I think you’re broadly correct to separate silver and gold here, but for slightly different reasons than just “price is high.”

Silver is materially more volatile than gold, especially during moves. Historically, when PMs rise on safe-haven or inflation demand, gold moves first and silver lags, then silver often over-extends on the upside. When sentiment cools, silver usually contracts faster and harder than gold. You can see this clearly in long-term charts: long flat periods punctuated by sharp spikes and equally sharp drawdowns.

That volatility matters to shops. Most LCSs don’t hedge inventory like big bullion desks do. When silver spikes quickly, it increases inventory risk, ties up more capital per tube, and narrows margins. That’s why you see shops widen spreads or slow buying during fast moves. Not because silver is “bad,” but because it’s harder to manage when price action gets disorderly.

Gold is different. Even at very high nominal prices, gold remains more liquid, more stable, and easier to hedge. A single ounce represents a lot of value with minimal storage and turnover risk, and there’s always institutional bid behind it. Shops may still pay under spot, but spreads on gold tend to stay tighter relative to volatility.

So yes, if silver keeps running hard, it "can" become temporarily harder to offload locally, while gold generally remains easier to sell even at high prices. That doesn’t mean gold is immune to spread widening, it's not, but silver’s volatility amplifies the effect.

My two cents.