Good post hairpin – I have previously said that I don't think ags wants to produce uranium but the offer from Heathgate has not been forthcoming or has not been good enough, so ags has had to hunker down and make like a long term producer. I have tried to get some info on GA and how they have come through the carnage in the US but they seem to run a very closed shop. They have got some very good government contracts though and we can assume that they are in a position to buy if they wanted to pay the price. In discussion at the agm with a director it seemed to me that the problem is the gap between the parties and perhaps Heathgate expected this to fall into their lap. Its over to ags to convince them that its not. We were told that Heathgate had spent up to $47m defining the resource so far and deserved some early payoff with production but ags also were looking for further exploration and definition. Heathgate also need more resource to fill there production capacity so I think we can expect the late 2009 timetable to be met. 1.Even with the global meltdown uranium seems to be on the comeback and countries are unlikely to place their new reactors on hold with the need for more clean and reliable energy source so fresh in their minds 2. Heathgate need 100% ownership – for privacy and also because this resource is so good and growing. What sort of mess would they have if Areva owned ags.? This is all very wearing on this poor battered shareholder but I feel its worth a punt. Its white knuckle stuff but our 36% share holder wants value for his investment and all we can do is abandon ship or go along for the ride – Heathgate have to deal with him or put up with a partner and lots of publicity on every development stage. An offer of $3 is on the cards for ags share of 4 mile
AGS Price at posting:
36.3¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
