Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Len re Uranium:
It was a good day for everything uranium that I own, except CCJ. Unfortunately for Team 9, that's the one I have in Pick Six!
SXR: +13.30% (on top of a like amount yesterday)
SAN: + 9.21%
DEN: + 6.13%
UEX: + 4.27%
ALZ: + 3.70%
UNI: unch.
And, the May '07 warrants in Uranium Participation Corporation were up another 8.90% on top of yesterdays 33.43% gains.
The last couple of days have been good ones. I am way overweight this sector, and getting more so in a hurry.
Steve
bbtocs re uranium:
Hard to discuss specific stocks on this board, as most do not have earnings. I U C is not a bad idea; last I heard, it is merging with D E N, and the two together should do well going forward. I am already up to my eyeballs in uranium stocks, but if I was putting more money to work in the sector, I would be thinking hard about S T M. It seems to me that, to the extent any uranium stock can be said to be "undervalued," this one may be it. Bob has owned this one for some time, and might have some thoughts on it.
The only pure uranium play that I am sure has earnings is CCJ, although D E N may be close. Frankly, even with these problems at Cigar Lake, CCJ looks like a good value to me at current prices.
And you can own the mineral by buying stock in Uranium Participation Corporation, U.TO. It has May '07 and September '08 warrants, a leveraged way to bet on the metal.
Steve
re Uranium:
Sprott's take on the flooding at Cigar Lake:
"Cameco’s Cigar Lake Mine Drowning:
Where Will U.S. Utilities Get Uranium Now?
Sprott Market Strategist:
Some May Sign $100 Long-Term Contracts
The announcement of water deluging the $12 billion ore body at the rate of 1,500 cubic meters an hour at the Cigar Lake uranium mine shocked the nuclear industry on Monday. As anyone who closely follows uranium mining stocks now knows, construction at Cameco Corp’s half-owned mine in Canada ’s uranium-rich Athabasca Basin will be delayed by at least one year, possibly much longer. The whole mine was flooded after massive steel doors – reinforced with concrete – could not hold back the water.
One wag joked Cigar Lake should instead be turned into a hydroelectric project. This surprising development means Cigar Lake ’s heralded supply of 7 million pounds of uranium oxide relieving a very tight uranium market by 2008 is gone. Future supply just got 30 percent tighter than was forecast.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if the uranium price gets pushed much higher,” Sprott Asset Management Market Strategist Kevin Bambrough told us in a tape-recorded telephone interview. “It should definitely steepen the curve that we’ve seen. I can’t imagine there will be aggressive sellers.” During our interview, Bambrough calculated the net asset value of Uranium Participation Corp (TSX: U). “As we speak, UPC is at C$10.90/share,” he said. “For the net asset value at that price, the uranium price would have to be about $75/pound. That’s where the stock market is telling you the price should be. That’s where investors think it is going.”
U.S. utilities should panic. Less than one month ago, we challenged Rajiv Kundalkar, Vice President of Nuclear Engineering for Florida Power and Light, about Cigar Lake and other significant uranium supply sources at a Platts-sponsored nuclear fuel conference. Bluntly, we asked him if he was aware of the risks at Cigar Lake and elsewhere. Calmly, he answered that he was.
Obviously, Mr. Kundalkar was not. (Hopefully, he is finally reading our new book, “Investing in the Great Uranium Bull Market,” which we gifted him.) Neither were a majority of utility fuel managers who failed to honestly appraise the risks involved with their supply sources. Those who neglected to lock up uranium inventory for their reactors through 2011 are now the butt of jokes at the Nuclear Energy Institute’s (NEI) annual uranium conference presently in session in Quebec City , Canada . Many fuel brokers and utility industry consultants emailed or phoned us, over the past six months, announcing they were convinced the uranium price was “too high.” Each one sincerely believed Cigar Lake , Kazakhstan and/or Olympic Dam would bring the uranium price back down to earth.
