insider
27th-February-2007, 10:08 PM
If the three mines policy is lifted and everyone can mine... then doesn't that mean The price Of uranium would fall... It makes sense to me
View Full Version : MTN - Marathon Resources
champ2003
27th-February-2007, 10:25 PM
If the three mines policy is lifted and everyone can mine... then doesn't that mean The price Of uranium would fall... It makes sense to me
No not at all as it has absolutely no impact on the physical Uranium on offer to the market and as you know demand will exceed supply for many years to come. A policy being lifted adds what?? Nothing but the chance for Australia to try and capitalise on high prices in 4-5 years time.
cheers
Champ
No not at all as it has absolutely no impact on the physical Uranium on offer to the market and as you know demand will exceed supply for many years to come. A policy being lifted adds what?? Nothing but the chance for Australia to try and capitalise on high prices in 4-5 years time.
cheers
Champ
deftfear
27th-February-2007, 10:30 PM
I didn't think that the 3 mines policy was a problem anyway, the SA government is pro uranium mining and would consider approving the mine regardless of the national labour party policy.
My opinion on uranium price if the 3 mine ban is lifted is that long term it may help push the price down, but short term it will probably just keep going the way it has been. Until all these possible mines come into production, I don't think there is a need to panic.
My opinion on uranium price if the 3 mine ban is lifted is that long term it may help push the price down, but short term it will probably just keep going the way it has been. Until all these possible mines come into production, I don't think there is a need to panic.
insider
3rd-March-2007, 04:19 PM
Hey guys where do you all think MTN will be heading? It is correction time so the likely hood of them falling is likely but the fundamentals are sooo good. What will some of you people do?
I think there is a strong chance that MTN will get smashed due to the market conditions so some buying opportunities are coming about. I haven't sold yet. thoughts people?
I think there is a strong chance that MTN will get smashed due to the market conditions so some buying opportunities are coming about. I haven't sold yet. thoughts people?
champ2003
3rd-March-2007, 04:34 PM
Hey guys where do you all think MTN will be heading? It is correction time so the likely hood of them falling is likely but the fundamentals are sooo good. What will some of you people do?
I think there is a strong chance that MTN will get smashed due to the market conditions so some buying opportunities are coming about. I haven't sold yet. thoughts people?
The mere fact that this stock has held up so well in the last week tells me it's unlikely that it will drop too much further just IMO. It did it's 12.53% drop in 1 day last week and rebounded the next day.
As you said fundamentals are very strong. There may be some more short term consolidation though.
I think there is a strong chance that MTN will get smashed due to the market conditions so some buying opportunities are coming about. I haven't sold yet. thoughts people?
The mere fact that this stock has held up so well in the last week tells me it's unlikely that it will drop too much further just IMO. It did it's 12.53% drop in 1 day last week and rebounded the next day.
As you said fundamentals are very strong. There may be some more short term consolidation though.
nizar
3rd-March-2007, 05:16 PM
If the three mines policy is lifted and everyone can mine... then doesn't that mean The price Of uranium would fall... It makes sense to me
Nope. The price of uranium will depend on supply-demand dynamics. Having the ban lifted will not bring any new supply to the market - at least not for a while. The lag time between discovery to production is about 8 years.
And even when you know the uranium is there - its gonna take about 3-4 years eg. SMM.
Nope. The price of uranium will depend on supply-demand dynamics. Having the ban lifted will not bring any new supply to the market - at least not for a while. The lag time between discovery to production is about 8 years.
And even when you know the uranium is there - its gonna take about 3-4 years eg. SMM.
Halba
4th-March-2007, 05:44 AM
agreed too long lead time for Aussie u explorers ATM, probably heavily discounted till 1 year before proddy
Imma think africa it will be more easily valued ,as govt approvals very quick and easy, and only has to be a mineable reserve/deposit. This is probably the best bet in capturing full upside from U (examples posted on threads in this forum include ern,ext,bmn,mru,wmt,acb,eve/african energy etc). These are in my opinion likely to 'leapfrog' the likes of SMM,MTN to production and thus will provide higher % total returns (and they are also low mkt cap).
I think you would probably need 5000t(10 mil pounds or so reserves) of U to get to bankable status IMHO, as that would represent possible 10 yr mine lifes. Additionally getting to bankable status would allow you to get taken over by majors(looking for quick proddie - look at OMC example) and thus immediately command premium.
Imma think africa it will be more easily valued ,as govt approvals very quick and easy, and only has to be a mineable reserve/deposit. This is probably the best bet in capturing full upside from U (examples posted on threads in this forum include ern,ext,bmn,mru,wmt,acb,eve/african energy etc). These are in my opinion likely to 'leapfrog' the likes of SMM,MTN to production and thus will provide higher % total returns (and they are also low mkt cap).
I think you would probably need 5000t(10 mil pounds or so reserves) of U to get to bankable status IMHO, as that would represent possible 10 yr mine lifes. Additionally getting to bankable status would allow you to get taken over by majors(looking for quick proddie - look at OMC example) and thus immediately command premium.
UraniumLover
5th-March-2007, 01:22 PM
Well, right now MTN is 3.09 a drop of 17.06%. Incredible.. Fishing isn't far off below 3.00
Can't wait until all ords goes back up ..
Can't wait until all ords goes back up ..
Realist
5th-March-2007, 01:39 PM
Well, right now MTN is 3.09 a drop of 17.06%. Incredible.. Fishing isn't far off below 3.00
Can't wait until all ords goes back up ..
It's getting beaten like a cheap Pinyata today. :banghead:
Can't wait until all ords goes back up ..
It's getting beaten like a cheap Pinyata today. :banghead:
mmmmining
5th-March-2007, 01:41 PM
Well, right now MTN is 3.09 a drop of 17.06%. Incredible.. Fishing isn't far off below 3.00
Can't wait until all ords goes back up ..
Have you seen it from $1.45 to $0.47?
The from $0.47 to $4.10
From $4.10 to $3.05
I guess Buttermere/Cosby is going to make a move before somebody else get a hand in this stock. It might use its associates to sell down MTN, and then raise an offer around $4.50, make it more attractive...
Pure speculation, with some reasoning, no insider info or fact.
Can't wait until all ords goes back up ..
Have you seen it from $1.45 to $0.47?
The from $0.47 to $4.10
From $4.10 to $3.05
I guess Buttermere/Cosby is going to make a move before somebody else get a hand in this stock. It might use its associates to sell down MTN, and then raise an offer around $4.50, make it more attractive...
Pure speculation, with some reasoning, no insider info or fact.
UraniumLover
5th-March-2007, 01:50 PM
Have you seen it from $1.45 to $0.47?
The from $0.47 to $4.10
From $4.10 to $3.05
I guess Buttermere/Cosby is going to make a move before somebody else get a hand in this stock. It might use its associates to sell down MTN, and then raise an offer around $4.50, make it more attractive...
Pure speculation, with some reasoning, no insider info or fact.
mmmmining I took the day of work to experience such an event. I hope Buttermere puts a better offer this time. I haven't worked it out yet but what would be a good offer for MTN if you took into consideration PDN offer for SMM which was rejected by SMM? I found that amusing.
The from $0.47 to $4.10
From $4.10 to $3.05
I guess Buttermere/Cosby is going to make a move before somebody else get a hand in this stock. It might use its associates to sell down MTN, and then raise an offer around $4.50, make it more attractive...
Pure speculation, with some reasoning, no insider info or fact.
mmmmining I took the day of work to experience such an event. I hope Buttermere puts a better offer this time. I haven't worked it out yet but what would be a good offer for MTN if you took into consideration PDN offer for SMM which was rejected by SMM? I found that amusing.
Realist
5th-March-2007, 02:36 PM
Have you seen it from $1.45 to $0.47?
The from $0.47 to $4.10
From $4.10 to $3.05
I guess Buttermere/Cosby is going to make a move before somebody else get a hand in this stock. It might use its associates to sell down MTN, and then raise an offer around $4.50, make it more attractive...
Pure speculation, with some reasoning, no insider info or fact.
Good point. It is possible.
The from $0.47 to $4.10
From $4.10 to $3.05
I guess Buttermere/Cosby is going to make a move before somebody else get a hand in this stock. It might use its associates to sell down MTN, and then raise an offer around $4.50, make it more attractive...
Pure speculation, with some reasoning, no insider info or fact.
Good point. It is possible.
insider
5th-March-2007, 02:45 PM
It's getting beaten like a cheap Pinyata today. :banghead:
Is that worse than beating a red headed step child? :casanova: :horse:
Is that worse than beating a red headed step child? :casanova: :horse:
nizar
5th-March-2007, 02:50 PM
Its funny with MTN i got a buy signal when it hit broke out into blue skies $1.37 not too long ago. But i wasnt convinced because volume was ordinary. Next week i check its still in the $1.30s im feeling like a champion thinking what a great move to not buy that dog and instead buying something else (that did give me my quick 10-20%).
I forget about MTN, do a bit more trading. Go on holidays. Go away for work. 2 months later i check and its like $4+.
But you live and you learn. And Now i know - PRICE is king.
I forget about MTN, do a bit more trading. Go on holidays. Go away for work. 2 months later i check and its like $4+.
But you live and you learn. And Now i know - PRICE is king.
UraniumLover
5th-March-2007, 04:48 PM
Its funny with MTN i got a buy signal when it hit broke out into blue skies $1.37 not too long ago. But i wasnt convinced because volume was ordinary. Next week i check its still in the $1.30s im feeling like a champion thinking what a great move to not buy that dog and instead buying something else (that did give me my quick 10-20%).
I forget about MTN, do a bit more trading. Go on holidays. Go away for work. 2 months later i check and its like $4+.
But you live and you learn. And Now i know - PRICE is king.
Relax Nizar .. MTN will recover.
I forget about MTN, do a bit more trading. Go on holidays. Go away for work. 2 months later i check and its like $4+.
But you live and you learn. And Now i know - PRICE is king.
Relax Nizar .. MTN will recover.
sydney1963
5th-March-2007, 06:04 PM
Its funny with MTN i got a buy signal when it hit broke out into blue skies $1.37 not too long ago. But i wasnt convinced because volume was ordinary. Next week i check its still in the $1.30s im feeling like a champion thinking what a great move to not buy that dog and instead buying something else (that did give me my quick 10-20%).
I forget about MTN, do a bit more trading. Go on holidays. Go away for work. 2 months later i check and its like $4+.
But you live and you learn. And Now i know - PRICE is king.
Go for 4 weeks holiday,when u cme back it will be $4.00
I forget about MTN, do a bit more trading. Go on holidays. Go away for work. 2 months later i check and its like $4+.
But you live and you learn. And Now i know - PRICE is king.
Go for 4 weeks holiday,when u cme back it will be $4.00
greggy
5th-March-2007, 06:06 PM
Go for 4 weeks holiday,when u cme back it will be $4.00
On what basis do you make this call?? Perhaps you just have quite a few of them. Either way, its not helpful to make calls like this without proper reasoning or a chart.
On what basis do you make this call?? Perhaps you just have quite a few of them. Either way, its not helpful to make calls like this without proper reasoning or a chart.
mmmmining
5th-March-2007, 07:03 PM
Spoken with a geologist at MTN, he has disclosed nothing unusual happened except the market correction.
A valid point he made is MTN is still outperforming many other uranium stocks in past one, two, and three months period. There is no need to panic.
He told me that the Mt Gee EPL is pastral lease from Crown land. The owner is running a tourist joint (like 20 rooms trailer park) just outside the EPL with some bush walking trails inside the EPL, which is no national park and no heritage.
For these who is panic about mining will affect tourist, please be advised to visit The Grand Canyon in USA. A uranium/copper mining site is one of the tourist attraction on the South Rim.
Another small info might address the water supply concern. There is a hot spring 3km from the Mt Gee deposit. The water resources is scarce, but there are ways to overcome it.
Of course, the issues that MTN is facing is no different from other uranium hopefuls, and mining companies, you have to address them one by one.
Hope the above info can help relief some of the pains of MTN holders.
My fair comments is that it is still too early to looking at the mining issues, instead, we should focus on the resources definition and upgrade.
So I believe Mr Market might consider it is not fair to view MTN as possible producer, but only give it a greenfield project valuation.
A valid point he made is MTN is still outperforming many other uranium stocks in past one, two, and three months period. There is no need to panic.
He told me that the Mt Gee EPL is pastral lease from Crown land. The owner is running a tourist joint (like 20 rooms trailer park) just outside the EPL with some bush walking trails inside the EPL, which is no national park and no heritage.
For these who is panic about mining will affect tourist, please be advised to visit The Grand Canyon in USA. A uranium/copper mining site is one of the tourist attraction on the South Rim.
Another small info might address the water supply concern. There is a hot spring 3km from the Mt Gee deposit. The water resources is scarce, but there are ways to overcome it.
Of course, the issues that MTN is facing is no different from other uranium hopefuls, and mining companies, you have to address them one by one.
Hope the above info can help relief some of the pains of MTN holders.
My fair comments is that it is still too early to looking at the mining issues, instead, we should focus on the resources definition and upgrade.
So I believe Mr Market might consider it is not fair to view MTN as possible producer, but only give it a greenfield project valuation.
champ2003
5th-March-2007, 07:10 PM
Everything has its price but i'd like to know, Is everybody ready for the large rebound when it happens?
:D
:D
insider
5th-March-2007, 08:39 PM
Spoken with a geologist at MTN, he has disclosed nothing unusual happened except the market correction.
A valid point he made is MTN is still outperforming many other uranium stocks in past one, two, and three months period. There is no need to panic.
He told me that the Mt Gee EPL is pastral lease from Crown land. The owner is running a tourist joint (like 20 rooms trailer park) just outside the EPL with some bush walking trails inside the EPL, which is no national park and no heritage.
For these who is panic about mining will affect tourist, please be advised to visit The Grand Canyon in USA. A uranium/copper mining site is one of the tourist attraction on the South Rim.
Another small info might address the water supply concern. There is a hot spring 3km from the Mt Gee deposit. The water resources is scarce, but there are ways to overcome it.
Of course, the issues that MTN is facing is no different from other uranium hopefuls, and mining companies, you have to address them one by one.
Hope the above info can help relief some of the pains of MTN holders.
My fair comments is that it is still too early to looking at the mining issues, instead, we should focus on the resources definition and upgrade.
So I believe Mr Market might consider it is not fair to view MTN as possible producer, but only give it a greenfield project valuation.
These issues were never anything to worry about... Those that bring it up are just kidding themselves... Tell me something do you think that the owner of the caravan park wouldn't want to see that place chocablock full of miners living in properties and houses he has built... Think of the economic benefits a mine would have in that area.
A valid point he made is MTN is still outperforming many other uranium stocks in past one, two, and three months period. There is no need to panic.
He told me that the Mt Gee EPL is pastral lease from Crown land. The owner is running a tourist joint (like 20 rooms trailer park) just outside the EPL with some bush walking trails inside the EPL, which is no national park and no heritage.
For these who is panic about mining will affect tourist, please be advised to visit The Grand Canyon in USA. A uranium/copper mining site is one of the tourist attraction on the South Rim.
Another small info might address the water supply concern. There is a hot spring 3km from the Mt Gee deposit. The water resources is scarce, but there are ways to overcome it.
Of course, the issues that MTN is facing is no different from other uranium hopefuls, and mining companies, you have to address them one by one.
Hope the above info can help relief some of the pains of MTN holders.
My fair comments is that it is still too early to looking at the mining issues, instead, we should focus on the resources definition and upgrade.
So I believe Mr Market might consider it is not fair to view MTN as possible producer, but only give it a greenfield project valuation.
These issues were never anything to worry about... Those that bring it up are just kidding themselves... Tell me something do you think that the owner of the caravan park wouldn't want to see that place chocablock full of miners living in properties and houses he has built... Think of the economic benefits a mine would have in that area.
Halba
5th-March-2007, 08:44 PM
What about minority groups? Can they stretch it out or delay the project severely? This has happened with my Terramin stock - delayed coz near a small town and has been delayed for more than a year.
mmmmining
5th-March-2007, 09:41 PM
What about minority groups? Can they stretch it out or delay the project severely? This has happened with my Terramin stock - delayed coz near a small town and has been delayed for more than a year.
Halba, I believe MTN has to deal with issues one by one. At this stage, their priority is to define and upgrade the resources to indicate and measured level. Mt Gee is no town, but full of hillside.
Halba, I believe MTN has to deal with issues one by one. At this stage, their priority is to define and upgrade the resources to indicate and measured level. Mt Gee is no town, but full of hillside.
Halba
5th-March-2007, 09:54 PM
Okay. I have to agree the resource itself is world class, similar to AGS's beverley 4 mile and SMM's.
I'll see how the coffey mining study is, its due soon.
I'll see how the coffey mining study is, its due soon.
hitmanlam
6th-March-2007, 01:51 AM
How I see it is MTN has great fundamentals (good mkt cap, good size resource). However, I can still see the price of this share going down short term due to this correction. But before you go & sell your shares, just think of these two ideas: (For me, I tell myself that these are facts)
1) When the correction is over and it rebounds up, where will the share price be then?.......(certainly not under $3)
2) Even if it does go down to $2 - $2.50, it would be a prime takeover target. And looking at the average price of the last couple of weeks plus a small premium to go with it, the takeover bid would be at least $4.50.
So whatever the short-term price of this stock will be, I believe that long term price of this stock is UP. The tricky part is trying to pick where the bottom will be & then buying in hard.
PS. If it ever reaches under $2. I think I am willing to increase my margin loan, mortgage my house, sell my car, and whack it all into this stock. I have already talked myself into doing it if it ever occurs.
1) When the correction is over and it rebounds up, where will the share price be then?.......(certainly not under $3)
2) Even if it does go down to $2 - $2.50, it would be a prime takeover target. And looking at the average price of the last couple of weeks plus a small premium to go with it, the takeover bid would be at least $4.50.
So whatever the short-term price of this stock will be, I believe that long term price of this stock is UP. The tricky part is trying to pick where the bottom will be & then buying in hard.
PS. If it ever reaches under $2. I think I am willing to increase my margin loan, mortgage my house, sell my car, and whack it all into this stock. I have already talked myself into doing it if it ever occurs.
sydney1963
6th-March-2007, 08:40 AM
On what basis do you make this call?? Perhaps you just have quite a few of them. Either way, its not helpful to make calls like this without proper reasoning or a chart.
It's the cheapst uranium stock in the market. According to the resources MTN has, its worth 5 billion. [$3/IB of U3O8]
It's the cheapst uranium stock in the market. According to the resources MTN has, its worth 5 billion. [$3/IB of U3O8]
kennas
6th-March-2007, 09:50 AM
It's the cheapst uranium stock in the market. According to the resources MTN has, its worth 5 billion. [$3/IB of U3O8]Can you expand on how you've come to this $5 b valuation please Sydney. Thanks.
Halba
6th-March-2007, 10:03 AM
Sydney, I don't think MTN is the "cheapest". So many things affect value and value is perceptive. Considering the location and resources I believe BMN to be the cheapest. These u stocks are particularly sensitive re: their location.
insider
6th-March-2007, 10:19 AM
Can you expand on how you've come to this $5 b valuation please Sydney. Thanks.
He got that value by multiplying the found resource by its current price...
So 69,000,000,000 pounds X $85 per pound... He has a point but how much is a company that doesn't earn money worth?
He got that value by multiplying the found resource by its current price...
So 69,000,000,000 pounds X $85 per pound... He has a point but how much is a company that doesn't earn money worth?
kennas
6th-March-2007, 10:24 AM
He got that value by multiplying the found resource by its current price...
So 69,000,000,000 pounds X $85 per pound... He has a point but how much is a company that doesn't earn money worth?Thanks Insider. I think that makes $5.8b. But surely a company's valuation isn't what raw resources it has in the ground. I think there are many other factors to consider what it's 'value' is.
So 69,000,000,000 pounds X $85 per pound... He has a point but how much is a company that doesn't earn money worth?Thanks Insider. I think that makes $5.8b. But surely a company's valuation isn't what raw resources it has in the ground. I think there are many other factors to consider what it's 'value' is.
nizar
6th-March-2007, 10:31 AM
Thanks Insider. I think that makes $5.8b. But surely a company's valuation isn't what raw resources it has in the ground. I think there are many other factors to consider what it's 'value' is.
The cost and the TIME taken to extract it should probably be considered.
The cost and the TIME taken to extract it should probably be considered.
kennas
6th-March-2007, 10:41 AM
The cost and the TIME taken to extract it should probably be considered.Cost is a good start. We've got no idea how much it's going to cost to actually get the mine up and running at this point. How much debt will that put the company under, or how many more shares will they have to issue to get the cash, diluting the shares by how much, blah, blah....list is endless.
Perhaps someone knows the 'average' cost to establish a uranium mine at Mt Gee, and how much it will cost to then extract it considering all the logistics and work force costs.
Hhhmm, perhaps this has already been covered in the thread and I missed it??
