Uranium Stocks Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Uranium Stocks

URNM 55.64

-0.1%

Dec 22 4:00 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: siempre33 who wrote (4988)	12/15/2006 2:06:04 AM
From: Chuckles_Bee	Read Replies (1) of 30235

CB, your comments are completely meaningless to me.... what are you trying to say? the criteria for picking ANY index has to do with the size of the co.s. involved, as stated by market cap....what's so hard to understand? if you have Q.s. about this pls. priv. msg. me....I'll do my best to answer....let's keep the quality of the board high by not posting frivolously...I'm sure Paul would appreciate it.. I can't do PM so we'll just have to suffer through public. I'm not trying to mess with/annoy you...nor mess up the board. I just question the logic of picking 15 of 2000 based on market cap. Uninformed investors, overly hopeful investors, or momo players can rally about any given stock and put it in the top 15 market cap regardless of what is proven in the ground (or anything else). ...and...Lack of public knowledge or big money manipulation can keep a company with serious assets out of the top 15 market cap. I realize this could be true of any index, but a uranium index (especially with juniors) seems more likely (at this early immature point in uranium market discovery time) a playground for market deception/over-do. I'm just wondering if it might be more valuable to list the companies by proven resources(or at least something to do with resources), rather than market play SP blather of the moment. And why 15? If the top 23 have about the same resources and #24 is a distant want-to-be, then 23 is better/more relevant than just 15 (with similar perspective being true if the top 7 are miles from #8). You are probably much better at this investment business than I am, so don't worry about my questions/thoughts if they annoy you. Ignore them if you want. I post as much to question my own thoughts (and the nature of the system) as those of others, so responses are a surprise, rather than expected. Best wishes and Merry Christmas! CB.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next