Member Info for TakingMyTime

I miss Nige, that's all. He'd have commented today.

Happy for the good news and good SP movement, but still quite bullish on this share. Will hold at least to 3500, maybe longer. Barring another Covid crash or similar, we'll see it within a year, I expect.

"Come on TMT this plagurism...... I used this one yesterday :-)"

Sorry, mate, I haven't been able to read much, let alone post, recently. So I missed your prior.

Not that anything ever stopped me from repeating jokes until they are stale.

No, PSN doesn't build many high rises.

"When you pay peanuts you get......"

An elephant? An elephant of a mine?

Hi, Bamps. That's why I still don't regret my buy at 36p. Looks way too high right now but will eventually look genius, and I can wait.

Heh. Really must learn to read other responses before responding myself. Can see the difference between grades at Hav and Telfer was already covered. Sorry for wasting your time (and mine).

@JTB "The last time i checked Telfer has some of the highest AISC costs in the world at over $1000."

That's partly because of the remoteness, which applies to Hav and which I mentioned previously, but mostly because of the much lower grade of Telfer ore. When it takes ten times as much ore to get an ounce of gold, your AISC is going to be high.

That's not going to be the case with Hav. Grades are very good compared to Telfer. That said, some of the gold at Hav might never come out of the ground, if some areas of the ore body are a significantly lower grade. If the ore from some areas of the ore body is equivalent to the current grades at Telfer, it won't be economical to mine. So keep your eye on the ore grades as drill results come in from the northern and eastern breccias, as the drills go deeper, and with any further stepouts. Good grades almost certainly means economical to mine and a significantly larger resource. Poor grades and this might not end up as big as I think it is.

I hope it's pessimistic and the AISC is lower than that. But I think a few things need to be noted.

1. Cadia is not a good comparison because it isn't remote like Telfer is. There's cost getting people, equipment, and gold and copper in and/or out of Telfer that you don't have at Cadia.
2. There's also transportation of ore from Hav to Telfer. That's going to have some cost.
3. There's also the cost of processing the ore at Telfer. NCM isn't going to do that for free. They are going to charge the JV a nice fee for that. The existence of the processing facilities means lower CAPEX and quicker production -- but it also means that NCM will want to collect fees, and that's going to be included in AISC.

Interesting. Back all through the autumn we heard constant whingeing about Berenberg not putting out a broker note, and about H&P not updating theirs.

Now, we see how much impact it has. Berenberg has a 33p note out, H&P a 30p note, and we're still sitting at 21p plus a fraction.

Broker notes don't put gold in the ground, nor get it out of the ground, nor make more appear when the drilling starts. In real value terms, broker notes add none, so in a pure market they shouldn't influence SP. PIs might be influenced by broker notes, but they shouldn't be. IIs won't be influenced.

I have no problem at all with the current broker notes from either source. They both state their assumptions very clearly. If anyone wants to do the basic research necessary to understand what they are doing, then you can without much difficulty figure out what the target price would be with different assumptions.

If you think their assumptions are wrong, plug in your own. At least they told you what the assumptions are so you don't have to just guess at what they are doing. It's all very clear, if you take the time to read it carefully (and research the terms you don't understand).

So, that's pretty cool. Not a lot, but another 1000 shares at a price that is discounted to the value of the underlying assets. I'll sell these at 300p+ whether it takes 1 year or 3, and grab a nice little profit out of it.

Obviously, the company is very bullish, as they should be. This move to acquire more uranium means the supply of uranium will be that little bit tighter as a result. Basically, the BOD are doubling down on the investment strategy.

Since I'm also bullish on uranium, I'm happy to take part in it.

Dilution is when you have more shares for the same asset. In this case, more shares paired with more assets. So it's not dilution, it's expansion funded by external financing.

I've subscribed for more shares. Whether I get them all, of course, remains to be seen.

@Spratt
GDXJ technically only "rebalances" once a quarter, in that the weighting is recalculated once a quarter, and then transactions are made to bring the fund in line with those weightings.

When new investors put money into the ETF, they buy more shares in all components, in line with the weighting percentage from the last quarterly rebalance. When investors in the ETF pull their money out (sell shares of the ETF), they sell shares according to the same weighting percentages.

So when we see GDXJ transactions, it's because of funds flowing in or out of the ETF.

As I've said before, I don't think we'll see significant buying or selling at the next GDXJ rebalance in March.

@Spy "sure. but these are not friends of friends. these are guys at barrick, kinross and their friends at Rio."

I've given you some flack before, but it's almost always because of stating stuff as fact without this kind of background. If you state your info is from guys at other miners (don't even have to be specific as to which ones) then that lets everyone evaluate it accordingly.

IMO, only, I think info coming from guys at other miners is valuable to know. It's not official releases. It's not someone at NCM or GGP who is really in the know and breaking the law. So it can't be relied on entirely. But still, it's from people who are more likely than me to have heard something from someone who does know. It's from people who understand the industry. It's great info, and I hope you provide it when you have it.

Info from a BB that came from someone at Rio or Barrick is not going to drive my investment decisions. But if it fits with what I can verify independently, it just might influence me sometimes. Bring it on, as far as I'm concerned.

@Paddy "that Newcrest are literally moving heaven & earth "

I can see the earth moving part of it but how are they literally moving heaven? I think I just caught the great Paddy Gall in a ramp -- or else, he's been partaking some of the stuff described in this thread and he's seeing heaven move?

Thanks, as always, Paddy.

Freddie, I was fortunate, I had a little more than your 22 years before losing my wife late last year. Not sure the length of time matters -- it changes the shape of the pain, maybe, but not the substance of it.

Your assessment of GGP may be plain daft but shared humanity is immensely more important than that. All the best to you.

Weird, Davie's comment got in there twice. Either I'm incompetent, or I'm having a hardware issue, or the board software went bonkers....

@Picpoul "1."
I am with you TMT, as a number 4
That was classic, LOL.

@Davielad "I am with you TMT, as a number 4"
Meant or not, I'll take it anyway, spares me having to think about it!

I own considerably more than I did when hydro built that list. Not anywhere near as much as some others.

I was still adding at 36p. In retrospect, an obvious mistake since I could have added those shares later for less. I did it because I believed the shares were going to be worth considerably more than that in the long term. I still believe that -- when the SP goes back up to 36p, I won't be selling.

I don't understand the SP movement or care all that much. I am persuaded of the value of the asset and of the business plan.

How much did GGP's market cap move? How much did their market cap move? SP is not the right thing to look at.

Not really any such thing as spot. I use this: https://www.uranium.info/weekly_U3O8_spot_price_indicator.php

Others may have something better. I bought this as a LT hold for two reasons, because first I think the LT outlook for uranium is very, very good (not the only one who thinks so, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh53GM2h_3c&feature=youtu.be), but also because it was trading at a significant discount to the value of its holdings. Just seemed a gift.

Anyway, because I'm in for longer term, I don't much care about daily or weekly spot prices. If they drop in the short term, I don't expect them to stay down. If they go very high, and I think it is sustainable, I might buy more YCA if it doesn't move accordingly, but current spot isn't really a factor for me. I'm here because I'm bullish on uranium over the long term, not because of current price fluctuations.