G'Evening Bruham, Thank you for your post. Yes, i will be...

G'Evening Bruham,

Thank you for your post. Yes, i will be forthright on WU as i was on BLR.

What gets me going is all these posters yelling 'vote no' and now are the top cheerleaders for WU, without thinking.

Glasier has done more in 4 months for WU, and BLR than was done in many years at BLR. If Hanson Taylor was so close to production before WU came along, BLR would have :

1. completed the 1st ablation machine to the extent it was operational.
2. signed uranium sales contracts.
3. started a 2nd ablation and possibly a 3rd ablation machine to mine for HT ore.
4. had the sell side search analysts write reports on BLR.

BLR management did not complete these tasks but somehow, Glasier did. Glasier did this all in September 2015 until December 2015, four months. Four months ! I challenge anyone on this forum to find a uranium CEO that moved as quickly as Glasier.

The share price is the only concern to me right now. And because the shares are tightly held, there is a big gap in the bid and offer. Shareholders like yourself are not a seller at below $4.50, nor should you be. And the news of WU is not out just yet, so the buyers are trying to 'pick off' the silly sellers around $3.00. We know WU wants to list on the U.S.A. exchange. Even PEN sees the benefit of this and i am not a big fan of G. Simpson. I would even expect Energy Fuels to leave its TSX exchange for a U.S only listing in 2016. The WU is a 2016, that is where the returns will be made. People buying in December 2015 should be well rewarded in my opinion.

Back to the share price. Assuming HT is a ZERO, WU can produce 1 million pounds of uranium per annum from the Sunday. If WU is signing contract to deliver today, assuming long term price of $45, this means Glasier must be confident of making money. Assuming $25 per pound cost, this is a gross margin of $20 per pound. $20 x 1,000,000 pounds per annum is $20 million in EBITDA. Uranium companies like Cameco are trading at 13 times EBITDA. Non producers like UEC are trading at 8 times EBITDA. So putting WU on a similar rating as UEC, 8 x $20 million is US$160 million. using 1.30 as the exchange rate to C$, this is about C$208 million. Divide by 17 million shares, this is a share price of C$12.23 per share. Versus the current share price, this is a potential increase of over 4 times. This why i do not worry so much about the current share price. Glasier is delivering on his promises so i will put the shares in the bottom drawer and forget about them for 1 year. It takes time for word to get out about the value inside WU.

Of course i used HT at ZERO value. Imagine what the share price can be if HT was in production also at 1 million pounds per annum??? Double C$12.23? More ? certainly not less in my mind. Size and scale matter in this business.

Finally, we read last month how U.S.A. utilities want U.S.A. mined uranium. This gives WU the advantage over most of the other producers. Only Energy Fuels, UR-Energy and possibly PEN are U.S.A. producers. Uranium 1 has an ISR deposit that is losing money. Same with Cameco. But the Cameco pounds are going to India.

Yes, the posters like Slick that are close to Glasier will have other thoughts and negative comments but this is my thinking. Glasier knows how to navigate the Colorado regulatory issues. So far, Glasier has delivered. I stick with the winners. i back winners.

Cait