MTN - Marathon Resources [Archive]

kgee

20th-March-2006, 02:13 PM

Hi again I am just reporting what I have read on other forums ...I have pasted their arguement here...it's been going for some time...I'm not 100% sure about it myself but will be following up on it and will make further investigations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tapman,
You are misguided.
There are multiple peolple telling you what they think of MTN. I can assure that it is not just me. I can tell you that there are many many very knowledgeable people that look upon Mt Gee with great scepticism.

I have been saying right from the beginning that this area is a no go zone.

Arkaroola Creek/Gorge is at the base of Mt Gee
Its also listed as a national heritage register

http://www.deh.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahdb/search.pl?mode=place_detail;place_id=5979

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.

Also Mt Gee itself is heritage listed.
http://www.deh.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahdb/search.pl?mode=place_detail;place_id=5978

Armchair
http://www.deh.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahdb/search.pl?mode=place_detail;place_id=5982

Mt Painter
http://www.deh.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahdb/search.pl?mode=place_detail;place_id=5981

Mt Gee, Painter, Armchair, Arkaroola Gorge is not just nearby, its where MTN want to dig.

Legally as stated by Marathon you can dig it up.
But the hurdles are immense.

As you can see from the heritage register this is an area of great significance.

What realistically are MTN's chances of mining, when it affects numerous national heritage places, Rare species (as listed on the heritage register)

And for Arkaroola Gorge

"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."

National Estate significance means this is area is protected big time.

Mining at Mt Gee, Painter, Armchair is not impossible, But wow, look at all those obstacles!

As I have said on this thread right from the start.
Marathons future is not at Mt Gee.

Watch them spend more money on their gold prospect in Victoria, and the IOCG Targets around Coober Pedy, as the focus on Mt Gee slowly but surely fades away.

YOUNG_TRADER

21st-March-2006, 01:55 AM

They are drilling there now, ie Hodkinson, Mt Gee and Armchair, so how can it be heritage listed if they are drilling there?

I will get to the bottom of this tomorrow and post up.

kgee

21st-March-2006, 12:12 PM

Yeah I'm still looking to get verification on this .... I've copied this from the other forum..

CRA were drilling in an era when native title and environmental issues meant little.

Goldstream drilled for the Ramp amd Capital Raising. Remember Pierponts Article.
So they didn't care about the long term prospects.

The juniors exploring nearby are about 20-30Km away from the very sensitive areas.

Marathon as can be seen from their map are right in the middle of the sensitive area.

http://www.marathonresources.com.au/pdf/051103ParalanaDrilling.pdf

This is not to say that the other juniors won't have issues. However I feel they are far enough away to give them some hope of mining.

I'm going to try and find the pierpont article and if its of any relevance I'll post it here

kgee

21st-March-2006, 12:47 PM

http://www.pierpont.com.au/eco_Archives/default.cfm?behaviour=view_article&id=3494
A very interesting read

YOUNG_TRADER

21st-March-2006, 05:26 PM

From what I can gather, although clarification is still pending they are somewhat surrounded by heritage listed spots ie Mt Gee etc,

But there actual deposits lie on the boundry of these as your not allowed to drill on heritage listed spots,

Also re CRA they arrived in 1989 to do there drilling well after Mt Gee was listed in 1982, moreover Goldstream drilled the place in 2001

List: Register of the National Estate
Class: Natural
Legal Status: Registered (28/09/1982)

Types of 'legal status' for each heritage list
The legal status of each place is shown on the results screen when you do a search on the Australian Heritage Database. You can limit your searches to records with a particular legal status by using the 'legal status' pull down box.

There are different types of legal status categories for each heritage list. Here is an explanation of each.

World Heritage List
National Heritage List
Commonwealth Heritage List
Register of the National Estate

Register of the National Estate
Registered
The place is in the Register of the National Estate. Although some places may be legally registered because they are within a larger registered area they may not necessarily possess intrinsic significance.

Here's my view, the reason Gold Stream abandoned its Uranium focus in 2001 was because suprise suprise Uranium price bottomed at $9 lb,
Moreover check the graph it shows that in 1989-90 when CRA had its focus Uranium again was starting to bottom out around $9 lb
And omg guess what again when Exoil looked at it back in 1970 the price was yep you guessed it around the $9 lb mark

So what does all this mean?

Put simply the price is now 4.5x what it was when all three of these other companies were drilling, they all drilled it and seemed to face no enviro problems, and MTN is drilling it, but whats different is that uranium is $40 lb or 4.5x what it was then, a rising Uranium price means that a lower cut-off is still profitable ie look at PDN they are starting to use 200-300ppm as they're cut-off

Also for reference a Uranium Spot Price Graph going back to the 70's ignore the green line as it represents uranium's price in todays' dollars (ie inflation adjusted) just look at the blue line

http://www.uxc.com/review/uxc_g_hist-price.html

YOUNG_TRADER

21st-March-2006, 05:39 PM

More info, have highlighted the key bits, you had me a tee bit worried when you first posted, you must be careful with your wording old boy, the National Heritage list and the Register of National Estate are very different things

YOUR PLACE MAY BE ENTERED IN THE REGISTER OF THE NATIONAL ESTATE

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
The Register of the National Estate is Australia's national inventory of natural and cultural heritage places which are worth keeping for the future. It is compiled by the Australian Heritage Commission-the Commonwealth Government's adviser on the National Estate.

There are now more than 12 000 natural, historic and indigenous places in the Register. They come from all parts of Australia and are owned variously by Commonwealth, State and local governments, by businesses, voluntary and other organisations and by private individuals. All places entered in the Register are strictly assessed against publicly available criteria outlining national estate values.

What does it mean if you're a private owner and your property is placed in the Interim List of the Register of the National Estate, or finally entered in the Register?

Direct benefits to owners

Firstly, listing in the Register means that your place has heritage value and has met various criteria of national estate significance. Details of these criteria are in another Background Note. Copies of the 'statement of significance' from the Register database, which outlines the special national estate values of your property, are sent to you when the Commission lets you know it intends to enter your place in the Register. Information on registered places is also available on the internet (http:/www.ahc.gov.au).

Not a land management decision

Entry in the Register of the National Estate is not a land management decision. The way in which private, State and local government owners manage their national estate properties is not directly affected by listing. The Commission does not manage places in the Register and entry in the Register does not give the Commonwealth Government any rights to acquire, manage, or enter places which are private property.

No legal constraints on private owners

Entry of their property in the Register does not place any direct legal constraints on the actions of owners of private property. Owners of registered places are not required to change the way in which they manage, maintain, or dispose of, their property. Entry in the Register does not mean that owners have to give any public right of access to registered properties.

Commonwealth Government constrained by heritage listing

The Commonwealth Government is the only body whose actions are constrained as a result of listings in the Register of the National Estate.

Each place in the List is assessed by the Australian Heritage Council as having national heritage values which can be protected and managed under a range of Commonwealth powers. A place entered in the National Heritage List is a national heritage place.

Places on the list are protected under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. This requires that approval is obtained before any action takes place which has, will have, or is likely to have, a significant impact on the national heritage values of a listed place. Proposals for actions which could affect such values will be rigorously assessed.

YOUNG_TRADER

22nd-March-2006, 10:22 AM

Price edging up ever so slowly after huge volatility from placements,

More importantly its getting very very close to drilling results from Mt Gee,

Also Kgee, did you see my 2 previous posts re Mt Gee and heritage, copy them and put them on that other forum where the debate is ragging, interested to know what they have to say

Market Cap

22nd-March-2006, 10:47 AM

Thanks for your good work in clarifying the issue, Young Trader. I was getting a bit worried but you have restored the confidence I had with MTN as one of the better Uranium stock.

Cheers,
MC

kgee

22nd-March-2006, 03:09 PM

Yes a big thanks young trader I will do as you suggest and will get back if there are any interesting developments ,as well if my other inquiries turn up I will do like wise
Of note the real reason that I'm doing so much research is that my last name is Gee and for some reason when I saw MTN i thought this must be fate and wanted to jump straight in...which probably scared me more than when I have made my previous investments...so I'm not trying to be a scare mongerer its just with this stock the more I have dug the more red flags have appeared
thanks again
Ps I've stocks in AZA and EDN any comments

YOUNG_TRADER

23rd-March-2006, 09:28 AM

Chart looks to be building strongly for a huge up-surge and drilling results are out by the end of the month, coincidence? I don't think so

YOUNG_TRADER

27th-March-2006, 10:47 AM

Chart looks to be building strongly for a huge up-surge and drilling results are out by the end of the month, coincidence? I don't think so

Don't miss the rocket, its at T minus 10 or so days to lift off!!!!!!!

jUST IMAGINE WHAT A CONFIRMATION OF A 55m lb + Uranium Deposit @ 500ppm cut-off will do for a company with a mkt Cap of like $40m in todays Uranium Environment!!!!!! :D

YOUNG_TRADER

27th-March-2006, 10:49 AM

IMO (and I could be wrong but time shall tell) MTN will trade at $1.50 in the next 4-6weeks, so thats my call

Still hold strongly to this belief, although its now 3-5weeks

YOUNG_TRADER

28th-March-2006, 10:03 AM

Few decent sized buy orders on the bid side this morn, $45k +

Mkt waking up to this sleeping bull?

Or Drilling results?

Time will tell ;)

YOUNG_TRADER

28th-March-2006, 03:27 PM

Hit $1 today,

Sell depth very very thin

Have drilling ann been confirmed?

YOUNG_TRADER

28th-March-2006, 03:28 PM

Ahhh profit takers emerge,

was freakin out, at one stage there was like 10,000 on the sell side and that was it!!!!!!!!

Theo

29th-March-2006, 01:32 PM

Hi everyone,

Our family are very happy owners of Marathon shares. :p: To date, 353% increase in price since listing in March 2005! And they have a lot of momentum left (we think they're just warming up).

Just for the record, the Paralana ore system (10km) long, which consists of 3 rich uranium deposits, namely Armchair-Streitberg, Hodgkinson and Mt Gee are located some 50km from a national park and are located on a privately owned ex sheep station, namely Arkoroola Station (owned and managed by local family for many years). The main form of income for that property is tourism (backpackers, etc.). The area for the possible future mine is situated on a designated conservation area and there is absolutely no heritage restrictions or native title/claim that we are aware of. :)

Drilling continues at Mt Gee - 3 to 4 of the 6 holes are complete, and we hope, like every other happy Marathon investor, that the assay results become available any day now.

We did our investment homework very carefully. For the time being, the Marathon team is small, but very experienced. It's only a matter of 'when' not 'if' this team will be expanding.

We believe that this resource is extremely large, and what has been drilled in the past, some 70km of core and what is being drilled now and in the future will proved beyond doubt that this is a world-class uranium resource.

We have looked at all the other uranium stocks in Western Australia, Northern Territory, Queensland, and Namibia (Paladin Resources). Marathon Resources' Mt Gee deposit is shaping up to be better than any of the above. Now's the time to get on board, especially as the political climate is starting to favour the exploration, mining, and exporting to China and India.

Be careful when you look at companies that they just don't talk about supposedly uranium-rich tenements - this is risky speculation. The proof of the pudding is visual pitchblende, and when the geiger counter ticks wildly over large mineralised drillcore intersections. This is what Marathon has had and looks forward to seeing a lot more of.

YOUNG_TRADER

29th-March-2006, 01:48 PM

Hey Theo, if you check all of my extensive posts you will see that I agree with what you have said completely and can back up your statements,

I still can't believe how much the mkt discounts this stock,

@ 500ppm cut off = 55m lbs U3O8 which @ $2.65 per lb = $150m = $3 MTN

@ 300ppm cut off = 75m lbs U3O8 which @ $2.65 per lb = $200m = $4 MTN

I would be very suprised if A Canadian doesn't swallow this up, they can pay up to $2 for it and its still a bargain,

michael_selway

29th-March-2006, 03:36 PM

YOUNG_TRADER

29th-March-2006, 05:07 PM

$2.65 was the old mkt EV per lb avg see the patersons report was $2.65

The current mkt EV per lb is about $3.50 see the RCR report

Its pretty simple, you simply list the current Uranium companies with their depostis and get their avg EV for a mkt EV, I do this for Oil companies for Gold companies, ie for example a good EV per ounce gold is $25 - $50 as the project moves closer to cash flow/development this rises,

Also many factors such as margins, profitability and so on effect the individual companies EV, for example PDN is on an EV of $5 per lb, but it is very close to production,

I'd say that at least $2 ev per lb, minimum should apply to MTN, (the low $2 because its in S.A.)

Hmmm I can't upload the report there too large,

well go to http://www.allianceresources.com.au/
the patersons report is on the left hand side dated 16/2/06

then go to http://rcresearch.com.au/documents/Look at the March review

YOUNG_TRADER

30th-March-2006, 12:23 PM

Hmmmm looks like results are in as MTN powers ahead on an otherwise slow day for Uranium

YOUNG_TRADER

30th-March-2006, 02:21 PM

Just realised why stock is powering ahead,

They are presenting tomorrow at the Pay Dirt conference, so all the smart players are realising that tomorrow they will re-announce previous JORC ann of 55m lbs - 75m lbs U3O8

Wait till that hits the mkt tomorrow

YOUNG_TRADER

31st-March-2006, 10:33 AM

Tick Tock Tick Tock, the eerrriee quiet before the storm,

They are presenting @ the conference @ 11.40am, I expect to see stock trade weak until they have finished presenting and with any luck there presentation will be an ASX ann,

I hope they do an EV per lb Uranium comparison to show just how undervalued they are

Rafa

31st-March-2006, 03:43 PM

sitting near the lows for the day...

what did they say at the conference today???

YOUNG_TRADER

31st-March-2006, 03:54 PM

Not sure, they haven't released a presentation yet,

I think today was just profit takers, traders and nervous punters, as far as I am concerned I will hold this stock for as long as it takes for a take over bid to come from a company like Mega, or Teck Caminco etc

The company has been far too quiet and far too well behaved, unlike other companies who have been releasing random Uranium ann, they have been quite, I think that they are in discussions with someone hence why they are keeping so quiet, but thats just my point of view,

Like I said I'm gonna hold, and wait for $2

Everyone else make up your own mind what you will do

YOUNG_TRADER

1st-April-2006, 01:42 PM

For the last 2 or so months I have been going on about Marathon Resources and their potential,

I felt a bit better when a Patersons report named MTN as "the most compelling buy in the Uranium Sector"

I am now happy to add that Fat Prophets has joined the ranks,

I found this article in the weekend Australian which shows Fat Prophets are now backing Marathon as a clear favourite in the Uranium Sector,

WEALTH

Resource minnows worth fishing for
Look beyond the majors for investment thrills, writes Robin Bromby
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

April 01, 2006

Uranium has investors running hot at the moment, even though most of the projects are years away from production.

Most analysts believe the uranium story has been overbought, but Fat Prophets analyst Gavin Wendt has a clear favourite in Marathon Resources.
"The company is one of only a handful of Australian uranium hopefuls that, in our view, have a meaningful prospect of achieving mining status," says Wendt.
The stock hit a new intraday high of $1.17 yesterday, about double what it was in February.

Wendt says two things differentiated Marathon from most uranium hopefuls. First, it possessed a large identified resource; second, its resource was located in South Australia, a state sympathetic to uranium mining.

YOUNG_TRADER

3rd-April-2006, 09:51 AM

Looks to open very very strong indeed,

YOUNG_TRADER

3rd-April-2006, 09:48 PM

What a great day for MTN, be intersting to see how it performs over this week,

Those drilling results are well overdue!!!! Damn Labs and their backlogs, hurry up!

kgee

4th-April-2006, 02:17 AM

YOUNG_TRADER

4th-April-2006, 10:07 AM

Its alive, its alive!

