Yeah - if point 1 then just incompetence in the fact that risk...

Yeah - if point 1 then just incompetence in the fact that risk mitigation and drafting up agreements couldn't have prevented this situation, so not total incompetence, but maybe naivety?

If everything is executed perfectly and nothing else goes wrong, there will still need to be dilution and/or additional borrowing or finance. I agree with you that getting to full independent production is a target worth aiming for, but there are risks involved in doing this and its not exactly a picnic bringing a new asset into production in this inflationary construction environment, especially on-time and in budget..

I have often seen the crucial development/early production stage spiral out of control and it's often a series of modest inconveniences/delays or breaches of contracts/legal disputes and other technical/teething/startup issues that all conspire into a larger problem and less-than-ideal funding solution, where eventually the funding solution eats up all the upside for shareholders, just as they were expecting to be rewarded. It can happen gradually like the boiling frog syndrome, and this is one of the most insidious value traps for mining investors.

Everyone agrees that in this case the commodity price will improve, PEN shareholders beleive it, and I would suggest that the management of UEC also beleive it, I'm just wondering if UEC has found a fast track way of vertical integration and market dominance at the expense of shareholders of PEN.

When all the contractural solutions rely on other people being nice guys and/or commodity prices behaving perfectly for your own convenience then I get a bit nervous.