a prudent investor is that that investor stores part of his or her wealth in precious metals. Lending money to people secured by good collateral like precious metals and lending that money to people who are prudent enough to store some of their wealth in gold and silver is a very good business because those prudent people don't default. I think it's good to hear about Battle Bank because we are seeing more and more of these types of Gold and silver collateralization progress is taking place where people can borrow against it. So I think it's good that people always have options and know what those options are. So I appreciate that there. The other week, we saw a pretty good sell-off again with gold and with silver and sell-off, correction, whatever people want to call it. This time, we were told there could have been a liquidity play where assets were sold off, especially since we saw AI or tech take a hit. I just wanted to know, from where you sit, what did you see as far as the cause of the latest bout where metals took a hit? Well, certainly we've seen central bank selling from countries that need money. The Russians need money. The Turks need money. And in both cases, they sold gold. I think that's an argument in gold's favor. They stored wealth in physical precious metals against a point in time when they absolutely positively had to have liquidity because of liquidity in the gold market. It was a wonderful form of savings, but there was selling from those sources. I think it's fair to say that there is also concern among some institutional investors about the fragility of credit markets, partially as a consequence of AI. If we began to see corporate credit distress, it's likely that the market response to that would be in the near term, before government interference, higher interest costs. There'd be a higher risk premium associated with those defaults. And a higher risk premium, meaning higher interest rates, would likely be bad for gold. So I think you've seen expressions, both in private credit markets as a consequence of concern over private and public credits. But you've also seen disintermediation out of precious metals by those central banks that needed the money. You have still seen net central bank buying because you've seen economies that are generating surplus cash, the Chinese as an example, or countries with credit concerns over time, like Ukraine, continuing to save in gold. At the retail level, and I'd be interested, I'm interested, Patrick, in what your advertisers have to say about this. The new retail investor seems to be more momentum-oriented than fundamentally oriented, which means, oddly, they're more attractive to gold at $5,500 than they are at $3,800. I think this is profoundly stupid, but that notwithstanding, we see ignorant momentum investors in every segment of the economy. I welcome that. It gives me somebody to sell my silver to at $75, and it gives me somebody to buy gold Gold front at $3,800. One needs a counterpart in every trade. Yeah, absolutely. I guess to speak on that a bit, you nailed it. You hit it on the head where, you know, we saw people on the way up, they were buying, you know, no matter where it was, they kept buying on the way up. It went down and you see people just lose interest. Now, the fundamentals, they're still intact, very much intact on why you should be buying the metal. But the momentum, the headlines, the stop the momentum, momentum fell or stopped. And you saw people just, they didn't want to have anything to do with it. You saw guys who held that silver all the way up to 120, 121 and came back down, you know, 90, 80, 70. And, you know, they got out, they made a profit, of course, but they got out, they said they've had enough. And again, the headlines, the loss of momentum. And I think, you know, If we're going to be honest here, there were people in the YouTube space, you know, they really got people with a momentum, you know, $150, $200, $300 silver. And so I saw a lot of people looking at it and they got on that boat and it just never happened, you know. And so we did see that. And now it's a time where maybe people should be buying and they're just not interested. And it's unfortunate. What I would urge the people who have listened to 30 minutes of this interview so far to consider is that historically, gold has traded well when people are concerned about the maintenance of their purchasing power in fiat-denominated instruments, primarily the world's reserve currency, which is to say the U.S. dollar. I believe, and I've said this on your show, that in the period 1974, now two years ago, To the period 2034 that I expect the U.S. dollar to lose 75% of its purchasing power. That's what happened in the decade of the 70s. If that happens, I would expect gold to maintain its purchasing power, which is to say I see the price of gold, if the U.S. dollar declines in terms of purchasing power by 75%, I see the nominal price of gold increasing, say, threefold. Given that, at $5,500, I wasn't a seller because I saw gold going much higher. If I'm not a seller, I'm probably a buyer. I am a systematic buyer of gold. I, you know, I'm coming off a highly successful Boca Raton conference when the financial settlement occurs with regards to that conference, the final financial settlement occurs. I'll use virtually all of the after-tax net proceeds to buy gold. For me personally, lower gold prices are in my interest since I'm going to be the buyer. Fire. I don't see myself, unless other asset classes fell in price precipitously, you know, unless there were other things to do with the money, I don't see myself being a gold seller in current conditions at any price much below $7,000. So for me personally, lower gold prices are in my interest because I'm going to be a buyer, not a seller. Now, I realize. That you have some listeners who maybe already have a disproportionate amount of their net worth in gold and silver, who feel differently than I do. But from my own viewpoint, I use it as a source of liquidity and a source of savings. And I'm still an active earner despite my advanced age. And the consequence of that is that I still continue to store surplus capital in gold. I want lower, not higher prices. And there's news of Hong Kong planning to launch a gold token representing a 400-ounce gold bar. In fact, Andrew Fay, a partner at the firm King & Wood, said tokenized gold is really hot right now because it brings together two of Hong Kong's policy priorities, becoming a global digital assets hub and becoming a global gold trading hub. Rick, what's your thoughts on tokenized gold? I'm fascinated by it, and I think it will, within 24 months, be a fact. And by the way, I think there will be more than one token. Uh, rather than focusing slavishly on the Hong Kong announcement, which by the way, I welcomed, uh, broadly speaking, uh, a tokenized, uh, a tokenized gold interest, uh, needs to be fairly universal. First of all, uh, I suspect that the tokenization protocol advanced by the London bullion market exchange and the world gold council will be the standard, uh, by