Finally market is realising this is one of the few real Uranium Players in the mkt (I didn't say the only but certainly one of only a few who have real potential)

travcorp

5th-April-2006, 12:52 PM

Today has been profit taking, but I think this one looks the goods to get up to $1.50 at least...

YOUNG_TRADER

5th-April-2006, 01:36 PM

Hmmm I don't think it was just profit taking, I think it was a combination of profit taking and market selling in Uranium,

But that being said, I have re-evaluated my stance on MTN, I originally picked $1.50 + as the price target, but now feel that a true fair value is close to $2.50 ish,

Here's my reasons,

Firstly as has been mentioned many times they have an indicated and inferred resource of

56.6M t grading 0.06% for 33,200t Uranium = 73m lbs Uranium,

Now given that the current drilling is aimed at increasing the confidence, ie perhaps shift some to the measured category,

@ an EV of $2 lb mkt cap should = $150m = about $2.70 MTN,

I have kept saying I think that a Canadian Major would be hard pressed not to want to buy up MTN @ levels up to $2.50 as it is acquiring Uranium very cheap,

Also it is important to note that this resource is for Mt Gee only, no resource Calculation has been undertaken for its Hodkinson Deposits,

In time I think MTN will be able to show that the Mt Gee/Hodgkinson area is one of the best deposits in Australia, the only other deposit in Australia (apart form the 3 current mines (and 4th Honeymoon) that is close is VUL and SMM's Mt Isa deposit which is in QLD.

Also a final thought a few weeks back Uranium was $37.5 a lb today its $41 lb, so say you bought a company which had a JORC deposit of Uranium and you paid an equivalent of say $2.50 per lb uranium, the recent price increase would have covered your acquisition cost,

To put it another way imagine buying a gold company that had a JORC deposit of 1moz and you paid $50m AUD for the company = an EV per oz gold of $50, now when the gold price went from $545 US /oz to $595 you effectively covered the cost of the acquisition,

So the point is in times of commodity price rises the EV per unit of resource has to increase.

YOUNG_TRADER

5th-April-2006, 08:24 PM

Anyone here a Fat Prophets subscriber?

If so have the published a report on MTN yet?
ie what exactly does Gavin Wendt think?

Most analysts believe the uranium story has been overbought, but Fat Prophets analyst Gavin Wendt has a clear favourite in Marathon Resources.
"The company is one of only a handful of Australian uranium hopefuls that, in our view, have a meaningful prospect of achieving mining status," says Wendt.
The stock hit a new intraday high of $1.17 yesterday, about double what it was in February.

Wendt says two things differentiated Marathon from most uranium hopefuls. First, it possessed a large identified resource; second, its resource was located in South Australia, a state sympathetic to uranium mining.

YOUNG_TRADER

5th-April-2006, 08:36 PM

Did anyone attend the sa uranium conference?
I just read it http://www.marathonresources.com.au/pdf/060331_UraniumConf.pdf
and it didn't really show me anything
I also heard a rumour that drilling at Mt Gee had to be completed by Easter,Tourist Season.????

Kgee, you been quite since we sorted out the whole Hetigage issue,

But according to their presentation Mt Gee driling is still underway,

How much longer? Don't think it can be too much longer they started in Early Feb, its been almost 2 months the drilling should have been finished by Mid March, give 2-3 weeks for lab assays and stuff sets this week or next at the latest as an announcement time.

The principal purpose of the program is to investigate extensions of the deposit as the current model suggests its further continuation in each direction. The drilling will also increase confidence in the results of drilling by
previous explorers, and enhance the resource estimate through the provision of additional data.

My guess is they're feeding assays into Computer Modeling to build new resource Calculation, which will have a much higher confidence, ie move more to indicated category.

YOUNG_TRADER

10th-April-2006, 07:28 PM

I would be very suprised if there is no ann regarding drilling, Mt Gee/Hodgkinson, assays, resource calc something,

They have been far too quite over at MTN, but then I guess thats their philosophy, its not a sprint its a Marathon, slow and steady wins the race ;)

kgee

10th-April-2006, 08:07 PM

Hi Young trader,yeah I hope those results are out soon...I see you posted on the NZ site...It almost felt unethical that I post your work there especially when I was getting thanks for it...I look forward to following this debate

I haven't rang yet ...I have their phone no. in front of me but are a little hesitant to hear what they say...I'm guessing it'll be a "we can niether confirm or deny" ....which could leed to another kiwi nucleur boycott!

By the way nice going on BKY I put a buy order in this morning but missed out when I checked this afternoon 26% in one day ...I might start following your post's a little closer

YOUNG_TRADER

11th-April-2006, 09:52 AM

Good to know that my views are shared by others, but they are seriously overlooking BKY!!!!!

Uranium hopefuls
CRITERION
Tim Boreham
April 11, 2006
THE current valuations being ascribed to even the most rag-tag uranium hopefuls might look reasonable in a decade's time. But it's just as likely that we've solved the Middle East's woes and sent a man to Mars by then as well.
The truth is: even if another ripper uranium resource is proved up, there's bugger-all prospect of an Australian mine being built (and approvals granted) in that period.

While the world will clamour for more uranium, shorter-term demand is likely to be satisfied by known new mines and existing projects, such as BHP Billiton's Olympic Dam.

Even Rio Tinto's Leigh Clifford - who's now known for pontificating on commodity prices - warns the current $US40 a pound uranium price - which has almost doubled in the past year - cannot be sustained.

He notes the planned new nuclear power plants - such as the 40 slated by the Chinese - could take a decade to fire up.

Clifford's salient warning is supported by the Australian Bureau of Agricultural & Resource Economics, which forecasts a modest 1 per cent per annum uptick in uranium demand over the next five years.

ABARE forecasts that the value of Australia's uranium exports will decline to $521 million by 2010-11, compared with $712 million in 2005-06.

"Despite recent significant increases in expenditure on uranium exploration, uranium production over the outlook period is expected to be largely dictated by production from existing operations," ABARE says.

While there's a big global supply/demand gap, the void is filled by recycling material from decommissioned bombs and reprocessing spent fuel.

There's also new production this year: Paladin Resources' Langer Heinrich project in Namibia (1180 tonnes per year) and the Zarechnoye mine in Kazakhstan (590 tonnes).

Next year, it's Southern Cross Resources' Dominion project in South Africa (1800 tonnes), while Cameco (the world's biggest producer) is expanding output at its existing Cigar Lake operation in Canada.

As with all manias, investors are spoiled for choice in terms of options to do their dough. At least 40 listed miners claim a uranium exposure. Dozens have packaged up their uranium tenements (or, strictly speaking, patches of dirt where uranium might reside) and flogged them off.

Oxiana, for instance, spun off Toro Resources (TOE) at 20c on March 24. Toro only yesterday announced the start of its drilling program, but that didn't stop the stock leaping to a high of $1.60 in late March. TOE stock yesterday closed 5.5c better at $1.22.

The uranium mania has been fuelled by political developments which look promising, but might be red herrings more than anything.

First, Labor's likely rethink on its "three mines" stance could remove a 20-year impediment to the sector's development. Labor governs in the relevant states of South Australia, Western Australia and Queensland, but expect them to handpass the hot potato into the calloused hands of their federal comrades.

Criterion suspects Labor's policy will change, given Australia has $32 billion of current uranium reserves. Alternatively, Labor is likely to be voted out of office in at least one of these states over the next decade, with Queensland looking the most vulnerable.

In the shorter term, it's more important for miners to prove up a resource for the politicians and greenies to argue over.

Uranium enthusiasts have also been heartened by the feds' agreement with China, to allow the Chinese to buy yellowcake and explore for the stuff here.

Hmm, very promising. But once again, the existing mines will fill the short-term demand. China did sign an exploration deal with Uranium Exploration (UNX), but there's more than a sneaking suspicion it's more interested in Uranex's Tanzanian ground.

Criterion ascribes a SELL recommendation to a whole sector: uranium explorers with no proven resources and little hope of achieving production.

It's a bit tough to tar all the players with the "overvalued" brush, but the valuations look crazy. At the very least, there's no way of knowing whether they're ridiculous or not.

Examples are Toro, UNX (38.5c), Nova Energy (NEL, $1.74), Encounter Resources (ENR, 60.5C) and Globe Uranium (GBE, 55c).

Paladin (PDN) should make good money from Langer Heinrich and its Malawi project will probably get off the ground.

But Paladin's market cap stands at $2.1 billion: more than the value ascribed to the Seven Network, Unitab, Dyno Nobel or the soon-to-be-producing Bendigo Mining.

A handful are worthy of a SPECULATIVE BUY. Summit Resources (SMM) has a proven ore body at its Mt Isa project: 22,100 tonnes of "measured and indicated resources". It's the local deposit most likely to be developed.

Marathon Resources (MTN, $1.07) has 33,000 tonnes of inferred resources at its Mt Gee tenement in the Flinders Ranges.

"Marathon Resources appears to be in the right place at the right time," says stock-picker Fat Prophets.

Another investor says: "Marathon has run ahead of itself. Needs to do more work."

Compass Resources (CMR, $2.35) also earns Brownie points for looking in the right place: the Rum Jungle field in the Northern Territory, which supplied Cold War uranium to the British and Americans before being forgotten for four decades.

Monaro Resources (MRO $1.06) is taking a different tack and looking to the Kyrgyz Republic, Russia's traditional source of uranium.

Monaro is still setting up, but boasts the biggest acreage in the consonant-rich republic. As well as being deficient in vowels, Kyrgyz also lacks the usual pesky environmental standards and red tape.

Alternatively, investors could forget about the blue sky and stick with ERA, the only dedicated uranium producer.

The trouble is, ERA's output is subject to long-term contracts well below current spot prices. Over time, these contracts will be rewritten at higher prices, so uranium's old-timer will be able to join the party.

ERA shares look fully valued at $15 but we rate them a LONG-TERM BUY.

Criterion subscribes to uranium watcher (and Monaro chairman) Warwick Grigor's view that investors should hold back for more drilling results.

His rule of thumb is that anyone with a 1000-tonne plus resource is worth a look at.

Grigor believes uranium is not just a cyclical play, but will benefit from sustained long-term energy demand.

The world certainly can't rely on wind farms if those orange-bellied parrots keep flying in the way.

Grigor adds: "I think the sector needs to play it cool for a little while." Indeed.

borehamt@theaustralian.com.au

The Australian accepts no responsibility for stock recommendations. Readers should contact a licensed financial adviser. The author does not hold shares in the above-mentioned companies.

YOUNG_TRADER

12th-April-2006, 01:23 PM

Looks like it will hold around the $1.07 - $1.20 mark until drilling is out,

Damn results are sure taking their time, surely they can't be too far away,

Are they there yet?

Are they there yet?

Are they there yet?

Are they there yet?

Are they there yet?

Are they there yet?

Are they there yet?

Are they there yet?

YOUNG_TRADER

21st-April-2006, 08:59 AM

Lots of holders are getting impatient and I can't really blame them, drilling results are well overdue,

I hear that they are due out at the end of the month but will the market notice?

I think investors will, but the pure speculators and punters have left the Uranium scene for a bit,

The Uranium supply shortage is not going away, it is a fuel of the future (medium term) and thus I still firmly believe that if a major is smart enough they will acquire a company which controls a huge deposit, I would call Mt Gee a huge deposit being in Australia's top 10, so am confident that one day a take over/ JV bid/offer will come along.

With a mkt cap of $55m and 70m lbs of Uranium (with upside) its still trading at under $1 per lb and still represents the most undervalued EV play on the mkt

Jay-684

24th-April-2006, 02:52 PM

any reason why the SP has taken a tumble over the past week?

bought in at $1.16 and feel I might have bought in at the top :(

powerkoala

24th-April-2006, 03:12 PM

Same here.
Got it at 1.075.
Collapse since...
any idea what happen?
no announcement or anything? :swear:

YOUNG_TRADER

24th-April-2006, 04:43 PM

Did you read my post?

The martket is Fed up with waiting for drilling results, it was a snowballl effect, once $1.07 (strong suppot) was broken, it began a downtrend, with today's movements it looks very shaky, when they arrive it will be interesting to see how stock performs

Long term its still the most undervalued play in Uranium on an EV basis, so says Patersons and Fat Prophets

Lots of holders are getting impatient and I can't really blame them, drilling results are well overdue,

I hear that they are due out at the end of the month but will the market notice?

I think investors will, but the pure speculators and punters have left the Uranium scene for a bit,

The Uranium supply shortage is not going away, it is a fuel of the future (medium term) and thus I still firmly believe that if a major is smart enough they will acquire a company which controls a huge deposit, I would call Mt Gee a huge deposit being in Australia's top 10, so am confident that one day a take over/ JV bid/offer will come along.

With a mkt cap of $55m and 70m lbs of Uranium (with upside) its still trading at under $1 per lb and still represents the most undervalued EV play on the mkt

powerkoala

24th-April-2006, 04:48 PM

I did read ur post.
That why buy on support level.
Yet, still no news at all.
Hope there will be something good this week. :mad:

YOUNG_TRADER

26th-April-2006, 12:56 PM

Stock is taking a beating, market seems to be Totaly Fed Up waiting for drilling,

I keep saying long term is great, but am going to use charts for buy signal short term,

Jay-684

26th-April-2006, 12:59 PM

I'm going to keep holding.

I know if I sell it'll immediately go up :)

I only have a $2000 parcel of MTN, so the downside of losing half or more of it isnt that bad.

I missed out on TZN @ 99c last week, and thought I'd missed the train. Obviously I was wrong! So I'll just pray for MTN instead :)

powerkoala

26th-April-2006, 01:15 PM

Same here.
Hopefully news will come soon.

powerkoala

26th-April-2006, 02:17 PM

Result out.
Still not effecting the market though... -sigh- :confused:

RichKid

26th-April-2006, 02:47 PM

Result out.
Still not effecting the market though... -sigh- :confused:

Are we to assume that the results were known so sp has already 'reacted' (ie poor results so has fallen over last few days) or that the results are not that significant (hence no movement).

YT, I'm interested in what fat prophets said about MTN, did they have a price target or time line for when value would be recognised?

RichKid

26th-April-2006, 03:11 PM

Emmm, looks like it's just the quaterly reporting, can't see any recent reports on drilling. A positive is that it's just sitting on a previous high, a negative is that it' s not established support yet. Short term selling pressure appears to be around.

YOUNG_TRADER

26th-April-2006, 03:12 PM

Lots of holders are getting impatient and I can't really blame them, drilling results are well overdue,

I hear that they are due out at the end of the month but will the market notice?

These aren't the results, they are activity reports,

But like I said when they are out market may not notice,

Fats says buy up to $1.07 medium time frame, its apparently they're favourite uranium stock, they eagerly anticipate the results

RichKid

26th-April-2006, 03:32 PM

blobbob

26th-April-2006, 07:02 PM

Delays in lab - results out by end of this week according to activity report

powerkoala

26th-April-2006, 07:05 PM

Think market won't effect much as they already wait too long.
Well, I still hold though.
Hope some good news arrives.

kgee

27th-April-2006, 11:13 AM

Hi I did a bit of investigating on mining at MT Gee
I sent this letter as follows
Dear Sir / Madam
Hi, I belong to a sharetraders forum and I'm trying to get to the bottom of a debate concerning Marathon Resources mining at MT Gee in the Arakoola region of the North Flinders Ranges
There is a lot of speculation going on that mining will never happen there because of conservation and cultural concern's
I have researched thru a lot of the legislation but as a layman the the acts such as the Environment Protection & Biodeversity Act 1999 are all pretty heavy reading but seem to suggest that approval for mining would be difficult
I was hoping that maybe you could give me your personal opinion on mining at Mt Gee and maybe some other contacts that would be informed on this subject
Thank's Your's Sincerely

The Reply

Thank you for your query. As you are aware Marathon Resources have been conducting exploration activities within the Mt Gee area, which occurs within the Arkaroola Sanctuary. Exploration and mining activities are permitted to occur within Sanctuaries in South Australia. Exploration for Uranium in the Mt. Gee area has occurred since the late 1960’s. It should be noted that Marathon Resources are in the early stages of exploration.