Sprott Asset Management Market Strategist Kevin Bambrough. His super bullish forecasts on uranium are coming to pass. Mr. Bambrough was also a senior contributing editor to “Investing in the Great Uranium Bull Market.”
“I still say the uranium price is going to test and exceed the inflation-adjustment highs of the prior peak,” Bambrough told us. “I think the (peak of) $110 to $120 will get taken out in this market.” Is this the super spike we’ve been waiting for, and will it sustain at higher levels? “We’ll have to see how high the spike goes,” Bambrough pondered. “I still think some companies are going to be able to sign long-term deals around $100/pound. I don’t think that will be a problem for some to have that opportunity.”
How Serious Is the Cigar Lake Supply Problem?
“This is probably going to set Cameco back much more than a year,” Bambrough predicted. Last spring, he had speculated in another interview about how the uranium price might be affected if Cigar Lake were delayed more than was then anticipated. “It was supposed to do 18 million pounds a year by 2010,” he explained. “We’re losing seven million pounds out of 2008. We’re probably going to lose another 11 million pounds in 2009.”
When will Cameco know they can mine Cigar Lake ? “Maybe, it will just be starting in 2010 if they figure it out,” Bambrough said. “If they figure out the whole new plan – the problem is you’ve got to deal with water permits.” Because Cameco may have to add a processing facility to be able to handle the increased flow rate, the company may have to apply for new water permits.
“Right now, they’re only permitted to process about 500 cubic meters of water an hour,” he pointed out. Cameco Chief Executive Jerry Grandey told analysts on Monday the water was flowing at 1500 cubic meters an hour. “Basically, they’ve got to go and apply for permitting to get processing in place to handle that extra water flow,” Bambrough said. “We don’t know what the flow rate is ultimately going to be. They don’t even know how contaminated the water is going to be and what processing needs to be done. They’ve got a big water problem to deal with.”
All of this will take longer than many expect. “They’re going to have to come up with a new plan and a new way to process it,” Bambrough predicted. “It’s not just about going back and rehabilitating this one area and continuing business as usual. They’re going to keep trying to work it. But in order to work it, they’re going to have to de-water it, which means they have to get water permits and put in a facility to process the water.”
As uranium and other miners have explained to us, mining is a difficult business. “In almost all metals, mining is being pushed to the limit,” Bambrough observed. “When you push things to the limit, when you push equipment to the limit and you’re going into uncharted frontiers, in terms of new depths in mining and new techniques, you’re going to run into problems.”
Located in northern Saskatchewan (Canada), Cigar Lake is the world’s largest undeveloped uranium deposit. The uranium mining project is now submerged in flood waters. Courtesy of Cameco Corp.
Can Cigar Lake be mined at all? “I think it will be somewhat mineable at some price, obviously at a higher cost,” Bambrough told us. “There’s no way to tell how long things will be delayed and what the ultimate cost will be. As you push things out a number of years, I wouldn’t be surprised if the capital expenditures double by the time this gets brought on, just because of the time element. You’ve already that money sitting there costing you money by producing later, for example the interest on the debt. Then, there are the new measures to be put in place to handle the new mining method.” Bambrough predicted the capital expenditures per pound would definitely double.
And Other Supply Sources for U.S. Utilities?
Will this force U.S. utilities out of their complacency regarding having a reliable source of uranium supply to power the country’s 103 nuclear reactors? “I think so,” Bambrough speculated. “It’s hard to say who’s going to get the forces majeures. A ‘force majeure’ is a clause in a commercial contract covering natural disasters, such as a flood, excusing the party from performing its obligations under the contract. “A lot of the forces majeures are probably going to the U.S,” he said. “The utilities were confident in the 18 million pounds to be coming out of Cigar Lake. They aren’t going to get this uranium. The question is: ‘Where are they going to get it?’”
We talked about Kazakhstan. “ Russia locked up Kazakhstan ’s big orebody a couple of weeks ago on the agreement to build processing facilities and nuclear plants,” Bambrough pointed out. “I think that is very significant. The Western World was counting on getting a lot of that supply. I think we can clearly see now that is going to be Russian-controlled supply I expect they will want to pair with their new reactor orders for both domestic and abroad.”
