IN back of melt

jkrk

A few days ago, I was asking for a price quote on potentially selling some generic gold coins.

The dealer indicated he would pay $10 in back of melt.

Does anyone know how the phrase originated as opposed to $10 below melt?

Thnx

jwitten

Who originated the phrase below melt? Why not under? Or less than?

jmlanzaf

@jwitten said:
Who originated the phrase below melt? Why not under? Or less than?

This is brilliant in its simplicity.

You do hear it said all 3 ways, and more.

TurboSnail

Does it sound better if he has a .6% service , processing or converting fee?

ricko

All part of the varying linguistic anomalies of American English...Having worked for a British firm for years, I can tell you some of our terminology drives them batty.... Cheers, RickO

BillDugan1959

I'm certain that I have heard "in back of melt" at least 40+ years ago. Well before the big blow out of 1979-1980.

jkrk

@jwitten said:
Who originated the phrase below melt? Why not under? Or less than?

I guess? your question makes sense.

In the late 70's I was trading gold miners so I never encountered gold dealers.

I started buying gold bars in the late 90's. Coins in 2004.

I didn't sell my first coin until 2015. Mainly been selling through E-Bay. To date, I have never sold a coin below melt (melt = I might as well keep) so the pricing / expression is new to me.

Terminology ... trading equities? that's my first language.

I remember trading DEC options when the stock was trading $200 "under the wheel".

BAJJERFAN

Either what they learned growing up or more likely maybe intended to confuse the seller.

If I buy a stock for $180 a share and it drops to $170 my wife would say that I'm now on the wrong side of it.

jkrk

@BAJJERFAN said:
Either what they learned growing up or more likely maybe intended to confuse the seller.

If I buy a stock for $180 a share and it drops to $170 my wife would say that I'm now on the wrong side of it.

Wrong side?

Maybe not? Perhaps, a bit early?

Smudge

Per coin or per oz.

BAJJERFAN

@jkrk said:

@BAJJERFAN said:
Either what they learned growing up or more likely maybe intended to confuse the seller.

If I buy a stock for $180 a share and it drops to $170 my wife would say that I'm now on the wrong side of it.

Wrong side?

Maybe not? Perhaps, a bit early?

That's her terminology for holding the stock at a price that is now below purchase price. In the hole or in the red also come to mind.

Then again a fat chance and a slim chance are the same thing so there's that.

jkrk

@BAJJERFAN said:

@jkrk said:

@BAJJERFAN said:
Either what they learned growing up or more likely maybe intended to confuse the seller.

If I buy a stock for $180 a share and it drops to $170 my wife would say that I'm now on the wrong side of it.

Wrong side?

Maybe not? Perhaps, a bit early?

That's her terminology for holding the stock at a price that is now below purchase price. In the hole or in the red also come to mind.

Then again a fat chance and a slim chance are the same thing so there's that

just tell her you're riding the "slope of hope".

Cougar1978

It is an industry term like back of bid.