The Regulation and Rehabilitation Branch (of Minerals and Energy, PIRSA) are the regulatory authority for mining activities within South Australia. If Marathon Resources does decide to apply for a mining lease over the Mt Gee area, the proposal would be assessed via PIRSA’s standard regulatory consultation/assessment process. This requires consultation with relevant state government agencies, community groups and individuals. The proposal would also be referred to the Federal Department of the Environment and Heritage as the proposal would trigger the EPBC Act 1999 (likely reasons: Nuclear Action and Threatened Species and Communities). This would result in a Federal / State consultation/assessment process. Only after the standard regulatory consultation/assessment process is complete, would a decision to approve or reject a mining lease be made by appropriate state and federal government Ministers.

For further information on this matter please contact the Regulation and Rehabilitation Branch (PIRSA) on 8463 3112 or refer to the following website for further details concerning mineral exploration and mining in South Australia http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/sector5.shtml.

Kind Regards

Daniel Radulovic

Environmental Officer – Mining (DEH)

I know the reply is as much as I expected ie there been no opinion
but the regulatory conditions do seem quite restrictive and I personally think if Rupert is half correct it will be the EPBC act that stands in the way of mining at Mt Gee...pure speculation on my part...I sold at 1.16 I may live to regret it but the stress it was giving me trying to get to the bottom of this,I figured it was better redirecting my focus somewhere a little less controversial

powerkoala

27th-April-2006, 02:17 PM

Ouch...
This stock really got smashed... :banghead:
Still wont bail out....

YOUNG_TRADER

27th-April-2006, 02:32 PM

RickG

27th-April-2006, 03:55 PM

The problem with MTN, is that it is being traded on relatively low volumes. It seems to me it is the small investor (ie us) that is making the price fall, not the Institutions. As YT has said, I think the small investor is sick of waiting for the drilling reports, and can see better value by putting there money in other stocks.

Trouble is, now no matter how good the drilling reports maybe, I am worried people will not take notice, having moved on.

But anyway, I am just glad BKY is moving up today :)

Rick

PS. Yes I hold MTN.

powerkoala

28th-April-2006, 01:15 PM

Hm,...
Everyday got bashed 7%
How you feel ?
So cheap yet nobody want it....
Any idea now Young Trader?

YOUNG_TRADER

28th-April-2006, 01:27 PM

Stock is taking a beating, market seems to be Totaly Fed Up waiting for drilling,

I keep saying long term is great, but am going to use charts for buy signal short term,

Any lower is worrying, especially below 80c,

Like I said Power, LT is great, by far THE LOWEST EV Uranium player, short term chart suggests down-trend and lack of news will not help fix situation,

YOUNG_TRADER

28th-April-2006, 01:34 PM

Also you say so cheap, but the news they have now is the same as before when I first bought @ 60c (and have traded many times since taking profits), only thing that has changed is markets view on Uranium and spot price U3O8,

Support level I see, 80c, 75c, 65c, 55c

It will look cheap the lower it falls, how low will it go who knows?

Did anyone predict that Mega Uranium would take over HMR? I didn't,

Why HMR and not MTN? Who knows, they are both in South Aus and MTN has 33kt Uranium while HMR has none, MTN has IMO some of the best Uranium ground in South Aus, it also has the lowest EV per lb, yet no take over offers,

powerkoala

28th-April-2006, 01:43 PM

I think market just knock everything down today.
Even nice stock got bashed so why not MTN as well :D
Cheers :D

YOUNG_TRADER

1st-May-2006, 02:43 PM

Stock may have bottomed @ 80c, be interesting to watch,

Drill results are still not out, has jumped up today by 15%,

powerkoala

11th-May-2006, 09:40 AM

Result out
Finally :swear:

Jay-684

11th-May-2006, 10:11 AM

up 8.4% so far

very early days though, so who knows where it'll close

still a long way off the high I bought at! :(

powerkoala

11th-May-2006, 10:24 AM

Don't worry mate.
Patient is virtue.
At least now we can go NORTH :p:

YOUNG_TRADER

11th-May-2006, 11:41 AM

I suppose that as the company's name suggests, its a 'Marathon' But the company's management have done a ****e job IMO, due to the long delay and lack of news flow the stock began to drop and thus now when news is released there's not enough buyers to generate enough momentum to start upward trend, hence stock will face strong selling on the way up,

That + the fact that there will be little to no activity till the end of the year is telling me not to buy back in, but rather to wait for next Uranium Bull Run, like I always said you have to overlay technical with fundamental analysis.

An article or fat prophets commentary may cause short upward swing, but long term stock may drift back to 66c level.

Gspot

23rd-May-2006, 02:48 PM

Looks Like Y_T is correct on this stock drifting back to 66c. Unfortunately this amazing wisdom came after I bought in at 85c. :banghead:
Anyone out there know, what Marathon has planned for next?? Mt Gee?? Y_T??

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-July-2006, 11:11 AM

Wake up peeps!

Someone is finally seeing the value in MTN offmarket bid @ 68c

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-July-2006, 11:19 AM

Very opportunistic bid IMO,

As stated MTN has one of the largest undeveloped Uranium Resources in Australia, Approximately
33,000t U3O8 = 72.6M lbs Uranium,

@ their bid of 68c they are paying $33.5m for the company or an amazingly low 46c per lb of Uranium,

I Always said if they're EV per lb Uranium stayed so low you'd see a takeover bid sooner or later, well here it is, and they have timed it well, just after 2 corrections 1 in Uranium he other in the general Market, so they can put in such a cheap offer!

This stock was heavily backed by Fat Prophets @ $1 and Patersons as well lets see what they're analysts say regarding this offer, fair value? I don't think so

powerkoala

6th-July-2006, 11:22 AM

But still, this sp before was $1.375 and goes down since....
now up quite good. not enough to return profit for me yet... :D

michael_selway

6th-July-2006, 11:36 AM

But still, this sp before was $1.375 and goes down since....
now up quite good. not enough to return profit for me yet... :D

Do you think offer is a bit cheap/disgraceful?

I don't hold MTN but I do find the offer letter funny.

You should sell because they're no liquidity. Therefore I should sell my BHP, less liquid than MTN.

You should sell because project cost is multiple of market cap. Therefore I should sell all my exploration based shares in case they discover something and have to deveolp it.

You should sell because of uranium price risk. Therefore I should sell all of my commodities portfolio.

I'm glad I read that, could have saved me a fortune. Corporate lawyers, salt of the earth.

thx

MS

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-July-2006, 11:50 AM

Do you think offer is a bit cheap/disgraceful?

MS, I'm in Coporate Law and I'm not salt, I'm as sweet as sugar (So sweet I'll make your teeth rot! :D )

But yes this offer is disgracefully undervalued as I posted above,

Very opportunistic bid IMO,

As stated MTN has one of the largest undeveloped Uranium Resources in Australia, Approximately
33,000t U3O8 = 72.6M lbs Uranium,

@ their bid of 68c they are paying $33.5m for the company or an amazingly low 46c per lb of Uranium,

I Always said if they're EV per lb Uranium stayed so low you'd see a takeover bid sooner or later, well here it is, and they have timed it well, just after 2 corrections 1 in Uranium he other in the general Market, so they can put in such a cheap offer!

This stock was heavily backed by Fat Prophets @ $1 and Patersons as well lets see what they're analysts say regarding this offer, fair value? I don't
think so

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-July-2006, 12:02 PM

Here are the fundamentals for my reasoning, as stated in previous post (see my early posts on MTN) Avg EV per lb Australian Uranium Companies is $2.65

Now here Crosby is trying to buy MTN for 0.45c a lb so immediately how cheap does their offer seem, realistically they can double or even tripple their offer in terms of price so that the EV they pay rises to 90c per lb or $1.35c per lb and it would still be cheap, at $1.35c per lb (which would require a bid of around $2) they are still only paying half what the market avg is for a lb of Uranium,

I hope this all makes sense,

So in essence what Crosby are paying for is the resource (73m lbs) they should be paying at least $1 per lb if not $1.35 which requires $73m - $100m bid = $1.50 - $2

So we'll wait and see, one thing is for sure 68c is just too cheap

stockmaster

6th-July-2006, 12:06 PM

kennas

6th-July-2006, 12:08 PM

kgee

6th-July-2006, 12:12 PM

Hey YT this can't be the type of takeover you were thinking about????
Didn't they put the strangest spin on the reasons for takeover....
it was'nt all serious was it? :eek7:

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-July-2006, 12:15 PM

Please correct me if I'm wrong here but I think the reason they can get away with a lower bid atm is that mining will not be approved while the Labor Party has 3 mine policy. They could be buying something that can never actually operate! Where's the value in that?

Well if that were true, Mega should not have bid (and increased its bid by 300% eventually) for HMR

Stocks like NEL, ENR, AGS, VUL, SMM should command very low EV per lb mkt caps,

The key word when I was highlighting my EV per lb avg was Australian companies which is a very low $2.65 per lb,

For Example EME in NT gets well over $5 per lb because its in N.T.
PDN gets like $30 because its about to produce,

So no I don't think that 0.45c per lb is justifiable given its in S.A. the 2nd best place to be in Aus, and given that worse places like Qld and W.A. command $2.65 and even AGS operating in S.A. commands over $2 per lb

Its all comparative!

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-July-2006, 12:24 PM

Hey YT this can't be the type of takeover you were thinking about????
Didn't they put the strangest spin on the reasons for takeover....
it was'nt all serious was it? :eek7:

Well if I wanted to acquire an excellent asset, I'd wait as Captain Jack Sparrow says for the 'Opportune Time' which in the case of listed equities after a sevre correction and an exodus from investors in that sector (Uranium) I'd then put in the cheapest offer I could stating that it was at a premium to the Companies stock price (Which just happens to be at a 12 month low)

I'd then also seek to put out as much negativity so that un-informed investors were encouraged to accept the offer,

I think MS summed it up best

I don't hold MTN but I do find the offer letter funny.

You should sell because they're no liquidity. Therefore I should sell my BHP, less liquid than MTN.

You should sell because project cost is multiple of market cap. Therefore I should sell all my exploration based shares in case they discover something and have to deveolp it.

You should sell because of uranium price risk. Therefore I should sell all of my commodities portfolio.

I'm glad I read that, could have saved me a fortune. Corporate lawyers, salt of the earth.

kennas

6th-July-2006, 12:28 PM

I agree YT, it's the potential that is being bought, but with significant risk which Crosby outline well in the bidder statement. All part of the game I suppose.

Anyone gambling on a higher bid? The environment is ripe for it.

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-July-2006, 01:21 PM

To put it into perspective MTN has deposits with an in-situ value of $4.3b gross

Thats 72m lbs @ $45 us/lb @ 75c:1 excahnge rate

I'd be very very very suprised if 1 of 2 things didn't happen,

1. Company Rejects the offer (if they didn't I'd suspect foul play and would wish to know exactly who is bidding for it)

2. Another Major steps in and ups the Anti

YELNATS

6th-July-2006, 01:34 PM

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-July-2006, 01:41 PM

Who is Crosby and who do they really represent?

I think their low offer and the way they talk the company down is a bit shabby and lacks credibility.

As a holder of MTN I'm hanging out for a better bid from Crosby or a counter-bidder.

Crosby is the same group who went after Tethyan Copper, offering a very low bid for the company

"TAKE NO ACTION IN RELATION TO CROSBY’S OFFER
In the next day or two you should receive takeover documentation from Skafell Pty Ltd (the nominee
company that Crosby Capital Partners is using to make its unsolicited takeover Offer).
Your Directors remain convinced that Crosby’s Offer undervalues the Company and its assets and advise you
to take no action in relation to the Offer. We are working on our detailed response to Crosby’s Offer (our
Target’s Statement) and will send it to you within the next 14 days."

A serious offer appeared well above Crosby's that eventually won,

Look at it like this its downside is 68c, its upside is $1.50 - $2 IMO hence I jumped on board as soon as I saw take over bid because I like those odds, low downside, extremely high upside

56gsa

6th-July-2006, 01:49 PM

I seem to remember TOE was floated with one of its objectives to consolidate uranium interests in Australia - I wonder if TOE will start getting active in buying up other small uranium hopefuls?

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-July-2006, 02:19 PM

A response,

The bid will be rejected!!!!!!!!

Crosby bids for Marathon

Ben Sharples
Thursday, July 06, 2006

FRESH from its failed takeover bid for Tethyan Copper, Crosby Capital has popped up on the Australian resource radar again, this time with a $A33.4 million hostile bid for junior Marathon Resources. However, the Hong Kong-based investment bank may have a fight on its hands.

Under terms of the bid, Crosby has offered to buy all of Marathon's ordinary shares, including those to be issued on the exercise of outstanding options for 68c per share.

Marathon chief executive John Santich told MiningNews.net the bid clearly and significantly undervalued the company and the board would not be recommending its shareholders to sell at 68c.

In its bid to soften up shareholders, Crosby listed a number of "significant risks" to shareholders, including project development risk and significant capital funding requirements; regulatory uncertainty over uranium mining; concentrated commodity price risk; uncertainty over the management's capability to advance and develop projects; and lack of liquidity.

"Lots of those things are true, that's the nature of the minerals industry, nobody's arguing about that, we all know that, that is why you invest in companies that you hope make a discovery," Santich said.

"That is the nature of the business."

Santich described the concentrated commodity risk related to Marathon as a "furphy" and poured cold water over suggestions that the company's management was not capable of advancing and developing projects.

"The only uncertainty is we haven't developed our full development team, but quite clearly we have the skills and we have the track record in terms of developing projects," he said.

"As for the lack of liquidity, I'm not sure that that is true, I think there is a fair amount of turnover, I think that the only pointer that they have there is, who would want to sell with the stock plummeting to 50c.

"There are plenty of reasons for that – the end of the financial year, the state of the market generally, and the fact that we've had a bit of difficulty getting our assays in on time from the laboratories."

Santich said Crosby has taken the stock at a long-time low and applied a "fantastic" premium, but have failed to take a long-term view.

"They've done it before, they recognise value when they see it, they'll take it out, pull it apart and put it back in for $200 million and they'll have the profits instead of our shareholders," Santich said.

"I hope we can manage to demonstrate to shareholders there is value there, but on the other hand, it's good to see somebody come out of the woodwork and say 'hey, this stock is undervalued, let's buy it'.

"Let's face it, Crosby are not going to pay full value for anything, it's a banker's bid, and that's what you do when you're in that sort of business, you look for something that is undervalued and you try and buy it."

Marathon is exploring the Paralana mineral system in the North Flinders Rangers, which hosts the company's Hodgkinson and Mt Gee uranium deposits.

The advanced Mt Gee deposit has an inferred resource of 57 million tones at 0.06% uranium oxide for 33,000t of contained uranium oxide, while recent drilling at Hodgkinson returned hits of 23m at 0.15% uranium oxide, including 1m at 1.15%.

Marathon also has a portfolio of copper-gold-uranium properties in the Gawler Craton, South Australia, along with copper-gold properties in western Victoria.

Shares in the company, which hit a 52-week high of $1.45 in April, remained unchanged during morning trade at 55c, capitalising the company at $24 million.

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-July-2006, 03:11 PM

And there it is, the rejection!