And Olympic Dam? “To put in the Olympic Dam expansion, they would have to put in a desalination plant,” Bambrough warned. “They already use all the local water resources to begin with. I think they’ll have to build more desalination plants, which requires more power.” He believes the Cigar Lake flooding may drive the uranium price high enough to make the massive capital expenditures required for Olympic Dam to move the expansion plans forward. “It may cost between seven and ten billion dollars,” Bambrough said.
Finding an immediate supply source will become a serious challenge for American utilities. “The delays are Cigar Lake will create a sense of urgency for the next few years,” Bambrough told us. “It’s almost the equivalent of the oil industry losing Saudi Arabia . The utilities lost what amounts to 10 percent of consumption.”
What about the emerging U.S. uranium mining industry? “It’s tough to get production up to 18 million pounds any time soon,” he responded. But Bambrough added, “Unless they start fast-tracking all the permitting, which is what I think is going to have to happen.”
For Cameco Corp, it was Black Monday, but for many uranium juniors it was Green Monday. As Cameco shares tumbled by nearly 10 percent trading on the Big Board, junior uranium companies such as SXR Uranium One, Energy Metals and UR-Energy shares jumped between 14 and 19 percent on the Toronto stock exchange.
We asked Bambrough about the companies which would benefit the most by the Cigar Lake delays. “I think that the ones which have been more criticized and more marginal stand to gain the most. The most-cost producers won’t gain as much. The near-term producers stand to really gain. The closer you are to production, you stand to gain more.” This past Friday, one of our favorite stock analysts, Bart Jaworski of Raymond James Canada, issued two strong buy recommendations on junior uranium mining stocks: Strathmore Minerals and Energy Metals Corporation. We’ve previously written about both and interviewed the president of the former in yesterday’s article.
Hopefully, U.S. utilities will heed our advice, and utility spokesmen, such as Mr. Kundalkar of Florida Power and Light will take our questions seriously, during our future chats. In the meantime, this weekend and next should be interesting when TradeTech issues the spot uranium price."
http://www.stockinterview.com/News/10242006/Cameco-Cigar-Lake.html
Steve
U.WT.TO:
The May '07 warrants were up 33.43% today.
Steve
Len:
And the May '07 warrants of Uranium Participation Corporation finished the day up 33.43%.
It is starting to sink in for everyone just what this Cigar Lake news means. The supply/demand fundamentals were compelling for uranium before this happened. While I have not had time to do the math, I read somewhere today that, once up and running, the anticipated production from Cigar Lake was supposed to be equal to something like 18% of the world's current annual production. Problems announced in today's successive PRs are quite a hit to expectations about 2008 fundamentals. Seems to me the movement in the UPC warrants reflects the expectation that uranium prices during the next 6 months are going much higher than even the uranium bulls have been expecting.
CCJ's stock should bounce back tomorrow, especially in view of the contract protection described in this afternoon's PR. And things may get pretty wild again in the uranium world.
Steve
re Uranium:
CCJ announced today that production at Cigar Lake will be delayed by a year, and more expensive than projected, by reason of problems at the mine.
This has hurt CCJ's price today, but has lit a fire under some of the other near term producers: SXR up 11% and UEX up 7%, as this is written. A delay at Cigar Lake is a delay in supply that was expected to come on line in early 2008, and thus ease pressures in the relatively near term on the spot and long term contract prices for the metal. Even as Len's index languishes at its 20% correction levels, the spot price has continued to rise, and it would not be surprising if, during the next week, it is significantly affected by this announcement. It is interesting that Uranium Participation Corporation and its May 2007 warrants -- direct plays on the spot price of the metal -- are making new highs. The warrants are up about 9% today.
It is ironic to say the least, but in the near term CCJ might actually benefit from its Cigar Lake problems, albeit not as much as other near term producers.
Steve
Bobwins:
After the week I've had, I should retire the entire machine.
Steve
u3o8:
Uranium Participation Corporation also has two series of warrants that trade on the TSX, symbols U.WT (expires May 10, 2007, strike price $6.25) and U.TW.A (expires September 14, 2008, strike price $12). With the May '07 warrants, Americans can buy and sell them, but cannot convert them to stock; so, you need to sell them before they expire, and they are pretty illiquid. I assume that the September '08 warrants are the same, but don't know for sure.
A leveraged way to play the metal.
Steve
Bobwins:
I predict a cold winter.
Incidentally, I have predicted sunshine every day for the past 35 years here in Southern California, and have been right about 90% of the time. Damn good track record, if you ask me.
Steve
Joeiniowa:
"Speculation" much appreciated.
Thanks.
Steve
rrufff re audited financials:
Agree 1000%. KPMG confirmation of numbers would be absolutely huge for this stock, IMO.
Steve
UEX.TO:
Among uranium stocks, I have had a relatively large position in UEX.TO for some time. In recent months it has been a disappointment. Perhaps today will be a good day:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13737717
Steve
Bob:
Think we know now what caused the buying. Back to $.15 and beyond today, I would guess.
Steve
bourg33 re SJLB:
So I heard. I bought back in yesterday at $.11, though not as much as I once had. If/when audited financials are out, and if positive, I will buy more whatever the price. Until then, I prefer to have a small position.
Good luck to all with this one. Potentially a real Zip Code Changer.
Steve
carguy re SLJB:
I gather rrufff is still holding all of his shares, and I know he is a heckuva lot smarter about these things than I am. So I will probably be trying to get back in at $.20 or something. But this message gave voice to what was going on in my head:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13655229
So, I got out. I used some of the money to buy more HMSG, another rrufff pink sheet stock that I think may do well.
Good luck with SLJB. I'll sure be watching it carefully. If the reality is anything like the hype, it is headed to $1 per share easy. Frankly, if the company delivers on the audited financials, and the numbers are good, it won't really matter if you get in at $.13, $.20 or $.30. You will make a pile of money. I had 300% gain in the stock, and decided to bail. This investment year has been a rough one for me. Not terrible, but hard work to make a $!
Steve
SLJB:
Decided to sell. In at $.035 and out at $.13. If audited financials are produced and are good, I will not doubt be trying to buy back in at a higher price. But for now, I am out.
Steve
shmolton re low volume:
In recent weeks, Thursday, Friday and Monday seem to be the high volume days in this stock:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=TCLL.OB
Steve
rrufff re audited financials:
If/when KMPG or any other reputable company signs off on these financials, I suspect they will be bulletproof. It is not lost on KMPG/whoever that huge money will be spent in reliance upon what is in them. Whatever the fees for the audit, they will not be .01% of the exposure that KMPG/whoever is taking on. I am not at all surprised that the auditors are taking their time!
Hopefully, management will be more circumspect going forward in predicting time of completion for things over which they do not have ultimate control.
But if the numbers are anything like what we have been led to expect, you have to believe that this stock is going to go nuts.
Steve
re Uranium:
Interesting post: "Russians Expecting $100/lb. Uranium"
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13433986
Steve
Guy re CHAR:
Always wondered what happened subsequent. Thanks for posting the information.
Steve
dayla re SLJB:
You are following this one more closely than I am. Don't know what to read into this activity -- not knowledgeable on the subject.
The story continues to be interesting. The latest PR says that in 3 months the company will have yet another new CEO, this time one directly elected by the shareholders. Although the stock is down 25% or so today on the news, I would love to think that there is and/or will be some kind of competition for control among those in the Middle East with an interest in taking a stake in the company.
I hope the audited financials show up by the end of the week. The stock will tank if they do not, and take off if they do, IMO.
Steve
re Uranium:
It appears that the weekly spot price for uranium reported by UxC is up another $1.25/lb. to $53.25. This price will be posted on the UxC website after the close today.
