are a great place to be invested right now. I think the lowest-cost producers in the U.S. I am also a big supporter of the in-situ recovery (ISR) production in the U.S. So I would focus on the Athabasca Basin, where the grade is the highest in the world, and the rule of law protects shareholders. It's very difficult for a Western company or a Canadian publicly traded company to compete with what Russia and China are doing internationally, especially in Africa. But, really, the value is in North America. South America has a few areas that I like. Speculators and investors who want exposure to uranium should focus in North America. I have a whole chapter in my book, "The Colder War," about the smart way to play uranium opportunities. But this is something that you'll see getting a lot of media attention by 2019. Will it change in the next few months? No. We are going to have a rude awakening shortly. is still the largest consumer of uranium globally, and that's not going to change. has positioned itself in a tough situation here. increased the Kazakh imports of uranium by over 80%. That is going from a bad situation to an even worse one. ![]() Sadly for the U.S., the difference is being made up not from Canada, not from Australia, not from U.S. Now only 25% can come from Russia by U.S. are powered by nuclear energy, that's not a good formula for national safety. So it's importing over 90% of what it consumes. consumes just under 50 million pounds (50 Mlb) of uranium annually, and it produces less than 5 Mlb. TER: What is the uranium landscape looking like now? Where should investors look for value? I definitely expect big things in Denison's future. One thing I've learned in 15 years of this business is never underestimate a Lundin group company. Very few groups have that level of power, ability and financial resources. The Lundin group is that rare breed that understands exploration and production. Denison's pattern has always been to look to increase shareholder value. MK: Definitely a possibility, or it could be bought out. TER: Will Denison try to buy another Athabascan company? Building a uranium mine is not an easy task. But in the near term, I think both companies will keep drilling fantastic numbers and move both projects forward. Then it might use Asian money or Cameco Corp. Now, if Fission and NexGen did merge, the pounds between the two justify a mill of their own. I currently do not own Fission or NexGen, so I don't have any skin in this potential fight. If that happened, the region could get very hot, and the other juniors could do quite well, such as Skyharbour Resources Ltd. But if it did happen, it would make for a very interesting story. The two management teams might not be a good fit. ![]() I actually think the two should merge, but I don't think the current Fission board would like that to happen. It's great to see young resource entrepreneurs doing so well. Tim Young, who is on my Top Ten Under 40 list, had incredible vision when he staked the properties NexGen holds today. In early 2014, we participated in the NexGen private placement, and the team at NexGen has done an incredible job. ![]() Perhaps the board changes at Fission, and the new board sees the benefits of merging with NexGen and a merger happens on friendly terms with NexGen. That would be a very interesting result to the Fission saga. PLS will have a permitting hurdle, not to mention there's no mill that could take their feed currently, so the company would have to build one, and that could cost as much as $1 billion ($1B).įission could become an acquirer of other projects on the east or west side of the basin, or it too could become a takeout target by larger company, or perhaps even become a target of a hostile take out by someone like NexGen Energy Ltd. A completely different skill set is required. MK: It is difficult for an exploration company to take something like PLS to production it rarely works. TER: What's next for Fission? It isn't going to try to take Patterson Lake to production, is it? Are there other suitors in the wings? I think both Fission and Denison are still interesting opportunities, because both are much cheaper than they were before the deal was offered. We tripled our money, and we sold, albeit a bit too early, but a profit is a profit. It is clear the majority of the Fission shareholders wanted the company to stay focused on its PLS project and didn't believe the benefits of diversification, including access to a mill, the Lundin group and Wheeler River, outweighed the potential of the PLS deposit. Marin Katusa: Ross McElroy and his team have done a great job growing the Patterson Lake South (PLS) resource, which is turning out to be a world-class deposit. (DML:TSX DNN:NYSE.MKT) deal? Why did investors reject it and what does it mean for the junior uranium mining landscape? The Energy Report: What happened to the Fission Uranium Corp.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |