# CTS - Contact Resources



## Sean K (12 December 2006)

CTS have a uranium project in Peru which has just released an inferred resource of about 1 m tns @ 0.32% U3O8, with a 400 ppm U cut off. Project is open at depth and along strike. 

Don't know too much more about them at this stage, but this looks interesting.

More to follow.


----------



## greenfs (3 January 2007)

Someone who has proven very reliable for me in the past & presumably close to management today has suggested that there may be more good news on the way. Not sure when though. I will closely monitor trading volumes which should help any interested parties through the maze with this stock


----------



## Sean K (4 January 2007)

greenfs said:
			
		

> Someone who has proven very reliable for me in the past & presumably close to management today has suggested that there may be more good news on the way. Not sure when though. I will closely monitor trading volumes which should help any interested parties through the maze with this stock



Thanks greenfs, Look forward to hearing more info when you get your hands on it. Is this friend a broker? Geologist? 

This has been off my radar since I first posted (watching too many things) and I haven't seen any more news from Peru.

Chart doesn't say much at this point. Heading generally down but looks like it might be turning. 

Will try to keep an eye on it more myself. I hadn't considered Peru being a U producer. Just a nice place to go travelling!


----------



## moses (6 January 2007)

greenfs said:
			
		

> Someone who has proven very reliable for me in the past & presumably close to management today has suggested that there may be more good news on the way. Not sure when though. I will closely monitor trading volumes which should help any interested parties through the maze with this stock



Presumably the good news will simply be a confirmation of higher grades than originally expected, as per the presentation.

I wonder how they'll go getting the ore down from 4000m on dodgy Peruvian mountain roads; hope the trucks have good brakes!


----------



## Sweet Synergy (12 January 2007)

Looks like this is on the move.  Has broken resistance with nice confirming vol


----------



## blobbob (12 January 2007)

m/c is currently $64million [inc oppies] has 80% interest in high grade near surface uranium deposit in Peru worth about $650million aud
undervalued ?


----------



## Robroy (14 February 2007)

*CTS - The Speculator's buy of the week*

David Haselhurst's Speculator column in The Bulletin magazine has picked CTS as its buy of the week:

The magazine hits the streets Wednesday.

I think the likely explanation for Tuesday's rise is this from another forum:

"Market reacting to Kyrgyzstan news where Urasia Energy & Uranium One have announced a JV. CTS is on the same strike with localised anomalies grading (0.1-0.7% Ur.) My calculations indicate a $2.5 NPV, not taking into account any upside."

Its alltime top of .70 is now just 1.5 cents away.

After that, a nice breakaway would seem to be a* possibility.

The Speculator bought the options BTW, though probably most readers won't have options accounts and will buy the shares.


----------



## RichKid (14 February 2007)

*Re: CTS - The Speculator's buy of the week*



			
				Robroy said:
			
		

> David Haselhurst's Speculator column in The Bulletin magazine has picked CTS as its buy of the week:
> 
> The magazine hits the streets Wednesday.
> 
> ...




Chances are it may rise further because of people buying on the tipsheet review, doesn't guarantee it'll keep rising. Further, the options are co issued so anyone can buy them without opening an options ac.


----------



## kromey (14 February 2007)

Robroy speculator mentioned CTS on the 5th of feb on the bulletins web site as well.


----------



## ned1 (15 February 2007)

Here is the latest David Haselhurst "The Speculator" article from this weeks Bulletin.

_The Speculator takes up arms for a small uranium miner with good prospects in the mountains of Peru.

This week we find an "el cheapo" uranium punt plus further gains in Image Resources from spectacular intersections of heavy minerals announced last week in Western Australia.

As this column has observed previously, most junior Australian uranium prospecting stocks appear grossly over-priced, given the political risks of developing any resource in the short to medium term. The same goes for those that have pinned their hopes on prospects in Third World countries. 
The odds are worth an exception, however, for Contact Resources (ASX code CTS), with a relatively high-grade inferred resource in Peru, South America, and a relatively low market capitalisation compared to various of its peers listed on the ASX. I understand there are at least four Canadian juniors with enough confidence to be prospecting for uranium in that country and Contact's joint venturers are former employees of IPEN, the Peruvian government's nuclear authority.

