Nuclear power and uranium mining 'multi-decade' investment theme

I am glad that you refer to the Seekingaalpha 'article' as this seem to be one of the only very few articles which claim that Extract Resources's shares are overvalued.

I am afraid, I haven't come across many other (if any!) commentators, industry 'insiders', stock analysts, stockbrokers, investment newsletters, magazines, websites and blogs, or, indeed Extract and Kalahari shareholders: Rio Tinto Plc, Itochu and the Geiger fund whom are negative about the potential of Extract resources and the likelyhood that they do not have a worldbeating uranium resource to be mined in a few years time.

Rather than refering to other companaies, you may want to elaborate on such with regards to Extract Resources?

Also I take issue that you refer to British American Tobacco, Scottish & Southern Energy, National Grid, Vodafone, Tesco and Pearson as "Pink Sheet Shares".
 
I have no idea what you are talking about, where did I say that Tesco and the others were pink sheet shares?
 
Your "The Pink Sheet shares that your newsletter is promoting are the scam"
You say "pink sheet shares" and you say "your newsletter" don't you?

Perhaps, if you had taken the time and effort to actually have a look around www.early-retirement-investor.com you may have understood what the web site is about: information on income investing and dividend re-investment as well as 'how to benefit' from long term investment themes, such nuclear power and emerging uranium miners, in order to retire comfortably.

See for examples of our only email alert aka "newsletter" called: DividendAlerts: http://www.early-retirement-investor.com/dividend-alerts.html
 
Your "The Pink Sheet shares that your newsletter is promoting are the scam"
You say "pink sheet shares" and you say "your newsletter" don't you?

Perhaps, if you had taken the time and effort to actually have a look around www.early-retirement-investor.com you may have understood what the web site is about: information on income investing and dividend re-investment as well as 'how to benefit' from long term investment themes, such nuclear power and emerging uranium miners, in order to retire comfortably.

See for examples of our only email alert aka "newsletter" called: DividendAlerts: http://www.early-retirement-investor.com/dividend-alerts.html

Kalahari Minerals is a pink sheet stock, symbol is KMPLF.PK
 
I am glad that you refer to the Seekingaalpha 'article' as this seem to be one of the only very few articles which claim that Extract Resources's shares are overvalued. .

Well Extract Resources didnt go overboard when they bought their corporate headquarters did they?
 

Attachments

  • Extract Resources HQ.jpg
    Extract Resources HQ.jpg
    214.9 KB · Views: 370
Well Extract Resources didnt go overboard when they bought their corporate headquarters did they?

If this is indeed Extract's headquarters, I am glad that they 'did not go overboard". At least they seem to be spending shareholders funds NOT on some fancy expensive tower block, but rather on / in the ground in Namibia
 
Kalahari Minerals is a pink sheet stock, symbol is KMPLF.PK

And Kalahari Minerals is also listed on the Alternative Investment Market . . . so what? Does that make their investment in Extract Resources of any less importance?

By the way your comments so far can be interpreted that all "pink sheet companies" are scams? Are they?

I am not an expert in pink sheet companies, as you seem to be, but my understanding of pink sheet companies is that many foreign companies, and smaller companies, don't want the expense of listing on a US exchange and trade via the pink sheets in the US.

I am sure shareholders of Kalahari Minerals are happy to hear that Kalahari did not go for the expense of listing on a US exchange.
 
Last edited:
And what is the problem with any of that? US private investors being limited in whether they may or may not invest in such a company. Is that your problem: limited tradability in the USA?

What about the merits of the uranium in the ground which Extract has been referring to in multiple disclosures at ASX, as well as Kalahari's AIM disclosures. And your 'sources' which disqualify any or all of their claims of uranium?
 
just to add a quick opinion. I have no knowledge about the companies mentioned, but in the first paragraph it states that there is a looming uranium shortage". Im afraid this is untrue, just look at the data on the World Nuclear Association website, if there were to be a massive expansion of nuclear worldwide there could potentially be a shortfall, but nuclear power plants are not and will not come online quickly enough for demand to surge. for a number of reasons be they a shortage of reactor vessels, skilled labour as well as financing cost s (upfront $5 billion) In fact it is asia and russia which are building the most.

An interesting fact: The USA gets 50% of its uranium for its nuclear power plants from decomissioned russian and US nuclear missles!!
 
If this is indeed Extract's headquarters, I am glad that they 'did not go overboard". At least they seem to be spending shareholders funds NOT on some fancy expensive tower block, but rather on / in the ground in Namibia

Well continuing on the theme of corporate responsibility and delivering value to shareholders it seems Kalahari share an office with 10 or 20 other businesses. I think this is also known as a virtual office or maildrop.

http://www.google.com/search?q=+38+...DN+office+&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=2304850557947867
 
How many companies are there who share an office block with other companies; what's the problem with that? Any idea how high the rents are in central London?

I am still waiting for your comments on whether any pink sheet company is a scam, as well as whether any of the uranium in the ground which Extract claims is a scam, whether the opinions of many analysts, stockbrokers, investment newsletters, magazines, etc, etc are all wrong claiming that Kalahari Minerals and its shareholding in Extract are not a scam?

Just a yes or no would do. Plus some of your sources to support your views.
 
just to add a quick opinion. I have no knowledge about the companies mentioned, but in the first paragraph it states that there is a looming uranium shortage". Im afraid this is untrue, just look at the data on the World Nuclear Association website, if there were to be a massive expansion of nuclear worldwide there could potentially be a shortfall, but nuclear power plants are not and will not come online quickly enough for demand to surge. for a number of reasons be they a shortage of reactor vessels, skilled labour as well as financing cost s (upfront $5 billion) In fact it is asia and russia which are building the most.

An interesting fact: The USA gets 50% of its uranium for its nuclear power plants from decomissioned russian and US nuclear missles!!

Hi Metalstrader

Thank you for your most welcome contribution.

You are right that the next few years, depending on how many nuclear power plants will indeed start-up there may or may not be a shortage of uranium.

However, several respected sources have indicated that the shortage will start as early as 2012 (e.g. the decommissioning of Russian nukes will be lapsing in 2013 and so far it is not expected to be extended), if not earlier. As a result, many comentators are expecting an increase in uranium 'spot' price. If there was no shortage, why the expected increase of the uranium spot price?

Be also aware that new uranium mines and processing facilities take between two and four years from the first 'spade' hitting the ground to the moment of first uranium processed and becoming available in some quantities. So, also on this note, there appears to be definately a uranium shortage looming.
 
Top