AGM 2014 - recap, page-13

Yes gents I concur with the summaries of the AGM today and appreciate the postings.

While disappointed to learn a few home truths today from a fellow shareholder I agree with Iceman regarding SLX lack of control over the process or the market. They can't make the market change, they can't stop the tsunami in Japan.

If you're like me then you invested in SILEX because you believed/trusted/hoped the technology had great potential to revolutionise enrichment and were prepared to take the risk.

When the deal was done with GLE the stock price went up irrationally. (That's when I should have sold ALL of my holdings but I didn't know any better). In reality how could the stock be worth $5/$10/$13 when there were no earnings and no prospect for earnings for a decade (yes 10 years from 2006 was going to be the best case scenario for an operating plant sending $$$ to SILEX).

OK so what has changed. Well a bloody big storm wiped out an aged reactor while killing 20,000 (as noted by MG today in a sobering reminder). He was at pains to say that a 3rd gen reactor would be at NO risk under similar circumstances.

So Japan shut down, Germany followed. As if Nuclear power doesn't have enough opposition from the overly vociferous ill-informed as it was. Now they had the emotional argument even if it was all sensationalism.

So back to the question of why did I (and maybe you) buy into SILEX - well for me, sure a big share price appreciation ($50 was touted by a close confidant to the company as serious estimation) is a comfortable place to be.

But the real hope was for big annual dividends - the real reason for 'investing' (aka long term).

Until today I was concerned that not only would this day never come but that I would have to offload my holding at a heavy loss (average only 2.40 odd, still in front overall but still feeling devastated).

However a couple of things I note:

• A discussion with a fellow shareholder I fully trust highlighted that SILEX ability to negotiate a royalty, being talked of being at least 10% (which can only be conservative given what they tend to release) in perpetuity is UNPRECEDENTED and of enormous value - quite an achievement. Further, MG was very clear that that is in tact, not under any threat and likely to go up than down as they continue to optimise 'stuff'.
• Nuclear power is not under the threats I had thought it was from PRISM, thorium (a non-fissile material apparently hence needs U to work)
• The need for baseload power from same will continue.
• While not a believer in man made climate change I am a fan of clean air funnily enough and any steps to produce clean energy are positive in my book and Governments seem to be heading that way now. Despite our Govt bucking the trend it will change its tune to keep up at some stage. If badged as clean energy instead of climate change BS then maybe Govt would be more amenable. Market forces will change them eventually.

So end of the day I guess I hold my shares and when I'm retired they will feed me instead of helping retire early. Pissed off sure but not totally hopeless. A 5-10 year delay on U. But who knows what might come from T and/or SS.

One other observation was MG's discomfort/fumbling in talking to the business but when a question of science came up he shifted gear and was able to rattle off answers without pause.

And that is why he should not be MD.

Lisa was underwhelming too I thought. I could have read the letter out loud. Not even convinced she wrote it given the delivery.

I won't be surprised if they retreat further though.

While the management team is in defensive mode it may be time to pepper them with some pointed questions regarding the progress of the deals for T and SS.