Contact claims a JORC-compliant inferred resource of 1.03 million tonnes grading 0.32% uranium oxide (or 7.2 million pounds of U3O8). With uranium around a current spot price of $92/lb, Contact's 80% equity in the deposit has an inground-value of $530m.

Yet the company carries a market capitalisation of $53m fully diluted for all outstanding options. (Contact has on issue 53 million shares plus 49 million June, 2008, options exercisable at 20c. The stock has traded over the past 12 months from a low of 29c to a high of 70c and last week at 59.5c/60c.)
Contact was floated in 2005 as a small gold prospector in WA but it didn't make much of an impression until geologist Allen Maynard took the helm in mid-2006 as executive chairman. The company then negotiated the purchase from Range Resources of its 80% interest in the Corachapi uranium project in Peru. The consideration was set at $250,000 cash plus an issue of eight million Contact shares to Range, plus exploration expenditure over two years of $2m.

Uranium was discovered at the site in the 1970s, when IPEN undertook an extensive trenching program down to eight metres over the shallow mineralisation to establish the present resource.

The prospect is in high mesa country (4000m) with mineralisation extending from surface in four so far identified zones extending 1100 metres in strike length. Contact believes the project area has the potential to yield a resource beyond the present one million tonnes to between three and five million tonnes.

Recent field work has identified localised grades within the project area considerably higher than the average grade in the so far identified inferred resource. An example offered is 10.4 metres of 1.144% (25lbs/t of uranium oxide). That's equivalent to about 3oz of gold per tonne.
Two reverse circulation drilling rigs will be on site early next month to firm up the status of the inferred resource. The company has established an office in the capital Lima and appointed a Peruvian manager and two local geologists to manage the program.

Company consultant Jon Garvey said the company expected to complete its exploration commitment this year, with trial mining in early 2008 and an upgrade to full commissioning and mining in late 2008. Preliminary costing suggests an initial capital cost of under $10m for a two-stage crushing plant and heap leach pad with a mining cost as low as $5-$7/lb of contained uranium.
We've taken a punt on Contact options at 39c for the right to pay an extra 20c by June, 2008, for a new share. By that time, the company should have made a string of announcements to justify its expectations for the uranium play.
The company is also looking to seek a listing on the Toronto Stock Exchange later this year, where there is a lot more empathy for companies operating in South America._


----------



## insider (3 March 2007)

There is an article on CTS in this months Money magazine... sounds good will have to do some research on them and add to my watchlist...


----------



## mmmmining (28 March 2007)

CTS has purchased the 20% interest held by Peruians  It claimed it will have 100% control of the project. 

The term is the same as to Ranger, very interesting.


----------



## Sean K (29 March 2007)

I haven't been following this too closely the past few months after their inferred JORC resource upgrade ann of about 1.25m tns U in Peru. Or 9.16 m lbs. I note they've now bought out the other 20% so it's fully owned and they claim that they're aiming for production this year. Must be the only other Australian listed company to start mining this year. They also claim in their last ann that the resource has potential to be expanded. Looking at some of the historic drill holes outsdie the curent envelope, it looks highly likely. Market cap looks pretty low for a near producer. Does this look undervalued to anyone??


----------



## mmmmining (29 March 2007)

kennas said:


> I haven't been following this too closely the past few months after their inferred JORC resource upgrade ann of about 1.25m tns U in Peru. Or 9.16 m lbs. I note they've now bought out the other 20% so it's fully owned and they claim that they're aiming for production this year. Must be the only other Australian listed company to start mining this year. They also claim in their last ann that the resource has potential to be expanded. Looking at some of the historic drill holes outsdie the curent envelope, it looks highly likely. Market cap looks pretty low for a near producer. Does this look undervalued to anyone??




Kennas, don't get carried too far away. I wish CTS can produce this year. But it is totally impossible, or a naive joke. The best shot is do a trial heap leach, this is all. I guesstimate this one as producer in 2009 or so. 

Nevertheless, CTS is still a very undervalued company. If the management can put their acts together, it could be a very good investment.I put this one in my uranium holding, and be prepared fort the long run.


----------



## Sean K (29 March 2007)

mmmmining said:


> Kennas, don't get carried too far away. I wish CTS can produce this year. But it is totally impossible, or a naive joke. The best shot is do a trial heap leach, this is all. I guesstimate this one as producer in 2009 or so.