Perhaps someone knows the 'average' cost to establish a uranium mine at Mt Gee, and how much it will cost to then extract it considering all the logistics and work force costs.
Hhhmm, perhaps this has already been covered in the thread and I missed it??
Rafa
6th-March-2007, 10:51 AM
I posted this on the SMM thread a while back,
But I am happy to value an explorer at an absolute maximum of 1/10 the value of its resource, taking into account dev time, risk, dilution, etc, etc.
But I am happy to value an explorer at an absolute maximum of 1/10 the value of its resource, taking into account dev time, risk, dilution, etc, etc.
kennas
6th-March-2007, 10:53 AM
I posted this on the SMM thread a while back,
But I am happy to value an explorer at an absolute maximum of 1/10 the value of its resource, taking into account dev time, risk, dilution, etc, etc.Is this common Rafa, or just your experience? I have seen that stated somewhere before. Perhaps it was you....
But I am happy to value an explorer at an absolute maximum of 1/10 the value of its resource, taking into account dev time, risk, dilution, etc, etc.Is this common Rafa, or just your experience? I have seen that stated somewhere before. Perhaps it was you....
mmmmining
6th-March-2007, 10:55 AM
Hi, Guys, I think we are getting too technical. MTN is not into mining stage yet. It is still a exploration company, so use the valuation method accordingly, that is the EV/lb resources.
The ratio of IGV (in ground value) to market cap/EV for exploration company is very high (10 to 30), moving significantly lower (5-10) when approaching mining stage.
The ratio of IGV (in ground value) to market cap/EV for exploration company is very high (10 to 30), moving significantly lower (5-10) when approaching mining stage.
nizar
6th-March-2007, 10:59 AM
i posted this on the SMM thread a while back,
but i am happy to value an explorer at an absolute maximum of 1/10 the value of its resource, taking into account dev time, risk, dilution, etc, etc
Agree.
I have heard this before.
I have market cap of MTN at $131million.
$580million still a while to get to that.
Looks cheap compared to DYL i must say.
(i dont hold this stock)
but i am happy to value an explorer at an absolute maximum of 1/10 the value of its resource, taking into account dev time, risk, dilution, etc, etc
Agree.
I have heard this before.
I have market cap of MTN at $131million.
$580million still a while to get to that.
Looks cheap compared to DYL i must say.
(i dont hold this stock)
sydneysider
6th-March-2007, 11:04 AM
Cost is a good start. We've got no idea how much it's going to cost to actually get the mine up and running at this point. How much debt will that put the company under, or how many more shares will they have to issue to get the cash, diluting the shares by how much, blah, blah....list is endless.
Perhaps someone knows the 'average' cost to establish a uranium mine at Mt Gee, and how much it will cost to then extract it considering all the logistics and work force costs.
Hhhmm, perhaps this has already been covered in the thread and I missed it??
Is there an issue with any potential mining at Mt Gee being blocked by aboriginal interests due to proximity to a sacred site nearby? I seem to recall reading something about this issue?
Perhaps someone knows the 'average' cost to establish a uranium mine at Mt Gee, and how much it will cost to then extract it considering all the logistics and work force costs.
Hhhmm, perhaps this has already been covered in the thread and I missed it??
Is there an issue with any potential mining at Mt Gee being blocked by aboriginal interests due to proximity to a sacred site nearby? I seem to recall reading something about this issue?
nizar
6th-March-2007, 11:06 AM
Is there an issue with any potential mining at Mt Gee being blocked by aboriginal interests due to proximity to a sacred site nearby? I seem to recall reading something about this issue?
Similar to whats happening at Jabiluka ey?
Similar to whats happening at Jabiluka ey?
exgeo
6th-March-2007, 11:07 AM
If you look back through this post, this question has only been asked and answered about 10 times before. It seems there is not much problem with aboriginal sites. Most problems can be made to disappear if the right palms are crossed with silver in any case.
sydneysider
6th-March-2007, 11:11 AM
If you look back through this post, this question has only been asked and answered about 10 times before. It seems there is not much problem with aboriginal sites. Most problems can be made to disappear if the right palms are crossed with silver in any case.
U must be kidding? Who pays the bribes to whom??
U must be kidding? Who pays the bribes to whom??
sydney1963
6th-March-2007, 11:34 AM
MTN @ $3.33 11.30 back from 2.94 yesterday,but the correction may not be finished yet,still SP200 did not go down to 5500 as some expected b4. :)
mmmmining
6th-March-2007, 12:04 PM
SP200 did not go down to 5500 as some expected b4. :)
You cannot pick a number in the air or from your smart system, and ask Mr Market to perform accordingly, and MTN does not have 100% weight in SP200, and MTN even not in any index yet.
You cannot pick a number in the air or from your smart system, and ask Mr Market to perform accordingly, and MTN does not have 100% weight in SP200, and MTN even not in any index yet.
kennas
6th-March-2007, 12:10 PM
still SP200 did not go down to 5500 as some expected b4. :)You should put the word YET in that sentence. I hope it doesn't for those still heavily exposed.
sydney1963
6th-March-2007, 12:43 PM
You should put the word YET in that sentence. I hope it doesn't for those still heavily exposed.
O.K, they said b4 on CBNC that correction may be extended to 10%, now DOWJ
still did not reach 6.5%. That mean ASX will be affected in the future if DOWJ went down another 3.5%, that could take SP200 to 5600 or even lower.
Again MTN, BMN & ERN are not at any index, I agree, but still could be affected by that, I say could be. It all speculation, and it is the worst case.
O.K, they said b4 on CBNC that correction may be extended to 10%, now DOWJ
still did not reach 6.5%. That mean ASX will be affected in the future if DOWJ went down another 3.5%, that could take SP200 to 5600 or even lower.
Again MTN, BMN & ERN are not at any index, I agree, but still could be affected by that, I say could be. It all speculation, and it is the worst case.
greggy
6th-March-2007, 04:57 PM
It's the cheapst uranium stock in the market. According to the resources MTN has, its worth 5 billion. [$3/IB of U3O8]
If you think that MTN is worth $5 billion then that equates to a share price of well over $100 and a higher market cap than PDN? I think your figures are way overinflated and if there was a "Ramp of the Month Awarrd for Newbies" I would back your nomination.
DYOR
If you think that MTN is worth $5 billion then that equates to a share price of well over $100 and a higher market cap than PDN? I think your figures are way overinflated and if there was a "Ramp of the Month Awarrd for Newbies" I would back your nomination.
DYOR
Halba
6th-March-2007, 04:59 PM
normally in ground value doesn't mean the mkt cap should be that?
greggy
6th-March-2007, 05:03 PM
normally in ground value doesn't mean the mkt cap should be that?
Agreed 100%. Hence, my point that sydney1963's analysis is totally misleading and dangerous.
DYOR
Agreed 100%. Hence, my point that sydney1963's analysis is totally misleading and dangerous.
DYOR
insider
6th-March-2007, 05:55 PM
Let's find some middle ground here...
SMM have a resource of 72,000,000,000 pounds
MTN have a resource of 69,000,000,000 pounds
SMM: I'm not quite sure how much ownership SMM have on their projects but I don't think it's 100%... correct me if I'm wrong please, but be nice about it :)
MTN: have 100% ownership of the project at Mt gee which is where the results come from
AGS had roughly about $450M
DYL somewhere like $350M
SMM have a market capital of around $600M
MTN have a market capital of around $170M
So in relation to other companies MTN is certainly a contender and a lot cheaper... They are not worth a billion but over the next twelve months I can see them rising to $500M... This is wishful thinking
SMM have a resource of 72,000,000,000 pounds
MTN have a resource of 69,000,000,000 pounds
SMM: I'm not quite sure how much ownership SMM have on their projects but I don't think it's 100%... correct me if I'm wrong please, but be nice about it :)
MTN: have 100% ownership of the project at Mt gee which is where the results come from
AGS had roughly about $450M
DYL somewhere like $350M
SMM have a market capital of around $600M
MTN have a market capital of around $170M
So in relation to other companies MTN is certainly a contender and a lot cheaper... They are not worth a billion but over the next twelve months I can see them rising to $500M... This is wishful thinking
greggy
6th-March-2007, 06:00 PM
Let's find some middle ground here...
SMM have a resource of 72,000,000,000 pounds
MTN have a resource of 69,000,000,000 pounds
SMM: I'm not quite sure how much ownership SMM have on their projects but I don't think it's 100%... correct me if I'm wrong please, but be nice about it :)
MTN: have 100% ownership of the project at Mt gee which is where the results come from
AGS had roughly about $450M
DYL somewhere like $350M
SMM have a market capital of around $600M
MTN have a market capital of around $170M
So in relation to other companies MTN is certainly a contender and a lot cheaper... They are not worth a billion but over the next twelve months I can see them rising to $500M... This is wishful thinking
Nice work here Insider, but $500M is still way short of sydney1963's $5 billion value. For sydney to quote such a high value is very irresponsible and just plain ramping,
SMM have a resource of 72,000,000,000 pounds
MTN have a resource of 69,000,000,000 pounds
SMM: I'm not quite sure how much ownership SMM have on their projects but I don't think it's 100%... correct me if I'm wrong please, but be nice about it :)
MTN: have 100% ownership of the project at Mt gee which is where the results come from
AGS had roughly about $450M
DYL somewhere like $350M
SMM have a market capital of around $600M
MTN have a market capital of around $170M
So in relation to other companies MTN is certainly a contender and a lot cheaper... They are not worth a billion but over the next twelve months I can see them rising to $500M... This is wishful thinking
Nice work here Insider, but $500M is still way short of sydney1963's $5 billion value. For sydney to quote such a high value is very irresponsible and just plain ramping,
mmmmining
6th-March-2007, 06:16 PM
Nice work here Insider, but $500M is still way short of sydney1963's $5 billion value. For sydney to quote such a high value is very irresponsible and just plain ramping,
Greggy, I guess everybody understand that Sydney1963 confused in ground value with stock market value. Maybe we should give him a break, considering he is new kinds on the block. IT is a learning process. There is no need to speak the "R" word IMHO.
Anyway, we should focused on how MTN could travel from $170m to $500m market cap. Definitely there are a lot of fears in MTN, and plenty of greeds in SMM. We just have to wait, study, and research.
Greggy, I guess everybody understand that Sydney1963 confused in ground value with stock market value. Maybe we should give him a break, considering he is new kinds on the block. IT is a learning process. There is no need to speak the "R" word IMHO.
Anyway, we should focused on how MTN could travel from $170m to $500m market cap. Definitely there are a lot of fears in MTN, and plenty of greeds in SMM. We just have to wait, study, and research.
greggy
6th-March-2007, 06:21 PM
Greggy, I guess everybody understand that Sydney1963 confused in ground value with stock market value. Maybe we should give him a break, considering he is new kinds on the block. IT is a learning process. There is no need to speak the "R" word IMHO.
Anyway, we should focused on how MTN could travel from $170m to $500m market cap. Definitely there are a lot of fears in MTN, and plenty of greeds in SMM. We just have to wait, study, and research.
I'm just trying to say here that it would bit of a worry if someone had since gone out and bought some thinking they were worth that much, but I'll move on from here. I just saw it as ramping and should you disagree so be it.
Anyway, we should focused on how MTN could travel from $170m to $500m market cap. Definitely there are a lot of fears in MTN, and plenty of greeds in SMM. We just have to wait, study, and research.
I'm just trying to say here that it would bit of a worry if someone had since gone out and bought some thinking they were worth that much, but I'll move on from here. I just saw it as ramping and should you disagree so be it.
nizar
6th-March-2007, 08:04 PM
I'm just trying to say here that it would bit of a worry if someone had since gone out and bought some thinking they were worth that much, but I'll move on from here. I just saw it as ramping and should you disagree so be it.
Somebody who buys stock blindly from a post on an online forum deserves to get burnt anyway.
Seriously.
Somebody who buys stock blindly from a post on an online forum deserves to get burnt anyway.
Seriously.
insider
6th-March-2007, 08:41 PM
Hey I have been burnt by rampings... I can't blame them because the choice was mine... but remember free tips are usually the most expensive!!!!
Back to MTN... They are going to take over Microsoft and the Pentagon... then take over the world... I swear :p:
Back to MTN... They are going to take over Microsoft and the Pentagon... then take over the world... I swear :p:
prs
6th-March-2007, 09:15 PM
Guys, I'm totally new to investing so please be understanding if I come up with strange questions. I've invested heavily in Marathon, like my super and of course apprehensive with latest downturn. You guys impress me with your knowledge and enthusiasm that MTN will regain its composure and rebound. Do you think it will go backwards much more and what sort of rebound do you think it will make?
Halba
6th-March-2007, 09:17 PM
prs ...you understand that no one has a crystal ball and can tell you where the price will be the next day, week etc.
But most ppl seem to be bullish on MTN so just ride the trend.
But most ppl seem to be bullish on MTN so just ride the trend.
mmmmining
6th-March-2007, 09:25 PM
Somebody who buys stock blindly from a post on an online forum deserves to get burnt anyway.
Seriously.
You just :axt: two groups of ASFers, I don't know which group you have hit harder, these who believe ASF is god, or those who believe that ASFers believe ASF is god? :D
Anyway, thanks for answering it for me. :alcohol:
Seriously.
You just :axt: two groups of ASFers, I don't know which group you have hit harder, these who believe ASF is god, or those who believe that ASFers believe ASF is god? :D
Anyway, thanks for answering it for me. :alcohol:
Mousie
7th-March-2007, 01:41 AM
You just :axt: two groups of ASFers, I don't know which group you have hit harder, these who believe ASF is god, or those who believe that ASFers believe ASF is god? :D
Anyway, thanks for answering it for me. :alcohol:
LOL!!!
To put it more kindly though:
ASF exposes us to stocks which we may not have heard of before, and now that we do, we can understand them a bit better objectively.
But with so many stocks (that you understood from ASF), and so few cash to go around, decide for yourself which ones provide the best value, and TAKE THE PLUNGE!!!
See? Easy!!!
(Disclaimer: Errrrr...if after all's said and done and you're still in the red, maybe not :eek: )
Anyway, thanks for answering it for me. :alcohol:
LOL!!!
To put it more kindly though:
ASF exposes us to stocks which we may not have heard of before, and now that we do, we can understand them a bit better objectively.
But with so many stocks (that you understood from ASF), and so few cash to go around, decide for yourself which ones provide the best value, and TAKE THE PLUNGE!!!
See? Easy!!!
(Disclaimer: Errrrr...if after all's said and done and you're still in the red, maybe not :eek: )
kennas
7th-March-2007, 01:54 AM
This thread has become very amusing. :D
Halba
7th-March-2007, 12:51 PM
Hi mmining, nizar and others
I have purchased a small parcel of MTN this morning. You have all successfully convinced me. I might top up again if it falls to add to my holding.
Reasons: Big resource and china shareholding tempted me. I guess with china as a s/holder the SA govt will want to give this the go ahead. Its on crown land so the usual things will have to be gotten through. Its best off as mmining has said to focus on the resource first, rest of stuff later.
Cheerios.
I have purchased a small parcel of MTN this morning. You have all successfully convinced me. I might top up again if it falls to add to my holding.
Reasons: Big resource and china shareholding tempted me. I guess with china as a s/holder the SA govt will want to give this the go ahead. Its on crown land so the usual things will have to be gotten through. Its best off as mmining has said to focus on the resource first, rest of stuff later.
Cheerios.
mmmmining
7th-March-2007, 01:06 PM
Hi mmining, nizar and others
I have purchased a small parcel of MTN this morning. You have all successfully convinced me. I might top up again if it falls to add to my holding.
Reasons: Big resource and china shareholding tempted me. I guess with china as a s/holder the SA govt will want to give this the go ahead. Its on crown land so the usual things will have to be gotten through. Its best off as mmining has said to focus on the resource first, rest of stuff later.
Cheerios.
Halba,
Dangerous, I guess you are acting on your own will, right? I don't want be named as a ramper.
Well, my theory is still the same, I am betting on the whole uranium sectors, not one or two particular stocks (provide you have enough play money).
The booming uranium sector will provide a support on the floor. We need to find stocks with star performance. Betting on multiple horses increase your odds to find them.
Of course, you might end up with one or two dogs. But we all know that, if you can have a few good ones with 100% to 1000%+ appreciations, you are still well ahead.
I have purchased a small parcel of MTN this morning. You have all successfully convinced me. I might top up again if it falls to add to my holding.
Reasons: Big resource and china shareholding tempted me. I guess with china as a s/holder the SA govt will want to give this the go ahead. Its on crown land so the usual things will have to be gotten through. Its best off as mmining has said to focus on the resource first, rest of stuff later.
Cheerios.
Halba,
Dangerous, I guess you are acting on your own will, right? I don't want be named as a ramper.
Well, my theory is still the same, I am betting on the whole uranium sectors, not one or two particular stocks (provide you have enough play money).
The booming uranium sector will provide a support on the floor. We need to find stocks with star performance. Betting on multiple horses increase your odds to find them.
Of course, you might end up with one or two dogs. But we all know that, if you can have a few good ones with 100% to 1000%+ appreciations, you are still well ahead.
Halba
7th-March-2007, 01:09 PM
I bought a small position, of my own volition. It will benefit from the labor party conference soon!
hector
7th-March-2007, 01:29 PM
Halba,
Dangerous, I guess you are acting on your own will, right? I don't want be named as a ramper.
Well, my theory is still the same, I am betting on the whole uranium sectors, not one or two particular stocks (provide you have enough play money).
The booming uranium sector will provide a support on the floor. We need to find stocks with star performance. Betting on multiple horses increase your odds to find them.
Of course, you might end up with one or two dogs. But we all know that, if you can have a few good ones with 100% to 1000%+ appreciations, you are still well ahead.
No offence, but you speaks the english as goods as Nacho Libre and all the orphans put together!
Dangerous, I guess you are acting on your own will, right? I don't want be named as a ramper.
Well, my theory is still the same, I am betting on the whole uranium sectors, not one or two particular stocks (provide you have enough play money).
The booming uranium sector will provide a support on the floor. We need to find stocks with star performance. Betting on multiple horses increase your odds to find them.
Of course, you might end up with one or two dogs. But we all know that, if you can have a few good ones with 100% to 1000%+ appreciations, you are still well ahead.
No offence, but you speaks the english as goods as Nacho Libre and all the orphans put together!
mmmmining
7th-March-2007, 01:32 PM
Halba,
I still hold MTN firmly. I didn't see any fundamental change for this stock yet. A few things we need to watch out carefully:
1. More drilling results, anytime soon (miner price impact and short)
2. Resource upgrade, End of March to May; (to establish new baseline)
3. Scope Study April to May; (MUST Watch)
4. Labor party conferences April 29; (Built in, Only negative will screw MTN)
5. Cosby revised bid, anytime (very likely, my prediction is $4.20 per share if Cosby still has a bit talent)
6. Chinese Count-bid anytime after Cosby revised bid (likely $5 per share)
I believe:
The resource upgrade will bring MTN to $5 level if there is no significant downgrade (-10%) on resources;
The company maker is not from a takeover, but from the scope study. A definite YES answer is must. Assume 5mlb annual production, with reasonable capex, then:
$20/lb cost will send this stock to $10
$30/lb cost will send this stock to $7
$50/lb will bury MTN instantly
Let's watch this baby together..
I still hold MTN firmly. I didn't see any fundamental change for this stock yet. A few things we need to watch out carefully:
1. More drilling results, anytime soon (miner price impact and short)
2. Resource upgrade, End of March to May; (to establish new baseline)
3. Scope Study April to May; (MUST Watch)
4. Labor party conferences April 29; (Built in, Only negative will screw MTN)
5. Cosby revised bid, anytime (very likely, my prediction is $4.20 per share if Cosby still has a bit talent)
6. Chinese Count-bid anytime after Cosby revised bid (likely $5 per share)
I believe:
The resource upgrade will bring MTN to $5 level if there is no significant downgrade (-10%) on resources;
The company maker is not from a takeover, but from the scope study. A definite YES answer is must. Assume 5mlb annual production, with reasonable capex, then:
$20/lb cost will send this stock to $10
$30/lb cost will send this stock to $7
$50/lb will bury MTN instantly
Let's watch this baby together..
Halba
7th-March-2007, 01:43 PM
Agree the scoping study by coffey is the key.
Plan B
7th-March-2007, 04:28 PM
Halba,
I still hold MTN firmly. I didn't see any fundamental change for this stock yet. A few things we need to watch out carefully:
1. More drilling results, anytime soon (miner price impact and short)
2. Resource upgrade, End of March to May; (to establish new baseline)
3. Scope Study April to May; (MUST Watch)
4. Labor party conferences April 29; (Built in, Only negative will screw MTN)
5. Cosby revised bid, anytime (very likely, my prediction is $4.20 per share if Cosby still has a bit talent)
6. Chinese Count-bid anytime after Cosby revised bid (likely $5 per share)
I believe:
The resource upgrade will bring MTN to $5 level if there is no significant downgrade (-10%) on resources;
The company maker is not from a takeover, but from the scope study. A definite YES answer is must. Assume 5mlb annual production, with reasonable capex, then:
$20/lb cost will send this stock to $10
$30/lb cost will send this stock to $7
$50/lb will bury MTN instantly
Let's watch this baby together..
