Did I offend you?
You are comparing apples to oranges. The bust of the dot.com boom was brought about by the "irrational exuberance" of throwing money at worthless companies. Many of these companies were simply in the "idea" stage and had no plan for how to make money from their ideas. It was a bubble in the truest sense of the word.
Gold, on the other hand, is a commodity with worldwide marketability and demand. However, holding it produces no return to you through dividends and compound returns. If you start with 100 oz, you end with 100 oz. The only way to make money off of gold is to buy when it's low and sell when it's high. As many others on this thread have pointed out, similar to the dot.com irrationality, people couldn't buy enough gold at $800/oz in the early 80s. These people earned nothing off of this investment in 20 years until the recent resurgence of interest. Meanwhile, even a portfolio of stocks and bonds bought at random would have likely given them nearly 10 times their original investment... even through the dot.com bust.
Added factors include the fact that there is still ample gold to be found through mining, when the price is high enough to support the expedition, and many countries have high stockpiles to unload when the price is too tempting. Both of these factors alone will limit the upside potential of this particular commodity.
I haven't advocated here that people buy growth stocks or any other investment. I have simply had an economic discussion regarding a particular metal.
No of course not. And no I do not believe the conventional wisdom of buying random stocks as guaranteed value, since it appears to me most companies fail and their stocks tank. Gold is a good countercyclical investment that is always there in every turn of events from Tulip mania to dot-com bust. But then again when I look for a stock to buy I look for dividend yield SBC 5%, DUK 4.5% are my types. I'm a fuddy duddy.