 LOL. I'm not getting carried away, just reading the 28 Nov 06 ann stating 'Aim for uranium production by end of 2007'.  Maybe they are being a bit ambitious.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (29 March 2007)

Its now by far one the most undervalued advanced staged U companies

At 60c the mkt cap is like $65m, this is similar to the likes of PEN, GBE and even MRU who are just advanced staged explorers.


I say CTS is probably one of a few who could be in production by 2008

I bought some opies today


----------



## MJSJ (4 April 2007)

CTS currently looking at late 2008 for production - my guesstimate would be early '09 - it appears they may be behind schedule on their drilling program? (Anybody know anything??)
Peru valued at approx. $900M (USD) on current $95/lb.(USD) [without any upgrades] - with approx. 100M Shares & Oppies - says undervalued to me!!!
I guess we may know more when their Quarterly Report comes out in the next few weeks.


----------



## exgeo (4 April 2007)

from last ann they are still waiting on a permit to drill. Once they get it and start drilling, then the rotary lie-detector will reveal all. I am long CTS (at 60c)


----------



## MJSJ (7 April 2007)

*Weekend Australian Article*

Good article in the Weekend Aust. on CTS's Peruvian Uranium Project - Very positive - CHECK it out!!!


----------



## Sean K (7 April 2007)

*Re: Weekend Australian Article*



MJSJ said:


> Good article in the Weekend Aust. on CTS's Peruvian Uranium Project - Very positive - CHECK it out!!!



Can you summarize it for us MJSJ?


----------



## MJSJ (7 April 2007)

Not realy an article, but 2 mentions on pg. 33 under the heading "Radioactive stock bets for speculators - Red Hot Tips - Warwick Grigor's Watchlist - Contact Resources - Undervalued Peru deposit".
Also in the body of the article, towards the end, "The ones he would buy are: Contact Resources, with its project in Peru."
Thaaaats all folks!!!!!!


----------



## mmmmining (9 April 2007)

When everyone's focus is no Peru, don't forget the 20% of whatever in Kyrgyzstan. (same country where MRO has the land). According to the companies website, The four projects has 1050t in C1, 12,630 in P1/C2, and 52,800t in P2. 

The are Russian system. C1 is close to Inferred Resources, while C2, P1 and P2 are considered as exploration potential, could be, and might be...

Anyway, it has opened another frontier for uranium hunting. The potential is very high.


----------



## mmmmining (9 April 2007)

mmmmining said:


> The are Russian system. C1 is close to Inferred Resources, while C2, P1 and P2 are considered as exploration potential, could be, and might be...




My mistake. 

Russian vs International reporting Code, JORC, etc 
A,B: Proved Reserve / Measured Resource 
C1: Proved or Probable Reserve / Indicated Resource 
C2: Probable reserve / Indicated Resource / Inferred Resource 
P1: Inferred Resource 
P2: Reconnaissance Mineral Resource (or UNFC code 334) 
P3: no equivalent

The projects in Kyrgyzstan has 13,680t uranium in P1 or better status, or In JORC's term, as inferred resources or better. If it is true, it is significant. 20% of them will be around 2700t, or about 6mlb.

Can someone think it differently? I must be wrong.


----------



## bigt (12 April 2007)

Great couple of days for CTS, increased volume and a rise in SP. I think the market is becoming more aware of these now. Cant believe for a $27m market cap (undiluted) its predicted to be in uranium production in 2007/8 (per their recent ann...late 07!). Excellent uranium grades and an increasing resource (read their anns), heap leach extraction is on the cards, with historical recoveries of 85%+. The ex-soviet grounds they can earn upto 90% in look VERY promising...once they sift through the historical data, they could be in for a big result. 

I'm in this as of today, fingers crossed but looks good value, hasnt run hard at all, and for the data on hand, it's got a great chance of a rapid sp increase IMO. DYOR of course.


----------



## mmmmining (12 April 2007)

bigt said:


> I'm in this as of today, fingers crossed but looks good value, hasnt run hard at all, and for the data on hand, it's got a great chance of a rapid sp increase IMO. DYOR of course.



Let the show begins. It could beat anyone on ASX to be the next producer.


