The information on this Website is not reliable and not intended to provide tax, legal, or investment advice. Nothing contained on the Website shall be considered a recommendation, solicitation, or offer to buy or sell a security to any person in any jurisdiction.
CEO.CA members discuss high-risk penny stocks which can lose their entire value. Only risk what you can afford to lose.
@Excelsior@Goldfinger - there may be a billion pounds of #Uranium in the #AthabascaBasin, $CCJ$DNN$NXE$FCU$UEX$CVV$AL but not all of it will be as "economically viable" as some believe due to the depth, water issues, permitting timelines, environmental push-back. Some of that Athabasca Uranium is actually underwater making accessing the ore more challenging, or directing miners to underground where they lose much of those ounces. This is one of the key advantages $NXE has over many of it's neighbors for example.
Higher grade is awesome, but it isn't always the most economical. There are plenty of commodities where lower grade resources end up being more economical due to power, roads, water, jurisdiction, taxes, permitting, distance to mill, etc... The other thing about much of the exploration being done in the Athabasca is that much of it is years away from all the permits and development needed to bring it to market.
Many of the existing producers or development stage companies in the #US ( $UUUU$URG$UEC$URRE$PENMF$WSTRF) and #Australia ( $EGRAF$BKLRF$TOEYF$BNNLF$BOE.AX ) are positioned to capitalize on prices as they rise in 2017-2020. The US is the #1 nuclear country and imports 90% of its fuel. (just imagine if the US imported 90% of it's Oil) The US producers that supply this need will have a big advantage for negotiations in this next cycle, as will the African deposits that may supply the reactors being built in #Africa, the #MiddleEast, and #Europe . #Index
@BrianBitcoinBull@Xriva with regards to #Uranium I do like $UUUU but at this stage of the cycle I actually like that $UEC has halted production and is not depleting their resource in a depressed market. $NXE is a great exploration project as is $FCU. $DNN I as really impressed with David Cates when I him and the some of the great things they have going running the mill for Cigar Lake, the clean up unit and if you look at a map of the Athabasca more than likely the next mine will be on the eastern side where there property is and utilities are. Fission and NexGen while excellent projects are far off and will take a great deal of infrastructure.
@PamplonaTrader" @BDMinefinder I have heard from a number of people that have spoken to Lukas Lundin and he wants out of Denison. He took a top lieutenant from Denison and put if on his Fruta del Norte (Lundin Gold) and he tried to merge with Fission, to dilute his interest down and allow Dev to run it. He would have been diluted below 10% and I think he would have resigned from the board, then gradually sold his stock. Plan failed, but we all know how much due diligence Lukas must have done to merge with Fission.....none. The reason he did not is because he had other plans. Just my opinion. I have know Lukas for a long time and that is my best guess."
In response to your comment above, I have heard the same. Early last year @Tommy asked Lukas about Fission and Lukas joked that maybe Fission should take out Denison.
Lukas has a pretty poor track record in #uranium. He bungled the first deal with Fission Energy and allowed Dev to keep PLS, which went on to become bigger than $DML. The failed merger with $FCU was reportedly his out.
@Excelsior@PamplonaTrader & @BDMinefinder - I'm a little slow at times so let me make sure I understand the plan with #Uranium miners....
Sell $DML$DNN Denison tomorrow before Lukas jumps ship, and never buy "stupid lbs out of #Africa that should never be put in production" like $GXU Goviex or water-logged $FCU Fission, and just buy more $NXE Nexgen... Right?
