Hi Fedex,I get sick of having to justify holding both MTN &...

Hi Fedex,

I get sick of having to justify holding both MTN & AGS.

Fedex, try telling a PDN shareholder that it is overvalued and that they paid to much for SMM.

Come to think of it, try telling Areva - Cameco - Denison -Sinosteel - Mega Uranium - Heathgate and a host of others that are investing into Australian uranium companies that they are paying too much in investment opportunities.

If you were to base your investment decisions purely as lb in the ground, then you could not go past AEX as the cheapest by a mile.

The problem with that is, you would not have taken into account the - Management - Feasability of mining - True indication of resource.

Fedex, you and others have so often made the point how expensive AGS is according to M/C lb in the ground ratio.

Well Fedex, how many lbs in the ground does Beverley 4 Mile have???

How can someone put a true valuation on a company when no one knows how big the total resource is???

The second point, at what premium can a shareprice be justified if it is expected to be a producer within the next couple of years given the next few years global demand of uranium??

Fedex, i know you can't answer those questions.

However, my decision for holding AGS is that i believe it will add further shareholder value over the next year or two. It may not grow as fast as others. How ever, i have no doubt that it will grow.

As for MTN, it has other hurdles to overcome.
Most importantly, being swallowed up without realising shareholder value.

The longer MTN remains an ASX listed company the more chance of shareholder value.

Thats why i hold MTN.

Cheers markco2