1. Clearly, Pala, JP, Blackrock et al want to make money - but its a mistake to place too much confidence in the decisions of the 'big boys'. They often get it 'wrong' (e.g. Pala's initial investment of $21.6M at 7.5c, Blackrock's $11.7M at 4c and JPM's $5M at 3.1c). JPMorgan in particular has made some spectacular mistakes.
2. Your comment that they "had the cash and could have invested in ANY company in the WORLD, but decided the best place to put those funds for the return expected was PEN.....go figure" is an exaggeration. Its a significant investment for Pala and reasonably significant for Resource Capital Fund but for Blackrock (with more than a trillion dollars of FUM) and JPM, the commitment is hardly even pocket money.
3. There are plenty of uranium explorers with permit processes in progress - as summarised on NRC's web site. More importantly, there are a number of existing producers operating well below capacity due to the U price, who are in a position to ramp up production if and when U prices improve
4. Of course a movement of 0.1c on .157% of the share base will cause some 'to have kittens' (i.e. those with a near-term exit strategy) because it is 6% of their asset's value. I'm sure the 11M seller (s) at 1.7c would have preferred the extra $110,000 they would have pocketed at 1.8c. Agree longer term holders shouldn't stress.
5. "imagine servicing the interest on a loan with cashflow as it currently". Indeed and that may happen with the ARSA payment - either that or more dilution
Have a look at the T 20 from 2014
6. Yes, PEN is making a TRANSITION from explorer to producer (with reserves, cost to explore & permitting under their belt) and that is why the existing producers in Wyoming (with similar M&I resources) provide a relevant valuation benchmark. These benchmarks indicate that a multiple of 2 to 4 is unlikely at this stage of the long term nuclear fuel cycle
7. I am, despite your claim to the contrary, comparing apples with apples on the relevant parameters (M&I resource inlieu of the preferred 'proved and probable resources'). Inferred resources don't count in resource valuations - check the Jorc Code.
8. A fully permitted ISL mine in Wyoming may 'look attractive'. No argument with that. But that does not mean a lack of competition from other sources. Why, you may ask, did one of our major shareholders (Areva) sign an offtake with a REE producer for 1.5M lbs of their U byproduct a couple of weeks ago. A by-product, incidently, comprising 55M lbs of M&I U resource - or more than 3 times the M&I resource at Lance.
PEN Price at posting:
1.7¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