Great summary, well done...
4. Labor party conferences April 29; (Built in, Only negative will screw MTN)
Im finding it hard to work out how much is actually built in to the share price already , ill guess we will find out soon enough.
I still hold MTN firmly. I didn't see any fundamental change for this stock yet. A few things we need to watch out carefully:
1. More drilling results, anytime soon (miner price impact and short)
2. Resource upgrade, End of March to May; (to establish new baseline)
3. Scope Study April to May; (MUST Watch)
4. Labor party conferences April 29; (Built in, Only negative will screw MTN)
5. Cosby revised bid, anytime (very likely, my prediction is $4.20 per share if Cosby still has a bit talent)
6. Chinese Count-bid anytime after Cosby revised bid (likely $5 per share)
I believe:
The resource upgrade will bring MTN to $5 level if there is no significant downgrade (-10%) on resources;
The company maker is not from a takeover, but from the scope study. A definite YES answer is must. Assume 5mlb annual production, with reasonable capex, then:
$20/lb cost will send this stock to $10
$30/lb cost will send this stock to $7
$50/lb will bury MTN instantly
Let's watch this baby together..
Great summary, well done...
4. Labor party conferences April 29; (Built in, Only negative will screw MTN)
Im finding it hard to work out how much is actually built in to the share price already , ill guess we will find out soon enough.
Halba
7th-March-2007, 04:35 PM
Don't think the costs will get that high...MTN's ore is very high grade and quality is good. i think average grade was 800ppm, with higher grade zones. This is a bargain isn't it with SMM likely to exit index.
sydney1963
8th-March-2007, 10:18 AM
Don't think the costs will get that high...MTN's ore is very high grade and quality is good. i think average grade was 800ppm, with higher grade zones. This is a bargain isn't it with SMM likely to exit index.
SMM market cap @ 850 millon, MTN @ 150 millon [atm].
Compare between the value of the resources both have. [under ground]
You will find MTN markt cap is very low, it is a bargain. :banghead:
SMM market cap @ 850 millon, MTN @ 150 millon [atm].
Compare between the value of the resources both have. [under ground]
You will find MTN markt cap is very low, it is a bargain. :banghead:
Halba
8th-March-2007, 10:23 AM
Agreed sydney pleased that my buy yesterday was spot on :)
I agree fundamentals looks good.
I guess I'm going to get set on MTN....big day ahead for me now.
I agree fundamentals looks good.
I guess I'm going to get set on MTN....big day ahead for me now.
Halba
8th-March-2007, 10:50 AM
oops cancel that its on the slide again
mmmmining
8th-March-2007, 11:16 AM
oops cancel that its on the slide again
Halba, I don't watch stock price every minutes, unless I want to trade it. Because I cannot move the price.
Halba, I don't watch stock price every minutes, unless I want to trade it. Because I cannot move the price.
Halba
8th-March-2007, 11:22 AM
Just accumulating a stake, need to get the entry right.
Slow, small amounts to buy it.
Slow, small amounts to buy it.
chris1983
8th-March-2007, 01:46 PM
hmm. this looks good hey. I have no money :( Who wants to lend me some? :P
Mousie
8th-March-2007, 01:54 PM
hmm. this looks good hey. I have no money :( Who wants to lend me some? :P
LOL you just traded WMT and what did you blew it on?? :p:
LOL you just traded WMT and what did you blew it on?? :p:
chris1983
8th-March-2007, 02:05 PM
LOL you just traded WMT and what did you blew it on?? :p:
I'm on FXR atm. I think they have a % gain in them once they put a message out that their nickel operations are going smoothly. MTN looks really good though..there must be a reason to their current valuation because their deposit is world class
I'm on FXR atm. I think they have a % gain in them once they put a message out that their nickel operations are going smoothly. MTN looks really good though..there must be a reason to their current valuation because their deposit is world class
Mousie
8th-March-2007, 02:14 PM
I'm on FXR atm. I think they have a % gain in them once they put a message out that their nickel operations are going smoothly. MTN looks really good though..there must be a reason to their current valuation because their deposit is world class
FXR looks a bit like a "picking the presently unloved" approach from what I noticed in just a few minutes research - but if u wanna get into MTN be prepared to hold a bit long-term IMO, these guys here are waiting for production and that may be some way off.
FXR looks a bit like a "picking the presently unloved" approach from what I noticed in just a few minutes research - but if u wanna get into MTN be prepared to hold a bit long-term IMO, these guys here are waiting for production and that may be some way off.
Rafa
8th-March-2007, 02:37 PM
Chris,
I've had MTN for ages, around the 70c mark...
I think MTN has run up way too fast for its own good, (from 1.80 to 4.00 in a matter of weeks) and was due for a well deserved breather...
If I was you, i would still wait... this correction, in my opinion, is not yet over, and there may be a cheaper entry point that can be attained... (mid $2 is my estimate)
It all depends on how you do your trading..
Long term, this is a good stock, but even tho this one and BMN are the two stocks i love the most, in my opinion there may be cheaper entry points to come in the near future.
Be interesting to hear any TA views on this correction... i.e. percentage retracement from peak, etc, and what this all means.
I've had MTN for ages, around the 70c mark...
I think MTN has run up way too fast for its own good, (from 1.80 to 4.00 in a matter of weeks) and was due for a well deserved breather...
If I was you, i would still wait... this correction, in my opinion, is not yet over, and there may be a cheaper entry point that can be attained... (mid $2 is my estimate)
It all depends on how you do your trading..
Long term, this is a good stock, but even tho this one and BMN are the two stocks i love the most, in my opinion there may be cheaper entry points to come in the near future.
Be interesting to hear any TA views on this correction... i.e. percentage retracement from peak, etc, and what this all means.
mmmmining
8th-March-2007, 02:48 PM
Chris,
and there may be a cheaper entry point that can be attained... (mid $2 is my estimate)
It has been there on this Tuesday, $2.62, and
If you are so sure, you can make some money or end up with more shares by selling it now, and buy it back at $2.75?
and there may be a cheaper entry point that can be attained... (mid $2 is my estimate)
It has been there on this Tuesday, $2.62, and
If you are so sure, you can make some money or end up with more shares by selling it now, and buy it back at $2.75?
sydney1963
8th-March-2007, 02:56 PM
It has been there on this Tuesday, $2.62, and
If you are so sure, you can make some money or end up with more shares by selling it now, and buy it back at $2.75?
Friday or Monday,because the data[job figure] will be announced on US by Friday which will effect the market and MTN sp.
The tug of war that's going on between the bulls and the bears is over the strength of the underlying economy and the strength of earnings," Quincy Krosby, Chief Investment Strategist at The Hartford, told CNBC.com. "Investors will be focused on the important economic data that's coming out on Friday. If the market can keep hold of Tuesday's gains, even if it's in a tight trading range, that's positive."
If you are so sure, you can make some money or end up with more shares by selling it now, and buy it back at $2.75?
Friday or Monday,because the data[job figure] will be announced on US by Friday which will effect the market and MTN sp.
The tug of war that's going on between the bulls and the bears is over the strength of the underlying economy and the strength of earnings," Quincy Krosby, Chief Investment Strategist at The Hartford, told CNBC.com. "Investors will be focused on the important economic data that's coming out on Friday. If the market can keep hold of Tuesday's gains, even if it's in a tight trading range, that's positive."
Halba
8th-March-2007, 03:09 PM
My opinion.
2.62 no way. This is a far too extreme price prediction. It hit that in one second in the extremities of the correction. It has bounced back well. Why would it go back down there?
2.62 no way. This is a far too extreme price prediction. It hit that in one second in the extremities of the correction. It has bounced back well. Why would it go back down there?
mmmmining
8th-March-2007, 03:14 PM
Friday or Monday,because the data[job figure] will be announced on US by Friday which will effect the market and MTN sp.
The tug of war that's going on between the bulls and the bears is over the strength of the underlying economy and the strength of earnings," Quincy Krosby, Chief Investment Strategist at The Hartford, told CNBC.com. "Investors will be focused on the important economic data that's coming out on Friday. If the market can keep hold of Tuesday's gains, even if it's in a tight trading range, that's positive."
You might find more clues by checking MTN.com.
The tug of war that's going on between the bulls and the bears is over the strength of the underlying economy and the strength of earnings," Quincy Krosby, Chief Investment Strategist at The Hartford, told CNBC.com. "Investors will be focused on the important economic data that's coming out on Friday. If the market can keep hold of Tuesday's gains, even if it's in a tight trading range, that's positive."
You might find more clues by checking MTN.com.
Halba
8th-March-2007, 03:40 PM
No one can predict the markets. Nobody has a crystal ball.
Just buy the stocks u think are good and hold em.
Just buy the stocks u think are good and hold em.
kennas
8th-March-2007, 03:48 PM
My opinion.
2.62 no way. This is a far too extreme price prediction. It hit that in one second in the extremities of the correction. It has bounced back well. Why would it go back down there?A few people are tipping that the correction has some way to go. Extreme lows anticipated are in the 4000s. It might not get there but if a wave C takes the markets back under the last low, then most stocks, including this, will probably suffer too. Having said that, if the market steadies, and more good drill results come out, or there's a takeover offer, etc etc, then this will go ok.
2.62 no way. This is a far too extreme price prediction. It hit that in one second in the extremities of the correction. It has bounced back well. Why would it go back down there?A few people are tipping that the correction has some way to go. Extreme lows anticipated are in the 4000s. It might not get there but if a wave C takes the markets back under the last low, then most stocks, including this, will probably suffer too. Having said that, if the market steadies, and more good drill results come out, or there's a takeover offer, etc etc, then this will go ok.
mmmmining
8th-March-2007, 04:03 PM
I am sorry if you do check in at MTN.com, and have found contents not relevant.
MTN is a speculative stocks, and in a very unique industry. It has its own boom and bust cycle associated with uranium industry, has very little to do with those economic calendar, particular US's.
If you want to speculate MTN, or uranium stock, you just waste your time and opportunity to study those big economic indicators.
If you have done your research, like it, and still worry about the damn job number, why not commit half of your money now, and another half later?
MTN is a speculative stocks, and in a very unique industry. It has its own boom and bust cycle associated with uranium industry, has very little to do with those economic calendar, particular US's.
If you want to speculate MTN, or uranium stock, you just waste your time and opportunity to study those big economic indicators.
If you have done your research, like it, and still worry about the damn job number, why not commit half of your money now, and another half later?
Halba
8th-March-2007, 04:12 PM
The coffey mining study is critical to the success of this share. IMHO other factors can work short term, but that is the critical and most important element.
mmmmining
9th-March-2007, 10:13 AM
People never learn. Stupid Buttermere should hear our voice before make such stupid offer. $3.52 is too low. $4.20 should be more acceptable.
Now we have a reference price, not the $3.52. is how much Buttermere want to see it a few years later. I guess Buttermere is not for not a non-profitable organization. I guess it want to double the price. I guess $7 for MTN is a fair price..
Now we have a reference price, not the $3.52. is how much Buttermere want to see it a few years later. I guess Buttermere is not for not a non-profitable organization. I guess it want to double the price. I guess $7 for MTN is a fair price..
Halba
9th-March-2007, 10:18 AM
the fair price will be what the mkt decides i guess! Ah well i got a small parcel of these
mmmmining
9th-March-2007, 10:19 AM
I am laughing at the offer statement:
"220% premium to the price of the placement shares of $1.10 to Talbot Group and CITIC Australia...."
How about a 15% discount to the all-time high!, and
450% premium to the original offer....
Where are those people in last 9 month?
Still not get it right...
"220% premium to the price of the placement shares of $1.10 to Talbot Group and CITIC Australia...."
How about a 15% discount to the all-time high!, and
450% premium to the original offer....
Where are those people in last 9 month?
Still not get it right...
kennas
9th-March-2007, 10:22 AM
People never learn. Stupid Buttermere should hear our voice before make such stupid offer. $3.52 is too low. $4.20 should be more acceptable.
Now we have a reference price, not the $3.52. is how much Buttermere want to see it a few years later. I guess Buttermere is not for not a non-profitable organization. I guess it want to double the price. I guess $7 for MTN is a fair price..Still not sure what a 'fair' price is for any company without a final JORC, or approaval to mine.....
Normal takeover offers come in at approximately 30% above the volume weighted average of the previous 30 days trading. So, $4.20 ish would seem fair ish at the moment. Buttermere are dreaming at the moment really. Their offer might look ok if we do have a major correction back down to the 4000s in the XAO, and the U market follows everything else.
Now we have a reference price, not the $3.52. is how much Buttermere want to see it a few years later. I guess Buttermere is not for not a non-profitable organization. I guess it want to double the price. I guess $7 for MTN is a fair price..Still not sure what a 'fair' price is for any company without a final JORC, or approaval to mine.....
Normal takeover offers come in at approximately 30% above the volume weighted average of the previous 30 days trading. So, $4.20 ish would seem fair ish at the moment. Buttermere are dreaming at the moment really. Their offer might look ok if we do have a major correction back down to the 4000s in the XAO, and the U market follows everything else.
mmmmining
9th-March-2007, 10:27 AM
Still not sure what a 'fair' price is for any company without a final JORC, or approaval to mine.....
Normal takeover offers come in at approximately 30% above the value weighted average of the previous 30 days trading. So, $4.20 ish would seem fair ish at the moment. Buttermere are dreaming at the moment really. There offer might look ok if we do have a major correction back down to the 4000s in the XAO, and the U market follows everything else.
Kennas, MTN do have JORC resources, like 67mlb. They are upgrading it from referred cat. to indicated and measured cat.
You can use all kind of formula to get the fair price, such as EV/lb resources, or peer analysis. Use both methods will value MTN at $10+.
I named the $7 plus is based on the Buttermere investment objective.
Normal takeover offers come in at approximately 30% above the value weighted average of the previous 30 days trading. So, $4.20 ish would seem fair ish at the moment. Buttermere are dreaming at the moment really. There offer might look ok if we do have a major correction back down to the 4000s in the XAO, and the U market follows everything else.
Kennas, MTN do have JORC resources, like 67mlb. They are upgrading it from referred cat. to indicated and measured cat.
You can use all kind of formula to get the fair price, such as EV/lb resources, or peer analysis. Use both methods will value MTN at $10+.
I named the $7 plus is based on the Buttermere investment objective.
kennas
9th-March-2007, 10:37 AM
Kennas, MTN do have JORC resources, like 67mlb. They are upgrading it from referred cat. to indicated and measured cat.
Yes. Note I said final JORC. It will have more than current JORC IMO. It wasn't supposed to be a negative comment.
Yes. Note I said final JORC. It will have more than current JORC IMO. It wasn't supposed to be a negative comment.
Realist
9th-March-2007, 10:45 AM
Buttermere are morons. :banghead:
Their original offer was embarassingly weak. And they sent me a letter every week, week after week, it did my head in getting offers for 68c for my $3.00 shares - it was worse than getting a letter from David Tweed.
Now the next offer looks weak to.
They need to pay a premium, cause otherwise i have to sell and pay 50% CGT tax.
I aint selling. There is no point in me selling, I'll lose money on tax.
Their original offer was embarassingly weak. And they sent me a letter every week, week after week, it did my head in getting offers for 68c for my $3.00 shares - it was worse than getting a letter from David Tweed.
Now the next offer looks weak to.
They need to pay a premium, cause otherwise i have to sell and pay 50% CGT tax.
I aint selling. There is no point in me selling, I'll lose money on tax.
Halba
9th-March-2007, 10:48 AM
3.52 seems a bit of a joke of a bid.
Broadside
9th-March-2007, 10:52 AM
People never learn. Stupid Buttermere should hear our voice before make such stupid offer. $3.52 is too low. $4.20 should be more acceptable.
Now we have a reference price, not the $3.52. is how much Buttermere want to see it a few years later. I guess Buttermere is not for not a non-profitable organization. I guess it want to double the price. I guess $7 for MTN is a fair price..
Buttermere also screwed up their takeover for TYC which is why I got into MTN, I don't know who is in charge of their strategy but they ought to be given the elbow. If they made an offer of $1.20 9 months ago, they may not have succeeded but they would have got a lot of acceptances and would be sitting on a very large paper profit. Here's a tip, next time Buttermere make an initial offer for another company, buy with your ears pinned back and wait.
Now we have a reference price, not the $3.52. is how much Buttermere want to see it a few years later. I guess Buttermere is not for not a non-profitable organization. I guess it want to double the price. I guess $7 for MTN is a fair price..
Buttermere also screwed up their takeover for TYC which is why I got into MTN, I don't know who is in charge of their strategy but they ought to be given the elbow. If they made an offer of $1.20 9 months ago, they may not have succeeded but they would have got a lot of acceptances and would be sitting on a very large paper profit. Here's a tip, next time Buttermere make an initial offer for another company, buy with your ears pinned back and wait.
mmmmining
9th-March-2007, 10:56 AM
For whoever not in the position yet, or have not in full position, $3.52 is not the final price, and think whoever increase the offer by 450%, and want it all for $3.52will not sell it tomorrow at $3.52;
For whoever is luck in the position, it is not a celebration time yet, and anything could happen, good and bad;
For whoever want to check US's jobless number first before considering MTN, it is a very valuable lesson for investment and speculation.
For whoever is luck in the position, it is not a celebration time yet, and anything could happen, good and bad;
For whoever want to check US's jobless number first before considering MTN, it is a very valuable lesson for investment and speculation.
Halba
9th-March-2007, 12:59 PM
They're gonna have to bid more!
nizar
9th-March-2007, 01:07 PM
They're gonna have to bid more!
I think so too.
I think so too.
Rafa
9th-March-2007, 02:26 PM
Buttermore are abosulute morons :banghead:
I really do think that this correction has some way to go, and if they delayed their bid till next week, they may well have seen MTN at 2.60ish and then the bid of 3.50 would have looked ok... Not only that, it would have allowed me to buy some more! :banghead: :banghead:
as it stands, MTN was around 3.30 when they came in with their second rediculous bid!!!
its fair to say my comments yesterday of it falling back to 2.60ish are now invalid.
That is good news for existing holders and bad news for those either wanting to get in, or to get some more (like me)!
Anyway...
I would think 3.52 is the new floor, so any purchases around the present prices should not see too much downside...
However the upside is huge, as there is no way this share is going to go for this price... 400 - 500m is a reasonably take over offer, whatever that equates to in share price (including all options, etc, etc).
I really do think that this correction has some way to go, and if they delayed their bid till next week, they may well have seen MTN at 2.60ish and then the bid of 3.50 would have looked ok... Not only that, it would have allowed me to buy some more! :banghead: :banghead:
as it stands, MTN was around 3.30 when they came in with their second rediculous bid!!!
its fair to say my comments yesterday of it falling back to 2.60ish are now invalid.
That is good news for existing holders and bad news for those either wanting to get in, or to get some more (like me)!
Anyway...
I would think 3.52 is the new floor, so any purchases around the present prices should not see too much downside...
However the upside is huge, as there is no way this share is going to go for this price... 400 - 500m is a reasonably take over offer, whatever that equates to in share price (including all options, etc, etc).
Halba
9th-March-2007, 02:42 PM
Hi rafa the risk rewards look good at this price. 25c downside, and possible upside as you say to the $400m dollar mark.
Rafa
9th-March-2007, 03:02 PM
i tend to agree with that...
And although a lot of it does depend on the final JORC and the FS from Coffeys...from where i am sitting at this point in time... this would have to be a good time to get in.
And although a lot of it does depend on the final JORC and the FS from Coffeys...from where i am sitting at this point in time... this would have to be a good time to get in.
insider
9th-March-2007, 03:41 PM
I will not accept less than $15 per share
nizar
9th-March-2007, 03:47 PM
i tend to agree with that...
And although a lot of it does depend on the final JORC and the FS from Coffeys...from where i am sitting at this point in time... this would have to be a good time to get in.
Yeh i picked up a few at $3.75.
And although a lot of it does depend on the final JORC and the FS from Coffeys...from where i am sitting at this point in time... this would have to be a good time to get in.
Yeh i picked up a few at $3.75.
insider
9th-March-2007, 04:11 PM
Yeh i picked up a few at $3.75.