I can dig it! :-)
@FundamentalAnalysis@PamplonaTrader also in regards to chinese investment. I think fission $fcu has a chinese investor and even $UEC has if i remember correctly Li Ka Shing invested in it he has also provided I believe some form of credit facility to them along with sprott. So I don't really see foreign investment stakes as carrying to much weight. We need to consider the big picture and how the players are going to behave. $nxe
1. I am not aware of any commodity experiencing a perpetual bull market. Also, your concerns with regard to volatility and cyclicality is not exclusive to explorers in the uranium space. If volatility and cyclicality make you uncomfortable, perhaps you are speculating in the wrong sector;
2. Again, Arrow is a strategic asset and $NXE will not be allowed to put Arrow into production. If and when conditions in the uranium market improve, Arrow will be the Grand Prize and will not be left to "sit";
3. Yes, the cost of acquisition will be significant. But you are flawed in your thinking Cameco will have to go it alone. Both McArthur River and Cigar Lake are joint ventures. Cameco is in an exploration and development pact with CGN and there are credible rumors of CGN recapitalizing Cameco via strategic investment once the tax issue is settled with the CRA. As well, there is nothing blocking foreign entities from owning and operating a mill, the cost for which will be roughly half the total CapEx for Arrow;
4. In one post you expressed concern over the Chinese preferring African and Kazakh mines and then in the next post reference three recent examples of the Chinese making strategic investments in Canadian/American exploration and development companies ($NXE $FCU$UEC). This after suggesting monied entities only having interest in producing assets;
5. You admitted to not having studied Arrow in too much detail. I think that is evident as otherwise you'd understand its strategic nature. Cameco defined 200Mlbs from surface before going underground to prove up over 600Mlbs of uranium. NexGen appears to be on pace for over 400Mlbs from surface, before ever going underground;
6. Not only will Arrow likely match (and possibly exceed) the total tonnage at McArthur, the setting should make Arrow much easier to mine and as a consequence much more profitable;
7. Mining Arrow will be technically straight-forward. Most miners with underground operations will have the technical capacity to develop Arrow. It also helps that Cameco recently laid off 500 employees from Rabbit Lake, which is also a basement hosted, vertically stacked deposit - the talent is readily available. Therefore, your assumption that there exists "only a few players in the uranium space with the expertise to develop Arrow" is factually incorrect; and
8. In one part of your post, you expressed concern regarding the limited technical expertise available to develop Arrow, yet in another part of your post you suggested mine supply could ramp quickly vs. demand growth. Globally, uranium mine production has been in a 30,000t-60,000t range for 60 years. The Athabasca Basin, which is often referred to as the "Saudi Arabia of Uranium" currently has just two operating uranium mines. I think you may be overstating the ability to bring new mine supply online.
@GoldfingerGiven size of $uranium sector if hedge funds start to really pile back into this sector we will see lots of stocks double and triple from current levels. Lots of meat on the bone if this really turns into a bull market cycle. $CCJ$CCO$FCU$GXU$NXE$uranium$URA
@GoldfingerThe $uranium stock rally of the last couple of months is an example of how trend following traders can miss out on big moves at turning points. We've seen many stocks rise 50%-100% in the span of 2 months but only now would trend followers begin to pay attention to this sector. Of course they would have also missed out on being long during most of the brutal declines. $CCJ$CCO$FCU$GXU$NXE$URA
@joegreatwhitenorthOnly a used car salesman could come up with two stock symbols that are basically saying F*** U!! Maybe their idea of an inside joke. Very clever. Based on that alone, how do you invest with these guys. $FUU$FCU
@lukejacksonI think the intersting thing about Uranium assets... is there's so few. So unlike gold projects, when People feel like Uranium has bottomed and they want to speculate on that, there's almost nowhere to go. We may have seen nothing yet... $GXU$NXE$FCU$DML
@MilksPrimeI think the intersting thing about Uranium assets... is there's so few. So unlike gold projects, when People feel like Uranium has bottomed and they want to speculate on that, there's almost nowhere to go. We may have seen nothing yet... $GXU$NXE$FCU$DML
@MilksPrime@lukejackson I think the intersting thing about Uranium assets... is there's so few. So unlike gold projects, when People feel like Uranium has bottomed and they want to speculate on that, there's almost nowhere to go. We may have seen nothing yet... $GXU$NXE$FCU$DML
@GEMOILThe fission controlled CSC is starting to wake-up Canex Energy Corp.
