quarterly report

Hi Folks

We have $4.5 million in the bank....and a heap of frequent flyer points ;)

I noticed a few things. Please correct me if I am mistaken.

Bulgaria is "Not 'before' the first quarter 2008"
I realise there are issues with timing but these 'not before' announcements should be more 'accountable'
Try 'not after' or 'by ....'

We are again fed with 'information fodder' for 95% of the report. Background info becoming repetitive...particularly without additional information.

Kazakhstan does not appear to have any timeframes or urgency.

The Brzkov/Veznice applications intrigue me. Veznice appeal underway. Brzkov too by the looks of it. Thomas Schrimpf is working away at the data just to make sure the companys efforts are not wasted here.....

Am I missing something?

We have any number of projects in various stages of negotiations and the company are focusing on rejected applications in a country thats already refused their offer for Rozna.
Is this the best place to put your resources and the main man?
I am asking the question here to others.

Pribram;
"Planning and permitting for trial mining has
commenced, with trial mining likely to commence in the first half of 2008 if the current review
is positive.

So we have 'first half' 2008 committment from Uran for Pribram if all is well.

Ukraine:

" The Company was formally advised that secrecy
conditions on Surskoye have been lifted. This follows
the lifting of secrecy over Novogurevskoye earlier in
the year."

Hmm thats nice Uran and what exactly 'is' that? What does that mean? Why not release 'some' of that data?

".....to discuss 'implementation of
the feasibility studies' of the Novogurevskoye and
Surskoye uranium projects as set out in a protocol
signed in December 2006. The Company was invited
to tour the Zheltye Vody uranium processing plant and
the nearby Novogurevskoye project."

Uran I would have thought after nearly 1 year of delays that would have been quite a clear cut exercise?

and this;

"Significant delays were experienced in commencing the feasibility due to the formation of
Ukratomprom and an inconclusive result in the 2006 elections. Following the election in October
2007 of a new government in Ukraine, the Company anticipates that the delays experienced during
the year will be overcome."

So folks, the company can give us Pribram time frame..albeit 'first half 2008' sometime, they can tell us that Bulgarian permits are 'not before first quarter 2008', they can tell us..well...nothing about what the MOU means in Kazakhstan except the exchange of technologies to proceed towards targets...

But get this...they CANNOT or WILL NOT give us any detail on Ukraine deposits timelines despite the fact that theyve spelt out its a clear run since the elections (note Uran Elections were end of September..not October;...I know October makes it sound better re delays...but it was September 30)

Its not good enough folks.
"The Company anticipates that the delays experienced during the year will be overcome"

I expect more than that from Uran from the flagship projects they themselves said would be acquired and in production by 2007.

Those statements are unclear and not good enough.

Pribram gets a 'first half 2008' call. Ukraine projects dont.

Someone wake them up at Uran please :)