The gold price sits at the heart of every gold investment pitch, and Jim Rickards’ “Trump’s Secret $2 Gold Mine” presentation is no exception. The pitch pegs the Pebble Project deposit at “almost $1 trillion” at today’s prices, a number that depends entirely on where gold goes from here. Understanding what actually drives the metal, and what a forecast must assume, is the difference between a thesis and a hope.
What Moves the Gold Price
Gold is driven by a handful of forces that have not changed much over decades. The first is real interest rates: when the yield on safe assets like Treasuries falls below inflation, gold pays you nothing but costs you nothing to hold, and money flows toward it. The second is the dollar: a weakening dollar makes gold cheaper for foreign buyers and lifts demand. The third is central-bank buying, which has been running at its heaviest level since 1950 and has put a structural floor under the metal. The fourth is fear, whether of inflation, currency debasement, or geopolitical shock.
Rickards is a macro strategist by training, and his gold thesis fits squarely in that framework. He was formerly the general counsel at Long-Term Capital Management, where he helped negotiate the firm’s 1998 rescue, and he has written a shelf of bestselling books on currency and monetary policy. When he argues that a rising gold price is a near-certainty, he is speaking from a well-developed worldview, not a passing trend. For more on that outlook and the broader case for owning gold, see our explainer on gold as an investment.
The $1 Trillion Figure
The “almost $1 trillion” number is a multiplication, not a profit estimate. Pebble holds an estimated 161 million ounces of gold, and at a gold price in the neighborhood of several thousand dollars an ounce, the raw in-situ value of that metal lands near a trillion dollars. The pitch then extends the logic: every $100 rise in gold adds roughly $16 billion to that figure, because 161 million ounces times $100 is $16.1 billion.
What that math leaves out is everything between the ground and a dollar of profit. A mine must be built, at a capital cost measured in billions for a remote Alaskan site. The ore must be processed, with heap-leach and tailings costs that vary by deposit. And above all, the project must be permitted, which Pebble has not been after more than twenty years of effort. In-situ value is a real number, but it is not the same as shareholder value. For the historical context on how gold prices have been reset by policy, see our piece on gold revaluation.
What a Forecast Must Assume
Any serious gold forecast has to answer three questions. Where are real rates going? How long will central-bank buying continue? And is the dollar entering a long decline? Reasonable people disagree on all three, which is why gold forecasts range so widely. Rickards’ structural case for gold is genuinely well-argued, and the metal’s recent run has vindicated much of it. But a forecast that leans on a $1 trillion deposit value is only as strong as the assumption that gold stays elevated, and that the ounces can ever be converted into mined, sold metal.
For how other investors are positioning around the same theme, see our look at John Paulson’s gold thesis.
The gold price is the tide that lifts every gold stock, and it has been rising for solid structural reasons. The caution is simply this: a forecast built on in-situ metal value assumes the full deposit reaches market, and that assumption is doing a lot of work.
What the Pitch Gets Right
It would be a mistake to dismiss the pitch as pure hype, because a good deal of it is solid. Rickards is a legitimate macro strategist with real credentials. He was the general counsel at Long-Term Capital Management, where he helped negotiate the firm’s 1998 rescue, and he has written bestselling books on currency and monetary policy that established him as a serious voice on gold. His structural case for the metal, built on central-bank buying, falling real rates, and dollar weakness, is well-grounded and has been vindicated by the metal’s recent run.
The deposit itself is also real. The Pebble Project is one of the largest undeveloped gold and copper deposits on earth, a point that both the Associated Press and the New York Times have acknowledged. A project of that size, in a rising gold environment, is exactly the kind of thing that can re-rate sharply if the legal picture shifts. A favorable summary-judgment ruling, combined with a pro-mining posture in Washington, could genuinely move a stock that trades at a roughly $900 million market cap against a deposit measured in trillions of dollars of in-ground metal.
The issue is not the direction of the argument. It is the precision. The headline numbers, $2.7 trillion in value and “double your money within minutes,” are sales framing built on gross in-ground metal, not on what shareholders could actually receive after building, operating, and permitting a mine. The gold case is strong; the specific stock case is a lottery ticket.
NewsletterVetter is an independent publication. We receive compensation from some of the services we review through affiliate links. Nothing on this site is investment advice. Always do your own research.