What will Crosby do? Should be a fair bit of speculation in the air, I'd expect Fat Prophets and Patersons to make comments on the offer,

At least it throws the spotlight on this hugely undervalued company

RESPONSE TO CROSBY BID
The Board of Marathon has met to consider the announcement dated 5 July 2006 by Crosby
Capital Partners Inc (Crosby) that it intends to make a takeover bid for Marathon.
The Board believes the unsolicited bid to be opportunistic and significantly undervalues
Marathon’s assets and future prospects.
The bid is also heavily conditional and uncertain. The Crosby announcement only contains an
outline of conditions of the bid. The full terms of these conditions will be set out in the
Bidder’s Statement.
The directors of Marathon collectively control 22.8% of Marathon’s fully diluted issued
capital and do not intend to accept the proposed offer. This means the minimum acceptance
condition set out in Crosby’s announcement will not be able to be met and the proposed offer
cannot succeed unless this condition is waived or varied.
Directors advise shareholders to take no action in respect of Crosby’s announcement or
the offer, when it eventuates, until the board of Marathon provides its detailed response
in the target statement, which will be provided to all shareholders in accordance with
the statutory timetable after Crosby’s formal offer documents have been received by
Marathon.

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-July-2006, 03:59 PM

Small buyers scrambling to get on board before close,

Should be some very interesting articles in the paper tommorrow

kennas

6th-July-2006, 04:03 PM

One of those was me. :)

YOUNG_TRADER

7th-July-2006, 10:54 AM

One things for sure, this bid is NOT going to succeed, but given the time that Crosby has probably spent putting it together I wonder how quickly they will turn around and up the ante, they are silly if they really want the company they should put in a bid of $50m = $1 per share, still heavily undervalues the company but gets alot of shareholders going hmmmmm that sounds ok,

Marathon runner: uranium junior won't wear Crosby
Robin Bromby, Takeovers
July 07, 2006
MARATHON Resources, one of the nation's most promising uranium explorers, has vowed to defend itself against an unwelcome $33.4 million takeover bid from Hong Kong investment bank Crosby Capital Partners.
This is Crosby's second foray into the Australian market after its bid for Tethyan Copper failed miserably with the predator gathering very few acceptances.

The latest attempt looks like going down the same path.

Marathon's directors control almost a quarter of the shares and their pledge yesterday not to sell would stymie Crosby moving to full control even if substantial acceptances were received.

Crosby is offering 68c a share, which Marathon's board has said is opportunistic and significantly undervalues the company. Investors pushed the price up 21c yesterday to a close of 76c, still well down from Marathon's high of $1.45 in April.

Fat Prophets analyst Gavin Wendt cannot see the bid succeeding, partly because Crosby - as it did with Tethyan - is highlighting what it considers Marathon's shortcomings.

Crosby said Marathon's liquidity was poor, it had no proven uranium reserves, it could find it hard to raise development funds and the company was exposed to any fall in the uranium price.

"With all those problems, you wonder why they're interested in the company," Mr Wendt said.

A recent Fat Prophets report named Marathon as one of the best uranium juniors in Australia.

This was because it differed from most uranium juniors in this country on two counts. Marathon had a large, identified uranium resource that was growing in size. Second, the company was strategically located in South Australia, one of the only two jurisdictions (the other being the Northern Territory) sympathetic to uranium mining and where there were mines in operation.

Its Mt Gee deposit, northeast of Olympic Dam, has an inferred resource of 57 million tonnes at an average grade of 0.06 per cent uranium oxide - that's a total of 31,200 tonnes of uranium.

Crosby's statement said the offer would allow Marathon shareholders to realise full value without depressing the share price. But the target's chairman, Peter Williams, said the bid was heavily conditional and uncertain and yesterday's announcement contained only an outline of what Crosby would offer.

"The directors control 22.8 per cent of Marathon's fully diluted issued capital and do not intend to accept," he said.

This is the second bid this year for a South Australian uranium junior. Canada's Mega Uranium paid almost $20 million for Hindmarsh Resources through a bid launched in January.

YOUNG_TRADER

7th-July-2006, 02:17 PM

Hmmm MEGA seems hungry!

Over here boy, over here, look big JORC deposit, come on boy over here, nice juicy 72m lbs of Uranium

YOUNG_TRADER

9th-July-2006, 10:57 PM

Hmmm apparantly PDN's hungry too,

Also interesting to note, but if there are alot of holders who bought in when MTN was above say $1, it is highly unlikely that they would be happy with a bid below that level,
I am still supremely confiednt that someone else will make a bid around $1, where the auction goes from there I can't say

King coal
CRITERION
Tim Boreham
July 07, 2006
Marathon Resources (MTN) 76c
Excel Coal (EXL) $8.68
TAKEOVERS are always a fertile source of blarney, but we're intrigued about the "talk it down" tactics employed in two new resource sector bids. Unveiling US coal giant Peabody's $1.83 billion ($8.50 a share) offer for Excel Coal yesterday, Excel's management pretty much admitted the company's fortunes had peaked.

In the case of uranium hopeful Marathon, suitor Crosby Capital devoted nine pages to questioning whether Marathon could last the distance.

Readers were left to ponder why the Hong Kong merchant bankers actually want to buy Marathon, if it's as crappy as they portray.

In the case of Excel, management offered 2006-07 (current year) net profit guidance of $120 million.

Yes, that's up on the expected $95-100 million for 2005-06 but well short of market expectations of around $160 million.

While coal's gloss looks to be wearing thin, analysts have described Peabody's bid as insufficient.

According to Fat Prophets resource analyst Gavin Wendt, the offer should be more like $9.50 to $10.50 a share. "It seems to sell the company well short."

In the case of Marathon, Crosby's $33 million, 68c a share, bid either endorses the uranium sector's potential or confirms the naysayers' doubts.

Marathon's key deposit, Mt Gee in the Flinders Ranges, has an inferred resource of 33,000 tonnes of uranium oxide, but Crosby kindly notes the tenement is ranked within the lowest category.

"Any cash flow from development of the company's prospects will be subject to successful advancement of further exploration projects and feasibility, which would be several years away," Crosby says. Crosby estimates Marathon has spent $2.4 million to date in total, but that developing Mt Gee alone would cost $150 million.

Crosby insists it's providing the means for punters to exit an illiquid stock, one which has tumbled from its early April peak of $1.45 a share.

Uranium sceptic Criterion nominated Marathon as one of the better uranium explorers, assigning a SPECULATIVE BUY call at $1.07 on April 11.

So our thinking was right, but the timing was off.

Marathon yesterday described the Crosby offer as "unsolicited and opportunistic" and noted that, as directors held 22 per cent of the capital, Crosby's bid wouldn't succeed with its condition of 90 per cent minimum acceptance.

Fat Prophet's Wendt, a Marathon fan, notes that most investors would have got into Marathon at a higher price. "Psychologically no-one wants to sell out at a loss."

Criterion believes Marathon holders might as well HOLD.
We also rate Excel a HOLD. There's a good chance of a counter-bid, or of Peabody being forced to sweeten the offer.

56gsa

10th-July-2006, 05:13 PM

MTN Announcement today - Conclusion from technical presentation - suggests deposit could be more than 33,000t.... timely to be putting this out!

Conclusion:
1) Historical intellectual input provided the base for understanding of geology and U-mineralisation at Mt Painter - Mt Gee area. However, it has also led to mythical opinions limiting exploration and resource potential.
2) Tectogenetic and ore genesis studies provide new information allowing reidentification and re-definition of the nature of the mineralised system and revision of exploration and resource potential.
3) Tectonic deformation controlling mineralisation is secondary of nature resulting from rejuvenation of pre-existing structures. Kinematic analysis suggests the system is propagated from the basement and from NE towards SW.
4) PMS forms uniform, 11-12 km NE extending, structurally controlled U-rich mineral system. Tectonic genesis, internal complexity of the system and ore development main stage (coffinite-uraninite) indicate its epigenetic, hydrothermal nature. Origin of torbernite is seen as resulting from later epithermal stage.
5) At Mt Gee deposit alone inferred resource of about 57million tonnes at 0.06% for 33,200 tonnes U3O8 has been defined. Mineralisation extends along WNW – ESE structural trend and is modified by influence of N and NE oriented structures.
6) Recent Marathon drilling results (MN8-13) and assays from archival PIRSA drillings (MGD047a & 151) and the CRAE drill hole (GE49), confirm continuity of U-mineralisation (along WNW trend within about 20m thick breccia zone), and suggest an increase of grade and inferred resource also in the eastern part of the Mt Gee deposit, compared to previous estimates.7) Up to date, U-mineralisation has been identified near surface and shallower levels of the PMS. This has led to identification of Mt Gee, Hodgkinson, Armachair-Streitberg deposits and a number of prospects with presence of uranium mineralisation. Further strong exploration and resource potential exists at shallow levels and with depth as determined by geophysical and tectonic criteria.

YOUNG_TRADER

13th-July-2006, 03:26 PM

Breakout?

I had 80c as a resistance level (Highs reached in August 05, was base for launch in march 06, was tested as support in late april/may 06, and has provided resistance in the last week)

Techies your view?

kennas

13th-July-2006, 04:22 PM

I think too much depends on the takeover YT.

Could go anywhere.

They might accept $1.00, or someone else could come in and fight for it and it goes to $1.50.....Or, the offer is withdrawn and it goes back to .50c. :confused:

Realist

13th-July-2006, 05:00 PM

According to Fat Prophets resource analyst Gavin Wendt, the offer should be more like $9.50 to $10.50 a share. "It seems to sell the company well short."

Ridiculous. :banghead:

Not that I think MTN is a bad buy at all, quite the contrary, but for an analyst (who happens to own the stock, so is biased) to make such a claim as to value a stock 15 times what it is selling now for is criminal.

Hence why FAT (his company) is down 12% this year. They are a joke.

It is about as usefull as a doctor (more likely some old guy in a white coat) prescribing an abdominizer for health reasons.

kennas

13th-July-2006, 06:09 PM

Realist, I think you'll find Fat Prophets have beaten the market over the past few years.

The reason the listed company is down is because the general market is going OK and the rest of us think we can pick winners just as easily.

LICs will do better when the market gets tougher.

3 veiws of a secret

14th-July-2006, 12:49 PM

Postman Pat turned up today with an envelope from Marathon......
QU: When does Bill Crosby's offer cease?.....just cannot see this takeover lifting off. Are they MAD?

shinobi346

14th-July-2006, 08:03 PM

3 veiws of a secret

14th-July-2006, 09:06 PM

Of course it won't. Especially when they need 90%+ for it to go ahead and the directors who are strongly against the takeover hold +20%.

Crosby can bag MTN all they want and say how they are doing shareholders a favour by buying out their share but if MTN is so bad why do THEY want it?
Today 01:49 PM

Sure I understand what your saying ,but what's got me confused is ...Has Crosby done their homework,or are am I missing the obvious,where's the cutting edge twist for this takeover ? or is it as dumb as lifting the price to "X" say $1.00,if so it seems so amatuerish... :iamwithst

56gsa

15th-July-2006, 11:01 AM

Fat Prophets StockWatch: Marathon In Demand
July 13 2006 - Australasian Investment Review – (AIR)

Marathon Resources has released encouraging results from exploration drilling on its Mt Gee uranium project in South Australia that point to a likely upgrade in the resource base.
Unfortunately, speculative interest in uranium stocks has waned since earlier this year, during the hype associated with the landmark uranium supply deal signed between Australia and China.

This volatile sentiment unfortunately has overshadowed the very real achievements made by Marathon, which remains one of just a handful of Australian uranium hopefuls in our view with a meaningful prospect of achieving development status.

From an all-time high of $1.45 in April, Marathon has corrected sharply. Just as rallies often become overextended through irrational investor optimism, corrections frequently attract excessive pessimism.

In the case of Marathon, this has seen prices retreat to around 50 cents in the last week.

The company has just received a hostile takeover bid from Crosby Capital Partners, a Hong Kong-based merchant banking group, offering cash consideration of 68 cents a share.
While Crosby’s interest reflects the obvious attractions of Marathon’s uranium assets, we believe the bid is too low and is unlikely to succeed.

Marathon Resources represents a first-class emerging uranium opportunity.

Investors must be diligent and invest only in those uranium companies that have solid assets with a realistic possibility of achieving production status in the near future.

Two things differentiate Marathon from most Australian uranium hopefuls. Firstly, it possesses a large, identified uranium resource that is growing in size; and secondly, its resource is strategically located in South Australia, one of only two states in Australia currently sympathetic to uranium mining and that host uranium mines.

With an advanced and proven uranium resource located in a state with current support for uranium mining, Marathon Resources appears to be in the right place at the right time.

Despite the recent fall out in the uranium sector in Australia, the company has all of the fundamentals in place for long-term success.

Disclosure: Marathon is held in the Fat Prophets portfolio.

Copyright Australasian Investment Review.
AIR publishes a weekly magazine. Subscriptions are free at www.aireview.com.au

Realist

24th-July-2006, 07:17 PM

I own MTN and am not ramping it. Or even recommending it, do your own research.

But Beazley's "remove the no new mines policy" comments tonite will certainly cause a stir in the price of MTN I would guess. Particularly being in SA a sympathetic state.

With some company wanting to take them over for 68 cents a share a couple of weeks ago and with the price being about $1.30 a few months back and only 72 cents today it certainly seems to me it is going to rise tomorrow.

Realist

26th-July-2006, 02:19 PM

Well it is up to 77.5 today, so a pissweak 6.5% increase this week, depsite Uranium being up and Beazley's comments.

Alot of cautious people out there.. :o

YELNATS

26th-July-2006, 02:59 PM

A lot of cautious people or non-believers in Beazley's ability to change ALP policy. Regards YN.

Realist

26th-July-2006, 03:06 PM

The ALP policy will change, it is just a matter of when. I'm betting next year.

MTN is up nicely today. :)

3 veiws of a secret

26th-July-2006, 03:15 PM

A lot of cautious people or non-believers in Beazley's ability to change ALP policy. Regards YN.

Also I would add that the BIG fella from Perth ain't in power ,nor is Midnight Oil !
Still Crosby & Co ,might know something more about MTN then you & I .The plot thickens.

56gsa

4th-August-2006, 01:29 AM

Only just saw this 1 August Announcement , re joint ventures with UraniumSA over 3 of MTNs Central Gawler Craton licences. UraniumSA has also signed JVs with Stellar Resources (SRZ) over ground in the same area.

Arrangements are conditional on a UraniumSA successful IPO later this year, with SRZ and MTN shareholders getting priority, and SRZ & MTN getting shares in UraniumSA.

Zero response on market - but this would perhaps make Crosby bid at current levels even less likely?

YOUNG_TRADER

7th-August-2006, 09:26 PM

How long will it be before one of those 'Corporate Advisors' for a big Canadian miner like Laramide or Mega realise just how undervalued MTN,

I mean I was just looking through a report on RPT (couldn't attach but here's link http://rcresearch.com.au/documents/ ) and the second graph on page 2 shows MTN as having the 7th Largest JORC Deposit amongst the global Uranium Juniors, it shows Mega paying $100m for RPT's 25mlbs,

So how much is MTN's 75mlbs worth? The same $100m, logic would indicate more, around 3x more given size, however there maybe a higher percieved risk due to lack of confidence in the resource etc, so if an equally confident resource would be valued at $300m (3x RPTs $100m) then due to reduced confidence we apply what a 1/3 disc rate? That still gives $100m

I just don't get why companies like TOE enjoy mkt caps of 4x that of MTN when they are operating in the same area and guess what MTN has a resource and a bloody big one at that!