Nice you made 1 cent per share profit... :cool:
Nice you made 1 cent per share profit... :cool:
insider
9th-March-2007, 04:23 PM
some shares slipped through at 18minutes past 4>>>> 4:18PM
how does this happen... when I go to the bank one minute late they just lock me out and then I stick my finger up...
how does this happen... when I go to the bank one minute late they just lock me out and then I stick my finger up...
nizar
9th-March-2007, 04:25 PM
Nice you made 1 cent per share profit... :cool:
Damn i thought it was 5c :banghead:
LOL :D
Damn i thought it was 5c :banghead:
LOL :D
insider
9th-March-2007, 04:32 PM
Damn i thought it was 5c :banghead:
LOL :D
Try not to spend it all at once... lol... It should have been 5 Cents
LOL :D
Try not to spend it all at once... lol... It should have been 5 Cents
Halba
9th-March-2007, 04:41 PM
Drill results r imminent also nizar so you have joined at a good time.
prs
11th-March-2007, 10:14 AM
Halba
What are these new drill results you mention?
Do you know when the results of the new licences are likely?
I mentioned in a previous thread that I had invested my super in Marathon, well that's about 154,000 shares so you can see that I'm pretty keen for this whole thing to work so I can retire.
What are these new drill results you mention?
Do you know when the results of the new licences are likely?
I mentioned in a previous thread that I had invested my super in Marathon, well that's about 154,000 shares so you can see that I'm pretty keen for this whole thing to work so I can retire.
Halba
11th-March-2007, 10:36 AM
prs such comments "I hold 154,000 shares" etc cannot be independently verified. I believe the moderator doesn't want people disclosing these figures as they don't contribute anything meaningful to the thread. I myself and others should cease this habit of telling how much you own - this contributes nothing and as stated can't be verified.
To answer your question re: drill results its in the prior announcements. I would think with 154,000 shares you would be up to date and even in the ear of the directors.
To answer your question re: drill results its in the prior announcements. I would think with 154,000 shares you would be up to date and even in the ear of the directors.
sydney1963
11th-March-2007, 10:47 AM
prs such comments "I hold 154,000 shares" etc cannot be independently verified. I believe the moderator doesn't want people disclosing these figures as they don't contribute anything meaningful to the thread. I myself and others should cease this habit of telling how much you own - this contributes nothing and as stated can't be verified.
To answer your question re: drill results its in the prior announcements. I would think with 154,000 shares you would be up to date and even in the ear of the directors.
Yesterday, 07:34 AM
Halba Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 580
Re: ERN - Erongo Energy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree Chris but I invested in BLR for some smaller diversification. I hold like 2k in BLR and 40 times that in BMN so agree.
Happy that ERN closed well on friday, news must be imminent.
To answer your question re: drill results its in the prior announcements. I would think with 154,000 shares you would be up to date and even in the ear of the directors.
Yesterday, 07:34 AM
Halba Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 580
Re: ERN - Erongo Energy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree Chris but I invested in BLR for some smaller diversification. I hold like 2k in BLR and 40 times that in BMN so agree.
Happy that ERN closed well on friday, news must be imminent.
Halba
11th-March-2007, 10:48 AM
Halba said:
I myself and others should cease this habit of telling how much you own
Already admitted I have done it on occasion.
Am ceasing this habit. So quoting my past words does nothing.
I myself and others should cease this habit of telling how much you own
Already admitted I have done it on occasion.
Am ceasing this habit. So quoting my past words does nothing.
mmmmining
11th-March-2007, 07:43 PM
I mentioned in a previous thread that I had invested my super in Marathon, well that's about 154,000 shares so you can see that I'm pretty keen for this whole thing to work so I can retire.
With such large holding on MTN, a non-indexed stock, You are very modest to claim that you are new to investment.
Anyway, welcome pre, I believe you have 154,000 reasons to do your own research actively on MTN, instead of being a passive reader and holder. If you have any information on MTN, I appreciate if you can share with us.
For whoever worried about the SA government, SA is in top 5 attraction to miners, ahead of QLD.
http://www.mineweb.net/whats_new/674167.htm
With such large holding on MTN, a non-indexed stock, You are very modest to claim that you are new to investment.
Anyway, welcome pre, I believe you have 154,000 reasons to do your own research actively on MTN, instead of being a passive reader and holder. If you have any information on MTN, I appreciate if you can share with us.
For whoever worried about the SA government, SA is in top 5 attraction to miners, ahead of QLD.
http://www.mineweb.net/whats_new/674167.htm
prs
12th-March-2007, 06:54 PM
Guys, please accept my apologies for any inappropriate comments. I AM completely new to investing and while I cannot disclose the reason why I decided upon MTN and chose to invest everything, I can honestly say that this is an interesting and traumatic ride that I'm on. I listen and read as much as I can but there are probably a number of sites I'm not aware of pertaining to my investment. Should you guys wish to offer any sites I would be very greatful. Please take it easy guys I really am only learning but would like to know heaps more with a view to continued investing.
I have e-mailed MTN and asked a similar question about the licences and not received a response. Disappointing but I haven't given up hope. I feel a bit shy about giving info that I have for fear of getting beaten down. However, should I find anything out I will most definately share, a reason why I joined this site. I guess also, there's a side of me that is looking for confirmation that I've done the right thing. Thks mmmmining for the welcome.
I have e-mailed MTN and asked a similar question about the licences and not received a response. Disappointing but I haven't given up hope. I feel a bit shy about giving info that I have for fear of getting beaten down. However, should I find anything out I will most definately share, a reason why I joined this site. I guess also, there's a side of me that is looking for confirmation that I've done the right thing. Thks mmmmining for the welcome.
Halba
12th-March-2007, 07:42 PM
prs how much $$ are you sitting on? Throwing 154,000 shares into a company without research is suicide. You might have fluked it here ,but i strongly suggest you do some research before hopping in.
Frankly i do not believe you. You sound very new and i very much doubt a newbie would put 154,000 shares. 154,000 shares even purchased at average of $2 is worth over $300,000. Do i believe you? I don't coz even i do not play with that sort of cash.
If i am wrong i must apologise. But normally people with that kind of cash(in one stock) are highly professional and methodical and have connections in the industry.
Frankly i do not believe you. You sound very new and i very much doubt a newbie would put 154,000 shares. 154,000 shares even purchased at average of $2 is worth over $300,000. Do i believe you? I don't coz even i do not play with that sort of cash.
If i am wrong i must apologise. But normally people with that kind of cash(in one stock) are highly professional and methodical and have connections in the industry.
mmmmining
12th-March-2007, 08:00 PM
Halba, I don't think we should getting into too much private (how much share I own, you own, or "Pre" own is a private matter). If you still not calm down yet, just think "Pre" might be a relative of one of the executives in MTN, or "Pre" might a rich person, or simply inherit it, even win a lotto.
I believe "Pre" might contribute a lot in this thread because of his large holding. All we need is use our time and energy to analyze MTN, not "Pre".
I believe "Pre" might contribute a lot in this thread because of his large holding. All we need is use our time and energy to analyze MTN, not "Pre".
Halba
12th-March-2007, 08:04 PM
who the heck is "pre" mmining? I was addressing "prs"
on a strictly MTN note the share is doing splendid :)
they are current drilling the eastern most side of the deposit. results or some progress report is imminent. Coffey mining study i believe will be in may
on a strictly MTN note the share is doing splendid :)
they are current drilling the eastern most side of the deposit. results or some progress report is imminent. Coffey mining study i believe will be in may
mmmmining
12th-March-2007, 08:07 PM
who the heck is "pre" mmining? I was addressing "prs"
on a strictly MTN note the share is doing splendid :)
they are current drilling the eastern most side of the deposit. results or some progress report is imminent. Coffey mining study i believe will be in may
Sorry, Halba, a typo. should be "prs"
on a strictly MTN note the share is doing splendid :)
they are current drilling the eastern most side of the deposit. results or some progress report is imminent. Coffey mining study i believe will be in may
Sorry, Halba, a typo. should be "prs"
prs
12th-March-2007, 09:14 PM
Guys, research was done prior to my investing. I am not a relative of anyone at MTN, I promise all of you I am a 57 yr old punter who is desperate to retire, who was literally getting nowhere with his superannuation and didn't have enough to fulfill that dream. I have taken a big plunge and while you may feel it suicidal it appears to be working. I am not a professional. I invested my super and bought MTN shares when they were $1.63, you know roughly how many shares I hold and the closing price today was $3.88. You can work it out from there.
Halba, the reason I invested that amount of money is that I have been working for over 41 yrs and I have been accruing super for that amount of time.
Halba, the reason I invested that amount of money is that I have been working for over 41 yrs and I have been accruing super for that amount of time.
kennas
12th-March-2007, 09:22 PM
Guys, it's probably best that no one post up how many shares they've bought and for how much. I've found that it just presents problems on the forum. There is no way to varify it, and can also be easily suspected as ramping. I'm not saying anyone has done that deliberately here, it's just a general comment. If anyone really has to tell someone how many shares they own in something, it's best to be done via PM. Cheers. Sean K
prs
12th-March-2007, 09:27 PM
Sorry kennas, just trying to help these guys understand where I'm coming from and that I'm not stupid, suicidal or some sort of ogre. No more numbers will be mentioned.
sleeper88
12th-March-2007, 09:34 PM
getting back to the issue here, does anyone think the directors will accept this offer and tell us shareholders to accept it too, in the absence of any higher bids (thats what they all say). I mean directors have made stupid decisions in the past.
Also, would it be wise for PDN to drop its offer for SMM and bid for MTN instead?
Also, would it be wise for PDN to drop its offer for SMM and bid for MTN instead?
Halba
12th-March-2007, 09:43 PM
Sleeper 88 I doubt much more will be heard on the issue of takeover.
Directors think its laughable and I myself think this is a joke (very underbidding).
Directors think its laughable and I myself think this is a joke (very underbidding).
mmmmining
12th-March-2007, 11:46 PM
Per ann, The Cosby's need a few days to formally lodge the revised offer.
I guess MTN is very likely to release further drilling results before any official response, even a preliminary scope study if it is to board's advantage.
Either way will send MTN's SP well pass $4, and of course a big Rejection.
If rejection without further drilling results or preliminary scope study, the SP will be around current level.
If the board recommend to accept the offer, then Bad News...
I guess MTN is very likely to release further drilling results before any official response, even a preliminary scope study if it is to board's advantage.
Either way will send MTN's SP well pass $4, and of course a big Rejection.
If rejection without further drilling results or preliminary scope study, the SP will be around current level.
If the board recommend to accept the offer, then Bad News...
insider
13th-March-2007, 11:53 AM
Nice little announcement this morning...
Quote from video transcript. "Marathon is the obvious company to invest in".
Quote from video transcript. "Marathon is the obvious company to invest in".
mmmmining
13th-March-2007, 12:12 PM
Nice little announcement this morning...
Quote from video transcript. "Marathon is the obvious company to invest in".
The video addressed several concerns, such as politics, environment, metallurgy, size and quality of resources. Very encouraging to listen.
Indicated 1000t+ U3O8/yr production (revenue at $250m+), and ~30yr mining life..
Quote from video transcript. "Marathon is the obvious company to invest in".
The video addressed several concerns, such as politics, environment, metallurgy, size and quality of resources. Very encouraging to listen.
Indicated 1000t+ U3O8/yr production (revenue at $250m+), and ~30yr mining life..
nizar
13th-March-2007, 12:14 PM
Per ann, The Cosby's need a few days to formally lodge the revised offer.
I guess MTN is very likely to release further drilling results before any official response, even a preliminary scope study if it is to board's advantage.
Either way will send MTN's SP well pass $4, and of course a big Rejection.
If rejection without further drilling results or preliminary scope study, the SP will be around current level.
If the board recommend to accept the offer, then Bad News...
MTN must and i suspect will, reject the offer saying the usual:
"THis offer undervalues the company and its prospects, etc,etc"
But if they accept like those idiots over at OMC, then that will cap the price. Look at OMC 4 months on, other uranium stocks have bolted, but its done nothing, im very happy to have sold that dog.
So if directors accept, that will cap the price.
If they reject, then off and away we go.
I guess MTN is very likely to release further drilling results before any official response, even a preliminary scope study if it is to board's advantage.
Either way will send MTN's SP well pass $4, and of course a big Rejection.
If rejection without further drilling results or preliminary scope study, the SP will be around current level.
If the board recommend to accept the offer, then Bad News...
MTN must and i suspect will, reject the offer saying the usual:
"THis offer undervalues the company and its prospects, etc,etc"
But if they accept like those idiots over at OMC, then that will cap the price. Look at OMC 4 months on, other uranium stocks have bolted, but its done nothing, im very happy to have sold that dog.
So if directors accept, that will cap the price.
If they reject, then off and away we go.
champ2003
13th-March-2007, 12:21 PM
MTN must and i suspect will, reject the offer saying the usual:
"THis offer undervalues the company and its prospects, etc,etc"
But if they accept like those idiots over at OMC, then that will cap the price. Look at OMC 4 months on, other uranium stocks have bolted, but its done nothing, im very happy to have sold that dog.
So if directors accept, that will cap the price.
If they reject, then off and away we go.
After this mornings announcement with them promoting investment into their company it has an underlying tone of rejection of offer IMO.
I think that they want to grow the company themselves.
"THis offer undervalues the company and its prospects, etc,etc"
But if they accept like those idiots over at OMC, then that will cap the price. Look at OMC 4 months on, other uranium stocks have bolted, but its done nothing, im very happy to have sold that dog.
So if directors accept, that will cap the price.
If they reject, then off and away we go.
After this mornings announcement with them promoting investment into their company it has an underlying tone of rejection of offer IMO.
I think that they want to grow the company themselves.
kennas
13th-March-2007, 12:25 PM
After this mornings announcement with them promoting investment into their company it has an underlying tone of rejection of offer IMO.
I think that they want to grow the company themselves.Everyone has a price I reckon.
I think that they want to grow the company themselves.Everyone has a price I reckon.
champ2003
13th-March-2007, 12:37 PM
Everyone has a price I reckon.
Yeah very true Kennas. It will be very interesting to see what price MTN eventually gives in to.
Yeah very true Kennas. It will be very interesting to see what price MTN eventually gives in to.
Halba
13th-March-2007, 12:56 PM
lmao "everyone has a price". But it looks as though I'm prepared to give this stock a PV valuation of somewhere between $750-$1.2billion dollars.
Reasons: $10/lb EV/lb as the standard benchmark. More premium added due to it being good grades.
Reasons: $10/lb EV/lb as the standard benchmark. More premium added due to it being good grades.
champ2003
13th-March-2007, 01:58 PM
Gosh at $3.85 the offer of $3.52 looks really attractive....NOT!!!!
:D
:D
nizar
14th-March-2007, 02:06 PM
Any thoughts on the Chairmans response?
He didnt really lean either way....
Why dont they just say No and give a presentation and bag the sh$% out of buttermere the way SMM did to PDN :banghead:
He didnt really lean either way....
Why dont they just say No and give a presentation and bag the sh$% out of buttermere the way SMM did to PDN :banghead:
Rafa
14th-March-2007, 04:08 PM
patience Nizar,
they don't really need to...
the market knows!
was hoping MTN dropped to 3.52 so i could buy some more...!
FALL MTN, FALL!!!
they don't really need to...
the market knows!
was hoping MTN dropped to 3.52 so i could buy some more...!
FALL MTN, FALL!!!
prs
14th-March-2007, 06:36 PM
I believe we can expect another drop in the uranium sector, not very big and certainly nowhere near the ordinaries. Could this be the correction we ought to have expected in April?
kennas
15th-March-2007, 12:32 PM
That ann from MTN looks pretty positive to me yet the sp has hardly moved :confused: Factored in perhaps?
They continue to get great grades, and will certainly extend the resource.
They continue to get great grades, and will certainly extend the resource.
mmmmining
15th-March-2007, 12:35 PM
More drilling results are out.
People have no idea with so many numbers. It is strange that market often cheers for a couple of rock grabbing, and quiet with flood of drilling results. Sometimes, Mr Market are really spoiled.
I believe MTN can do better by putting the numbers in context of the modeling.
Anyway, I am going to do a study tonight, to compare all kind of numbers.
People have no idea with so many numbers. It is strange that market often cheers for a couple of rock grabbing, and quiet with flood of drilling results. Sometimes, Mr Market are really spoiled.
I believe MTN can do better by putting the numbers in context of the modeling.
Anyway, I am going to do a study tonight, to compare all kind of numbers.
nizar
15th-March-2007, 12:48 PM
That ann from MTN looks pretty positive to me yet the sp has hardly moved :confused: Factored in perhaps?
They continue to get great grades, and will certainly extend the resource.
Agree, the resource will be extended..
The market has misunderstood.
I dont think anything is factored in, not at this market cap.
They continue to get great grades, and will certainly extend the resource.
Agree, the resource will be extended..
The market has misunderstood.
I dont think anything is factored in, not at this market cap.
Halba
15th-March-2007, 12:49 PM
Looks good the grades look higher than their model am I correct?
A lot of 900-1000ppm's higher than 690 average grade.
Also mkt will only react on final jorc numbers.
cheerios
Bear in mind mkt got bashed yest ppl a bit slow today.
A lot of 900-1000ppm's higher than 690 average grade.
Also mkt will only react on final jorc numbers.
cheerios
Bear in mind mkt got bashed yest ppl a bit slow today.
insider
15th-March-2007, 04:07 PM
That ann from MTN looks pretty positive to me yet the sp has hardly moved :confused: Factored in perhaps?
They continue to get great grades, and will certainly extend the resource.
This is where I believe the uranium sector is a bit strange... There is no logical pattern to it going up or down or sideways... AGS did the same thing, they came out with results, they didn't move for a while, I sold and then bang... the stock rose to 2 dollars from 43 cents or something... I'm happy sit back and watch it bolt off... there's no way I'm falling for this again... the common thing with both stocks is that AGS was in a correction period with new results... and MTN is now in a correction period with new results
They continue to get great grades, and will certainly extend the resource.
This is where I believe the uranium sector is a bit strange... There is no logical pattern to it going up or down or sideways... AGS did the same thing, they came out with results, they didn't move for a while, I sold and then bang... the stock rose to 2 dollars from 43 cents or something... I'm happy sit back and watch it bolt off... there's no way I'm falling for this again... the common thing with both stocks is that AGS was in a correction period with new results... and MTN is now in a correction period with new results
mmmmining
15th-March-2007, 07:14 PM
the common thing with both stocks is that AGS was in a correction period with new results... and MTN is now in a correction period with new results
IMHO, the only thing is common between AGS and MTN is both has uranium asset in SA, and only miles away from each other.
The key difference is that AGS is full of greed, over $400m market cap for a possible 25% of 30,000t U3O8.
(High grade, near term producer, ISL mining, More exploration targets, everything about AGS is excellent, blue sky...)
On the other hand, MTN is full of fear, less than $230m market cap for a JORC 100% of 31,000t U3O8,
(Doubtful resources modeling, average grade, may not be mined, national park, aboriginal problem, heritage issue, environmental problem. The very low share price reinforce people's doubt. Cannot be that cheap, must have some problems.....)
As time pass by, both greed in AGS and fear for MTN are eased. You can notice the share price travel in a different way from Mid-Jan.
AGS is a passive pig-back uranium asset holder. The delay in release the JORC resources by partner is not inspiring.
While batch after batch excellent drilling results, and PR activities do remove a lot of doubts on MTN
When Cosby offered MTN at 68c, MTN's share has been around 75c for a few months until the uranium sector took off.
It is very normal to see the MTN is trading around $3.70, a 5% premium over Cosby's offer.
Having seen so many good drilling results, people start to take it for granted. I guess MTN's price will not be much higher than $3.52 until the indicated/measured JORC resources released, or a positive scope study.
I am not saying that AGS is not worth $2, or to use AGS's valuation to get $10+ for MTN. Because they are very different stocks, with different stories...
IMHO, the only thing is common between AGS and MTN is both has uranium asset in SA, and only miles away from each other.
The key difference is that AGS is full of greed, over $400m market cap for a possible 25% of 30,000t U3O8.
(High grade, near term producer, ISL mining, More exploration targets, everything about AGS is excellent, blue sky...)
On the other hand, MTN is full of fear, less than $230m market cap for a JORC 100% of 31,000t U3O8,
(Doubtful resources modeling, average grade, may not be mined, national park, aboriginal problem, heritage issue, environmental problem. The very low share price reinforce people's doubt. Cannot be that cheap, must have some problems.....)
As time pass by, both greed in AGS and fear for MTN are eased. You can notice the share price travel in a different way from Mid-Jan.
AGS is a passive pig-back uranium asset holder. The delay in release the JORC resources by partner is not inspiring.
While batch after batch excellent drilling results, and PR activities do remove a lot of doubts on MTN
When Cosby offered MTN at 68c, MTN's share has been around 75c for a few months until the uranium sector took off.
It is very normal to see the MTN is trading around $3.70, a 5% premium over Cosby's offer.
Having seen so many good drilling results, people start to take it for granted. I guess MTN's price will not be much higher than $3.52 until the indicated/measured JORC resources released, or a positive scope study.
I am not saying that AGS is not worth $2, or to use AGS's valuation to get $10+ for MTN. Because they are very different stocks, with different stories...
