BUC,
I see you are still stirring again.
Yes, WU could pay $13,5 million because it will be into production. BLR won't . BLR, after reading the auditor comments, ceases to be a going concern very soon. Understand the phrase 'ceasing to be an ongoing concern'.
IMO, Glasier goes exactly to the other side of the JV. You came up with the idea, you can have the credit when this happens. Hopefully Glasier is reading this board or someone here is forwarding Glasier your idea.
You neglect to take into consideration the vanadium. Long term contracts can be signed today at $50 plus escalators. Add in another $125 per ton for vanadium and the economics of WU are much better than you think, even excluding ablation. Hence another reason why HT is not a 'must have'. IMO
As to the grade of HT 600ppm, the WU grades at 2200ppm, almost 4 times better. And oh yes, that vanadium kicker again of $125 per ton that comes for free. You mention 1200 ppm in selective spots at HT. I spoke to a Denison rep a few months ago when I was doing DD on the area and he told me that in some underground areas of the Sunday Complex there are areas of over 4000 ppm. Oh yes, and that pesky vanadium credit of $125 comes again. IMO
So Yes, Glasier holds all the cards. Yes, In My Opinion....Not BLR and not the Wyoming ablation group. Because BLR has no money and neither do the guys in Wyoming. There is a clear reason why the ablation company is being run out of Scriven's house. Hopefully we find out soon.
But the real key. WU has mill access, BLR has zero mill access. BUC, if the deal falls, where will you advise the BLR board to send the HT ore? Pinon Ridge? No. White Mesa? Could be full by the time HT starts production in 2017. Shootaring? Won't reopen in our lifetime. Sweetwater? A snowballs chance in hell.
IMO, IMO, iMO.......is there really a need for IMO? Isn't everything posted here just opinions?
Cait
Expand
