moving forward, page-30

Not really surprised that they need more money if they are serious to bring the project a step further.
Bring it on. What attracted me to PEN and where i believe it differs from its peers is the following:

1. The project is in Wyoming US. You could not think of a better place to have a Uranium mine. Mining and environmental approvals are expected to be relativily fast. Compare that with Australia. How long is it going to take to get approval for any new mines in SA, WA let alone Queensland. The environmental approval processes in Aus will be lenghty and costly and when finally approved the opportunity may be lost. And then consider the risk of any mine development in an unstable African nation (lesser so for Namibia and SA). I believe that there is only a 1 to 5 year window for any new mines as major advances in the energy sector will make fission technology less attractive and a costly niche in the long term.

2. I like the in-situ leaching process. Clean, cheap, about 80% recovery rate. No digging. Chemicals to be used are simple. Maybe the only problem could be contamination with other minerals during extraction using ion exchange resins. From greenfield to full commissioning and production would be fast. With substantially lower risk of cost blow outs.

3. There is still more opportunity to increase the resource.

4. The current Market cap is very low and equates to less than $1.0 per pound of Uranium found. So compares ver favourable with its peers. The Karoo resource is an extra.

5. Agree that the large amount of scrip could be a hindrance. Agree that consolidation would help.

Just my toughts on the matter.