Halba
15th-March-2007, 07:29 PM
Both have different resource models, grades, enviro/social issues/ sentiment
Its like comparing a juicy orange to a nice apple.
I think AGS- east zone has about 35000,40,000t contained u308
West may have about 15,000-20,000 high grade, with another 10,000+ in surrounds. Send me a pm if u want to know my calcs. Thats about 50,000 exploration target+(versus the 30,000 u mentioned) so you might want to have a look at your calculation again... re AGS
Also open pits u can produce more than underground depending on size of process plant( ithink MTN said minimum 1000tpa).
Its like comparing a juicy orange to a nice apple.
I think AGS- east zone has about 35000,40,000t contained u308
West may have about 15,000-20,000 high grade, with another 10,000+ in surrounds. Send me a pm if u want to know my calcs. Thats about 50,000 exploration target+(versus the 30,000 u mentioned) so you might want to have a look at your calculation again... re AGS
Also open pits u can produce more than underground depending on size of process plant( ithink MTN said minimum 1000tpa).
bigt
15th-March-2007, 07:30 PM
Very good comment mmmmmining, there is more to a stock than tonnage alone..much more.
prs
15th-March-2007, 09:44 PM
Anybody notice that uranium has gone up to $91/lb?
Any comments on the impact?
Any comments on the impact?
insider
15th-March-2007, 10:15 PM
Anybody notice that uranium has gone up to $91/lb?
Any comments on the impact?
It did? good...
You made some great points mmmmmining... but you didn't understand what I was saying... I was saying that I believe that the uranium sector is kind of unpredictable, companies that are worth billions yet don't make a cent is one way it defies logic... people keep asking questions like "it's soooo good why doesn't it go up?" and then for no reason at all it jumps up unexpectedly... there probably is a reason but it does defy logic... My dodgy little comparison between AGS and MTN was nothing more than an example of unpredictability in this sector... so my advice is just sit and wait... that's all... What I speak of is something outside of analysis, good results, issues, politics etc.
Any comments on the impact?
It did? good...
You made some great points mmmmmining... but you didn't understand what I was saying... I was saying that I believe that the uranium sector is kind of unpredictable, companies that are worth billions yet don't make a cent is one way it defies logic... people keep asking questions like "it's soooo good why doesn't it go up?" and then for no reason at all it jumps up unexpectedly... there probably is a reason but it does defy logic... My dodgy little comparison between AGS and MTN was nothing more than an example of unpredictability in this sector... so my advice is just sit and wait... that's all... What I speak of is something outside of analysis, good results, issues, politics etc.
Halba
16th-March-2007, 08:17 AM
Insider sure they don't make profits, but isn't markets all about expectations of profit? With the resource size of Mt Gee, the profit potential is sizeable (assuming +1000tpa given in presentations). Not only that, the forward u price is unlikely to be $100/lb, it could theoretically be higher when they are in bankable feasibility - say about $120/lb.
prs
17th-March-2007, 10:00 AM
I would have thought that with demand for U outstripping supply, with actual auctioning going on for U, :rolleyes: with Cigar Lake flooded and probably not capable of production for some years to come, with China trying its hardest to get into Australia's uranium, with ERA with a flooded mine and with the results of the recent drilling at Mt Gee that MTN must surely be qualified to be issued with a licence in the near future. Any thoughts?
kennas
17th-March-2007, 10:04 AM
I would have thought that with demand for U outstripping supply, with actual auctioning going on for U, :rolleyes: with Cigar Lake flooded and probably not capable of production for some years to come, with China trying its hardest to get into Australia's uranium, with ERA with a flooded mine and with the results of the recent drilling at Mt Gee that MTN must surely be qualified to be issued with a licence in the near future. Any thoughts?I don't think any of those factors play a part in MTN getting a lisence to mine. :confused: I think that's up to the SA gov after an application is received. Plus, I think getting the lisence to mine is after a BFS anyway, so long time comming I think. And, I'm still not sure if SA are playing the National Labor card on No New Mines at the moment anyway.
champ2003
17th-March-2007, 10:12 AM
I don't think any of those factors play a part in MTN getting a lisence to mine. :confused: I think that's up to the SA gov after an application is received. Plus, I think getting the lisence to mine is after a BFS anyway, so long time comming I think. And, I'm still not sure if SA are playing the National Labor card on No New Mines at the moment anyway.
Thank god for the election coming up so we can all put the speculation over mining in SA to rest. As far as I'm aware its the most uranium mining friendly state in Australia.???
:banghead:
Thank god for the election coming up so we can all put the speculation over mining in SA to rest. As far as I'm aware its the most uranium mining friendly state in Australia.???
:banghead:
kennas
17th-March-2007, 10:58 AM
I don't think any of those factors play a part in MTN getting a lisence to mine. :confused: I think that's up to the SA gov after an application is received. Plus, I think getting the lisence to mine is after a BFS anyway, so long time comming I think. And, I'm still not sure if SA are playing the National Labor card on No New Mines at the moment anyway.
Thank god for the election coming up so we can all put the speculation over mining in SA to rest. As far as I'm aware its the most uranium mining friendly state in Australia.???
:banghead:Amen to that. I have to say though that SA is not a 'U friendly' State, just because they have 2 operating and one approved. The Honeymoon Mine has been allowed to go ahead because it was approved in 2002 when the Liberal Party was in power in SA. While the current leader may be open to mining, he still has to follow Nat Labor policy.
Thank god for the election coming up so we can all put the speculation over mining in SA to rest. As far as I'm aware its the most uranium mining friendly state in Australia.???
:banghead:Amen to that. I have to say though that SA is not a 'U friendly' State, just because they have 2 operating and one approved. The Honeymoon Mine has been allowed to go ahead because it was approved in 2002 when the Liberal Party was in power in SA. While the current leader may be open to mining, he still has to follow Nat Labor policy.
Halba
17th-March-2007, 11:01 AM
Yep kennas is right. Don't even have to look at this approval issue until AFTER the BFS outcomes.
champ2003
17th-March-2007, 11:18 AM
Amen to that. I have to say though that SA is not a 'U friendly' State, just because they have 2 operating and one approved. The Honeymoon Mine has been allowed to go ahead because it was approved in 2002 when the Liberal Party was in power in SA. While the current leader may be open to mining, he still has to follow Nat Labor policy.
Thanks guys,
In your opinion whats the most friendly U mining state at the moment then?
:confused:
Thanks guys,
In your opinion whats the most friendly U mining state at the moment then?
:confused:
kennas
17th-March-2007, 11:23 AM
Thanks guys,
In your opinion whats the most friendly U mining state at the moment then?
:confused:Canberra, Norfolk Island, Christmas Island, Nowra, and NT. And any Australian embassy overseas.
In your opinion whats the most friendly U mining state at the moment then?
:confused:Canberra, Norfolk Island, Christmas Island, Nowra, and NT. And any Australian embassy overseas.
champ2003
17th-March-2007, 11:28 AM
Canberra, Norfolk Island, Christmas Island, Nowra, and NT. And any Australian embassy overseas.
Ok I guess i asked a silly question.
Cheers!
:)
Ok I guess i asked a silly question.
Cheers!
:)
insider
17th-March-2007, 06:07 PM
There was a full page article on uranium in today's Herald Sun... it was titled "Uranium Fever" It picked the top ten Uranium Deposits in Australia and said who owned them... There wasn't anything said about MTN that we don't know but mentioned the takeover bid from Crosby Financial Partners in Hong Kong... It also stated that MTN along side PNN have had recent gains of 400%...
There wasn't that much said about the companies and no market capitals were mentioned, however the found resource was... Hopefully investors will see how much more uranium MTN have compared with the rest and compare market capitals...
In the Article there was also mention about how the market is anticipating a change in next months review of the labor policy on new mines...
There wasn't that much said about the companies and no market capitals were mentioned, however the found resource was... Hopefully investors will see how much more uranium MTN have compared with the rest and compare market capitals...
In the Article there was also mention about how the market is anticipating a change in next months review of the labor policy on new mines...
Halba
18th-March-2007, 08:37 AM
Those articles are aimed at the average Joe, not much in them really.
kennas
18th-March-2007, 09:26 AM
Those articles are aimed at the average Joe, not much in them really.I agree, not much we shouldn't know already. The effect will be that your next cabbie will be telling you to buy uranium stocks..... :banghead:
nizar
18th-March-2007, 09:58 AM
Those articles are aimed at the average Joe, not much in them really.
Creating awareness (that MTN exists!) among average Joes is not a bad thing.
But i dont want them to catch on yet. Though it willl be good if, in the future, they do come to the understanding that uranium stocks are unreal - they will be buying from us when PDN is around the $30/40 mark and MTN maybe $10-15.
And thats just before the uranium bubble bursts.
Remember the masses rarely get it right.
I was reading a book where it was mentioned that there was a fund manager that pick stocks by taking the position opposite to what is in those stockmarket newsletters, he subscribes to about 30 newsletters, and in his calculation, he puts largest weighting to the ones that have the largest number of subscribers. He managed north of a billion dollars, and has been very succesful. His reasoning was that the masses always rely on these newslettes to make decisions, and the masses rarely get it right. Funny stuff :D
Creating awareness (that MTN exists!) among average Joes is not a bad thing.
But i dont want them to catch on yet. Though it willl be good if, in the future, they do come to the understanding that uranium stocks are unreal - they will be buying from us when PDN is around the $30/40 mark and MTN maybe $10-15.
And thats just before the uranium bubble bursts.
Remember the masses rarely get it right.
I was reading a book where it was mentioned that there was a fund manager that pick stocks by taking the position opposite to what is in those stockmarket newsletters, he subscribes to about 30 newsletters, and in his calculation, he puts largest weighting to the ones that have the largest number of subscribers. He managed north of a billion dollars, and has been very succesful. His reasoning was that the masses always rely on these newslettes to make decisions, and the masses rarely get it right. Funny stuff :D
insider
18th-March-2007, 11:04 AM
The thing is for the no new mines policy to be lifted I think there needs to be a significant amount of investor pressure... So getting the average joe to jump on would be good...
prs
20th-March-2007, 07:43 PM
Hey Guys
The board has gone very quiet. What's happening, what are your thoughts about the lack of movement?
The board has gone very quiet. What's happening, what are your thoughts about the lack of movement?
mmmmining
20th-March-2007, 08:19 PM
Hey Guys
The board has gone very quiet. What's happening, what are your thoughts about the lack of movement?
I check the dictionary about a word PATIENT,
1. bearing pains or trials calmly or without complaint;
2. manifesting forbearance under provocation or strain;
3. not hasty or impetuous;
4. steadfast despite opposition, difficulty, or adversity
In last April, someone bought MTN at $1.40. It took 8 long months until last Dec. to be in the money;
MTN just being sideway for a month, I believe you need to hug "PATIENT" for a while.
By the way, MTN will response by this Friday.
The board has gone very quiet. What's happening, what are your thoughts about the lack of movement?
I check the dictionary about a word PATIENT,
1. bearing pains or trials calmly or without complaint;
2. manifesting forbearance under provocation or strain;
3. not hasty or impetuous;
4. steadfast despite opposition, difficulty, or adversity
In last April, someone bought MTN at $1.40. It took 8 long months until last Dec. to be in the money;
MTN just being sideway for a month, I believe you need to hug "PATIENT" for a while.
By the way, MTN will response by this Friday.
insider
20th-March-2007, 09:01 PM
I check the dictionary about a word PATIENT,
1. bearing pains or trials calmly or without complaint;
2. manifesting forbearance under provocation or strain;
3. not hasty or impetuous;
4. steadfast despite opposition, difficulty, or adversity
In last April, someone bought MTN at $1.40. It took 8 long months until last Dec. to be in the money;
MTN just being sideway for a month, I believe you need to hug "PATIENT" for a while.
By the way, MTN will response by this Friday.
I've been waiting for Thursday and Friday for months... MTN will be presenting at a national uranium conference... should be good... Go to Uranium a raging bull thread to read more... MTN's involvement will be positive... MTN have the largest deposit of all the companies presenting but one of the smallest capitals... :D
1. bearing pains or trials calmly or without complaint;
2. manifesting forbearance under provocation or strain;
3. not hasty or impetuous;
4. steadfast despite opposition, difficulty, or adversity
In last April, someone bought MTN at $1.40. It took 8 long months until last Dec. to be in the money;
MTN just being sideway for a month, I believe you need to hug "PATIENT" for a while.
By the way, MTN will response by this Friday.
I've been waiting for Thursday and Friday for months... MTN will be presenting at a national uranium conference... should be good... Go to Uranium a raging bull thread to read more... MTN's involvement will be positive... MTN have the largest deposit of all the companies presenting but one of the smallest capitals... :D
prs
21st-March-2007, 05:58 PM
G'Day mmmmining
You're dead right and I believe that's the lesson I have to learn at the moment. I have been told to be patient and that the next two weeks are going to see MTN start to really move.
Insider, what was the name of that site please?
You're dead right and I believe that's the lesson I have to learn at the moment. I have been told to be patient and that the next two weeks are going to see MTN start to really move.
Insider, what was the name of that site please?
mmmmining
21st-March-2007, 06:05 PM
G'Day mmmmining
You're dead right and I believe that's the lesson I have to learn at the moment. I have been told to be patient and that the next two weeks are going to see MTN start to really move.
Insider, what was the name of that site please?
if you are in Adelaide, you should take a look, at least the expo.
http://www.paydirtsuraniumconference.com/
You're dead right and I believe that's the lesson I have to learn at the moment. I have been told to be patient and that the next two weeks are going to see MTN start to really move.
Insider, what was the name of that site please?
if you are in Adelaide, you should take a look, at least the expo.
http://www.paydirtsuraniumconference.com/
prs
21st-March-2007, 06:10 PM
Insider, what I mean is could you please give me the page number at Raging Bull as there are over 80 of them?
prs
21st-March-2007, 06:29 PM
mmmmining thanks for sharing that. I've just had a look at the site and my impatience has been replaced with absolute encouragement.
insider
21st-March-2007, 07:21 PM
Insider, what I mean is could you please give me the page number at Raging Bull as there are over 80 of them?
here's the link...
http://www.paydirtsuraniumconference.com/
here's the link...
http://www.paydirtsuraniumconference.com/
insider
22nd-March-2007, 10:49 AM
A share acceptance form from buttermere just came through the mail... I shredded it...
UraniumLover
22nd-March-2007, 05:43 PM
A share acceptance form from buttermere just came through the mail... I shredded it...
:blover: Lovin MTN still :blover: I shredded buttermere too.
Hopefully this will continue moving up like other u plays today.
:blover: Lovin MTN still :blover: I shredded buttermere too.
Hopefully this will continue moving up like other u plays today.
Halba
22nd-March-2007, 07:17 PM
Uraniumlover seems like you are lovin a lot of stocks today.... :1luvu:
mmmmining
22nd-March-2007, 07:28 PM
MTN reject the revised offer.
mmmmining
22nd-March-2007, 07:52 PM
Good Staff.
Highlight from the rejection document:
1. CEO of Crosby boost on 14 Mar 07: (page 5 or 2)
"We continue to see substantial additional value within the Marathon business."
For project with such huge risk, under normal situation, it required MTN return 100%+ to justify $200m+ return. From this point of view, MTN will worth $7+
2. Resources upgrade in 3 months (page 9 or 6)
3. The scoping study is well advanced (page 9 or 6)
4. Drilling out side Mt Gee in the Paralana Mineral System. 4 diamont drill holes completed this month at Armchair deposit. (page 9 or 6)
5. (extra) I quote from: www.miningNews.net:
"South Australian Mineral Resources Development Minister Paul Holloway told the Paydirt Uranium Conference in Adelaide that "the State Government is very confident that the no new mines policy will change, allowing South Australia's competitive advantage in the uranium sector to come to the fore".
"It's my opinion that South Australia will move fairly quickly to change our policy," he said, noting that any policy change won't affect existing operations and already strong support for the change from the state's premier and other ministers."
Highlight from the rejection document:
1. CEO of Crosby boost on 14 Mar 07: (page 5 or 2)
"We continue to see substantial additional value within the Marathon business."
For project with such huge risk, under normal situation, it required MTN return 100%+ to justify $200m+ return. From this point of view, MTN will worth $7+
2. Resources upgrade in 3 months (page 9 or 6)
3. The scoping study is well advanced (page 9 or 6)
4. Drilling out side Mt Gee in the Paralana Mineral System. 4 diamont drill holes completed this month at Armchair deposit. (page 9 or 6)
5. (extra) I quote from: www.miningNews.net:
"South Australian Mineral Resources Development Minister Paul Holloway told the Paydirt Uranium Conference in Adelaide that "the State Government is very confident that the no new mines policy will change, allowing South Australia's competitive advantage in the uranium sector to come to the fore".
"It's my opinion that South Australia will move fairly quickly to change our policy," he said, noting that any policy change won't affect existing operations and already strong support for the change from the state's premier and other ministers."
andrewkmz
22nd-March-2007, 08:27 PM
I like the word "unanimously", which means all directors agreed to reject. Also "the scoping study on the Mt Gee deposit being undertaken by Coffey Mining is well advanced.", seems to me very positive. I feel this one is worth a lot of more.
shinobi346
22nd-March-2007, 08:36 PM
:blover: Lovin MTN still :blover: I shredded buttermere too.
Hopefully this will continue moving up like other u plays today.
I tore mine up today too. I would have torn it up a while ago but it must have got lost under the pile of paper on my desk. Buttermere talks about doing us a favour by taking the risk of holding MTN off us. I don't think so.
Dear Buttermere. Your desire to buy MTN only makes me want to hold more.
Hopefully this will continue moving up like other u plays today.
I tore mine up today too. I would have torn it up a while ago but it must have got lost under the pile of paper on my desk. Buttermere talks about doing us a favour by taking the risk of holding MTN off us. I don't think so.
Dear Buttermere. Your desire to buy MTN only makes me want to hold more.
Halba
22nd-March-2007, 09:29 PM
the announcements today by MTN were highly professional. The responses to the bid were well worded and showed that a lot of key events will be happening in the next few months which will add value to MTN.
Comparisons with other uranium transactions include Omegacorp - which got taken over for about $14/lb of inferred resource. Others include SMM also around that per pound, and SXR's purchase of Urasia.
They have also put up a timetable of their likely development. Their timeline seems as good as any other Australian deposit right now, and are aiming for a 2011 start date. This is realistic, but probably it cannot come earlier than that.
Comparisons with other uranium transactions include Omegacorp - which got taken over for about $14/lb of inferred resource. Others include SMM also around that per pound, and SXR's purchase of Urasia.
They have also put up a timetable of their likely development. Their timeline seems as good as any other Australian deposit right now, and are aiming for a 2011 start date. This is realistic, but probably it cannot come earlier than that.
UraniumLover
22nd-March-2007, 09:49 PM
Uraniumlover seems like you are lovin a lot of stocks today.... :1luvu:
Haliba ,
it is hard not be just a little excited.
The only problem is i'm running out of money. Maybe you can lend me some Haliba so i can spread more love. Currently holding following u stocks
:1luvu:MTN, BMN, PNN, ACB, UKL, WMT, NTU, ERN, SMM, PDN, TOE :1luvu:
Out of all these MTN,PNN,TOE my favourites as SA. Living in SA i know how important these projects wll be for the state as SA needs it badly. Mike Rann won't last if these projects don't go through in my opinion. There has been a reduction of jobs in agriculture due to drought, economies of scale etc and the rural guys need Mining jobs.
With the Uranium conference in SA soon the likes of PNN, MTN, TOE should benefit in terms of foreign investment and exposure. I may attend if not too buzy to say hi to Sinosteel and other foreign investors.
Haliba ,
it is hard not be just a little excited.
The only problem is i'm running out of money. Maybe you can lend me some Haliba so i can spread more love. Currently holding following u stocks
:1luvu:MTN, BMN, PNN, ACB, UKL, WMT, NTU, ERN, SMM, PDN, TOE :1luvu:
Out of all these MTN,PNN,TOE my favourites as SA. Living in SA i know how important these projects wll be for the state as SA needs it badly. Mike Rann won't last if these projects don't go through in my opinion. There has been a reduction of jobs in agriculture due to drought, economies of scale etc and the rural guys need Mining jobs.
With the Uranium conference in SA soon the likes of PNN, MTN, TOE should benefit in terms of foreign investment and exposure. I may attend if not too buzy to say hi to Sinosteel and other foreign investors.
insider
22nd-March-2007, 10:06 PM
I tore mine up today too. I would have torn it up a while ago but it must have got lost under the pile of paper on my desk. Buttermere talks about doing us a favour by taking the risk of holding MTN off us. I don't think so.
Dear Buttermere. Your desire to buy MTN only makes me want to hold more.
You actually read it?! :eek7:
Dear Buttermere. Your desire to buy MTN only makes me want to hold more.