I've said it from day one, this company is cheap, damn cheap and its a matter of time before it gets snapped up, minimum the company is worth $100m = $2 per share, a succesful bid may have to be a shigh as $150 - $200m to win over directors.

So until a decent offer comes in we'll just have to sit and wait

YOUNG_TRADER

29th-August-2006, 11:29 AM

UBS has been buying up recently, now holds just under 6%

Good to see I'm not alone in my faith for this company

Realist

29th-August-2006, 11:41 AM

You are not alone, I hold quite a alot of MTN.

I'm very confident in MTN. Obviously they have alot of Uranium, but the takeover bid at 68c gave me the confidence to buy, and at 70c it is a bargain!

Keep holding.... ;)

Realist

30th-August-2006, 10:37 AM

Hmm, up from .695 to .765 in the past few days.

10% rise, is something happening? :confused:

YOUNG_TRADER

30th-August-2006, 11:12 AM

Yep,

UBS released today exactly how thy've gone about getting a 6% interest,

On marekt purchases AFTER THE TAKE OVER BID, KEY WORD AFTER!

They're buying anything on market in small chomps so as not to alert the mkt to it, sellers are starting to thin out + anyone who may have been a seller realises that they can wait to see how high UBS will chomp up to,

Something is definately up

Realist

30th-August-2006, 11:17 AM

Archinos

30th-August-2006, 12:52 PM

New resource estimate just out.

YOUNG_TRADER

30th-August-2006, 01:03 PM

This is their 3rd re-estimate and the mkt just doesn't seem to care,

@ cut-off of 300ppm (which is what all the majors ie PDN are using) there's 30kt's+ U3O8 in the ground,

@ $48us/lb and 75c US/AUD exchange =

30,000 x 2,200 x ($48/0.75c) = $4,224,000,000

Thats right in ground value of $4.2Billion

Whats MTN's current mkt cap? around $35m

So lets see $35m MKT CAP VS $4.2Billion in ground value of 1 of 4 deposits

When will this get it proper value (At least $100m) attributed to it?

Archinos

30th-August-2006, 01:13 PM

When will this get it proper value (At least $100m) attributed to it?

I don't know, but I want it to stay off the radar so I can buy more! :)
Perhaps they need someone more local doing the estimates. Eitherway, they need to drill it more & I see this and the 2 previous rpts re:substancial holders as v+ve news. Glad to see they've dropped reference to 'tectonogenic analysis' as all it appears to be is standard structural analysis.

Realist

30th-August-2006, 01:24 PM

Patience my friends.

If we can hold over a year and make a 10 bagger, our taxes are halved...

Alot depends on the Labour Party mining policy in SA I suppose. That is to be decided early next year isn't it?

Archinos

30th-August-2006, 01:26 PM

Well with the news that Uranium One has given the go ahead for development of their Honeymoon deposit in SA (unless I read the Miningnews report wrong...), "Thunderbirds are go!" for SA already...

Realist

30th-August-2006, 01:33 PM

Well with the news that Uranium One has given the go ahead for development of their Honeymoon deposit in SA (unless I read the Miningnews report wrong...), "Thunderbirds are go!" for SA already...

Wow, that is interesting, I have noticed Uranium shares mostly rise a little in the past two days.

Can you please post that article?

kennas

30th-August-2006, 01:39 PM

Yeah, saw that report too. Isn't it one of the three that Labor had approved those many moons ago?

MTN looking ok atm.

Archinos

30th-August-2006, 02:01 PM

from Miningnews.net.
AUSTRALIA is set to get its fourth uranium mine with sxr Uranium One giving the green light to the development of the Honeymoon project in South Australia, 34 years after the discovery of the deposit.

The development of the Honeymoon project is expected to cost $US41.5 million ($A54 million) including $5.6 million for working capital costs, and produce 400 tonnes of uranium oxide annually over a life of six to seven years. Cash operating costs are pegged at $14.13 per pound of uranium oxide.

Capital expenditure and cash operating costs have increased on a 2004 feasibility estimate of $24.6 million and $12.40 per pound, respectively.

The project has a net present value of $37.7 million at an 8% discount and an internal rate of return of 40%, applying a flat uranium price of $46.50/lb over the life of the project. The uranium spot price is currently $48.50/lb.

The development decision comes after a review of a 2004 Ausenco feasibility study by Mayfield Engineering and Aker Kvaerner Australia and a revised mineral resource estimate compiled by Adelaide-based Ore Reserve Evaluation Services.

Extraction of the yellowcake will be via in situ leaching and the project is fully permitted with a mining licence in effect for 20 years. sxr Uranium One said it plans to finance the project with a mix of finance from debt and internal sources.

In addition, sxr Uranium One has revised the indicated resource to 1.2 million tonnes at 0.24% uranium oxide for 2900t.

The company said while the grade of the deposit has increased from 0.11%, the resource has reduced by 12%, with the company excluding a number of thin, low-grade intercepts believed not amenable to ISL mining.

Honeymoon is expected to come online in 2008....

I haven't chased up details re when they got permitted, however I don't think it's too long a bow to drawn in saying that the development should give substantial impetus to the push for further U mining activity (in SA at least).

Archinos

30th-August-2006, 02:11 PM

and from ABC online...

Australia's fourth uranium mine is a step closer, with resources company Uranium One approving development at its Honeymoon site in the far north-east of South Australia.

Honeymoon was granted a 20-year licence under the previous Liberal state government, and is now waiting on final approval from the Environment Protection Authority.

Uranium One's Greg Cochran says he is confident of getting that approval before production starts in early 2008.

"The current State Government has been very supportive during the approvals process," he said.

"The standards that both the South Australian and Federal governments set are extremely high."

Honeymoon will be Australia's smallest uranium mine, and will employ about 50 people.

Uranium One has already secured markets for its yellowcake uranium in Europe and in North America.

Realist

30th-August-2006, 03:11 PM

It is 78 cents now.

Up 8.5 cents or 12% in a couple of days.

Definately something going on...

dangerman

30th-August-2006, 03:26 PM

PARALANA MINERAL SYSTEM
MT GEE DEPOSIT: REVISED ESTIMATES DEMONSTRATE
HIGHER GRADE RESOURCE
HIGHLIGHTS
1. NEW ASSESSMENT CONFIRMS SUBSTANTIAL INFERRED
RESOURCE AND HIGHER GRADE OF THE MT GEE DEPOSIT
(KRIGING METHOD WITH RIGOUROUS YAMAMOTO CORRECTION *)
(a) CUT OFF GRADE 1,000ppm YIELDS 10.1Mt @ 0.133% U3O8 FOR
AROUND 13,500t U3O8
(b) CUT OFF GRADE 500ppm YIELDS 25.4Mt @ 0.081% U3O8 FOR
AROUND 20,600t U3O8
(c) CUT OFF GRADE 300ppm YIELDS 45.6Mt @ 0.068% U3O8 FOR
AROUND 31,250t U3O8
(COMPARES WITH 59.0Mt @ 0.062% U3O8 FOR AROUND 36,650t U3O8
USING ORDINARY KRIGING METHOD)
2. FULLY FUNDED DRILLING PROGRAM AIMING TO UPGRADE
TO INDICATED/MEASURED RESOURCE SCHEDULED TO START
LATER THIS YEAR
3. MINING SCOPING STUDY PLANNED TO COMMENCE EARLY 2007
4. ORE GENESIS STUDIES: URANINITE (UO2) DOMINATES MT GEE
MINERALISATION INDICATING SIMPLER EXTRACTION PROCESS

dubiousinfo

30th-August-2006, 04:23 PM

Couldn't SA Govt give the next U mine approval to an Australian company. :(

havingfun

30th-August-2006, 04:28 PM

South Africans could probably say the same thing...plenty to go round

Realist

30th-August-2006, 04:31 PM

Couldn't SA Govt give the next U mine approval to an Australian company. :(

Ridiculous isn't it!! :banghead:

Archinos

30th-August-2006, 04:41 PM

Perhaps, but then again it is this exact situation that has given rise to the current opportunities :)

havingfun

30th-August-2006, 05:08 PM

UBS are not ur average corner co-op/building society..Give it time

56gsa

30th-August-2006, 10:55 PM

UBS appear to be buying on behalf of Australian hedge fund MM&E Capital (http://www.mmecapital.com.au)... according to their website they have a 3-6 month horizon on takeover arbitrage so i guess they're looking to for an increase in Crosby bid or rival bid... given they've be buying at less than 80, not sure what prioce they would look to be selling at?

Archinos

31st-August-2006, 10:25 AM

Nice one 56
I also noticed that they're into IPOs, so perhaps it's a double pronged stratergy since MTN holders will also be eligible for the Uranium SA float - if it goes like any of the others as of late, might there be the chance of a very neat & quick return once floated?

dj_420

31st-August-2006, 11:08 PM

im in on 0.75, got in right before the ann re deposit rerating. this stock shows huge potential. i agree with YT, why all the interest in AGS when MTN has much more u and it is 100% owned. as well as that MTN has other tennements also. what the?? market has completely overlooked this little stock i believe. so am happy to get in at mid 70's.

besides that what does everyone think about the upcoming float UraniumSA. Im in the progress of looking through the prospectus. let me know what others think about it.

Realist

1st-September-2006, 10:29 AM

Told you something was up. 83 cents now!!!

Ironically on September 1st - I entered MTN in Augusts stock tipping comp. :o

Realist

1st-September-2006, 10:31 AM

86 cents now! Wow...

Up 16 cents or 23% from last week.

Rafa

1st-September-2006, 10:59 AM

the volume is absolutely tiny!!!

kennas

1st-September-2006, 11:03 AM

the volume is absolutely tiny!!!

And buyers disappearing quickly. Strange. I'm grabbing some though.

YOUNG_TRADER

1st-September-2006, 11:14 AM

The key is to see what UBS is doing,

If next week they announce a change to their holding and it shows that they have been buying more, it will all depend on price,

If they have in fact been buying above 80c, that will be extremely bullish, however I'd expect that they are smarter than that, knowing that there will be weak hands they can still IMO soak up more weak sellers around the mid 70c level,

Depending on how it closes and opens next week, from a techie perspective it looks very bullish, 80c has been the lid on MTN corresponding to the highs reached last august, re-tested this July, and smashed through on vertical ascent in march 06,

Kennas, a chart please, with a strong lid drawn at 80c from Aug 05- to now should show what I'm on about, if you have the time, thanks

Anyway as the companies name suggest it will be a 'marathon' not a 'sprint' ;)

kennas

1st-September-2006, 11:21 AM

2 year weekly. Pretty clear resistance at $0.80. Let's hope it holds above, then onward and upward!

Interesting pennant on the long weekly, not really clear on the 6 mth daily.

Realist

1st-September-2006, 11:21 AM

Anyway as the companies name suggest it will be a 'marathon' not a 'sprint' ;)

Exactly!! That is why I bought it. I'm not in for a quick buck, I'm in for a longterm fortune.. :)

dj_420

3rd-September-2006, 02:29 PM

Hey guys take a look at this, these figures are worked out by a company market capitalisation divided by the tonnage of u that stock owns.

eg summit 280 000 000 / 40 000 (estimate u tonnes) = $7 000
which is undervalued when compared to other u stocks.

BUT when we do the same for MTN
market captialisation of 40 000 000 / 31 250 (tonnes in mt gee) = $1 280

DID i do these calculations correctly??
because from what i can see MTN is obscenely undervalued, it is so undervalued it is not funny. DOes anyone want to check these figures to make sure im not wrong

COMPANY COMPARISONS

ORD MINNETT

URANIUM REPORT ERA

Attached is Ord Minnett's Company Review dated 11 July 2006 on Australian Uranium Producer ERA.

Table 4 compares a number of uranium companies market value of A$ per tonne U3O8 based on their uranium reserves and resources.

Summary Table 4

COMPANY Valuation A$/tU3O8

AREVA $75,084

PALADIN $56,520

DENISON $46,558

CAMECO $29,314

SRX URANIUM $10,224

ERA $9,818

SUMMIT $6,932

MARATHON $1,280

An analysis of Ord Minnett's table indicates, based on companies uranium reserves and resources, Summit's share price on a comparative basis, should be over 10x its current price when compared to AREVA, over 8x its current price when compared to Paladin, around 7x when compared to Denison and 4x times when compared to Cameco.

Further, the quality of Summit's uranium resources in terms of grade and tonnes and proximity to existing mining infrastructure, translate directly into Summit becoming one of the world's lowest cost uranium producers with high margin profitability.

Alan J Eggers Managing Director
SUMMIT RESOURCES LIMITED

YOUNG_TRADER

4th-September-2006, 11:14 AM

May have popped above 80c level, (not yet confirmed)

If so new base at 80c (previous 68c which was T/O offer)

Be interesting to see if UBS are still buying now that price is above 75c,

shinobi346

4th-September-2006, 09:15 PM

A thick booklet from crosbys was on my doorstep when I got home this evening. I immediately chucked it in the wheelie bin. They can waste some other persons time but not mine.

dj_420

4th-September-2006, 09:34 PM

Support seems to be building around the 80 cent mark, a few times the sp gapped but buyers filled in the gap.

i would have thought that if sp movements last week was JUST because of jv with USA and MTN holders are offered a priority of the float then it would have retraced already (friday been the last day).

MTN up 3% today, in general most u stocks across the board were up due to increase in spot price. MTN has begin to show some nice movement (if not slow but steady) in sp.

dj_420

4th-September-2006, 09:43 PM

i forgot to ask has anyone been looking at acquiring USA shares in this float due to MTN having a priority??

i had a look over tennements, some interesting grades at ben buy tennement 0.12 - 0.18% u. and port lincoln with 4.6 kg/t.

56gsa

4th-September-2006, 10:14 PM

420 - had a quick look - interesting because of the JVs they have formed with MTN & SRZ - and also a lot of the prospects are in the same area. But then the Board doesnt stick out as having huge experience in the development of U.?

As a MTN holder it would be good for uSA to rocket, and do well - but then thats just hoping. I think it was uSA also said they would be issuing SHs free options about 3 months down the track - obviously a strategy to get people to hold..

Did you look at UKL's prospects at all - they did well today altho some on the thread thought little of their holdings? Be interesting to compare.

YOUNG_TRADER

5th-September-2006, 10:33 AM

This Uranium Sa float has got some serious backer behind it, I didn't realise,
Have a read

Chinese join the uranium search
Email Print Normal font Large font By BARRY FitzGERALD
September 5, 2006

Advertisement
AdvertisementChina'S interest in Australian uranium from existing mines has been extended to its participation in potential new discoveries resulting from the uranium exploration boom.

The $6 million float of Adelaide-based UraniumSA yesterday has Chinese investors among its seed capital investors and Xu Gang, the Australian representative of China's monopoly uranium buyer, Chinese National Nuclear Corp, on its board.

UraniumSA managing director Russel Bluck said having Mr Xu on the board represented CNNC's first active interest in uranium exploration in Australia. He noted that CNNC was not a "direct" holder in the company.

Mr Xu is a non-executive director, as is Alice McCleary, a member of the Takeovers Panel. The chairman is Tom Phillips, former chief executive of Mitsubishi Australia and a director of Australia Post.

UraniumSA's focus is on the uranium potential of South Australia, home to three of Australia's four uranium mines and advanced projects - Olympic Dam, Beverley and Honeymoon.

The group has secured more than 7500 square kilometres of exploration ground in what it calls the Gawler Craton uranium province, with much of the package contributed by listed groups Stellar Resources and Marathon Resources.

Stellar shareholders will get a preferential offer for 14.73 million UraniumSA shares at the issue price of 20¢ and Marathon shareholders 6.26 million shares. That would leave about 9 million shares available to the public. Sponsoring broker is Melbourne's Lands Kirwan Tong.

