Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Condor who wrote (3529)	10/27/2006 10:38:29 AM
From: siempre33	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 30201

Coxe is jumping on the bandwagon, sez everybody should own U jr. quality pure plays....this obviously will help co.s like URZ, EMC, STM, TUE....

To: Condor who wrote (3529)	10/27/2006 10:41:23 AM
From: kurtwalter2	Respond to of 30201

Don Coxe's Investment Recommendations 1. After four years of focusing on oils and base metals, it is time to add new commodity-producing sectors to a long-term portfolio. 2. Within the oil group, our favorites are, in order, oil sands, reÞ ners, natural gas producers, and offshore drillers. 3. Within the base metals group, our favorites are copper, nickel and zinc. Each time we get enthusiastic about the aluminums, they announce major new expansions. 4. Uranium should be a core holding for those who can live with the problem of political incorrectness. 5. Precious metals stocks have corrected from their highs and some are now attractive. We continue to believe that gold is the clearest value in the group, although platinum?s attractions are becoming more obvious as the automobile industry?s catalytic converter decisions become more platinum-friendly. Silver is a tweener?it isn?t a truly precious metal, because it tarnishes, but it still has attractions for Indian brides, and there will be more of them who can afford baubles and bangles. Its industrial demand has shifted from Þ lm production to electronics, but has remained strong. 6. Financial stocks have performed well, despite the inversion of the yield curves. We recommend that investors concentrate on those with the best dividend records. We share the concerns of those who question the asset quality of some aggressive American regional banks, particularly in real estate lending. 7. The forest products stocks are a subset of the earth group. Our esteemed colleague Stephen Atkinson has been telling us that investors are wisest to focus on the Brazilian producers, and should eschew the Eastern Canadian loggers. 8. As for agribusiness, there are numerous opportunities. Although the ethanol boom is at risk if oil prices fall below $50, we are conÞ dent that Congress will continue to cosset ADM and other alternative energy players. Always have, always will. We believe that the opposition to genetically-modiÞ ed seeds will continue to crumble, which means that Monsanto, DuPont and their competitors are worthy of consideration as core investments. 9. Our case for long zeros is as hedges against economic problems that hit the commodity stocks. The US economy continues to give mixed signals, while economies abroad look stronger. Winter should tell the tale. If, because of continued strong economic growth, you don?t make money on long zeros, you will proÞ t hugely on your basic materials stocks.

To: Condor who wrote (3529)	10/27/2006 12:47:49 PM
From: smh	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 30201

C, The Mineweb summary of Coxe's report is already once removed, so I'm not sure how much value further condensation has, however, I think Siempree states the bottom line well. <Coxe is jumping on the bandwagon, sez everybody should own U jr. quality pure plays...> Jumping on the bandwagon indeed! For someone so widely regarded as a great visionary, he is way late. Some time ago someone asked him a question, following his weekly radio address, about uranium. His answer was something like... I don't talk about uranium because it is such a politically charged subject. I didn't get what he was talking about then and still don't. According to the article he recommended that “uranium should be a core holding for those who can live with the problem of political incorrectness.” Is he talking about the quickly disappearing environmentalist concerns with nuclear power? Does he think this is something investors may not be able to live with? These kind of statements drive me nuts... “Cameco is the biggest uranium pure play, but its aggressive hedging strategies make it problematic.” What do people think the big producers should do - set up a roadside stand like they are selling vegetables - or maybe auction it off as it comes out of the ground? SMH