You actually read it?! :eek7:
mmmmining
28th-March-2007, 01:55 PM
In addition to Mt Gee's 31,255t U3O8, there are resource estimates done by Exoil as follow: (MTN's ann on 2 Aug 2005)
Hodgkinson: 484t at 2200ppm
Armchair: 680t at 1000ppm
Streitberg: 600t at 1000ppm
Radium Ridge: 1211t at 700ppm
Total: 2975t at 1000ppm
MTN does not even mention this afterwards. They are all within 12km radius, and a good size deposits with further exploration upside that most uranium junior hopefuls are dying for.
Why?
If Mt Gee deposit is not real, I guess MTN will jump up and down about those smaller deposits.
MTN need to break the all time high ($4.1) with large volume before everyone is convinced to forget about the Cosby's bulldogXShizi.
It might just around the corner with a positive drilling results from Armchair. Refer to my previous post, Armchair might have 680t uranium at 1000ppm. The amount is not significant, but it give rooms for people's imagination, Current Mt Gee is a small area, there are a lot more outside.
Hodgkinson: 484t at 2200ppm
Armchair: 680t at 1000ppm
Streitberg: 600t at 1000ppm
Radium Ridge: 1211t at 700ppm
Total: 2975t at 1000ppm
MTN does not even mention this afterwards. They are all within 12km radius, and a good size deposits with further exploration upside that most uranium junior hopefuls are dying for.
Why?
If Mt Gee deposit is not real, I guess MTN will jump up and down about those smaller deposits.
MTN need to break the all time high ($4.1) with large volume before everyone is convinced to forget about the Cosby's bulldogXShizi.
It might just around the corner with a positive drilling results from Armchair. Refer to my previous post, Armchair might have 680t uranium at 1000ppm. The amount is not significant, but it give rooms for people's imagination, Current Mt Gee is a small area, there are a lot more outside.
Halba
28th-March-2007, 02:23 PM
Needs an announcement to break.
So far the breaks have not been convincing. All it will take is one DOW down and it will go back down :banghead:
So far the breaks have not been convincing. All it will take is one DOW down and it will go back down :banghead:
nizar
28th-March-2007, 02:44 PM
Needs an announcement to break.
So far the breaks have not been convincing. All it will take is one DOW down and it will go back down :banghead:
The DOW was down last nite, didnt seem to bother the MTN open.
So far the breaks have not been convincing. All it will take is one DOW down and it will go back down :banghead:
The DOW was down last nite, didnt seem to bother the MTN open.
mmmmining
28th-March-2007, 02:51 PM
The DOW was down last nite, didnt seem to bother the MTN open.
I guess you are senior enough to read Halba.
Let me have a try: He did not have enough MTN (this is what the :banghead: for), and wish it goes down enough, so he can top it up like crazy...
Halba, deny it please!:D :D
I guess you are senior enough to read Halba.
Let me have a try: He did not have enough MTN (this is what the :banghead: for), and wish it goes down enough, so he can top it up like crazy...
Halba, deny it please!:D :D
Halba
28th-March-2007, 03:57 PM
I think i got MTN covered, but it all depends on price doesn't it?
I think it will need a good announcement for it to break. But this is healthy price action nonetheless.
:sword: <<< break the wall downnn!
I think it will need a good announcement for it to break. But this is healthy price action nonetheless.
:sword: <<< break the wall downnn!
Halba
30th-March-2007, 02:51 PM
Hi. Thought people had forgotten this stock! Fat prophets have a hold on it and a $400m dollar+ valuation(or around 7-8dollars), assuming $5/lb. They think the market is still undervaluing this resource. I agree.
Plan B
30th-March-2007, 03:07 PM
Hi. Thought people had forgotten this stock! Fat prophets have a hold on it and a $400m dollar+ valuation(or around 7-8dollars), assuming $5/lb. They think the market is still undervaluing this resource. I agree.
Yes I tend to agree...
And IMHO if some other company other than "butterballs" doesnt come in and offer a higher price before the april labour conference..... Then I will eat my hat!! .. :alcohol:
Yes I tend to agree...
And IMHO if some other company other than "butterballs" doesnt come in and offer a higher price before the april labour conference..... Then I will eat my hat!! .. :alcohol:
mmmmining
30th-March-2007, 03:39 PM
People are playing waiting game:
In a week or two: Armchair drilling results;
In a month or two resources upgrade;
Scope study results;
Revised bid again??
Counter-bid??
In a week or two: Armchair drilling results;
In a month or two resources upgrade;
Scope study results;
Revised bid again??
Counter-bid??
kennas
30th-March-2007, 03:43 PM
Considering the loc of Mt Gee tennament has anyone considered a tie up between MTN/AGS/Quasar/Heathgate. That's one serious block of U infested dirt. Just thinking out loud...perhaps they'll hear me. :)
Plan B
30th-March-2007, 04:11 PM
Considering the loc of Mt Gee tennament has anyone considered a tie up between MTN/AGS/Quasar/Heathgate. That's one serious block of U infested dirt. Just thinking out loud...perhaps they'll hear me. :)
I like the way you think Kennas..... lol
I like the way you think Kennas..... lol
champ2003
30th-March-2007, 07:05 PM
Hi. Thought people had forgotten this stock! Fat prophets have a hold on it and a $400m dollar+ valuation(or around 7-8dollars), assuming $5/lb. They think the market is still undervaluing this resource. I agree.
Actually Fat prophets has a valuation much higher than 7-8 dollars. Try doubling that and you will be close.
:)
Actually Fat prophets has a valuation much higher than 7-8 dollars. Try doubling that and you will be close.
:)
prs
30th-March-2007, 09:02 PM
Anybody tell me why it is that uranium has gone up to $95/lb and MTN has remained pretty much the same?
Mousie
30th-March-2007, 11:28 PM
Anybody tell me why it is that uranium has gone up to $95/lb and MTN has remained pretty much the same?
Try asking Mr Market. :D No, seriously.
Try asking Mr Market. :D No, seriously.
insider
31st-March-2007, 11:48 PM
Anybody tell me why it is that uranium has gone up to $95/lb and MTN has remained pretty much the same?
There are plenty of possibilities... My assumption is market manipulation... It's short lived...
I've seen orders for 27, 1, 100, 32 shares... It's ridiculous crap... Don't worry...
There are plenty of possibilities... My assumption is market manipulation... It's short lived...
I've seen orders for 27, 1, 100, 32 shares... It's ridiculous crap... Don't worry...
insider
1st-April-2007, 07:15 PM
Is Mount Gee under the Flinders Ranges Council, the pastoral zone or the rural zone... If you don't understand what I'm asking to please investigate or don't answer at all... I can't find a detailed map of South Australia that can show me which council Mount Gee is under...
insider
1st-April-2007, 07:42 PM
I'm pretty sure it falls under the Flinders Ranges council which offers two planning policies. Policy A is the very strict one and applies mostly for areas south of Hawker... It's a no mining kind of policy... Policy B, although still strict allows a possibility for mining if constraints are followed... the Paralana system, (Unless somebody can hopefully prove that it is not part of the Flinders ranges) is treated as an animal sanctuary so mining there is tight...
Essentially the directors of MTN will need to offer a condition where once they have finished mining works they would remove any evidence of human impact for example plant vegetation over tracks and tunnels... MTN's mining will require tunneling to get to resources as the surface of these scenic resources mustn't be impacted...
Below are the conditions of policy B
here is the source provided as ASF policy requires: http://www.planning.sa.gov.au/edp/pdf/FLRA.PDF
This is page 44
Environmental Class B Policy Area
Objective 1: The conservation and protection of the natural environment and beauty of the
area.
Land in the area constitutes the foreground of the most prominent ranges in the region. It contains
many features of outstanding natural beauty and environmental importance.
The land should be kept free of development that is not a necessary part of pastoral activity. Any new
development should be in close proximity of existing buildings and structures.
Where there are popular tourist attractions, such as the gorges, existing sites for the parking of
caravans in informal groups, within vicinity of these sites, should be retained. No additional sites
should be established.
Stock routes should be carefully monitored and controlled to prevent over-grazing.
Objective 2: Roads which do not destroy or damage the natural environment, character and
beauty of the area.
Care should be taken to ensure that the improvement of roads in the Environmental Class B Area
does not unduly disturb landforms, vegetation, wildlife and other attributes which make the area
attractive to both tourists and scientists.
It may be necessary to adopt lower than normal design speeds for some roads, and curtail the degree
of access they provide, by having, for example, spur rather than loop roads. At creek crossings, care
should be taken to minimise damage to vegetation by roadworks. Concrete fords rather than bridges
should be used wherever possible.
New roads and improvement to existing roads should ensure access to areas of scenic importance is
available, but restricted to protect the environmental quality of the Area. In respect, access to these
areas not served by a road shown on Flinders Structure Plan, Map FlRa/1 (Overlay 1) needs to
remain difficult to discourage vehicular access.
Objective 3: The retention and protection of the landscape from mining operations, and
prospecting and exploring of new resources.
Mining activities in the Environmental Area Class B should be carried out with the minimum effect on
the scenic and natural qualities of the area.
PRINCIPLES OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL
Form of Development
The principles of development control expressed in this zone are additional to those which apply to the
whole of the council area.
1 Development should not damage the natural scenic features of the area.
2 Native vegetation should not be cleared.
3 New roads or tracks should only be formed or constructed where the natural environment of the
area is not endangered.
4 Development should be designed and sited so as to conserve buildings, structures or sites of
natural or man-made heritage, especially those listed as State Heritage Items, or Aboriginal
heritage significance, geological monuments or on the register of the National Estate.
5 Mining activities should only take place in the Ranges Zone where:
(a) the deposits are of such paramount significance that all other environment, heritage or
conservation considerations may be over-ridden;
(b) the exploitation of the deposits is in the National or State interest;
(c) investigations have shown that alternative deposits are not available on other land in
the locality outside the zone; and
(d) the operations are subject to stringent safeguards to protect the landscape and natural
environment.
6 No buildings or structures, including transmission line towers and antennae, should be erected in
the Ranges Zone other than:
(a) simple shelters and rainwater storage for walkers and persons on horseback; or
(b) buildings which form extensions of an existing pastoral homestead and/or tourist
accommodation facilities provided that they are:
(i) essential for pastoral activities,
(ii) small scale tourist accommodation, such as .Farm Stays. and .Bed and Breakfast.
establishments associated with existing pastoral activities, and are
(iii) located within or form compact and continuous extensions of existing groups of
homestead buildings and/or tourist related buildings,
(iv) in keeping with the existing use of the land,
(v) of the same or lesser scale as existing buildings,
(vi) are ancillary and adjacent to existing buildings,
(vii) constructed of materials which blend with the landscape and the design of existing
buildings,
(viii) sited and designed to be unobtrusive, and
(ix) sited so that excavations for access roads, utilities and building construction are
minimised, or
(x) sited so as to not result in the removal or damage to native vegetation.
7 Rubbish collection points should be provided with any development associated with tourist
attractions, and regularly serviced to remove any such rubbish.
8 The provision of firewood deposits should be incorporated in development associated with tourist
accommodation where appropriate, to ensure degradation of the natural vegetation does not
occur.
Is MT Gee and Mt Painter heritage listed? - yes
Is Mt Gee and Mt Painter an animal sanctuary of the rare and endangered yellow footed rock wallaby? - yes
Is Mount Gee and Mount Painter Mineable? - Yes
Essentially the directors of MTN will need to offer a condition where once they have finished mining works they would remove any evidence of human impact for example plant vegetation over tracks and tunnels... MTN's mining will require tunneling to get to resources as the surface of these scenic resources mustn't be impacted...
Below are the conditions of policy B
here is the source provided as ASF policy requires: http://www.planning.sa.gov.au/edp/pdf/FLRA.PDF
This is page 44
Environmental Class B Policy Area
Objective 1: The conservation and protection of the natural environment and beauty of the
area.
Land in the area constitutes the foreground of the most prominent ranges in the region. It contains
many features of outstanding natural beauty and environmental importance.
The land should be kept free of development that is not a necessary part of pastoral activity. Any new
development should be in close proximity of existing buildings and structures.
Where there are popular tourist attractions, such as the gorges, existing sites for the parking of
caravans in informal groups, within vicinity of these sites, should be retained. No additional sites
should be established.
Stock routes should be carefully monitored and controlled to prevent over-grazing.
Objective 2: Roads which do not destroy or damage the natural environment, character and
beauty of the area.
Care should be taken to ensure that the improvement of roads in the Environmental Class B Area
does not unduly disturb landforms, vegetation, wildlife and other attributes which make the area
attractive to both tourists and scientists.
It may be necessary to adopt lower than normal design speeds for some roads, and curtail the degree
of access they provide, by having, for example, spur rather than loop roads. At creek crossings, care
should be taken to minimise damage to vegetation by roadworks. Concrete fords rather than bridges
should be used wherever possible.
New roads and improvement to existing roads should ensure access to areas of scenic importance is
available, but restricted to protect the environmental quality of the Area. In respect, access to these
areas not served by a road shown on Flinders Structure Plan, Map FlRa/1 (Overlay 1) needs to
remain difficult to discourage vehicular access.
Objective 3: The retention and protection of the landscape from mining operations, and
prospecting and exploring of new resources.
Mining activities in the Environmental Area Class B should be carried out with the minimum effect on
the scenic and natural qualities of the area.
PRINCIPLES OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL
Form of Development
The principles of development control expressed in this zone are additional to those which apply to the
whole of the council area.
1 Development should not damage the natural scenic features of the area.
2 Native vegetation should not be cleared.
3 New roads or tracks should only be formed or constructed where the natural environment of the
area is not endangered.
4 Development should be designed and sited so as to conserve buildings, structures or sites of
natural or man-made heritage, especially those listed as State Heritage Items, or Aboriginal
heritage significance, geological monuments or on the register of the National Estate.
5 Mining activities should only take place in the Ranges Zone where:
(a) the deposits are of such paramount significance that all other environment, heritage or
conservation considerations may be over-ridden;
(b) the exploitation of the deposits is in the National or State interest;
(c) investigations have shown that alternative deposits are not available on other land in
the locality outside the zone; and
(d) the operations are subject to stringent safeguards to protect the landscape and natural
environment.
6 No buildings or structures, including transmission line towers and antennae, should be erected in
the Ranges Zone other than:
(a) simple shelters and rainwater storage for walkers and persons on horseback; or
(b) buildings which form extensions of an existing pastoral homestead and/or tourist
accommodation facilities provided that they are:
(i) essential for pastoral activities,
(ii) small scale tourist accommodation, such as .Farm Stays. and .Bed and Breakfast.
establishments associated with existing pastoral activities, and are
(iii) located within or form compact and continuous extensions of existing groups of
homestead buildings and/or tourist related buildings,
(iv) in keeping with the existing use of the land,
(v) of the same or lesser scale as existing buildings,
(vi) are ancillary and adjacent to existing buildings,
(vii) constructed of materials which blend with the landscape and the design of existing
buildings,
(viii) sited and designed to be unobtrusive, and
(ix) sited so that excavations for access roads, utilities and building construction are
minimised, or
(x) sited so as to not result in the removal or damage to native vegetation.
7 Rubbish collection points should be provided with any development associated with tourist
attractions, and regularly serviced to remove any such rubbish.
8 The provision of firewood deposits should be incorporated in development associated with tourist
accommodation where appropriate, to ensure degradation of the natural vegetation does not
occur.
Is MT Gee and Mt Painter heritage listed? - yes
Is Mt Gee and Mt Painter an animal sanctuary of the rare and endangered yellow footed rock wallaby? - yes
Is Mount Gee and Mount Painter Mineable? - Yes
Halba
1st-April-2007, 07:52 PM
Anybody tell me why it is that uranium has gone up to $95/lb and MTN has remained pretty much the same?
I was right it can't mine. It's just gone up to this level due to hype. I was right all along.
I was right it can't mine. It's just gone up to this level due to hype. I was right all along.
insider
1st-April-2007, 08:00 PM
I was right it can't mine. It's just gone up to this level due to hype. I was right all along.
read my previous post... infact read the last three sentences
read my previous post... infact read the last three sentences
Halba
1st-April-2007, 08:44 PM
looks complex still . I just note that Rio's application to mine Robe river was revoked due to the prescence of troglobites. Such is the risk of mining in australia- too many barriers and this is reflected in MTN's price. The run from 80c to $4.00 was just due to it going up on uranium price, the run after here has to be on some fundamental reason i.e. mineability, and this has to come from the government, not your word insider. If Premier Rann comes out and supports Mt Gee then yes it will be fine to mine. So far he has only supported Curnamona;s mine, AGS Beverley 4 mile and Honeymoon in the public. He has yet to make a single mention of Mt Gee mine and his support of the mine. If Rann does, then this would seal the deal.
insider
1st-April-2007, 08:51 PM
Ummm... I will take back what I said... The Paralana system is a Zone A as shown on the map on page 50... Zone A guidelines are shown on page 43... The summary of it all is MTN can't mine unless the rules are overiden... Sorry Halba but A simple can't mine isn't enough you need sources and research and I just provided it... Ultimately MTN directors must have researched this and have some thing up there sleeves unless they are uranium pretenders... I haven't been this nervous since the correction...
mmmmining
1st-April-2007, 10:57 PM
Ummm... I will take back what I said... The Paralana system is a Zone A as shown on the map on page 50... Zone A guidelines are shown on page 43... The summary of it all is MTN can't mine unless the rules are overiden... Sorry Halba but A simple can't mine isn't enough you need sources and research and I just provided it... Ultimately MTN directors must have researched this and have some thing up there sleeves unless they are uranium pretenders... I haven't been this nervous since the correction...
Death to MTN? Come on, guys, are we MTN executives, or Coffey' specialists? or a bunch of kids are watching scary movie on Friday night?
NONE. Today is April 1, April FOUL DAY!:D :D :D
Considering the following is posted on 2 April.
Insider, thank you for opening this kind of worms. I cannot find any Objectives for prohibiting mining "Environmental Class A Policy Area".
ONLY land you cannot mine is the national park and natural reserve. I repeat. Any rest of land can be mined even your backyard is not safe if you can pass the EIA.
The document is dated on about Development Act 1993, dated back on 21 August 2003. I believe MTN executives have read it, Coffey's consultants have read it. I don't believe they are all EVA, try to eat a "forbidden fruit".
If you are still not sure yet, thinking about a billions of dollars, hundreds of jobs, is that significant to state and national interest? How about billions tones of CO2 saved for the planet, and reduced greenhouse gases emissions indirectly?
On Page 44 of the Plan:
Objective 3: ....
Mining activities should only occur in the Environmental Class A policy Area if the reserves of minerals are of paramount importance, ...or their exploitation is in the State or national interest......."
Still not calm down yet?
Who will against it? Of course, the so-called environmentalist, the greens. How big is their voice? And how many people will live in Mt Gee? So relax, let those environmentalist pretender eat **** and die, let the acid rain falling on the green forest turn the tree leaves into "Bob Brown"...
Still not, sell the dame MTN, and run. Don't look back, and don't regret for the rest of your life...
Death to MTN? Come on, guys, are we MTN executives, or Coffey' specialists? or a bunch of kids are watching scary movie on Friday night?
NONE. Today is April 1, April FOUL DAY!:D :D :D
Considering the following is posted on 2 April.
Insider, thank you for opening this kind of worms. I cannot find any Objectives for prohibiting mining "Environmental Class A Policy Area".
ONLY land you cannot mine is the national park and natural reserve. I repeat. Any rest of land can be mined even your backyard is not safe if you can pass the EIA.
The document is dated on about Development Act 1993, dated back on 21 August 2003. I believe MTN executives have read it, Coffey's consultants have read it. I don't believe they are all EVA, try to eat a "forbidden fruit".
If you are still not sure yet, thinking about a billions of dollars, hundreds of jobs, is that significant to state and national interest? How about billions tones of CO2 saved for the planet, and reduced greenhouse gases emissions indirectly?
On Page 44 of the Plan:
Objective 3: ....
Mining activities should only occur in the Environmental Class A policy Area if the reserves of minerals are of paramount importance, ...or their exploitation is in the State or national interest......."
Still not calm down yet?
Who will against it? Of course, the so-called environmentalist, the greens. How big is their voice? And how many people will live in Mt Gee? So relax, let those environmentalist pretender eat **** and die, let the acid rain falling on the green forest turn the tree leaves into "Bob Brown"...
Still not, sell the dame MTN, and run. Don't look back, and don't regret for the rest of your life...
insider
2nd-April-2007, 12:00 AM
Death to MTN? Come on, guys, are we MTN executives, or Coffey' specialists? or a bunch of kids are watching scary movie on Friday night?
NONE. Today is April 1, April FOUL DAY!:D :D :D
Considering the following is posted on 2 April.
Insider, thank you for opening this kind of worms. I cannot find any Objectives for prohibiting mining "Environmental Class A Policy Area".
ONLY land you cannot mine is the national park and natural reserve. I repeat. Any rest of land can be mined even your backyard is not safe if you can pass the EIA.