which. The competing tokens will be based. They need to be a depository receipt, which is to say that the tokens can't be fractionalized interest. They need to be backed gram for gram by gold in segregated, trusted storage facilities. And those storage facilities either need to be owned in publicly traded corporations, where you can see the balance sheet and the income statement, or government guaranteed by governments that trust. In addition, the token issuers need to be completely transparent. Uh... If you have a deposit receipt, that deposit receipt needs to be issued by an intermediary who can ensure that that deposit receipt is 100% backed and back it themselves. You need to be very careful when you buy a token that what you're buying is an actual deposit receipt rather than the unsecured obligation of the token issuer. It's very important that you note that. Once those protocols are met, then you need to be able to pay attention to jurisdiction. What I like about Hong Kong is that Hong Kong has an interest, that is to say the Hong Kong government and behind that the Chinese government, has an interest in being a fair and recognized intermediary. Uh, the Chinese government has regulated paper gold contracts, but they have not thus far discouraged their citizenry from owning physical gold. Uh, and I think that there are governments as diverse as an example is the United Arab Emirates and Hong Kong that will be among the leaders worldwide in the tokenization of gold. I think that the U S government's I think that the U.S. government has some reason to fear. Um, anonymous gold holding, uh, and disintermediation from US government securities into gold. And I think probably jurisdictional leadership and tokenization will occur first in jurisdictions like Hong Kong and the United Arab Emirates. I think once you have jurisdictional certainty, uh, and you have overcome the commercial, uh, aspects, which is to say guaranteed delivery receipts. You would need, at some level, to be able to redeem your tokens for physical gold. In other words, you would need to be able to effect full redemption. I think the market adoption of those tokens would be spectacular. You will need a jurisdiction. You'll need it to be legal somewhere. But once it's legal somewhere, and once you harmonize... The ability of, say, Starbucks to aggregate a whole bunch of little tokens into a redeemable amount and then translate that token into physical gold, you will see gold become money again. You know, when the talk of the tokens first came up, people expressed their concerns about, you know, this thing can be hacked. And, you know, that's a story for a different day. But, you know, recently we saw 6.3 billion Binance hacked. We saw freezers getting hacked in Europe, spoiling food. Akamai reports cybercrime is up almost some 250% since the beginning of the year. And in past years, we saw oil and energy companies also hacked with ransomware. Rick, your opinion here. Would there be any concerns with tokenized gold? These are technological problems that I think will be solved. I don't think they'll be solved before they do some damage. Battle Bank got hacked. You know, we grew our deposit base very quickly and some fraudsters discovered. That they could transfer in stolen money to Battle Bank and then transfer it out very quickly and leave us holding the bag from the people they stole it from originally. Originally. The consequence of that is that we had to make the process of new account opening and your access to your own money within the first 10 days of depositing it with us somewhat more cumbersome. And we stopped the problem. There are technological fixes to all those hacks. They make technology less efficient. And I'm certain, certain, that one or more of the digital coin sponsors that have done everything else right, which is to say jurisdiction, delivery receipt, and redeemability, will experience technical problems. Now, it's important to note that this isn't unique to gold. People's bank accounts get hacked all the time. Uh, people. People's IRS accounts get hacked, in fact. The IRS has had a problem sending out refund checks to people who weren't receiving their refunds. You know, people have impersonated the taxpayer. So these hacks are not hacks that are problems unique to the gold business. They're unique to the fact that digitization makes every single aspect of financial services much more efficient. And we've adopted the technology faster than we've perfected it. And the scamsters have figured out a way to arbitrage the efficiency of digitization with a technology which hasn't kept up, kept pace. But it will. These are problems that we'll solve over time. All right. Rick Ruhl, I want to thank you again for your insights and for coming on. And before we head out, can you tell people how they can follow you? And, of course, about Battle Bank. Absolutely. People who are dissatisfied with their current bank, which probably means all of your listeners, should check out the offerings at BattleBank. Go to BattleBank.com. Among other things, we allow people to bank in 28 currencies, not just one. Why be a prisoner to the U.S. dollar or the Canadian dollar or the euro or the yen when you can bank in 28 currencies? You can do that with BattleBank. At BattleBank, too, we pay you interest on your deposits. There's $3 trillion in deposits in the United States in checking accounts that receive no interest. Why would you receive no interest? If you're interested in interest, check out BattleBank. BattleBank also will allow you to buy, sell, store, or borrow against your stack. For some reason, most of our American competitors don't consider gold or silver to be good collateral, but we do. So if you're interested in gold and silver, or if you're interested in accessing credit secured by your gold and silver for any purpose. So establish a line of credit, and then you have the credit available when the need or the desire arises to access the capital you had stored in gold and silver without having to store your gold and silver. Battlebank.com. You can also reach me, and I'll give you an incentive to do so, at RuralInvestmentMedia.com. If you like what I have to say about natural resources or precious metals investing, particularly in the equities, go to RuralInvestmentMedia.com, list your natural resource stocks, and I will for free. Rank them 1 to 10, 1 being best, 10 being worst. I'll comment on individual issues if I think my comments might have value. That's RuralInvestmentMedia.com. List your natural resource stocks, and I will, for free, evaluate them for you. Rick Rural, again, I want to thank you for stopping by, and I hope we can do this again soon. Patrick, I enjoy these visits, so I look forward to being invited back at your leisure. That was Rick Rule sharing his views on the economy and precious metals. To get more of Rick's insights and views, head on over to RuralInvestmentMedia.com. And if you are a precious metals investor looking to optimize your holdings, contact us at www.OctusMetals.com and we'll show you how you can do just that.