Forbes and a much more focused article, not one that tries to literally cover the world geographically and in terms of ree miners! LOL
"I'd say this was a useful exercise."
I had to pull teeth to get some posters here to discuss the valid issues that the SA info raised.
The article raised a lot of valid issues they needed to be clarified which you helped to do.
I suspect that there are some juvenile posters on this board that dont want to have a civil and adult debate/discussion.
I guess you would find that would be on any board
What raised my concern on ALKEF was that the article mentioned the minimal in rare earths with expected production of less than 5,000 tons per annum and their was enough uranium in the deposit that Alkane put a note in its presentation that the New South Wales province in Australia bans uranium mining.
That info needed to be clarified.
BTW, I would bet that 99% of the new REE investors have never heard of 43-101 filing until the SeekingAlpha artile
There is always info to be descovered even at SeekingAlpha.
I would NEVER sugest that someone 'blindly' buys or sells a stock based on any SeekingAlpha or The Street article
No intention that was to be directed at anything you wrote. It is just that it is so amazing the folks would put so much store in a flyweight SeekingAlpha, online, article. Of course there were some obvious points like the political stability, etc. that I have alluded to previously, but my comments were specific to dumping ALKEF only based on lack of understanding of the ree minerals/industry or state political realities--can't expect that author of such a globally focused/all miner focus would have such important info.
NOBODY ever said to blindly believe the Seeking Alpha article. all I said was that they made some valid points which they did
It's too bad that too many posters get to defensive instead of countering the points made with facts
It took torpeau phakosurgeon to counter the points without the nonsese
No, no, no keep this under cover and everyone believe the "profoundly authoritative, almost Biblical" SeekingAlpha article so we can get a nice drop and pick up more ALKEF before the SeekingAlpha Dittoheads realize they have trusted a totally unreliable source of information. LOL
What are the writer's ree credentials to write about the entire global ree industry and most all of the players? And then to give stock advice on specific companies! LOL Sounds like something maybe only Jesus, the Buddha or Mohammad should try. LOL Accept whatever such an egotist says with a grain of salt.
You don't need 'credentials' to do thorough DD
I have not seen anybody else bring up the uranium issue but maybe I missed it
Read the comments on his on his article and you will see he gets a lot of props
BTW, I don't think he did this article by himself
I agree but I like look at bothe sides of ones who makes the most commpelling arguments
I cant just simply ignore the points that Seeking Alpha made. That does not mean that it isn't a great potential but I am not going into this REE buble blind..
"We eliminated Alkane Resources because based on its corporate presentation the project is minimal in rare earths with expected production of less than 5,000 tons per annum with other mineral products the primary focus of the project. We also noted that while the deposit is not classified as radioactive there is enough uranium in the deposit that Alkane put a note in its presentation that the New South Wales province in Australia bans uranium mining."
Interestingly, I view that ancillary mineral production as a BIG PLUS! LOL I have never been impressed with SeekingAlpha writers--they seem to have gotten their credentials writing for Women's Wear Daily! In the case of this article in question, far to broad and too shallow to be given my credence, IMO. Actually, I hope we all get rich with our investments irrespective of which ree stocks you own. Except, of course, that juvenile "Fester" "Pustual"> LOL