The document is dated on about Development Act 1993, dated back on 21 August 2003. I believe MTN executives have read it, Coffey's consultants have read it. I don't believe they are all EVA, try to eat a "forbidden fruit".
If you are still not sure yet, thinking about a billions of dollars, hundreds of jobs, is that significant to state and national interest? How about billions tones of CO2 saved for the planet, and reduced greenhouse gases emissions indirectly?
On Page 44 of the Plan:
Objective 3: ....
Mining activities should only occur in the Environmental Class A policy Area if the reserves of minerals are of paramount importance, ...or their exploitation is in the State or national interest......."
Still not calm down yet?
Who will against it? Of course, the so-called environmentalist, the greens. How big is their voice? And how many people will live in Mt Gee? So relax, let those environmentalist pretender eat **** and die, let the acid rain falling on the green forest turn the tree leaves into "Bob Brown"...
Still not, sell the dame MTN, and run. Don't look back, and don't regret for the rest of your life...
I understand what you're saying but for now it's under Class A zoning, the resource is under a mountain lined with Crush Breccia and some rare crystal formations... There are endangered species in the area as it is regarded as an animal sanctuary... The paralana system is heritage listed...
Yes it all can be overridden as all the documents I've sourced and read for twelve hours today suggest but there is a huge task ahead... If another company with an equally substantial resource in South Australia turn up soon MTN won't look so hot to the premier of SA... I keep forgetting the losers name...
I don't care how good a company is but you have keep asking questions for and against it... I hate complacency...
Remember I have all my eggs in this basket... Good luck to everyone which means good luck to me too...
They won't mine without conditions...
NONE. Today is April 1, April FOUL DAY!:D :D :D
Considering the following is posted on 2 April.
Insider, thank you for opening this kind of worms. I cannot find any Objectives for prohibiting mining "Environmental Class A Policy Area".
ONLY land you cannot mine is the national park and natural reserve. I repeat. Any rest of land can be mined even your backyard is not safe if you can pass the EIA.
The document is dated on about Development Act 1993, dated back on 21 August 2003. I believe MTN executives have read it, Coffey's consultants have read it. I don't believe they are all EVA, try to eat a "forbidden fruit".
If you are still not sure yet, thinking about a billions of dollars, hundreds of jobs, is that significant to state and national interest? How about billions tones of CO2 saved for the planet, and reduced greenhouse gases emissions indirectly?
On Page 44 of the Plan:
Objective 3: ....
Mining activities should only occur in the Environmental Class A policy Area if the reserves of minerals are of paramount importance, ...or their exploitation is in the State or national interest......."
Still not calm down yet?
Who will against it? Of course, the so-called environmentalist, the greens. How big is their voice? And how many people will live in Mt Gee? So relax, let those environmentalist pretender eat **** and die, let the acid rain falling on the green forest turn the tree leaves into "Bob Brown"...
Still not, sell the dame MTN, and run. Don't look back, and don't regret for the rest of your life...
I understand what you're saying but for now it's under Class A zoning, the resource is under a mountain lined with Crush Breccia and some rare crystal formations... There are endangered species in the area as it is regarded as an animal sanctuary... The paralana system is heritage listed...
Yes it all can be overridden as all the documents I've sourced and read for twelve hours today suggest but there is a huge task ahead... If another company with an equally substantial resource in South Australia turn up soon MTN won't look so hot to the premier of SA... I keep forgetting the losers name...
I don't care how good a company is but you have keep asking questions for and against it... I hate complacency...
Remember I have all my eggs in this basket... Good luck to everyone which means good luck to me too...
They won't mine without conditions...
mmmmining
2nd-April-2007, 12:18 AM
I understand what you're saying but for now it's under Class A zoning, the resource is under a mountain lined with Crush Breccia and some rare crystal formations... There are endangered species in the area as it is regarded as an animal sanctuary... The paralana system is heritage listed...
Yes it all can be overridden as all the documents I've sourced and read for twelve hours today suggest but there is a huge task ahead... If another company with an equally substantial resource in South Australia turn up soon MTN won't look so hot to the premier of SA... I keep forgetting the losers name...
I don't care how good a company is but you have keep asking questions for and against it... I hate complacency...
Remember I have all my eggs in this basket... Good luck to everyone which means good luck to me too...
They won't mine without conditions...
Understand your concern.
A few sleep pills for you:
Ken Tolbot own over 8% of it,
CITIC owns over 8% of it;
Directors collect owns like 15%;
Cosby want it at $3.52, and expecting to make a killing on it
Go ask yourself a simple question, are they stupid?
MTN is super cheap compare with peers, the market has discounted the environmental issues already. I repeat, I believe it is minable. Only take a bit longer, tougher, and more money to get all approvals. We have not get there yet. If not, we can sue the directors.
Relax, just wait for the Coffey's scope study. They will tell you the full story. Don't pick up a piece of old and dirty document, and scare to death. Plus Cosby has provided a floor on the share price ATM.
Yes it all can be overridden as all the documents I've sourced and read for twelve hours today suggest but there is a huge task ahead... If another company with an equally substantial resource in South Australia turn up soon MTN won't look so hot to the premier of SA... I keep forgetting the losers name...
I don't care how good a company is but you have keep asking questions for and against it... I hate complacency...
Remember I have all my eggs in this basket... Good luck to everyone which means good luck to me too...
They won't mine without conditions...
Understand your concern.
A few sleep pills for you:
Ken Tolbot own over 8% of it,
CITIC owns over 8% of it;
Directors collect owns like 15%;
Cosby want it at $3.52, and expecting to make a killing on it
Go ask yourself a simple question, are they stupid?
MTN is super cheap compare with peers, the market has discounted the environmental issues already. I repeat, I believe it is minable. Only take a bit longer, tougher, and more money to get all approvals. We have not get there yet. If not, we can sue the directors.
Relax, just wait for the Coffey's scope study. They will tell you the full story. Don't pick up a piece of old and dirty document, and scare to death. Plus Cosby has provided a floor on the share price ATM.
insider
2nd-April-2007, 12:23 AM
Understand your concern.
A few sleep pills for you:
Ken Tolbot own over 8% of it,
CITIC owns over 8% of it;
Directors collect owns like 15%;
Cosby want it at $3.52, and expecting to make a killing on it
Go ask yourself a simple question, are they stupid?
MTN is super cheap compare with peers, the market has discounted the environmental issues already. I repeat, I believe it is minable. Only take a bit longer, tougher, and more money to get all approvals. We have not get there yet. If not, we can sue the directors.
Relax, just wait for the Coffey's scope study. They will tell you the full story. Don't pick up a piece of old and dirty document, and scare to death. Plus Cosby has provided a floor on the share price ATM.
LOL... you're good mmmmining....Buttermere are stupid though... The thing is no one ever at ASF or HC showed sources of all that was discussed earlier and not in that depth... I just wish someone would would rip out a massive take over bid today...
when is Coffey's scope study coming?
A few sleep pills for you:
Ken Tolbot own over 8% of it,
CITIC owns over 8% of it;
Directors collect owns like 15%;
Cosby want it at $3.52, and expecting to make a killing on it
Go ask yourself a simple question, are they stupid?
MTN is super cheap compare with peers, the market has discounted the environmental issues already. I repeat, I believe it is minable. Only take a bit longer, tougher, and more money to get all approvals. We have not get there yet. If not, we can sue the directors.
Relax, just wait for the Coffey's scope study. They will tell you the full story. Don't pick up a piece of old and dirty document, and scare to death. Plus Cosby has provided a floor on the share price ATM.
LOL... you're good mmmmining....Buttermere are stupid though... The thing is no one ever at ASF or HC showed sources of all that was discussed earlier and not in that depth... I just wish someone would would rip out a massive take over bid today...
when is Coffey's scope study coming?
mmmmining
2nd-April-2007, 12:36 AM
LOL... you're good mmmmining....Buttermere are stupid though... The thing is no one ever at ASF or HC showed sources of all that was discussed earlier and not in that depth... I just wish someone would would rip out a massive take over bid today...
when is Coffey's scope study coming?
They told me the end of May for the Scope Study. But I doubt it because they might have to released it after the resources upgrade, which might be around early June.
The scope study has been mentioned in the target statement as "Well Advanced" equal to "Looking Good", or "Being Taken Care Of..."
Before that, a lot of drilling results will be released to the market, including one of the satellite deposit, Armchair.
when is Coffey's scope study coming?
They told me the end of May for the Scope Study. But I doubt it because they might have to released it after the resources upgrade, which might be around early June.
The scope study has been mentioned in the target statement as "Well Advanced" equal to "Looking Good", or "Being Taken Care Of..."
Before that, a lot of drilling results will be released to the market, including one of the satellite deposit, Armchair.
insider
2nd-April-2007, 12:38 AM
They told me the end of May for the Scope Study. But I doubt it because they might have to released it after the resources upgrade, which might be around early June.
Before that, a lot of drilling results will be released to the market, including one of the satellite deposit, Armchair.
sounds exciting:D
Before that, a lot of drilling results will be released to the market, including one of the satellite deposit, Armchair.
sounds exciting:D
Halba
2nd-April-2007, 07:15 AM
Armchair doesn't have much u, satellite deposits r small.
mmmmining
2nd-April-2007, 09:28 AM
Armchair doesn't have much u, satellite deposits r small.
Yes, it is very small compare to Mt Gee. But it is not your armpit either. Here is the summary all the satellite deposits (non JORC)
Hodgkinson: 484t at 2200ppm
Armchair: 680t at 1000ppm
Streitberg: 600t at 1000ppm
Radium Ridge: 1211t at 700ppm
Total: 2975t at 1000ppm
Yes, it is very small compare to Mt Gee. But it is not your armpit either. Here is the summary all the satellite deposits (non JORC)
Hodgkinson: 484t at 2200ppm
Armchair: 680t at 1000ppm
Streitberg: 600t at 1000ppm
Radium Ridge: 1211t at 700ppm
Total: 2975t at 1000ppm
Halba
2nd-April-2007, 09:30 AM
Not too bad, thats about 6million pounds. Worth about $40m or so assuming $6/lb. More than SMM's latest resource estimates.
insider
2nd-April-2007, 05:23 PM
Here is the Heritage listing of MTN... as you can see in 1976 Mt Gee was a Uranium project then in 1982 became a Registered National Estate... The question you need to ask is why do they still allow drilling... Maybe the state plan to release the Mountain for Uranium mining.
Arkaroola Gorge, Arkaroola Rd, Arkaroola Village via Copley, SA
Photographs:
List: Register of the National Estate
Class: Natural
Legal Status: Registered (28/09/1982)
Place ID: 5979
Place File No: 3/00/260/0060
Statement of Significance:
Many of the diverse, rugged and often unique geological, geographical and botanical features which make the Arkaroola-Mount Painter region a wilderness area of great scientific and aesthetic interest. In addition, it is a major haunt of the until-recently rare yellow footed rock wallaby (PETROGALE XANTHOPUS).
The Commission has determined that this place has Indigenous values of national estate significance. The Commission is currently consulting with relevant Indigenous communities about the amount of information to be placed on public record.
(The Commission is in the process of developing and/or upgrading official statements for places listed prior to 1991. The above data was mainly provided by the nominator and has not yet been revised by the Commission.)
Official Values: Not Available
Description:
The Arkaroola Creek, flowing from the Gammon Ranges to the south, swings east in the area of Bolla Bollana smelters and becomes unusually and spectacularly sinuous, frequently doubling almost back into itself. Cutting through the resistant quartzites, tillites and granites of Proterozoic age, it forms a number of beautiful waterholes and gorges with sheer rock walls. The surrounding terrain is typically chaotic with serrated quartzite, massive tillite and bulbous granite peaks. The flora often reflecting the geology, is dominated by several acacia and eucalypt species, yaccas, porcupine grass and after seasonal rains, wildflowers of great beauty.
History: Not Available
Condition and Integrity:
Moderately good. Graded roads passing through Arkaroola Village provide direct access to Bolla Bollana, Arkaroola and Stubbs waterholes. The station management attempts to control tourism by prohibiting camping outside the village and setting aside special areas for mineral collecting.
Location:
About 8000ha, 94km north-east of Copley on Arkaroola Road near Arkaroola Village, AMG points: SH5409-Copley 325454, 325507, 465507, 465454 and return to start, approx. 0.5km north of Arkaroola Village.
Bibliography:
(1) SPRIGG, R.C., & SPRIGG, G. (1976): ARKAROOLA-MT. PAINTER IN THE
FLINDERS RANGES, SOUTH AUSTRALIA. AUSTAPRINT, ADELAIDE. (2) MOONEY, P.
(1976): ARKAROOLA AREA. IN, MCBRIAR, E.M. & MOONEY, P.A. (EDS.),
GEOLOGICAL MONUMENTS OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA,PT I,GEOL. SOC. AUST., S.
AUST. DIV. 200-206. (3) CORBETT, D.W.P.,(ED.)(1969): THE NATURAL
HISTORY OF THE FLINDERS RANGES LIBRARIES BOARD
Arkaroola Gorge, Arkaroola Rd, Arkaroola Village via Copley, SA
Photographs:
List: Register of the National Estate
Class: Natural
Legal Status: Registered (28/09/1982)
Place ID: 5979
Place File No: 3/00/260/0060
Statement of Significance:
Many of the diverse, rugged and often unique geological, geographical and botanical features which make the Arkaroola-Mount Painter region a wilderness area of great scientific and aesthetic interest. In addition, it is a major haunt of the until-recently rare yellow footed rock wallaby (PETROGALE XANTHOPUS).
The Commission has determined that this place has Indigenous values of national estate significance. The Commission is currently consulting with relevant Indigenous communities about the amount of information to be placed on public record.
(The Commission is in the process of developing and/or upgrading official statements for places listed prior to 1991. The above data was mainly provided by the nominator and has not yet been revised by the Commission.)
Official Values: Not Available
Description:
The Arkaroola Creek, flowing from the Gammon Ranges to the south, swings east in the area of Bolla Bollana smelters and becomes unusually and spectacularly sinuous, frequently doubling almost back into itself. Cutting through the resistant quartzites, tillites and granites of Proterozoic age, it forms a number of beautiful waterholes and gorges with sheer rock walls. The surrounding terrain is typically chaotic with serrated quartzite, massive tillite and bulbous granite peaks. The flora often reflecting the geology, is dominated by several acacia and eucalypt species, yaccas, porcupine grass and after seasonal rains, wildflowers of great beauty.
History: Not Available
Condition and Integrity:
Moderately good. Graded roads passing through Arkaroola Village provide direct access to Bolla Bollana, Arkaroola and Stubbs waterholes. The station management attempts to control tourism by prohibiting camping outside the village and setting aside special areas for mineral collecting.
Location:
About 8000ha, 94km north-east of Copley on Arkaroola Road near Arkaroola Village, AMG points: SH5409-Copley 325454, 325507, 465507, 465454 and return to start, approx. 0.5km north of Arkaroola Village.
Bibliography:
(1) SPRIGG, R.C., & SPRIGG, G. (1976): ARKAROOLA-MT. PAINTER IN THE
FLINDERS RANGES, SOUTH AUSTRALIA. AUSTAPRINT, ADELAIDE. (2) MOONEY, P.
(1976): ARKAROOLA AREA. IN, MCBRIAR, E.M. & MOONEY, P.A. (EDS.),
GEOLOGICAL MONUMENTS OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA,PT I,GEOL. SOC. AUST., S.
AUST. DIV. 200-206. (3) CORBETT, D.W.P.,(ED.)(1969): THE NATURAL
HISTORY OF THE FLINDERS RANGES LIBRARIES BOARD
mmmmining
2nd-April-2007, 05:52 PM
Any land with exploration license issued is not a protected reserve or natural reserve, or national park. A registration on a XYZ list does not prevent it from drilling. It is a fact. It has been drilled not just by MTN, last drilling is around 2000 by GDM.
I am pretty sure it would not be prevented from mining if MTN can pass the tough EIA. Let's wait for the Coffey's scope study.
I am pretty sure it would not be prevented from mining if MTN can pass the tough EIA. Let's wait for the Coffey's scope study.
Halba
2nd-April-2007, 06:01 PM
Let's wait for the Coffey's scope study.
Yep. If that gives a big tick this has the potential to increase very quickly. Why? Coz it will be able to be mined, and the right valuation Ev/lb will be applied. Till then I have no idea :confused:
Yep. If that gives a big tick this has the potential to increase very quickly. Why? Coz it will be able to be mined, and the right valuation Ev/lb will be applied. Till then I have no idea :confused:
mmmmining
2nd-April-2007, 07:20 PM
Yep. If that gives a big tick this has the potential to increase very quickly. Why? Coz it will be able to be mined, and the right valuation Ev/lb will be applied. Till then I have no idea :confused:
Yes, we are small punters, let the professional do their job. Here is a link about what does it mean being on the National Estate List.
http://www.ahc.gov.au/register/furtherinfo/listing.html
I am happy to know it means almost nothing. The land holders can do their business as usual, including exploration, and mining.
Very interesting to know, If I find your home lovely, I can nominate your home as a National Estate, so be nice and careful.
Yes, we are small punters, let the professional do their job. Here is a link about what does it mean being on the National Estate List.
http://www.ahc.gov.au/register/furtherinfo/listing.html
I am happy to know it means almost nothing. The land holders can do their business as usual, including exploration, and mining.
Very interesting to know, If I find your home lovely, I can nominate your home as a National Estate, so be nice and careful.
Halba
2nd-April-2007, 08:12 PM
When I saw the photos and the video there appears to be nothing there. Just hilly areas far from people (Mt. Gee actual mine area). This should beat AGS's returns until the end of the year. Surely AGS can't double, MTN has the potential to double on one tick in scoping study. AGS scoping study tick, JORCS, resource estimates are already priced in.
insider
2nd-April-2007, 08:18 PM
When I saw the photos and the video there appears to be nothing there. Just hilly areas far from people (Mt. Gee actual mine area). This should beat AGS's returns until the end of the year. Surely AGS can't double, MTN has the potential to double on one tick in scoping study. AGS scoping study tick, JORCS, resource estimates are already priced in.
Yeah I saw A picture of a yellow footed rock wallaby sitting on what was a crush breccia lined with a phosphorus uranium type of crystal (yellow colour)... The wallaby didn't realize it but it was sitting on billions of dollars... Stupid animal:rolleyes:
Yeah I saw A picture of a yellow footed rock wallaby sitting on what was a crush breccia lined with a phosphorus uranium type of crystal (yellow colour)... The wallaby didn't realize it but it was sitting on billions of dollars... Stupid animal:rolleyes:
Halba
2nd-April-2007, 08:29 PM
Yeah I saw A picture of a yellow footed rock wallaby sitting on what was a crush breccia lined with a phosphorus uranium type of crystal (yellow colour)... The wallaby didn't realize it but it was sitting on billions of dollars... Stupid animal:rolleyes:
It's an underground mine, key word being under the ground so it won't affect anything above the ground. :batman:
It's an underground mine, key word being under the ground so it won't affect anything above the ground. :batman:
kennas
3rd-April-2007, 08:22 AM
MTN has the potential to double on one tick in scoping study. AGS scoping study tick, JORCS, resource estimates are already priced in.[/U]Halba, I don't agree with this. AGS might be overvalued at the moment depending on the JORC produced. If overall it's under Lonsec's estimate of potentially 120m lbs ish, then it could be smashed. Opposite for larger resource. Point is, we don't really know if it's all factored in yet. It's just speculation really which we must acknowledge. (personally, I am expecting a 'buy the rumour sell the fact' sell off based on previous experience with long anticipated announcement as you would have exp with BMN. Although the scoping study ann didn't do AGS any harm. But again, this is speculation which must be acknowledged) Your comment 'MTN has potential to double' when they ann a scoping study, well....what can I say?
Fab
3rd-April-2007, 08:48 AM
Halba, I don't agree with this. AGS might be overvalued at the moment depending on the JORC produced. If overall it's under Lonsec's estimate of potentially 120m lbs ish, then it could be smashed. Opposite for larger resource. Point is, we don't really know if it's all factored in yet. It's just speculation really which we must acknowledge. (personally, I am expecting a 'buy the rumour sell the fact' sell off based on previous experience with long anticipated announcement as you would have exp with BMN. Although the scoping study ann didn't do AGS any harm. But again, this is speculation which must be acknowledged) Your comment 'MTN has potential to double' when they ann a scoping study, well....what can I say?
What does overvalued means for a U stock? Look at PDN :)
What does overvalued means for a U stock? Look at PDN :)
Halba
3rd-April-2007, 08:49 AM
PDN controls, owns and operates its uranium deposit, ensuring greater $$. The only stocks that majority own control their uranium are BMN and MTN and ERN(90%). SMM, AGS all have 50% interests or less.
mmmmining
3rd-April-2007, 09:14 AM
Halba, you have a good point. If you are majority owner, and an operator, you control you destination, for good or bad.
