Ann: Appendix 5B March 2023 Quarterly Cashflow, page-56

I have read lots of comments/articles about the increasing number of reactors being built, especially in China. However, I have yet to see any analysis of uranium consumption based on expected go-live dates for these. Since reactors easily take 20-30 years to be built and tested as ready to go live, this is obviously an important time factor impacting on uranium demand.
I have been hearing about an imminent increase in demand for over 7 years based on the planned increase in reactors but how often do you see a timeline of enabled reactors with real live demand?
Now, I do recognise that a utility building a new reactor will line up its supplies of reactor fuel well in advance of go-live, with off-take agreements (7 years probably) but they also need contracts with the very few enrichment processors who can process that yellowcake.

PDN is a good example of how a Chinese company acted to secure supplies well in advance of increased consumption, to the extent that it is now a significant SH.

This is a long term game but market commentators persistently try to make it sound as though it is just around the corner. Short term traders are the ones who can profit along the way.in the near term, with demand speculation.
Sites have been mothballed around the world in Khazakastan, Canada, Namibia, Malawi and even Australia (eg Honeymoon). These can be brought into production fairly quickly and so head off new entrants. DYL is not one of those, even if PDN as JB's old stamping ground in Namibia, is.
DFSes have been published for Mulga Rock and Tumas, but no FID for either, as of now.
With today's SP, DYL is starting to look attractive compared to companies like ACB and AEE which are still at exploration stage with resources defined and a DFS in place. DYL has better geographic dispersion involving Namibia (U3O2 friendly) and Australia (albeit politically negative).