In an interesting development, DEN.TO and IUC.TO have announced an intention to merge:
http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/articlehybrid.aspx?storyID=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20060918:MTFH36180_2...
This is a merger of equals, but it seems pretty clear that in the coming months (years?) there will be many mergers and acquisitions in this sector.
Steve
tophat59 re SLJB:
Why did you sell?
Thanks.
Steve
re Uranium:
"Uranium Catches On With Niche-Savvy Investors"
venerdì, 15 settembre 2006 1.45
By Nick Trevethan
LONDON (Reuters) - Uranium could be the next big thing for investors searching for high returns in niche markets, with growing interest in nuclear power fueling the boom.
A number of funds have already moved into the physical uranium market including Canadian-listed Uranium Participation Corp and Nufcor International, a joint-venture between AngloGold Ashanti Limited and FirstRand Limited which manages Nufcor Uranium.
"I think we are seeing the tip of the iceberg of financial investors entering the physical uranium market," said Mitchell Dong, chief investment officer of Solios Asset Management Inc. It operates several funds and pools of private capital investing in energy assets, including uranium.
"We think we will see a move from a purely physical market to a blended physical and financial market, as we see in the power markets in the Nordic countries and the United States."
Spot uranium prices have nearly doubled over the last 12 months to $52 per pound, according to the website of Ux Consulting (UxC), a leading publisher of uranium prices and price forecasts.
Uranium demand from the world's 440 nuclear reactors runs at around 80,000 tonnes per year, while mine production is around 50,000 tonnes.
The shortfall made up from finite stocks of highly enriched weapons-grade material from nuclear warheads that is downblended for use in commercial reactors.
Analysts said increasingly sophisticated investors would want to cash in on rising prices.
"We are seeing a requirement for more sophisticated, more active investment products. It is no longer simply a question of putting money into an index fund and coming back in five years," UBS analyst Robin Bhar said.
"This more active approach will require a myriad of new imvestment products such as structured notes and niche markets like uranium."
Recently, ETF Securities announced plans to launch a series of products that would allow investors to gain exposure to commodity price movements by tracking indices.
"We could see more speculative activity in uranium that doesn't rely on holding physical material through exchange traded-notes (ETNs) -- assets that are based on benchmark prices rather than a store of physical material," Bhar said.
In addition to the ETFs, around half a dozen private hedge funds hold physical uranium.
"Five years ago over 80 percent of spot market volume was purchased by utilities. So far this year under 20 percent has been purchased by end users," a European uranium analyst said.
Andrew Ferguson, manager of Geiger Counter Limited, a closed-end uranium mining and exploration fund with 13 million pounds under management, said the market was too new to cope with exchange traded notes.
"There are people out there looking at paper-based assets, but the market is a bit too new for those."
"Some clever person will come up with something along those lines. We are happy investing uranium miners and assets like Nufcor. Physical uranium is also an option, but we see the greatest upside with producers and explorers," he said.
Gary Stoker marketing manager Nufcor International Ltd said: "Certainly uranium markets have been very interesting for investors over the last three or four years and it does not appears as if that interest is abating."
"Uranium until recently saw no investor interest and even now 90 to 95 percent of the market is producer to end-user business, but investors are starting to get into the market"
He said the financial community was investing anticipating substantial growth.
"Various numbers are bandied around. The one thing that is certain is that the economics of a nuclear power station are fairly insensitive to the price of uranium.
"Even if prices double from here, it won't significantly affect the competitiveness of nuclear power."
That bullish view was shared by investors in Nufcor's fund, which holds over 1,000 tonnes of uranium and trades at around 30 percent above its net asset value.
http://www.borsaitaliana.reuters.it/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=fundsNewsUK&storyID=2006-09-15T11...
dayla re SLJB:
I saw that post. Not sure if Wessal has bought 50 million shares or is getting ready to do so.
But my sense is that the stock will go up tomorrow in anticipation of the next CEO announcement on Monday morning. If the audited financials confirm $15 million or so in net profits for the past 12 months, my guess is that the stock will be $.30 (or more) within a day or two.
