Hello Buc,
How was AT going to bring early cash flows? Goviex is 3-4 years away from production. So who else is contracted to use AT? No one, otherwise it would have been announced.
So there are no early cash flow opportunities for AT. Other than WUC, who else can use AT? Which uranium companies can use AT ? Cameco ? Rio Tinto? Not Energy Fuels, not UR Energy, not URanium Resources, not Anfield, not Fission, not Peninsula, not Laramide, not Alliance. Maybe the hydrocarbon soil remediation sector. But then there needs to be an oil spill. But I do not want to see another BP disaster in the GOM.
If you thought the farm was being sold for a pittance, why did shareholders let the share price drop to ,2? If ,61 is a pittance why was it allowed to drop?
And the costs of R&D for AT are not behind us. There is major costs to build anything commercial. I will spell it out to you. How many days would the 5tph need to be operating, assuming an 8 hour day, 5 days per week to process the 10,000 ton October stockpile? With the cost of labour, power, water, etc, do you think this is commercial? And what mill will process such a small amount of ore? Not White Mesa, it is shut. Sweetwater? No. Shootering? No.
I see short term greed and a lack of understanding here. People complaining about losing money in BLR and when a solution is presented by Glasier that should get the investment returned, BLR shareholders want more. But they were not buyers of BLR at ,2 or ,3 or even ,4.
Do you want to buy BLR cheap? Vote against the deal and watch BLR enter receivership. Because if BLR shareholders do not accept this lifeline, BLR will be toast. Then you can try to bid on the BLR assets when they are auctioned off, if there is anything left after Azarga gets paid first . And Glasier would have moved on to brighter pastures while building his mill.
Any BLR shareholder that votes against this deal is playing with fire and is putting us BLR shareholders chances of making back our losses at huge risk.
Cait
Expand