I would say AGS's situation is not that bad since Quasar Resources is the partner. It seems the SA Premier like it, another positive. Only thing is B4M has to have enough staff to justify the rich valuation.
MTN is not out of favor either. It was mentioned by Premier in the ann as well.
I would say AGS's situation is not that bad since Quasar Resources is the partner. It seems the SA Premier like it, another positive. Only thing is B4M has to have enough staff to justify the rich valuation.
MTN is not out of favor either. It was mentioned by Premier in the ann as well.
Broadside
3rd-April-2007, 09:27 AM
When I saw the photos and the video there appears to be nothing there. Just hilly areas far from people (Mt. Gee actual mine area). This should beat AGS's returns until the end of the year. Surely AGS can't double, MTN has the potential to double on one tick in scoping study. AGS scoping study tick, JORCS, resource estimates are already priced in.
Halba the AGS JORC will only be scratching the surface, there will be a lot more exploration upside to come. I think MTN has great potential but in terms of quality I think AGS is one of the very best prospects in Australia, and will be one of the first new producers, certainly far sooner than MTN, if they ever produce.
Halba the AGS JORC will only be scratching the surface, there will be a lot more exploration upside to come. I think MTN has great potential but in terms of quality I think AGS is one of the very best prospects in Australia, and will be one of the first new producers, certainly far sooner than MTN, if they ever produce.
Halba
3rd-April-2007, 09:28 AM
Mmmmining
MTN is not out of favor either. It was mentioned by Premier in the ann as well.
Yes. That was excellent he mentioned it. Showed Mt Gee still on radar. All it needs is one of those bullish ramps from Rann and we're sailing to a more appropriate valuation. 100% owned production of 1000tpa+ potential production is quite good cash flow, but lets see how much AGS's mine can produce(8 weeks time scoping study - if they meet deadline)
MTN is not out of favor either. It was mentioned by Premier in the ann as well.
Yes. That was excellent he mentioned it. Showed Mt Gee still on radar. All it needs is one of those bullish ramps from Rann and we're sailing to a more appropriate valuation. 100% owned production of 1000tpa+ potential production is quite good cash flow, but lets see how much AGS's mine can produce(8 weeks time scoping study - if they meet deadline)
mmmmining
3rd-April-2007, 12:30 PM
The interim scoping report has been received.
Not much contents. But the keywords is the title:
MT Gee Scoping Points to Mining, and Long Term Commitment to Environment...
Not much contents. But the keywords is the title:
MT Gee Scoping Points to Mining, and Long Term Commitment to Environment...
mmmmining
3rd-April-2007, 03:11 PM
Try to analysis the purpose of this release. Cannot figure it out. Let's me do a interpretation, maybe wrong.
1. Mt Gee has more resources than published. It is more significant than most people thought. Such phase is used:
"indicated both increased mineralised thickness and higher grades than anticipated;"
"Only scratched the surface"
"Paralana Mineral System has the potential to be one of the great uranium systems in Australia"
2. Mining is possible.
Reinforced its (MTN) view on the mining potential of the Mt Gee..."
"We already have a viable mine"
"Underground mining"
"a tank leach processing plant sited...."
"1000t/yr"
3. Tough EIA process
"One of he great uranium systems in Australia" means back off, greens or so, for state and national interest
"Long term commitment to Environment"
"committed to environmentally sustainable mining.."
"committed to both the environment in the Flinders Ranges..."
4. Cost at high end
"Given the spot price and encouraging uranium grades,..."
"Underground mining...."
"tank leach processing plant...."
Conclusion:
At $100 U3O8 price, project revenue is US$220m year
IGV is US$7b Very significant.
I have a tick based on this report, and don't care what Mr Market is thinking in short term.
1. Mt Gee has more resources than published. It is more significant than most people thought. Such phase is used:
"indicated both increased mineralised thickness and higher grades than anticipated;"
"Only scratched the surface"
"Paralana Mineral System has the potential to be one of the great uranium systems in Australia"
2. Mining is possible.
Reinforced its (MTN) view on the mining potential of the Mt Gee..."
"We already have a viable mine"
"Underground mining"
"a tank leach processing plant sited...."
"1000t/yr"
3. Tough EIA process
"One of he great uranium systems in Australia" means back off, greens or so, for state and national interest
"Long term commitment to Environment"
"committed to environmentally sustainable mining.."
"committed to both the environment in the Flinders Ranges..."
4. Cost at high end
"Given the spot price and encouraging uranium grades,..."
"Underground mining...."
"tank leach processing plant...."
Conclusion:
At $100 U3O8 price, project revenue is US$220m year
IGV is US$7b Very significant.
I have a tick based on this report, and don't care what Mr Market is thinking in short term.
prs
3rd-April-2007, 09:08 PM
Halba, you have a good point. If you are majority owner, and an operator, you control you destination, for good or bad.
I would say AGS's situation is not that bad since Quasar Resources is the partner. It seems the SA Premier like it, another positive. Only thing is B4M has to have enough staff to justify the rich valuation.
MTN is not out of favor either. It was mentioned by Premier in the ann as well.
Guys
Initially some of you accused me of being a professional and I tried to point out that I wasn't. Perhaps I now support that claim with the question, what the hell is "ann" please? There is certain jargon that I just don't understand and it frustrates me as I have such a significant investment in MTN. Please use the KISS principle, Keep It Simple Stupid.
I would say AGS's situation is not that bad since Quasar Resources is the partner. It seems the SA Premier like it, another positive. Only thing is B4M has to have enough staff to justify the rich valuation.
MTN is not out of favor either. It was mentioned by Premier in the ann as well.
Guys
Initially some of you accused me of being a professional and I tried to point out that I wasn't. Perhaps I now support that claim with the question, what the hell is "ann" please? There is certain jargon that I just don't understand and it frustrates me as I have such a significant investment in MTN. Please use the KISS principle, Keep It Simple Stupid.
prs
3rd-April-2007, 09:15 PM
Try to analysis the purpose of this release. Cannot figure it out. Let's me do a interpretation, maybe wrong.
1. Mt Gee has more resources than published. It is more significant than most people thought. Such phase is used:
"indicated both increased mineralised thickness and higher grades than anticipated;"
"Only scratched the surface"
"Paralana Mineral System has the potential to be one of the great uranium systems in Australia"
2. Mining is possible.
Reinforced its (MTN) view on the mining potential of the Mt Gee..."
"We already have a viable mine"
"Underground mining"
"a tank leach processing plant sited...."
"1000t/yr"
3. Tough EIA process
"One of he great uranium systems in Australia" means back off, greens or so, for state and national interest
"Long term commitment to Environment"
"committed to environmentally sustainable mining.."
"committed to both the environment in the Flinders Ranges..."
4. Cost at high end
"Given the spot price and encouraging uranium grades,..."
"Underground mining...."
"tank leach processing plant...."
Conclusion:
At $100 U3O8 price, project revenue is US$220m year
IGV is US$7b Very significant.
I have a tick based on this report, and don't care what Mr Market is thinking in short term.
MMMMining
Please explain what you mean by the last 3 lines of your last communication I am confused and please forgive me for my lack of knowledge and understanding of your jargon.
1. Mt Gee has more resources than published. It is more significant than most people thought. Such phase is used:
"indicated both increased mineralised thickness and higher grades than anticipated;"
"Only scratched the surface"
"Paralana Mineral System has the potential to be one of the great uranium systems in Australia"
2. Mining is possible.
Reinforced its (MTN) view on the mining potential of the Mt Gee..."
"We already have a viable mine"
"Underground mining"
"a tank leach processing plant sited...."
"1000t/yr"
3. Tough EIA process
"One of he great uranium systems in Australia" means back off, greens or so, for state and national interest
"Long term commitment to Environment"
"committed to environmentally sustainable mining.."
"committed to both the environment in the Flinders Ranges..."
4. Cost at high end
"Given the spot price and encouraging uranium grades,..."
"Underground mining...."
"tank leach processing plant...."
Conclusion:
At $100 U3O8 price, project revenue is US$220m year
IGV is US$7b Very significant.
I have a tick based on this report, and don't care what Mr Market is thinking in short term.
MMMMining
Please explain what you mean by the last 3 lines of your last communication I am confused and please forgive me for my lack of knowledge and understanding of your jargon.
harriss2
3rd-April-2007, 09:23 PM
Hello prs,
I know exactly what you are saying. I am feeling quite emboldened now, and this is my second post on ASF - each within the half hour.
"ann" means announcement. Took me months to work that one out, and yes I was frustrated with my stupidity.
Took me longer to work out IMO, and IMHO. Actually, I didn't work it out.
Someone was kind enough to ask the question in one of the threads, and as I breathed a sigh of relief, I stated "Oh, so that's what it means!"
I know exactly what you are saying. I am feeling quite emboldened now, and this is my second post on ASF - each within the half hour.
"ann" means announcement. Took me months to work that one out, and yes I was frustrated with my stupidity.
Took me longer to work out IMO, and IMHO. Actually, I didn't work it out.
Someone was kind enough to ask the question in one of the threads, and as I breathed a sigh of relief, I stated "Oh, so that's what it means!"
zed327
3rd-April-2007, 11:14 PM
Found this tonight for MTN holders that are hoping to mine soon. :(
Potential uranium mine touted in SA
A South Australian uranium explorer says an interim report shows the potential for an underground mine in the north of the state.
Marathon Resources says its deposit at Mount Gee could produce 1,000 tonnes of uranium annually.
But Marathon chief executive John Santich says more studies would need to be done before a mine is developed.
"It's too early to say yet but it will be several years because a lot of preliminary work will have to be done, including environmental and social work, as well as technical material," he said.
Yesterday, two companies behind another uranium deposit in far north SA, Alliance and Quasar Resources, indicated they would apply for a mining lease this year.
Premier Mike Rann promoted the deposit near the Beverley uranium mine during his trade visit in Chile.
Potential uranium mine touted in SA
A South Australian uranium explorer says an interim report shows the potential for an underground mine in the north of the state.
Marathon Resources says its deposit at Mount Gee could produce 1,000 tonnes of uranium annually.
But Marathon chief executive John Santich says more studies would need to be done before a mine is developed.
"It's too early to say yet but it will be several years because a lot of preliminary work will have to be done, including environmental and social work, as well as technical material," he said.
Yesterday, two companies behind another uranium deposit in far north SA, Alliance and Quasar Resources, indicated they would apply for a mining lease this year.
Premier Mike Rann promoted the deposit near the Beverley uranium mine during his trade visit in Chile.
zed327
3rd-April-2007, 11:19 PM
Sorry about the blue highlight, really bad colour choice :banghead:
This is the full article
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200704/s1888908.htm
This is the full article
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200704/s1888908.htm
mmmmining
3rd-April-2007, 11:26 PM
Hello prs,
I know exactly what you are saying. I am feeling quite emboldened now, and this is my second post on ASF - each within the half hour.
"ann" means announcement. Took me months to work that one out, and yes I was frustrated with my stupidity.
Took me longer to work out IMO, and IMHO. Actually, I didn't work it out.
Someone was kind enough to ask the question in one of the threads, and as I breathed a sigh of relief, I stated "Oh, so that's what it means!"
Here is a tip, search internet for the whatever you don't know.
I know exactly what you are saying. I am feeling quite emboldened now, and this is my second post on ASF - each within the half hour.
"ann" means announcement. Took me months to work that one out, and yes I was frustrated with my stupidity.
Took me longer to work out IMO, and IMHO. Actually, I didn't work it out.
Someone was kind enough to ask the question in one of the threads, and as I breathed a sigh of relief, I stated "Oh, so that's what it means!"
Here is a tip, search internet for the whatever you don't know.
insider
4th-April-2007, 10:21 AM
MTN are taking off without a count down... and all the dummy sellers are disappearing
Realist
4th-April-2007, 10:23 AM
Wow, up 22c today already!! :eek:
mmmmining
4th-April-2007, 10:23 AM
MTN has broken the all-time high. We need big volume to confirm this, and hopeful it can close well above the last all time high, $4.1 for a couple of days. So people can decouple it from Cosby's bid. So far so good.
Realist
4th-April-2007, 10:35 AM
I got the letter from Crosby a couple of days ago.
I chuckled.... then sighed and frowned.
They've got to offer us a premium or what is the point?
I mean I turned down 68c fer christs sakes now we are $4.21.
Anyone who accepted that first Crosby offer must be suicidal.
How much are these morons spending on these offers? The postage alone must be really high.
I chuckled.... then sighed and frowned.
They've got to offer us a premium or what is the point?
I mean I turned down 68c fer christs sakes now we are $4.21.
Anyone who accepted that first Crosby offer must be suicidal.
How much are these morons spending on these offers? The postage alone must be really high.
insider
4th-April-2007, 10:47 AM
there's about 2000 shareholders... each including posting would cost about 2 dollars... 4000 dollars...
insider
4th-April-2007, 11:57 AM
This is annoying to watch... MTN clearly has bots working against them... every time the price goes up about 50000 shares are always hovering about 2 cents above the last traded price and then when it goes down so do the bots but nothing is ever sold... and then you get the odd BOT wanting to buy 91 shares just to push the price down or something... :mad:
Brujo
4th-April-2007, 12:04 PM
What are/is "bots"?
insider
4th-April-2007, 12:56 PM
Thre little computer programs that are suppose to imitate humans
Mousie
4th-April-2007, 01:04 PM
Thre little computer programs that are suppose to imitate humans
Must have been living in a cave when it comes to this - you mean these people (presumably some full service brokers) use bots to buy/sell their client's big chunks of shares via manipulation?
Must have been living in a cave when it comes to this - you mean these people (presumably some full service brokers) use bots to buy/sell their client's big chunks of shares via manipulation?
insider
4th-April-2007, 01:16 PM
It's more so that they can buy more MTN shares by getting people to sell early... if you hold good for you
Mousie
4th-April-2007, 01:23 PM
I just wanna understand what's going on coz I've noticed small chunks of shares being sold or bought as well; always wondered how these guys are gonna keep paying brokerage to sell off small lumps at a time to disguise the fact that it's actually one buyer/selling doing the trades
insider
4th-April-2007, 01:27 PM
I just wanna understand what's going on coz I've noticed small chunks of shares being sold or bought as well; always wondered how these guys are gonna keep paying brokerage to sell off small lumps at a time to disguise the fact that it's actually one buyer/selling doing the trades
It's probably buttermere so that their take over bid looks tempting... even though it isn't
It's probably buttermere so that their take over bid looks tempting... even though it isn't
mmmmining
4th-April-2007, 01:30 PM
I just wanna understand what's going on coz I've noticed small chunks of shares being sold or bought as well; always wondered how these guys are gonna keep paying brokerage to sell off small lumps at a time to disguise the fact that it's actually one buyer/selling doing the trades
Some brokers only charge you as one trade of the total number of shares per day, if you place a multiple buys only or multiple sells only for the same share. (if you buy and sell multiple times, you are charged one buy, and one sell)
Well some brokers or fund managers might trade it generate fees or balance portfolios based on the certain written rules.
Some brokers only charge you as one trade of the total number of shares per day, if you place a multiple buys only or multiple sells only for the same share. (if you buy and sell multiple times, you are charged one buy, and one sell)
Well some brokers or fund managers might trade it generate fees or balance portfolios based on the certain written rules.
insider
4th-April-2007, 03:35 PM
The bots have a bid for 6 shares... :mad:
shinobi346
4th-April-2007, 09:02 PM
there's about 2000 shareholders... each including posting would cost about 2 dollars... 4000 dollars...
Where did you find there's only 2000 shareholders?
I heard they have to pay quite a bit for the share registry. so the postage is just a fraction of what those bozos are spending.
Where did you find there's only 2000 shareholders?
I heard they have to pay quite a bit for the share registry. so the postage is just a fraction of what those bozos are spending.
insider
5th-April-2007, 12:10 AM
I wouldn't know I don't work in a mail room... I heard it from an interview or something or I read it somewhere... who really cares up 19 cents today:D
insider
5th-April-2007, 12:41 AM
Is mtn's Mt gee resource (ISL) In-Situ Leech?
mmmmining
5th-April-2007, 12:48 AM
Is mtn's Mt gee resource (ISL) In-Situ Leech?
"a tank leach processing plant sited...."
"a tank leach processing plant sited...."
insider
5th-April-2007, 01:01 AM
"a tank leach processing plant sited...."
What does that involve?
What does that involve?
insider
5th-April-2007, 01:09 AM
Mt Gee doesn't allow for isl anyway
insider
5th-April-2007, 01:12 AM
You know I just found a statistic that says less than 1% of mines in Australia don't get approval... In fact environmental approvals favor companies not the community...
mmmmining
5th-April-2007, 01:13 AM
What does that involve?
Simply it is not ISL, and heap leach, but want to read more:
Uranium ore is crushed and formed into a slurry. The slurry is pumped into a leaching tank and classified by a sparge tube projecting water at teeter velocity at the bottom of the ore bed. Thereafter, a second ore bed is pumped by the slurry into the tank and the second bed classified. This is repeated until there are four or five ore beds in the tank. Thereafter, the ore is leached by passing liquid up from the bottom of the tank at velocities less than teeter velocities so that the bed remains classified. After leaching, the ore is formed into a slurry and the slurry pumped from the tanks to disposal.
Simply it is not ISL, and heap leach, but want to read more:
Uranium ore is crushed and formed into a slurry. The slurry is pumped into a leaching tank and classified by a sparge tube projecting water at teeter velocity at the bottom of the ore bed. Thereafter, a second ore bed is pumped by the slurry into the tank and the second bed classified. This is repeated until there are four or five ore beds in the tank. Thereafter, the ore is leached by passing liquid up from the bottom of the tank at velocities less than teeter velocities so that the bed remains classified. After leaching, the ore is formed into a slurry and the slurry pumped from the tanks to disposal.
kennas
5th-April-2007, 10:06 AM
Broken out on volume. Looks good to go.
insider
5th-April-2007, 10:29 AM
Simply it is not ISL, and heap leach, but want to read more:
Uranium ore is crushed and formed into a slurry. The slurry is pumped into a leaching tank and classified by a sparge tube projecting water at teeter velocity at the bottom of the ore bed. Thereafter, a second ore bed is pumped by the slurry into the tank and the second bed classified. This is repeated until there are four or five ore beds in the tank. Thereafter, the ore is leached by passing liquid up from the bottom of the tank at velocities less than teeter velocities so that the bed remains classified. After leaching, the ore is formed into a slurry and the slurry pumped from the tanks to disposal.
It sounds a lot environmentally friendlier than ISL... good... I'm 90% sure MTN will mine at Mt Gee now
Uranium ore is crushed and formed into a slurry. The slurry is pumped into a leaching tank and classified by a sparge tube projecting water at teeter velocity at the bottom of the ore bed. Thereafter, a second ore bed is pumped by the slurry into the tank and the second bed classified. This is repeated until there are four or five ore beds in the tank. Thereafter, the ore is leached by passing liquid up from the bottom of the tank at velocities less than teeter velocities so that the bed remains classified. After leaching, the ore is formed into a slurry and the slurry pumped from the tanks to disposal.
It sounds a lot environmentally friendlier than ISL... good... I'm 90% sure MTN will mine at Mt Gee now
insider
5th-April-2007, 10:34 AM
Broken out on volume. Looks good to go.
The sellers list is anorexic... :D
The sellers list is anorexic... :D
mmmmining
6th-April-2007, 02:13 PM
Fully diluted shares: 60m, the $8m cash in hand will prevent dilution.
Resources: 81mlb
At $3/lb It worth: $4.05
At $4/lb, It worth: $5.40
At $5/lb, It worth: $6.13 (assume 10% dilution)
At $6/lb, It worth: $7.36
At $7/lb, It worth: $8.59
At $8/lb, It worth: $8.93 (assume another 10% dilution)
At $9/lb, It worth: $10.04
At $10/lb, It worth: $11.16
Well, MTN is still at EV$3.3/lb. With possible increasing resources, and anticipated positive scope study, and in a favorable state, it seems still a long way to go to catch peers valuation, which is at EV $10/lb. Maybe by the time it gets there, uranium stocks are valued at $20/lb. Who knows?
At $10/lb MTN worth $11+ assume 22% dilution.
Resources: 81mlb
At $3/lb It worth: $4.05
At $4/lb, It worth: $5.40
At $5/lb, It worth: $6.13 (assume 10% dilution)
At $6/lb, It worth: $7.36
At $7/lb, It worth: $8.59
At $8/lb, It worth: $8.93 (assume another 10% dilution)
At $9/lb, It worth: $10.04
At $10/lb, It worth: $11.16
Well, MTN is still at EV$3.3/lb. With possible increasing resources, and anticipated positive scope study, and in a favorable state, it seems still a long way to go to catch peers valuation, which is at EV $10/lb. Maybe by the time it gets there, uranium stocks are valued at $20/lb. Who knows?
At $10/lb MTN worth $11+ assume 22% dilution.
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.1.0 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.