Ann: Presentation - DFS Completed for Lance, page-126

Always, thank you. I appreciate your input and the way you deliver it, @arsenic.

To your point, HotCopper is generally not the place to discuss cashflows or valuation models (whereas Twitter is full of such discussions), which to my mind possibly speaks to the different sort of investors each medium attracts. It is not a criticism, there are many paths to reach the top of the mountain, but ultimately when you invest in a spec company you are investing in the hope of future cashflows, so it makes sense to try and calculate what those cashflows will look like. This is precisely why companies like PEN have to release a PEA then a DFS, to extrapolate out those numbers. What I've noticed is that on the uranium threads, the conversation is usually about the macro, not the individual company metrics. My theory here is because either a) the individual figures are not well understood, or b) they are not that impressive, so it's more exciting/convenient to talk about the bigger picture, or c) a combination of both.

If you look at my cashflow numbers earlier in this thread, I would suggest with a touch of cynicism that the reason there aren't a lot of cashflow figures provided in the PEN DFS is because overall the numbers are fairly underwhelming. Of course the company wants to present everything in as positive light as possible, their jobs literally depend on it. "Keeping it simple" is an excuse, in my mind. The DFS is your defining document to explain to the market what you're proposing to deliver. I understand this will not be a popular opinion here, but the numbers here are not exciting - work out the cashflow numbers on different *sustained* uranium prices and then apply an EBITDA multiple in line with the industry average (say 4-6x). The numbers are not big. Again, to my point about cynicism, the company basically buried the NPV figure at the very back of the DFS. Almost every other one I've read is at the front, because it's a crucial piece of information.