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 (8723)	3/3/2007 11:51:40 AM
From: energy_investor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 30215

Tommaso, you make some excellent points! I haven't lost a wink of sleep over the last few days regarding this market correction for all the reasons you so eloquently point out. If the recent market correction were occurring when the prices of our UR stocks were say 5 times higher than at present I would be worrying (but then I would have reduced my UR exposure to some degree well before this point). At the moment, however, I believe many of these stocks are still very inexpensive (based on DCF calculations and other factors -- I am excluding pure uranium exploration plays here; these are more like buying a lottery ticket , IMO ) Interestingly, my calculations show that I can still expect to more than double my money this year, even after the recent correction. Cheers Energy_Investor

To: Tommaso who wrote (8723)	3/3/2007 2:46:24 PM
From: energyplay	Respond to of 30215

Tommaso wrote "The entire situation with uranium has not changed in the last week." True. The Money side of the equation changed. With thoughts that almost free money from Japan might become more expensive, and the " quick and uninterrupted ride into a heaven of unlimited wealth " in China stocks may be TAXED, limited, or the elevator may stop going up, money has been pulled backed. At some point the money will come back. It would be nice if it went to silver or oil or widget stocks first, but I fear that Uranium will be one of the first groups to move. That increases my risk of missing the Uranium train.

To: Tommaso who wrote (8723)	3/3/2007 3:08:32 PM
From: energyplay	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 30215

Are large caps preferable to small caps in Uranium ? Tar sands take lots of capital investment - giant trucks, then processing of tar, cleaning waste, transporting waste. A cubic yard of tar sand might weight about 2 metic tons, and has maybe 3 barrel oil extractable oil. That's using about 15% bitumen and about 300 pounds per barrel (about 7 pounds per gallon for a 42 gallon barrel) Tar sands range from 1 to 20%, so 15% is towards the high end. At $70 a barrel, that's $210 dollars. A cubic yard of sand stone will weight about 2 metric tons. With 0.5% uranium that will have 22 pounds of uranium. At $73 a pound, that's $1650 dollars. The cubic yards are worth 8 times as much. Now assume uranium goes to $100 and we 2% ore... That ore would be worth $4400 a ton. I think this can be mined with much less capital. So smaller caps may not have as large a disadvantage.