The pendejo does not mention URG exceeding rate production gives it a low ball rate for yearly estimates
on production, if anything will probably be able to produce more uranium that exceeded there own estimates,
probably 800,000 plus per year, if there over exceeding capacity on a new mine, new employees in that
short of time my guess we will be well over the mines initial capacity or there more uranium then there letting
on, both scenarios are more than likely a given, should be a cash machine from here on out and once they
start paying off some loans and new contracts will keep this puppy humming....
The writer of the SA article appears to be doing a CYA type follow-up here. I sense that the writer was threatened or felt threatened by some discussion with URG or those supporting URG's position.
The writer appears to be short URG or trying to help some group that is short. This is because this follow--up still pushes the envelope of creating the belief that URG has a very long ride ahead by using numbers that are very, very low as pointed out by others here.
I give zero credibility to this writer. If the writer even had any real sense of looking at the potential here, the numbers would have offered at least the possibility of much more positive outcome from production, margins, profitability, and growth.
As typical, these SA articles must be viewed with the belief that the writers have some kind of vested interest in the stocks that they are discussing regardless of saying that they have no position.
Sure looks like URG is going to survive. You think this writer and his group of thugs already covered by now and hold a large long position?!?! LOL
Anyone that has a clear understanding of this company knew that these things were all going to fall into place including the start of production and the bond funding. Only a matter of time before first meaningful revenues are generated and company starts growing. The largest risks over past several years are behind URG. Greatest trouble now is market sentiment on U sector which will change.
That's probably why there exceeding production....lot's of Uranium in those hillz boyz....and state of the art
ISR plant CCJ might want to but em out just to get there hands on it so they can duplicate it....lol
Don't read the article to give the author a $0.01 per view. I will sum it up for you. He starts by back tracking a little from his last article, in which a 2 year old could do better math, and then goes on to use poor math to say URG is in a better spot. I commented on his article the last time and said that most of URG's production is already sold at the term price ($60/lb.) but this author and his horrible math wants to keep using $50/lb. in a horrific attempt at being an "analyst". He understates income and overstates expenses. Much the same and this man desires not acknowledgement. Not because he seems to be against URG, but because the numbers he is using are inaccurate. He has a predetermined opinion that he then confirms with numbers he pulls out of his a*#.
I read his article when it came out, and the one the day before on seeking alpha night and day
one pos and other negative, they wouldn't have gotten the loans if they were not impressed with the
mine, management ect...We are due for good news soon and when it happens it will go back to
p.s I thought his article was all bs at the time and wonder about the timing of it more than