click to invite
@cole119Question about $FCU, some here might know. CGN's Offtake agreement is for 20% plus an additional 15% at industry standard term. Was there anything set in terms of pricing for the first 20%? Example "the 20% offtake agreement is at a x% discount to spot". I thought I recalled seeing that it was at a certain percentage discount, 9% seems to stick in my mind. @teevee@pamplonatrader? Thank you in advance
@teevee@cole119, see $FCU news release here: http://fissionuranium.com/news/index.php?&content_id=297 "Pursuant to the Off-take Agreement, CGN Mining will purchase 20% of annual uranium production from the PLS Property and will have an option to purchase an additional 15%, at industry standard terms." .....In a clarification to the exchange on disclosure, FCU contends PLS could be a stand alone enterprise with its own mill......good luck with that, as I expect PLS will sit for many decades before developed, if ever.
@teevee@PamplonaTrader, thx for digging up those details again. It is something that FCU should have disclosed in their news releases on the CGN deal. Without question, $FCU and CGN are tied at the hip now. FCU's lack of development expertise aside, I can't see anyone other than CGN stepping up to either be involved in development, or finance PLS. The other issue, is whether or not the gov't would approve a second stand alone mill in the SW sector of the basin. Somehow I doubt it. Who ever owns 100% of the mill on the SW sector of the basin, will control timing and development of all deposits in that region. My money is on NXE:-)
@ocotilloreduxKevin- I would not call PLS a fatally flawed asset, I would call it an asset that $FCU is reluctant to take to PFS or FS since the world would then know more accurate costs for building dykes/isolation walls/mill/tailings disposal and water treatment plant which would seriously ruin the project economics as a standalone asset. The PEA used nonsense capital numbers almost as bad as the numbers Denison used.
@PamplonaTrader"@ocotilloredux Kevin- I would not call PLS a fatally flawed asset, I would call it an asset that $FCU is reluctant to take to PFS or FS since the world would then know more accurate costs for building dykes/isolation walls/mill/tailings disposal and water treatment plant which would seriously ruin the project economics as a standalone asset. The PEA used nonsense capital numbers almost as bad as the numbers Denison used." $DML$DNN#uranium
@ocotilloreduxAs for the argument that NXE will have to use an $FCU pit for tailings disposal, I don't buy it. Firstly, what is FCU going to use prior to first pit completion? Secondly, I highly doubt a pit protruding into an existing water body will be approved for tailings disposal by Sask Environment and the CNSC. So this leaves only the small onshore deposit as a potential pit but is there enough pounds to even justify its mining and what below top of bedrock capacity would it have for future tailings anyways? It also needs a water cut off strategy since the top 50m or so of overburden will be saturated with groundwater. So yes, I support subsurface tailings disposal but I don't see a role for FCU here to help out NXE hence locking in the mining sequence for the camp. The Jeb disposal pit and mill was ~10 km away from the majority of the ore in the Sue pits at Areva's McClean Lake so the mill at Arrow could easily be 5-10 km from the deposit in order to site the tailings pit correctly. Moving 100,000 T of ore a year from mine to mill costs peanuts. Download the Technical Proposal here.... http://publications.gov.sk.ca/deplist.cfm?d=66&c=4416
@schischiWhich near term producer/explorer has the best chances to be the next uranium heroes ? $GXU , $PLU ? $FCU needs 7-10 Years for Production $NXE also .. So they are more buyout targets - right ?
@Wannabeinvestor@schischi, if you work through this board you will realise that $FCU will not go to production in 7 to 10 years. I dare say same goes for $PLU. $GXU is a totally different story, isn't one of their projects already permitted?
@lukejacksonBring on the Uranium fomo for institutional investors. Fund lags in performance - fund manager checks the holdings of other outperforming funds - sees a basket of uranium- trys to fit large amounts of capital into small vehicles (there aren't many options) with no clue about how they will exit unless they get bought out. $nxe$gxu$fcu