I see your point - but on this occasion I fail to concur that there may be any degree of pointlessness in mentioning a rising copper price simply because we are not yet producers. After all, an important axiom of economy is "Future Value" and this is just one reason why share prices escalate in numerous non-producers world-wide.
IMO, to ignore a rising or falling copper price when considering CDU (or SFR +++) would be akin to allocating a SP value as a function of IGV without considering the Extent of Exploration, Infrastructure developement, contractual arrangements, Database content, status of Government pre-requisites (ML, EIS, Native Title, and numerous other hurdles) along with site developement(structures) and accumulation of mining equipment and machinery. Much more can be added in here.
A similar scenario would be the allocation of an IGV based on a Brazillion tons on U308 in an IOCGU, while the present state Government exists in Queensland. ATM that is zilch.......but, a change of Government is going to happen, and mining of Uranium in Queensland then becomes more "when" than "if" as a result of that change.
So, while IGV of Uranium at Rocklands is zero because of present Government legislation, FV as a function of the Uranium Resource (when/if it becomes known) will be considered by long term investors because they will take into account a change of government and subsequent change in legislation which will allow mining of Uranium.
Soverign risk (in its many forms) aside, this post is merely to point out why I believe copper price rising and falling has a direct relevance to the CDU SP, regardless of our status as a producer. e.g. If the Cu price went to $6.00 a lb that would have an effect, would it not? How about $8?
BTW, thanks for your well wishes.
CDU Price at posting:
$2.06 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
