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: Tommaso who wrote (4142)	11/19/2006 8:04:33 PM
From: TheSlowLane	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 30219

I don't read the WSJ, though I probably should. I did see a bullish article in the Economist a couple of months ago, but it was certainly not on the cover. My sense is that it is way off the radar screens of most investors. Doug Casey shares your opinion (U has best fundamentals) and I heard it from a couple of others at the New Orleans Conference as well. I have to think about how to shift a bit from explorers to producers, although if I don't do anything, it may happen anyway through takeovers. IUC/Denison gave a pretty compelling presentation...

To: Tommaso who wrote (4142)	11/19/2006 8:54:12 PM
From: Dave	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 30219

In that case, I think we will see uranium at $200 in the next eighteen months. Tommaso I think you had better consider how long an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will take to get approved. Personally, I do not see a NEW nuclear plant being built in this country in the foreseeable future. Then once the design starts, the NRC, DOE and state regulartory agencies get involved. The vit plant at Hanford has been going for 10 years and is currently undergoing redesign of certain structures because of newly imposed seismic criteria. Other long range problems include disposal of fuel. Lots of fuel being stored in pools; I suspect leakage problems will start in the next few years. The cost of transferring low level waste is huge, transferring fuel almost impossible since Nevada storage is a political nightmare. It seems to me uranium demand for current will continue, and may increase somewhat particularly if Russia increases cost of weapons grade material. That being said, I have stuck my toe in the water, so to speak, but do not expect rapid growth in the near future for US plants. Dave