How good it ultimately gets is anyone's guess. I'm not planning on selling any time soon.
Steve
dayla re SLJB:
Looks to me like this train is about to leave the station in a big way. Nice to close today above $.10.
Steve
wadegarrett re HSOA:
There is NO doubt that there will be a lead plaintiff. The ONLY question is who, not whether. And, there are already MANY lawsuits. In all probability the plaintiff firms will cut a deal; if not, the court will appoint one from the MANY candidates.
HSOA may be the most undervalued stock in the universe, and I hope you make a ton on it. But the realities about the litigation are obvious. Again, whether it impacts the bottom line at HSOA will depend upon insurance.
Steve
re Uranium:
In the past 3 years uranium has gone from $10/lb. to $50/lb. Apparently that is finally enough to persuade Deutsche Bank that it should initiate uranium coverage:
http://www.billcara.com/archives/DB%20Sept%201%202006%20Uranium.pdf
And, in another bold and daring move, CIBC is predicting $70/lb. by the end of 2007:
http://www.globeinvestor.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060908.wuranium0908/GIStory/
I'm told that these guys actually get paid to come up with this kind of stuff. Amazing . . .
Steve
researcher59 re VMC index by daily volume:
Thanks very much for this sort. Because of the great investment ideas and advice the VMC board offers, this is becoming a relevant consideration for me.
Steve
re Uranium:
A few days ago a poster on the Uranium exploration board posted this link, which shows the market caps for Canadian uranium companies:
http://www.preciousmetalresources.com/canadian/uranium/marketcaps/
I was surprised to see that, after Cameco (CCJ), there are still 5 companies with a larger market cap than Denison (DEN.TO). The 5 are: AXU.TO, IUC.TO, MGA.V, SXR.TO, and UEX.TO. I had always believed that DEN.TO was #2 in size, and by a meaningful margin. I own DEN.TO and 2 of the 5 that are now larger, and am wondering if it makes sense at this point to allocate funds away from the 2 larger, and towards DEN.TO.
Uranium stocks are off to a good start today, continuing last week's gains reflected in Len's portfolio.
Steve
GACF:
Global Aircraft Solutions Inc. (GACF) Announces Completion of Seventh Avolar 737-300
Tuesday September 5, 8:30 am ET
TUCSON, Ariz.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 5, 2006--Global Aircraft Solutions Inc. (OTCBB: GACF - News) today announced that its wholly owned subsidiary, Hamilton Aerospace, has completed fleet integration and return-to-service maintenance for Avolar's seventh 737-300 aircraft. Avolar's eighth 737-300 aircraft is currently in work at Hamilton Aerospace, and is scheduled for induction into Avolar's fleet before the end of September. The induction maintenance work provided by Hamilton Aerospace on Avolar's seventh and eighth aircraft will generate revenues of approximately $2 million for Hamilton Aerospace and Global's wholly owned aircraft parts sales subsidiary, World Jet.
ADVERTISEMENT
Hamilton Aerospace also announced that it is scheduled to receive its first routine heavy maintenance check from Avolar in October of this year. This upcoming scheduled heavy maintenance visit has an estimated total value of approximately $500,000 for Hamilton Aerospace and World Jet.
John Sawyer, president of Global Aircraft Solutions and Hamilton Aerospace, stated, "As projected, Avolar is becoming a very significant customer for Hamilton Aerospace and World Jet. Avolar is now operating profitably and is on schedule to have 10 aircraft in service by year-end. It is important to note, that now that Avolar is mature enough, its first aircraft are starting to come due on their first scheduled heavy maintenance visits. This development, together with the continuing growth of Avolar's fleet, should translate into increasing aircraft maintenance revenue for Hamilton Aerospace, and increasing aircraft parts sales revenue for World Jet for the foreseeable future."
