basic value comparison, page-14

'The principle point I wanted to make was the uncertainty about how regulators would deal with AT and/or UBHM for Uranium, not to mention whether it's viable at scale or not..'

I take your point and its valid. There are no guarantees of immunity from regulatory delays, anyone with any history in the uranium space should understand this.

'To believe some turn of phrase or interpretation of rules made before the days of AT may exempt BLR from undergoing the scrutiny associated with permitting, Agreement State or not, is foolhardy, and for the cheerleading squad to continuously carry on as if it's "in the bag" does those less able to discern wood for trees an injustice. I can name a few here that are apparently so star struck by recent events - a hard and uncomfortable landing awaits in my opinion!

I agree, but its their risk.

My point is only pertinent to my own assessment of SP upside on the proposed corporate activity, and moreover, on the market having actually seen for the first time since Fukushima, external investment in and transformational planning of, an otherwise typical U-junior, in an otherwise depressed market.

In other words someone is putting their money where their mouth is, and bugger me...its in BLR! Now why would that be happening? thats the question that the market will be asking itself when and if money changes hands...and thats an upside catalyst in my view.

The other thing that I don't believe is coincidental, is that the acquisition is timed for Feb 2014 and this should be post-AT commercial confirmation, according to progress thus far. If its a lemon its a lemon, BUT, nowhere in the acquisition funding detail is there any mention of the deal being contingent on the above. I'm comfortable with the assumption that AM has seen enough already, and for me money talks.

The issue of regulatory constants is in my view connected more with the decision of an investor to punt on SP movements based solely on profitability once in production (excluding a jump in the spot), and how long they are prepared to lock their funds away on that basis.

Given that (for example) PEN is purported to be close to opening the front door, the market seems still to be ignorant of this fact given todays low of 2.2c, or at least reluctant to reward near-term producers for that status.

I don't think this has anything to do with the quality of the company, I think its entirely about market insecurity across the sector.

Once the price turns, there is more potential upside in this space than in any other IMO.