UraniumSA's main exploration properties are in the Kingoonya palaeo-drainage system. Other explorers that have taken up ground in the area are Toro and Heathgate, operator of the Beverley mine in SA's Curnamona Craton.

The area has the potential for sediment-hosted uranium deposits amenable to in-situ leach extraction, similar to that used at Beverley.

YOUNG_TRADER

5th-September-2006, 02:58 PM

I've been thinking,

Given that this Xu Gang chap (Aus rep for Chinese National Monopoly Uranium Company) is on the board and was a seed investor in UraniumSa, he is surely well versed with MTN and its huge deposit,

I see this as a big thing as he must also be aware that a very low Hostile T/O offer has been put in, I wonder if Mr Xu likes what he sees at MTN? ?

newbie investor

5th-September-2006, 05:50 PM

I felt people here are positive about JV with UraniumSA. However, I don't share the same view with them.

I wonder why Marathon Resources and Stellar would agree the JVs with UraniumSA. They gave UraniumSA 70% equity for those minerals but only get a tiny proportion of shares from USA. It's not a fair deal at all.

I also concern cash flow problem. I'm not sure when Marathon can start to make a profit. I think current cash level can only last for 1 year. That means Marathon will need to issue placement to outsider and dilute shareholding from current investor.

The ideal situation for me is Crosby raise its bid to higher level and we sell our shares to them. If no new bidder and Crosby bid is collasped, Crosby and MM&E Capital will sell out all their shares. I fear the price will fall down to lower than 50c in that case.

dj_420

5th-September-2006, 06:04 PM

Realist

5th-September-2006, 06:05 PM

I too got the booklet and offer from Crosby recently.

I was disapointed the booklet paper was glossy and the paper was hard, it made for poor toilet paper indeed.

newbie investor

5th-September-2006, 07:42 PM

newbie

i think you are underestimating MTN. a placement around $1 is not going to dilute these shares much. there are only 50 million of them to start with!!!!
say they need another 15 million to continue exp for a year, that is only another 15 - 16 million shares on issue.

if they get 70% then obviously the tennements are in areas completely unexplored. why risk a potload of money when you already have a huge resource.

as for cash flow, YES it is going to be years before MTN see a profit but that is because they arent allowed to mine their resource yet.

look at mt gee, its 100% owned and has almost 70 million pounds of u.
that is a company maker for an exploration company.

if crosby raise their bid i am still not selling out. i think the majority of the shareholders want to see MTN go right through to production stage. i am not selling out, this is a long term investment for me.
It's simply unrealistic to expect a placement of $1 a share. If the bid from Crosby collasped, current price isn't sustainable. Given market capitialisation of MTN, even a placement of $1 per share can have considerable dilutive effect.

If Crosby can offer a reasonable price and I expect that the price of MTN will fall sharply when Crosby withdraw from the bid, I don't see a reason to reject the offer. I won't reject them only because they are foreign based company.

I never doubt technical abilities of MTN for mining. But since the setup of JVs with UraniumSA, I doubt MTN has enough expertise to deal with financial issue. I'm inclined to cash in for a good price.

YOUNG_TRADER

5th-September-2006, 09:29 PM

Hmmmm I smell a rat, newbie you work for Crosby? ? ?

Mate on a serious note, they have spun out assets which aren't getting any attention, its what good management does so they can focus their attention on the one area,

Mt Gee is one of several deposits, last I checked the company had $4m or so in the bank which will be enough for at least 6 months more of drilling,

Their previos placement was @ 66c, so if they placed say 10m shares @ 68c = say $6.5m after costs they have enough cash to get pre-feasibility completed

That would take mkt cap from 55m shares to 65m,
Also re "The ideal situation for me is Crosby raise its bid to higher level and we sell our shares to them. If no new bidder and Crosby bid is collasped, Crosby and MM&E Capital will sell out all their shares. I fear the price will fall down to lower than 50c in that case."

Crosby don't have any MTN shares, only an idiot would accept their offer, read this thread thoroughly to get an idea of what type of operators Crosby are, they're vultures who seek out highly undervalued companies and try and swoop,

If the bid fails who knows what will happen, for now MTN has started to come back under the spotlight,

I reckon in the next 6months we'll see an offer of $2 per share = $100m (what was paid for RPT)

nizar

5th-September-2006, 09:36 PM

YT,

do u hold MTN?

if yes, then a good chance (only chance IMO) to get ur hands on uraniumSA float... With one of their directors a CNNC representative; and some media coverage already; it will be a winner i reckon... and open at a massive premium... i think public offer have no chance

YOUNG_TRADER

5th-September-2006, 09:40 PM

50,000 MTN, bought at 72c day of the T/O offer,

Previously rode from 60c to $1.35 :D

radio-active man

5th-September-2006, 10:54 PM

If the ar*e end of the sp falls through as suspected by youngtrader my cheque book will be open to pick up the pieces. I am sure that I will not be only one. Manipulation is a wonderful tool of the money men.

This is a longterm play; Mt Gee is arguably the 4th largest known deposit in Australia and is situated in SA. (Refer article below)

Sell at your own peril. Good luck at finding Mt gee in the article below. Just like everything about MTN, it is all there to see but you really have to look hard to find it.

Probably just the way I like it. As all of a sudden this is going to explode. People are going to wake up and are going to see through all the garbage and lies about this one.

Who else is going to apologies for their negative tirades and then offer to buy the company or withdraw their criticism of the way they JORC'd the resource.

Crosby's offer, (btw went straight into the bin) reworded.

Your company is garbage, your management is garbage, the resource probably isn't there or isn't worth that much but hey coz we are such good guys we are willing to buy the company of you.

As if, this is a scam on the grandest scale.

These shares are being handed down to my grandkids and further down my lines. I will be adding to my holding at every opportunity. the Uranium boom has not even begun.

One thing to think about.

If Australia has 1/3 of the worlds Uranium reserves add up the table below and see how long the our uranium reserves will last. (http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2006/uranium_resources.html)
85 years is one estimate. We first run out of oil, gas and then Uranium. What's left to sustain the worlds growing poulation.

Amazing how shortsighted I have been in the past. Not anymore.

August 2006

Australia's Uranium Deposits and Prospective Mines

Summary of Resources Available in Major Deposits and Prospective Mines Deposit Grade U3O8 Contained U3O8 category

Jabiluka, NT 0.52% 67 000 t reserves
plus: 0.39% 21 000 measured & indicated resources
0.48% 75 000 inferred resources

Beverley 4 mile ??? > 50,000T??

Koongarra, NT 0.8% 14 540 t reserves
Mt Fitch, NT 0.046% 4 050 t resources

Angela, NT 0.1% 10 250 t resources

Bigrlyi, NT 0.14% 5 200 t resources

Nolans Bore, NT 0.02% 3977 t resources

Kintyre, WA 0.15-0.4% 36 000 t reserves & resources

Yeelirrie, WA 0.15% 52 500 t indicated resources

Mulga Rock, WA 0.14% 13 300 t resources

Manyingee, WA 0.09% 12 000 t resources

Oobagooma, WA 10 700 t inferred resources

Lake Maitland, WA 0.03% 7900 t resources

Lake Way, WA 0.054% 4600 t resources
Centipede, WA 0.063% 4400 t resources
Thatchers Soak, WA 0.03% 4100 t resources
Honeymoon, SA 0.42m%, 0.24% 2900 t indicated resources
Billeroo West (Gould Dam), SA 0.045%, 0.33 m% 2 500 t indicated resources
Prominent Hill, SA 0.012% 9900 t inferred resources
Mt Gee, SA 0.073% 33,000 t inferred resources

Crocker Well, SA 0.048% 8 576 t resources
Curnamona, SA ? ?
Valhalla, Qld 0.077% 16 900 t indicated resources
9 000 t inferred resources

Skal, Qld 0.119% 5000 t resources
Andersons Lode, Qld 0.143% 6500 t inferred resources
Westmoreland, Qld up to 0.2% 22 500 t inferred resources
Ben Lomond, Qld 0.25% 4 760 t resources
Maureen, Qld 0.123% 2940 t resources

This table was updated with April 2006 data from Geoscience Australia. Figures may differ from older ones in the text, and not all deposits are written up below.
Note that information on Ranger, Olympic Dam and Beverley are in a separate paper.
See also paper on Uranium Exploration in Australia.

dj_420

5th-September-2006, 11:01 PM

newbie investor

6th-September-2006, 01:53 AM

hey newbie, ill buy your shares in MTN if you dont want em

honestly i think you are an absolute fool to sell this stock.
there is no value in buying a share and selling out at the first sign of a takeover. do you hold any shares for long term?

what exactly do u see wrong with MTN.

COuld it be the fact that they have a defined JORC resource of 70 million pounds (which in fact is larger than many u producers deposits and they still have other tennements for exp) or is it the fact that they only have 45 million shares on issue.

how many shares do you think are needed to dilute stock.

take a look at EXT almost a billion shares on issue and have not even defined a resource. now to raise capital to finish defining deposit the issues WILL dilute that stock. you do realise that it actually takes capital to define a deposit and begin mining.

NOW look back at MTN they have a huge resource and ONLY 45 million shares on issue. this share would be great value even with 150 million shares on issue

If you can find a stock that has a deposit the same size and only 5 million shares on issue so YOU dont have your dillution pls let me know.

You realise that SMM has 200 million shares on issue and that is considered very small for the advanced state they have drilled their deposits up to
If I sell it higher than market price to you, you are fool.
If I sell it lower than market price, I'm fool.
If I sell it to you at market price, why don't I sell it at market?

I doubt you're working for MTN :D . You always emphasize the value of resources. You seem to neglect the cost of development and the risk that those projects may not bring into production.

My advise is: If the offer is higher than current price, ACCEPT it. If the offer is lower than current price, REJECT it. I think this decision rule is much more sensible than yours. I don't prepare to accept 68c offer but I hope they will raise it soon.

I studied finance in UNSW and not an expert of mining. I may not judge the potential of the mineral system as good as you. I only know that if everything is as certain as what you said, MTN doesn't need to spend so much to upgrade the resources. And the stock price would be 10 times more already.

dj_420

6th-September-2006, 08:33 AM

look at every single australian u stock with significant deposit

they should all be 10x
AGS
SMM
MTN

many more but i dont know all of them

i have studied finance also and for political reasons, which is a macroeconomic influence on the market these stocks are undervalued. i see value in long term rather than a quick offer today.

these political influences will soon change, ie policy change, we now have news articles that are talking about nuclear enrichment. so attitude is changing, by the time next year comes around everyone will be saying reverse the three mines policy BUT we wont allow enrichment.

BY the time the policy changes U spot price will be $65 - 70 plus. it is an exciting time in aust for any company who has a significant u desposit

THAT is all we need, policy change.

i know that about the market price i was just trying to make a point. i dont see the point in selling out and then having a policy reversal next year which will give the good u companies a good 2x boost at minimum. i would feel like a right fool if i sold out now at $1 and then see the policy reversed next year and accelerate to $3 +

what do you see as fair value on this stock, we are well below our highs for the last year.

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-September-2006, 02:57 PM

Interesting write up on new float UraniumSa

http://www.fnarena.com/index2.cfm?type=dsp_newsitem&n=8143A82F-17A4-1130-F531368BCB1ED984

Hope the link works

Realist

6th-September-2006, 04:02 PM

MTN got beaten like a bongo drum today. Down 9 points. Why?

Something is up, is someone manipulating the price or something?

Is Crosby buying any shares itself outside of the offer? What happens if Crosby get 51% of MTN, what does that mean for us? What it they get 89% or 90% what happens?

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-September-2006, 04:15 PM

Realist,

MTN is a buy and wait for a higher offer play,

Don't focus on day to day fluctuations too much,

Was a bit suprised to see it jump above 80c so easily and now fall through so easily (so much of resistance/support)

They need 90% before they can do a forced T/O as directors hold 20%+ this won't happen,

So only way for a T/O to succeed is for directors to ok it,

This is a buy and wait for $2 for me, unless I really need the money for a better punt

Regards

Realist

6th-September-2006, 04:23 PM

Rafa

6th-September-2006, 04:46 PM

This MTN is driving me nuts...
Switched out of AVO couple of days ago (after a tidy profit) into MTN... :mad: :mad: :mad:

oh well.... gotta love trading!

if the offer is $2bucks i'll be selling... :rolleyes:

YOUNG_TRADER

6th-September-2006, 07:52 PM

I totally agree Young Trader, I was just checking though. ;)

There's something more to this than meets the eye I think. I suspect Crosby have moved their first pawn. They'll make a big move soon for say $1.40 or they'll run off and try their silly games with another company. I don't seriously expect they ever thought they could buy MTN for 68c, it is merely their first of many moves.

One thing that is for sure, no-one will take the 68c offer.

Agree Realist,

Of note is the fact that to put a T/O offer together like Crosby has done requires research time, meetings, finance approvals, etc ALL = TIME = FEES, lawyers fees + accountnats fees + bankers fees + advisors fees and so on,

Usually can cost 1-2% of the deal, 2% of $30m = $600k so they'll at least up the offer before they walk away, else they'll cop a loss, both in money and in terms of reputation, which when operating in Hong Kong is far more important.

Crosby will become know as the dog that always loses its fight

shinobi346

8th-September-2006, 12:05 PM

Beethoven

8th-September-2006, 12:31 PM

Has anybody got their priority app form yet? I've been checking the letterbox everyday after work but haven't received anything except evil bills. The offer opened on Monday and on a first in first served basis, you can understand why I am getting pretty anxious.

I got a letter saying investors are encouraged to buy into the IPO and get the application form on the uraniumSA website. :)

shinobi346

8th-September-2006, 12:46 PM

I got that letter, but the way I read it was the propectus would be sent to us soon. The one on USA's website is only for the general public. The priority form needs to be sent to us because it confirms eligibilty for the offer.

Either we've both lost it in the mail or it's slow getting to us. Kinda sucks when the priority offer is already open for applications and its processed on a first in first served basis and and all I can do here is sit here and wait for the form to arrive.

Beethoven

8th-September-2006, 12:48 PM

Gspot

8th-September-2006, 01:04 PM

I've spoke to Marathon and the prospectus doesn't go out till the 12th.

powerkoala

8th-September-2006, 01:47 PM

I just print the prospectus at UraniumSA website and sent them on Wednesday. Doesnt it count ?
I m holding MTN, but can't wait that long for the prospectus to arrive on 12 Sept.
Hope they accept it.

shinobi346

8th-September-2006, 07:02 PM

Thanks for that Gspot. So we effectively only have the 12th-29th to respond to the offer. Maybe they should change the start date of the priority offer for MTN shareholders to the 12th then. :banghead:

powerkoala - You'll still be in line to get the shares but I don't think they will know/acknowledge you are eligible for the priority offer. Using that form puts you in a different queue than using the blue and yellow forms MTn and the other mob are/should be sending out.

I'll be pissed off if there are MTn shareholders signing up for the offer already using a form they got by other means.

Realist

14th-September-2006, 10:37 AM

Up 7 cents, or 9% today.

Certainly MTN is a chance for traders to buy on dips and sell on peaks these past few weeks.

It wont go below 70c I would not have thought cause of the takeover offer at 68 cents.

So when/if it dips again I may buy in.

YOUNG_TRADER

14th-September-2006, 11:03 AM

I think people are taking more notice of MTN given what PNN managed in terms of MOU,

I doubt MTN will do similar because those MOU's with Sino require them to have a majority control of 60% or more and most companies don't see that as good value (JMS)

But I reckon when a major offers you a JV you take it, beggers can't be choosers!

Realist

14th-September-2006, 11:05 AM

you got your USA offer yet YoungTrader?