Steve
wadegarret re HSOA:
I have no dog in this fight either, but there will be no problem finding a lead plaintiff. Under the PSLRA, the appointment of lead plaintiff (and lead plaintiff's counsel!) is the first order of business in class litigation. There will be no shortage of candidates here. Scott & Scott, KGS, Glancy & Binkow, etc. are simply trolling to enlist additional shareholders in their respective camps to strengthen the possibility that they will have the lead plaintiffs and thus be lead counsel.
I have already posted my thoughts about the lawsuit itself.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=11791764
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=11794784
Steve
Bobwins re Uranium:
It is not just your imagination. Uranium spot price has risen this week per Trade Tech to $52/lb.
From the Trade Tech uranium website:
"In the Market ...
The spot uranium market was extremely active in August in spite of expectations for a 'summer slowdown.' The highly anticipated results of the US Department of Energy (DOE) auction of 700 mtU as UF6 were released, indicating that the market remains hungry for supply. In addition, the auction of 100 thousand pounds U3O8 was met with aggressive competition from potential buyers. Sellers continue to seek market-related pricing terms for spot delivery. Buyers, in an effort to resist these market-related pricing terms, are accepting higher prices in order to obtain fixed pricing terms as evidenced by the results of this month’s two fixed-price auctions. The buyer mix remains diverse, with utilities, producers, and intermediaries seeking market purchases. Long-term uranium demand remains strong and continues to exert upward pressure on the spot uranium price. Historically, the spot uranium market becomes more active in September and TradeTech expects uranium prices to continue their upward climb through the month. more
"Uranium Price Surpasses $50
– Can the Market Sustain this Record Price? –
Denver, Colorado, August 31, 2006—The spot market price for uranium climbed to US$52 per pound uranium oxide (U3O8) today—marking a record level in the history of uranium price reporting, begun nearly 40 years ago by NUEXCO in 1968.
In the past six months, the uranium spot market has broken through two price barriers. In March 2006, the price for uranium rose above $40 per pound U3O8 for the first time since January 1980. The uranium price first reached $40 in April 1976 and remained in the $40 range until January 1980. However, the market in the late 1970s was considerably different than today’s uranium market, which begs the question: Is today’s record price level sustainable? 'We think it is,' said Treva Klingbiel, president of TradeTech, LLC, a nuclear energy market consultant. 'After years of industry consolidation and tight financial conditions, uranium exploration has suffered and there will be a time lag, perhaps as long as five to seven years, before the supply side can fully respond. Thus, secondary supplies (primarily uranium inventories) will need to continue filling the ‘supply gap.’ With little strategic stock to mitigate supply disruptions, prices can rise dramatically, and in fact, have done so,' Klingbiel advised.
The biggest difference in the uranium market today is that the supply/demand outlook is much clearer than it was a quarter century ago, based on more realistic contract terms and uranium requirements. 'The challenge will be to bring more uranium production online to assure market balance,' Klingbiel added. Since 1990 uranium requirements have outstripped uranium production. World uranium requirements are expected to increase steadily throughout the next decade to a peak of over 200 million pounds U3O8, according to TradeTech. Uranium producers are gearing up for this added demand. A number of existing producers are planning for expansion, while new junior producers are preparing for uranium exploration and production."
http://www.uranium.info/
Steve
re Uranium:
Uranium spot price rises to $52/lb.
From the Trade Tech uranium website:
"In the Market ...
The spot uranium market was extremely active in August in spite of expectations for a 'summer slowdown.' The highly anticipated results of the US Department of Energy (DOE) auction of 700 mtU as UF6 were released, indicating that the market remains hungry for supply. In addition, the auction of 100 thousand pounds U3O8 was met with aggressive competition from potential buyers. Sellers continue to seek market-related pricing terms for spot delivery. Buyers, in an effort to resist these market-related pricing terms, are accepting higher prices in order to obtain fixed pricing terms as evidenced by the results of this month’s two fixed-price auctions. The buyer mix remains diverse, with utilities, producers, and intermediaries seeking market purchases. Long-term uranium demand remains strong and continues to exert upward pressure on the spot uranium price. Historically, the spot uranium market becomes more active in September and TradeTech expects uranium prices to continue their upward climb through the month. more
Uranium Price Surpasses $50
– Can the Market Sustain this Record Price? –
Denver, Colorado, August 31, 2006—The spot market price for uranium climbed to US$52 per pound uranium oxide (U3O8) today—marking a record level in the history of uranium price reporting, begun nearly 40 years ago by NUEXCO in 1968.
