charlie aitken report, page-20

Yes. They get the best of both worlds. One they have massively cheap production costs and two they can produce up to 20 times as much that can be done now.

With the potentially massive shortfall in production verses demand in the future for enriched uranium (EU), GLE may be be able to grab a big slice of the market. It would take a while for them to oversupply the market. It takes at least 5 years to bring another plant into operation. At least in the US anyway.

If they produce 10 times the amount of EU and their costs to produce the EU are 1 tenth of their competitor, they can just take over the supply side of the market. They can produce huge volumes with one plant. That's why I can't see management selling out or recommending any takover. I guess that it why GLE are calling it a "gamechanger".

Now that it is proven technology, I can't even see the NRC saying no to the approval of the plant. I could be wrong, but as I understand it if GLE can't go ahead with it, then they will simply go to another country if they can. If GLE are prevented from building a plant somewhere, then the tech reverts back to Silex. Can you imagine how much the chinese would be willing to pay for this tech ? I don't think that the US would even contemplate letting it out of their hands.

Management know this and I can't see them recommending a takeover.

As with anything stated here, this is merely an opinion and is not a recomendation or financial advice. we we all need to do our own research and seek professional advice.

I could be wrong and it can all turn ugly.