I assume you are going to take it up... :confused:

YOUNG_TRADER

14th-September-2006, 11:58 AM

I got it last week, already sent it off ages ago....... Haven't you guys got yours yet??????????

Just joking, nope haven't got it yet, a bit edgy like you guys becuase its a first in first serve basis,

C'mon Postie!!!!!!!!!

Plan B

14th-September-2006, 12:38 PM

Just got my USA blue priority form and prospectus.

It looks like B/pay can be used with the blue form...and you dont have to post the blue application form back ......hope mine goes through in time...lol

Realist

14th-September-2006, 12:52 PM

Is there a mad rush for the priority spots though? :confused:

I'm not so sure there is!

Plan B

14th-September-2006, 12:59 PM

Mad rush?? ..... No

But as YT has said , First in first served... :)

YOUNG_TRADER

14th-September-2006, 01:09 PM

Plan B what was the priority allotment type ie 1:3 1:5 1:6 1:10????

They haven't said how they're doing it,

Beethoven

14th-September-2006, 01:39 PM

Plan B what was the priority allotment type ie 1:3 1:5 1:6 1:10????

They haven't said how they're doing it,

hi YT,

i got my form just not too long ago. All u get is a form that looks almost identical to the public offer form and the prospectus on the uraniumSA website. Doesn't really say much on the prority allotment.

Hope that helps

dj_420

14th-September-2006, 02:13 PM

i still havent received my priority form :(
i think the whole system is pretty unfair, insto's would already have their allotments, and in the meantime some ppl might miss out because of the postal system.

in all honesty i think they should have had both forms on their prospectus, WHICH didnt have the form even for public offer on the date which they said it was to be opened.

the timeframe also is a quack, by the time some of us receive our forms we will have maybe 10 days to get our applications in. although my app will be express posted the min i get it!

im just going to be very dissapointed if i miss out on some shares. ive already sold down in other stocks so i could have extra money for this float

powerkoala

14th-September-2006, 02:26 PM

keep checking the mail box....
yet nothing there, got crosby offer and buttermere offer which goes straight to bin.
sent the public offer form since 6 sept and hoping i can get them.

Beethoven

14th-September-2006, 02:36 PM

keep checking the mail box....
yet nothing there, got crosby offer and buttermere offer which goes straight to bin.
sent the public offer form since 6 sept and hoping i can get them.

when did u get the crosby offer?

powerkoala

14th-September-2006, 02:37 PM

last week...

YOUNG_TRADER

14th-September-2006, 03:38 PM

hi YT,

i got my form just not too long ago. All u get is a form that looks almost identical to the public offer form and the prospectus on the uraniumSA website. Doesn't really say much on the prority allotment.

Hope that helps

Are you in S.A.?

I'm in Melb, should take 3 days from S.A. to Melb,

If your in S.A. you would have got it in 1 day,

Expecting mine Friday!

Beethoven

14th-September-2006, 03:39 PM

Are you in S.A.?

I'm in Melb, should take 3 days from S.A. to Melb,

If your in S.A. you would have got it in 1 day,

Expecting mine Friday!

lol believe it or not im from queensland :confused: So distance wise i should be getting it later than you ????

I was concerned about the distance and time it would take to reach my area. Wow im impressed this package was actually air mailed to me :D

Plan B

14th-September-2006, 04:45 PM

Plan B what was the priority allotment type ie 1:3 1:5 1:6 1:10????

They haven't said how they're doing it,

Sorry to take so long YT , i went out for the afternoon....
but as Beethoven has said , they dont say much on the priority allotment.

Mellow77

14th-September-2006, 05:34 PM

Plan B

14th-September-2006, 05:45 PM

Just got the priority offer,
do you guys understand the instructions like me, i.e. pay for desired amount of shares by BPAY and wait whether I get my portion? Without actually having to send the blue form back?

Thanx for your opinions.

Yes thats the way i understand it ....

It also says the same thing on the USA web site ------> http://www.uraniumsa.com.au/

Beethoven

14th-September-2006, 06:07 PM

Just got the priority offer,
do you guys understand the instructions like me, i.e. pay for desired amount of shares by BPAY and wait whether I get my portion? Without actually having to send the blue form back?

Thanx for your opinions.

Well that was what i did was gave a sum of money through bpay and entered biller code... ref number and that was it. I didnt send the blue form through the mail. Now waiting for my shares if i get any that is...

radio-active man

14th-September-2006, 07:18 PM

yep got my priority offer application blue form today and as soon as I got home jumped on the internet and plugged in the bpay variables.

I believe that the biller reference number will be specific to your details and therefore there is no need to send the blue form back.

Fingers x'ed i get my full amount.

lol

dj_420

14th-September-2006, 10:11 PM

what a crock, i feel ripped off already, i am still waiting for priority offer, hoping it will come in the morning.

i just have a feeling that ive missed out because it took so long to get here. i think USA should have done it differently, a lot of ppl will miss out due to postage delays.

radio-active man

14th-September-2006, 10:17 PM

Cathers,

don't quote me on this but I read somewhere if the priority offer was ovesubscribed then the priority offer will be scaled back.

I hope it's not and hope that you get yours. Be sure to take a day off and wait for the postman.

YOUNG_TRADER

18th-September-2006, 11:43 AM

Uranium buy sets off chain reaction
Robin Bromby
September 15, 2006
INVESTORS need to rerate uranium companies in light of China's Sinosteel move to take control of a small deposit in South Australia, according to one analyst.
Far East Capital's Warwick Grigor is sending a note to clients this morning telling them that the Sinosteel plan to take 60 per cent of the Crocker Well project means Beijing now rates uranium as an essential strategic mineral.

"Everyone needs to sharpen their pencils and realise this is not another dotcom boom," he says.

"Real big money will now start to flow."

Pepinnini Minerals, the company exploring Crocker Well, which plans to sell a 60 per cent stake to Sinosteel, saw its shares lift another 7c to 67c yesterday.

Another South Australian explorer which is believed to have been approached by Sinosteel, Marathon Resources, rose 4c to 79c.

But Mr Grigor sounds one warning note: many of the uranium projects in Australia will fall by the wayside, especially those which are reheated ones from exploration in the 1960s and 70s uranium land rush.

Those with grades too low or a resource too small will not get over the development hurdle, he says.

"A project will need to have 20,000 tonnes to make the grade - anything else is tinkering at the edges."

Crocker Well contains an estimated 6735 tonnes of uranium, a tenth of the size of the mothballed Jabiluka deposit in the Northern Territory.

It lies just across the border from Broken Hill and near the Honeymoon deposit, where a Canadian company plans to open Australia's fourth uranium mine.

Gavin Wendt, resources analyst at financial adviser Fat Prophets, said the Sinosteel move showed the Chinese would be looking at the smaller companies where they could deal with several suppliers and have equity in the project rather than depend just on existing producers BHP Billiton or Energy Resources of Australia.

"I don't think this will be the last uranium deal we'll see with China," Mr Wendt said.

He expected Chinese companies to concentrate initially on deposits in South Australia and the Northern Territory where mines could be developed under present political policies.

But he said Canadian interest in our uranium resources would continue and it was clear those buyers were prepared to take the long-term view that eventually Queensland and West Australian bans on mining would be lifted - as shown by the Canadian takeover of West Australian explorer Redport.

YOUNG_TRADER

18th-September-2006, 11:44 AM

China's hunger for secure supplies feeds our economy
China is pumping money into our resources sector -- and our companies can't get enough, Robin Bromby reports
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

September 16, 2006
NOTHING would have concentrated minds in Beijing more than that 71.5 per cent increase in iron ore prices at the start of 2005. Then, this year, Shanghai Baosteel was forced to capitulate again, agreeing to pay BHP Billiton a further 19 per cent hike, setting the price for other iron ore buyers.
The Chinese tried to talk the prices down before the 2006 talks, to no avail - although, as one industry insider points out, they don't want prices to go down too far because so much of their domestic production is from low-grade iron ore mines. Too low a price would put these operations out of business.

So, while the huge price hikes did cause concern, it was really the balance of power in the sector that mattered more.

Long before this, the Chinese steel makers were known to be fed up with the iron ore situation where the three big players - BHP, Rio Tinto and Brazil's CVRD - called the tune and everyone else danced to it.

Now it's clear they're not going to take it any longer than they have to. Chinese companies are either buying deposits, taking substantial stakes in companies or using their enormous foreign exchange resources to buy up emerging mine production. The bottom line: they want some level of control and security of supply.

And it's not just in Australia. This is a worldwide phenomenon. China National Offshore Oil tried to buy Unocal and was thwarted only by political pressure in the US; they tried to get a stake in Canada's oil sands; the China National Nuclear Corp was recently awarded uranium targets in Chad; the Chinese are building a large iron ore mine and railway in Gabon.

Tony Howland-Rose says we should welcome them.

His company, Allegiance Mining, is about to start mining nickel near Zeehan, Tasmania. One of the world's largest buyers of the metal, Jinchuan Group, is to take all the nickel produced at the Avebury mine for 10 years and is expected to soon exercise its option over 25 million Allegiance shares.

Jinchuan is also involved with Fox Resources. There the Chinese came up with financing to help develop Fox's West Whundo copper-zinc project in return for the right to buy all the copper produced.

Furthermore, Jinchuan earlier this year subscribed for shares in the initial public offering by Redstone Resources, which has extensive nickel-copper-platinum group metals targets in the Musgrave region, which straddles the Northern Territory, West Australian and South Australian borders.

Howland-Rose says the Chinese want security of supply, just as the Japanese did when they bought into our coal and other assets back in the 1970s and 80s. Australians should see this as the perfect match: our exploration companies get financing they would otherwise struggle to find, while the Chinese know they are going to get the metal they need to keep their factories humming along.

"Whether we like it or not, we have an interdependency. A lot of good relationships are going to come out of this," Howland-Rose says.

Aurox Resources managing director Charles Schaus could not agree more. His company has just signed a deal whereby Chengde Iron & Steel and China Metallurgical Group will invest in the junior and guarantee to buy the bulk of the output of vanadium and titanomagnite iron ore from the Balla Balla project southwest of Port Hedland.

Customers for such speciality metals are not always easy to find and are also susceptible to sudden price falls.

Precious Metals Australia learned that lesson several years ago when Xstrata decided the Windimurra mine in Western Australia was no longer viable and closed it down - and so chopped off PMA's royalty stream.

Schaus says the deal for Aurox not only guarantees a buyer for mine output, but his company suddenly has access to Chengde's considerable vanadium expertise. Aurox, as a result, is now bullet-proof, he says.

"This is the best thing that could ever have happened to Aurox - we're still getting to grips with the benefits."

Handling the relationship the wrong way can cause deals to fall apart. For evidence of that, look no further than Andrew Forrest

and Fortescue Metals Group wrecking the relationship with Chinese steel makers by the use of some loose words about the deals done. The Chinese have never come back, no matter how much they want FMG's iron ore.

But, as this week's move into uranium by Sinosteel showed, the Chinese game is no longer just about iron ore. They want just about everything - bauxite, nickel, liquefied petroleum gas, copper, rare earths, vanadium, among them. Sinosteel also retains a small stake in Lynas Corp, which is moving to be a producer in Western Australia of rare earths - which will all be processed in China.

And yesterday the Aluminium Corp of China - known as Chalco - got the Queensland Government nod to develop the huge bauxite deposit at Aurukun.

It was the uranium deal that really raised eyebrows. Sinosteel is negotiating to take 60 per cent of the Crocker Well deposit in South Australia. It is known that the Chinese company had approached Marathon Resources, which is also exploring for uranium in South Australia.
Uranex took a more tentative step earlier this year by forming a loose alliance with China National Nuclear Corp. At this stage, this does not involve Chinese ownership - and, anyway, it's thought CNNC is more interested in Uranex's large Tanzanian exploration acreage rather than the Thatcher Soak project in Western Australia, at least while that state bans uranium mining.

Remember, too, there have been hints that the Chinese are interested in investing in Olympic Dam, although BHP has shown no sign of following up on that.

But Resource Capital Research's John Wilson says we should expect China to target more of our uranium.

He says there has been a constant flow of executives from Australian uranium explorers making their way to Beijing in recent months.

"It's an open market - and the Chinese have shown they're the people prepared to pay the most for these resources," Wilson says.

"We don't appreciate their appetite for uranium," he says.

Nor, possibly, for other metals.

Sinosteel owns 40 per cent of Rio Tinto's Channar iron ore mine and is in a joint venture with Midwest Corp on its Weld Range hematite project and Koolanooka magnetite deposit, both in the mid-west region of Western Australia. BHP sliced off 40 per cent of its Jimblebar Pilbara operation to a consortium of four Chinese steel mills.

Back in the mid-west, Anshan Iron & Steel has 50 per cent of Gindalbie Metal's iron ore deposits, the two companies agreeing this week to build a magnetite pellet plant in the Chinese city of Yinkou.

In fact, the Gindalbie experience shows the efficacious side of the Chinese resources land rush. The move by Anshan (usually called AnSteel) plucked what had been a junior explorer and placed the Australian company into the ranks of industry players. The deal was seen by analysts as a company-maker.

The other regional iron ore emerging player, Murchison Metals, opted to do a deal with South Korea's Pohang Iron & Steel - the demand in Korea for steel feedstocks is no less insatiable.

Gindalbie managing director David McSweeney is thrilled to be in business with AnSteel. He knows, because the steel maker is essentially a government agency, that the alliance has the full support of the Chinese Government and that the relationship is rock solid and long term. AnSteel will finance the mining feasibility study, finance the mine development, finance the pellet plant in China - and buy all the mine's output. "Gindalbie couldn't be in a better position," McSweeney says.

In June, Shougang Steel paid $52.5 million to Mt Gibson Iron to take control of the Extension Hill magnetite deposit.

Base metals are of interest, too. Hunan NonFerrous Group is to work with Compass Resources to jointly develop the Browns base metals project in the Northern Territory, Hunan as a first step taking a $30 million placement in the Australian company. The Chinese have agreed to put up $60 million of the development cost, 70 per cent of future exploration and will be a willing buyer for Compass's cobalt output. However, the Compass uranium interests around the old Rum Jungle mine were specifically excluded from the joint venture.

Companies still in the exploration stage are also looking to China for financial and technical lifelines.

David Flanagan heads Pilbara iron ore explorer Atlas Iron.

He is looking for a Chinese partner for both the direct-ship iron ore Atlas has 75km from Port Hedland and for the development of the deeper, and much larger, magnetite deposit.

Flanagan knows the Chinese can provide the infrastructure and expertise needed to get such a project going.

He knows, too, that this is all about our digging up the raw material, shipping it to China where it gets processed and value-added - and then some of that is sold back to us.

"It all makes perfect sense if you come from China."

kennas

18th-September-2006, 11:55 AM

Thanks for these articles YT. MTN is definately in the sights of the Chinese. As expected, not much support out there for the Crosby offer which was pretty lame really.

hector

18th-September-2006, 12:28 PM

Hi guys, enjoy reading your posts. Some news from down my way for what it's worth:

"Marathon Resources Ltd have served a 'Notice of Entry' to property owners in the vicinity of the former Wild Dog Mine (Myponga, Fleurieu Peninsula SA, mined for uranium during 1954 to 1955) for the purpose of undertaking mineral exploration" - from Victor Harbor Times Sept 14th.

"They pulled 346t of uranium out of the Wild Dog mine in 1954-55, so it is a highly defined area and it is a must for us to explore its possibilities" Peter Williams, Chairman

Realist

18th-September-2006, 12:34 PM

Thanks Hector...

maybe we'll see some price action soon..

hector

18th-September-2006, 12:45 PM

Nah mate, fairly ambitious vision to imagine U mine there adjacent to Adelaide water reservoir. On the other hand, Terramin got through all EPA hurdles with concerns about River Murray contamination with its Angus Zinc Project, so if high grade finds a possibility perhaps.