In the past six months, the uranium spot market has broken through two price barriers. In March 2006, the price for uranium rose above $40 per pound U3O8 for the first time since January 1980. The uranium price first reached $40 in April 1976 and remained in the $40 range until January 1980. However, the market in the late 1970s was considerably different than today’s uranium market, which begs the question: Is today’s record price level sustainable? 'We think it is,' said Treva Klingbiel, president of TradeTech, LLC, a nuclear energy market consultant. 'After years of industry consolidation and tight financial conditions, uranium exploration has suffered and there will be a time lag, perhaps as long as five to seven years, before the supply side can fully respond. Thus, secondary supplies (primarily uranium inventories) will need to continue filling the ‘supply gap.’ With little strategic stock to mitigate supply disruptions, prices can rise dramatically, and in fact, have done so,' Klingbiel advised.
The biggest difference in the uranium market today is that the supply/demand outlook is much clearer than it was a quarter century ago, based on more realistic contract terms and uranium requirements. 'The challenge will be to bring more uranium production online to assure market balance,' Klingbiel added. Since 1990 uranium requirements have outstripped uranium production. World uranium requirements are expected to increase steadily throughout the next decade to a peak of over 200 million pounds U3O8, according to TradeTech. Uranium producers are gearing up for this added demand. A number of existing producers are planning for expansion, while new junior producers are preparing for uranium exploration and production."
http://www.uranium.info/
Steve
dayla re SLJB:
I bought the stock a few months ago because rrufff had positive things to say about it, and the company's public statements were so bullish. I am optimistic that exciting things are on the horizon. I do not believe it is a "scam" by any stretch of the imagination.
At the same time, I suspect that the Sulja people are naive, I am skeptical if not downright cynical about "contracts" to do business in Dubai, and I don't have any idea what to make of Wessal. I am not aware of anything that obligates Wessal to buy stock, and absent an enforceable commitment, it is just talk. I understand that Wessal's intention must be disclosed, but that does not mean it is going to happen, and I doubt that the SEC can touch those in the Middle East responsible for generating the big money glow that surrounds this company. I will "believe it when I see it" where the Wessal acquisition is concerned, and frankly, where a lot of these projected revenues are concerned.
If/when audited financials arrive, we will know what we have. In the meantime, I am up 100% or so in the stock, and don't have any interest in selling right now. Whatever the details turn out to be, I am persuaded that at this price the risk inherent in the situation is well worth taking. And I derive a large measure of comfort from the fact that rrufff appears still to be long the stock.
Steve
10bagger re SDRLF:
Would be interested in your thoughts regarding Q2 numbers.
Thanks.
Steve
Len:
Thanks for finding it for me. Should have looked more carefully.
Steve
dayla re SLJB:
I am not anxious about my investment. But I am anxious about the possibility that "drive by" pumping will infect this quality board. The SLJB board, with its 2000 posts per day, is unreadable for that reason, and I would hate to see the "to da moon" noise migrate here.
Steve
dayla re SLJB:
I am long this stock, but it seems to me that there is enough "optimism" in the PRs themselves, without further touting.
If the PRs are to be believed the stock should already be 10x higher than it is, and if the investment community actually did believe the PRs, the stock would already be 10x higher. But the story is sufficiently "improbable" that skepticism abounds. I hope the PRs are accurate. Hell, I hope the PRs are 10% accurate. But your statement as fact that Wessel money is coming "real soon" suggests you know something.
Heaven forbid you should be asked to "reveal your sources."
Steve
Len, SSKILLZ1:
Are we tracking how the wild card picks are doing as a group in comparison with the qualified value microcaps?
Just curious . . .
Steve