u308 is the future, page-12

Well argued, Jamie.

What he fails to realise is that not all uranium companies are created equal.

Bannerman is no Peninsula, just as Peninsula is no Cameco.

If he cared to drill down into some key words: sentiment shifts, $555 million capex (as opposed to) $60 million capex, cash costs of US$41 per pound (as opposed to) US$30 per pound, years away from production (Bannerman, Namibia, 2015**, PEN, Lance, 2012), weakening spot and/or long term uranium prices.

**Bannerman is aiming to commence production in 2015 and anticipates the creation of more than 2500 new jobs through the mine, its suppliers and contractors.

http://www.commonwealth-of-nations.org/Namibia/Minerals/Bannerman_Resources_/welcome

NB: my updated data shows Etango will now come in at $638 million and US$42 cash cost per pound (good luck with that!)

Now, besides the fact that Bannerman have no DFS at or near completion, have no strategic partners or off-take agreements to speak of, are in a region which has recently sent shockwaves through the investment community (loose lips sink ships, and if history is any guide, it will not be the last), PEN and Bannerman may as well be on different planets.

PEN are in the box seat because they can profit from rising uranium prices sooner than Bannerman can, as revenues begin piling through the front door.

The Etango project is just that: a project. Not a milch cow for years to come.

Sentiment is one thing, production is another. The two, therefore, are mutually exclusive.