Any positive exploration ann is good news for SP though I suppose...

dj_420

18th-September-2006, 01:12 PM

There are many media articles beginning to appear on the topic of uranium. i think many u players in aust will see a large re-rating. any stock that has a deposit of 30 000 tonnes plus will IMO soon enjoy a nice ride.

it will be the quality and size of deposits that will make or break companies now. 30 000 tonnes at a med grade will provide a significant deposit for a u exp.

we have seen u spot price increase to $52 per pound and it hasnt really flowed through to u stocks as much as what was expected. i think towards the end of the year we will begin to see a massive boom in u.

SMM and MTN my picks for aust u stocks. looking forward to SMM JORC ann regarding andersons and other tennements.

dj_420

20th-September-2006, 07:38 PM

spot price of uranium now $53.25

so every $1 that u spot price increases means that insitu value for MTN deposit increases by around $70 million US.

i am beginning to be super bullish on uranium, think we will see some speculation driven buying soon and re-rating of solid uranium stocks, like ags, bmn, smm, mtn, pdn. some have already had a good run but i believe there is plenty in the tank for these companies.

just waiting for policy reversal, every time there is some media speculation on this topic we see a big rush to the aust u stocks.

dj_420

20th-September-2006, 07:44 PM

Got this article on u, ill post it on MTN thread but obviously just as relevant to decent u stocks

http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/powerful-argument-for-nuclear/2006/09/19/1158431711366.html?page=2#

Powerful argument for nuclear

Michael Backman
September 20, 2006
Page 1 of 2 | Single page
IS URANIUM a good bet? If the evidence from Asia is anything to go by, the answer is yes. The economies of China and India are growing fast. Neither produce enough power for existing requirements.

The US Government's National Intelligence Council has estimated that India's energy consumption will at least double by 2020. China's will rise by 150 per cent. That heralds an environmental disaster.

Why? Because the power that both produce comes largely from the dirtiest, most harmful means: burning coal. The situation is unsustainable. Nuclear power is an obvious solution and, in a few decades, Asia could be home to at least half the world's nuclear reactors.

Coal burning accounts for about 70 per cent of the energy produced in China, compared with a global average of about 25 per cent. China wants to get this down to 60 per cent by 2020, but even if it is possible it will mean coal-generated power will dramatically increase in absolute terms.

As things stand, China uses more coal than the US, the European Union and Japan combined, and its coal consumption this year is up

14 per cent on last year. According to one report, a new coal-fired power station opens in China every seven to 10 days.

Not surprisingly, China has quickly become one of the most polluted countries. Air quality is abysmal. Official estimates are that 400,000 Chinese die each year from diseases related to air pollution. Separately, the World Bank says 16 of the world's 20 most polluted cities are in China.

Pollution levels in India are also rising but the problem is not as acute as in China. Nonetheless, India is stepping up its construction of coal-fired plants, meaning that its greenhouse gas emissions will accelerate. And given that India's population is expected to pass China's in 2030, that's a worrying trend.

Both are looking to generate more power from gas and hydro-electric schemes. But both sources will only slow the rate of growth of greenhouse gas emissions. And so nuclear energy is looking increasingly viable, and even desirable.

According to the World Nuclear Association, of the 442 operational reactors in the world, almost a quarter, or 109, are in Asia. Another 28 are under construction worldwide. Fifteen of these are in Asia. More are planned, so that in total, 285 nuclear reactors are either operational, under construction, planned or proposed for South and East Asia.

The most nuclear of Asia's economies are South Korea, Japan and Taiwan, which generate 45, 29 and 20 per cent respectively of their power from nuclear sources. China's nuclear power plants generate just 2 per cent and India's 2.8 per cent. This is when, worldwide, nuclear accounts for 16 per cent of all the power generated. There is room for growth.

A sign of things to come was the nuclear co-operation treaty between India and the US earlier this year. And the US Government's Export-Import Bank recently provided US company Westinghouse with $US5 billion in loan guarantees for bids to supply technology to build nuclear power plants in China's Guangdong and Zhejiang provinces.

Australia's agreement to sell uranium to China is instructive, as was the recent announcement that a representative of China's main nuclear power plant operator, the Chinese National Nuclear Corp, had joined the board of South Australia-based explorer UraniumSA, which is preparing to float on the stock exchange.

China plans a fivefold increase in its nuclear power capacity by 2020. It now has 10 operational nuclear reactors. With five more under construction, 13 more planned and a further 50 proposed, China expects to have at least 78 nuclear reactors in the future.

Assuming that each new plant will consume the same uranium as the average of the existing plants (in fact, the newer plants are likely to consume more), then

China's annual demand for uranium will rise to at least 10,093 tonnes, from the current 1294 tonnes.

That's almost a tenfold increase. China produces about half its current uranium needs, suggesting that almost all its future requirements will be imported.

Most of the uranium China imports probably comes from Kazakhstan, Russia and Namibia. We don't actually know because China withholds the data. Certainly, Kazakhstan is the world's fourth-biggest producer of uranium and supplies about 8 per cent of world demand. But a new source will be Australia.

As for India, its long-term plan is to increase nuclear's share of power output to 25-30 per cent by 2050. Government plans are for 47 nuclear reactors in the future, up from 14. Assuming that each new plant consumes the same uranium as the average of existing plants, then India's annual demand for uranium will be 3918 tonnes, up from 1334 tonnes. India is now self-sufficient in uranium. Eventually, it will become a net importer.

There might be some squeamishness now about China and India's nuclear programs, but if their use of fossil fuels continues to grow exponentially then it may not be long before the world actually begs China and India to build more nuclear reactors.

Even if India and China do nothing more than raise nuclear power's share of the total to the current world average, uranium has a very bright future indeed.

michaelbackman@yahoo.com

nizar

20th-September-2006, 08:05 PM

yeh i read this article at work 2day... its GOLD.. :D

YOUNG_TRADER

21st-September-2006, 01:12 PM

According to one report, a new coal-fired power station opens in China every seven to 10 days.

:eek: :eek: :eek:

Thats scary!,

Back to MTN, not suprisingly the 'bid' has been 'extended' lol

YOUNG_TRADER

25th-September-2006, 10:14 PM

I have read several times that Sino Steel approached MTN to sign a similar deal to the one they inked with PNN,

However I feel the following paragraph from MTN's target statement shows what the directos are fighting for

Based on the JORC compliant inferred resource (the same resource category asMarathon’s Mt Gee deposit), and the $30.5 million cash component, this
transaction effectively values PepinNini’s in ground inferred resource at $3.42 per lb of U3O8. This compares to the implied value attributed by the Offer to the U3O8estimated to be contained in your Mt Gee resource of 48.5 cents per lb of U3O8.

So it would appear that after crunching some numbers the chaps over at MTN feel that if Sino Steel would offer PNN an effective $3.43 per lb deal, then a deal with MTN should be worth similar, which would be 7.1134x higher than Crosby's current offer($3.42 per lb vs 0.485c per lb)

Lets say 7x for simplicities sake, that would = $4.76 per MTN share

I doubt Sino would offer anywhere near that, but I'd be happy with a deal that valued MTN @ $2 a share

radio-active man

26th-September-2006, 05:52 PM

As seems as though buttermore has withdrawn its takeover offer. Refer to latest announcement.

deftfear

26th-September-2006, 08:05 PM

I think the release is regarding buttermere's application to the takeover panel, not the takeover of mtn as such.

dubiousinfo

26th-September-2006, 09:53 PM

As seems as though buttermore has withdrawn its takeover offer. Refer to latest announcement.

Crosby's (Buttermere) have not withdrawn the takeover offer.

The application that was withdrawn was in relation to Crosby's claim of deficiencies in the the Marathon Target Statement. Marathon issued a supplementary Target Statement yesterday which has negated Crosby's claims, so there is no issue to be decided.

The takeover offer still stands till the extended date of 3 Nov.

radio-active man

26th-September-2006, 10:49 PM

thanks for the clarification.

Crosby's (Buttermere) have not withdrawn the takeover offer.

The application that was withdrawn was in relation to Crosby's claim of deficiencies in the the Marathon Target Statement. Marathon issued a supplementary Target Statement yesterday which has negated Crosby's claims, so there is no issue to be decided.

The takeover offer still stands till the extended date of 3 Nov.

Realist

26th-September-2006, 11:27 PM

radio-active man

27th-September-2006, 12:26 PM

Personally I feel that there has been a "very slow" accumulation between 75-85c. Once it broke the 80c resistance it should have ran and ran hard.

Nice ploy though make an offer of 68c and buy up everything on offer between 75-85c using a different alias.

You won't shake me out.

JORC resource - arguably the 4th largest in Australia.

newbie investor

27th-September-2006, 03:57 PM

Butterballs should just raise their bid, they are wasting everyone's time and money with this pissant offer.

Just offer $2 a share and we'll all be happy.

I read somewhere there is no evidence of anyone whatsoever taking this offer. Haha, that is riduculous, what on earth are they thinking, or are they pulling a sly one over us somehow?.... :sly:
You think they will offer you $2 a share?

Crosby lost much money due to recent slump of natural gas price. I guess they've already lost US$100m. I think they will withdraw the offer very soon.

kennas

27th-September-2006, 04:15 PM

Crosby lost much money due to recent slump of natural gas price. I guess they've already lost US$100m. I think they will withdraw the offer very soon.

I have got a feeling this could hurt MTNs sp too.........We know it's worth more, but I've just got this feeling.......

Realist

27th-September-2006, 07:12 PM

It wont hurt the stock price at all.

If no-one wants to sell at 68c, then obviously everyone thinks it worth more than that. The current SP is 76c. So you'd think it was currently undervalued.

If everyone was jumping to sell at 68c that would worry me!!

It is a waiting game, Labor party conference re: no new mines policy, MTN to move towards mining the stuff and selling it, USA float which MTN own 8% of, and another possible takeover from a bigger player. Who knows, but I am holding and waiting. :p:

We've had no bad news yet!!

newbie investor

28th-September-2006, 04:48 AM

It wont hurt the stock price at all.

You forget MM&E Capital?:eek7:

They aren't LT investor. They only want to earn from "takeover arbitrage". If Crosby withdraw its offer, you can imagine what they will do.

Realist

28th-September-2006, 11:24 AM

You forget MM&E Capital?:eek7:

They aren't LT investor. They only want to earn from "takeover arbitrage". If Crosby withdraw its offer, you can imagine what they will do.

I'm not interested in temporary price changes.

I'm interested in the fact that MTN has potentially the 4th largest Uranium source in the world and it is very cheaply priced, a market cap of $29M.
It is a waiting game...

And thanks to MTN I should have got USA IPO shares and may make money on that enoguht o cover my iniital purchase of MTN I hope.

MTN is a hold and wait!!

radio-active man

28th-September-2006, 12:12 PM

That does sound better "4th largest Uranium source in the world' but I am not to sure how accurate that statements is.

Australia, yes and arguably the world??????

I'm not interested in temporary price changes.

I'm interested in the fact that MTN has potentially the 4th largest Uranium source in the world and it is very cheaply priced, a market cap of $29M.
It is a waiting game...

And thanks to MTN I should have got USA IPO shares and may make money on that enoguht o cover my iniital purchase of MTN I hope.

MTN is a hold and wait!!

Realist

28th-September-2006, 01:29 PM

That does sound better "4th largest Uranium source in the world' but I am not to sure how accurate that statements is.

Australia, yes and arguably the world??????

Would you believe the 4th largest in the known Universe? :D

newbie investor

3rd-October-2006, 04:12 AM

Takeover bid seems to be over.

Crosby finally changed its target to Orchard Petroleum. It's interesting that the offer price is A$0.68 again. I think they really like this figure. :D

dj_420

3rd-October-2006, 08:33 AM

its also interesting to see that the last traded price was 0.74 cents. i thought most takeovers were supposed to be above the sp otherwise ppl have no incentive to sell.

crosby's sounds like its a very poorly run outfit. no-one will ever take them seriously with the offers they put on the table.

Realist

3rd-October-2006, 09:28 AM

They made the takeover bid when MTN was 48c. But that was May during the big dip, MTN was trading over $1.10 a few months before.

They were trying their luck and it cost them money for no gain, it just made them look silly.

At $1 people would have seriously considered it, at $1.50 I think it may have happened.

YOUNG_TRADER

3rd-October-2006, 10:12 AM

The Hong Kong investment bank yesterday said it had approached the board of Melbourne's Orchard Petroleum with a $147 million cash takeover offer.
Meanwhile, it is still battling for control of South Australian uranium explorer Marathon Resources after losing its $180 million bid for Tethyan Copper to Chilean copper miner Antofagasta earlier this year.

Notice how all of there bids are $150m or $150m+

a $150m bid for MTN = $3 per share,

Given the time and expense in putting together a T/O it is highly unlikely that Crosby will walk away without even uping the bid to $1 minimum,

Also Crosby is based in Hong Kong, China is just a few hrs away, since its no secret that Sino Steel approached MTN and PNN regarding JV's and got told by MTN to take a hike, I wonder who Crosby is doing the bid for, also like I have said the Uranium SA float exposed MTN to the Chinese Nuclear Corp,

insider

8th-October-2006, 11:27 PM

mmmmining

9th-October-2006, 06:23 AM

What does the 6 month forecast look like for MTN? There's been take over offers so perhaps there are more in future. There are upcoming reports. The Labor state of SA are very keen on mining uranium... Any thoughts... looks like an awesome investment from here... But can someone share a bit of their own research whilst I sift through their reports?

I can see MTN's price could be as low as $0.4, or as high as $4 in 6-month time depends on how the story is developed.

Let's image Cosby put all its money into Orchard, and say withdrawn the offer to MTN, I reckon all weak hands will sell down, and push down the price toward $0.4, and rebounce to $0.8 within a couple of days.

Let's image that a Chinese comany will purchase 60% of MT Gee and surrending area for $120m (use PNN as reference), $4 MTN will look cheap.

I believe a couple of bad Pierpont reports (Aug and Dec 2005) is still haunting this stock even it is cleared by independant mining consulant company.

I believe the biggest problem with this company is the communication. They did not address shareholder's concern in an effective way, either too academic, or with backward and inward view.

The $0.5/lb referred JORC resources is extremely cheap by any standard. The management should explain this to shareholder in great detailed plan instead of asking us just simply reject to Cosby's offer.

The only negative things I can put together are:
1. Bad Pierpont Reports;
2. Lack of new drilling in MT Gee area;
3. Lack of info on metallurgical test of MT Gee, accessibility, and environment isssue, and government policy.
4. Lack of clarification about MT Gee resources. I figured it out the currently 31,000 ton resources only for MT Gee area only. There are several other deposits such as Mt Painter, MT painter East, Radium Ridge, Armchair, Henckinson, etc not even included.
5. Lack of both technical and managment capacity to move the project forward quickly. PNN is doing well by recognize their shortcoming, and find a Chinese partner.

I believe and hope time will overcome all these concerns. (I have held a bit of MTN at higher purchase price while having seen many of my other Uranium stocks' price more than doubled). I am adding some position from time to time.

believe that Cosby's bid is not a serious one because they have not hold any MTN stocks before the offer. Cosby has the bad habbits to jump on stock that is deeply undervalued when a lot of weak hands fold.

As the matter of factor, the low ball offer is the negative to the MTN stock price. Just look at SMM, PDN, PNN, NEL, RPT, etc are all either recovered to near all time high from June low. Without Cosby's offer, I believe MTN will be over $1 at least.

We should express our concern to the Board. We can write to them, call them, and do want we can.