There is tremendous variety in the location, grade, depth, geology, milling resources, available capital, expertise of personel, and other factors among the increasing panoply of entities that might be called "uranium companies."
As I posted, I am invested in 21 companies, including the smallest of small caps (Glen Hawk).
But when I make suggestions for other people, I don't want to be responsible either for getting them into money-losing situations or for trying to pump my own holdings. I don't imagine myself as a guru whom anyone would pay any attention to anyway, but in the past I have accidentally caused a few people to jump into investments where they had no business being. So it seems best to stick to the producing companies as the most important recommendations.
Of the hundreds of uranium "explorers," very few will be able to get into production. The most promising seem to be the in situ operations that will revive known deposits.
I think your arguments apply best to UEX and JNN, which are making incredible discoveries and work in concert with Cameco, Areva, and Denison. |