----------



## MJSJ (13 April 2007)

mmmmining said:


> Let the show begins. It could beat anyone on ASX to be the next producer.




You could be right - my tip is early '09.


----------



## mmmmining (14 April 2007)

I used to have some doubt about the geology of the Peru Corachapi Deposit. After hearing the opinion from famous geologist Geoff Blackburn, AOM, I am convinced it is a good one.


----------



## 56gsa (16 April 2007)

Unusual trading on the options last week - very high volumes but price was still kept down - often below the share price equivalent - even now it looks like share will open 64 but sell on options at 43...  for 20 cent June08 options you'd expect them to be around 50?  am i missing something here?


----------



## bigt (16 April 2007)

Can't answer your question, but I have noticed that for the last week or so, CTS comes out like a gunshot at opening, then falls back. Buy/sell ratio still around 6:1 (or so), it just isnt keeping its gains made in the morning..it has been slowly creeping up though. IMO a drastically undervalue stock for the resource is currently has and more importantly, what it could have after further drilling (open extensions all round). 

Do any more experienced traders recognise what this pattern of trading may suggest?


----------



## insider (17 April 2007)

bigt said:


> Can't answer your question, but I have noticed that for the last week or so, CTS comes out like a gunshot at opening, then falls back. Buy/sell ratio still around 6:1 (or so), it just isnt keeping its gains made in the morning..it has been slowly creeping up though. IMO a drastically undervalue stock for the resource is currently has and more importantly, what it could have after further drilling (open extensions all round).
> 
> Do any more experienced traders recognise what this pattern of trading may suggest?




This to me suggests that there are people buying up for a potential run... I''ve noticed that all Uranium stocks before they become superstars go through phases like this... I'm going to buy up I think... good company, good prospects, good resource, good country (Peru), tiny market capital, yeah this has huge potential....


----------



## insider (17 April 2007)

56gsa said:


> Unusual trading on the options last week - very high volumes but price was still kept down - often below the share price equivalent - even now it looks like share will open 64 but sell on options at 43...  for 20 cent June08 options you'd expect them to be around 50?  am i missing something here?




Market manipulation most likely


----------



## MJSJ (17 April 2007)

insider said:


> Market manipulation most likely




I think that one of the major (BIG) holders has been selling into the market every time it starts a run?? Opinions please.


----------



## MJSJ (18 April 2007)

Some news re Solex et al whose project is close to CTS at Corachapi, in Peru.

Solex Resources Corp. Intercepts 0.089% U308 Over 10 Metres at Macusani
Tue Apr 17, 2:12 PM
Email Story IM Story Printable View 
VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(CCNMatthews - April 17, 2007) - Solex Resources Corp., (TSX VENTURE: SOX.V) ("Solex" or the "Company") and Frontier Pacific Mining Corporation (TSX VENTURE: FRP.V) ("Frontier Pacific" or the "Operator"), (collectively the "Joint Venture Participants") are pleased to report that recent assays on the remaining 7 drill holes at Calvario III have outlined further high grade Uranium mineralization on the near surface horizontal ignimbrite zone, previously described in our News Release dated April 2, 2007. 

Drill hole No. 56 intercepted 0.089% U308 (1.92 lbs per ton) over 10 metres (33 feet), including 0.3% U308 (6.65 lbs per ton) over 3 metres (10 feet).

I'm looking forward to the results of CTS's drilling.


----------



## insider (18 April 2007)

MJSJ said:


> Some news re Solex et al whose project is close to CTS at Corachapi, in Peru.
> 
> Solex Resources Corp. Intercepts 0.089% U308 Over 10 Metres at Macusani
> Tue Apr 17, 2:12 PM
> ...




When can we expect the drill results to come out as I'm still trying to get in at a lower entry


----------



## MJSJ (18 April 2007)

insider said:


> When can we expect the drill results to come out as I'm still trying to get in at a lower entry




My understanding is that drilling hasn't commenced yet - I would expect it to be at least 4-6weeks before we have any news - should be enough time to get set - as the sp seems to be sliding a bit at the moment - Good Luck!


----------



## MJSJ (22 April 2007)

Some press - CTS was given a wrap by the MD of Far East Capital on Inside Business - the transcript hasn't been posted yet - maybe tomorrow!
[ http://www.abc.net.au/insidebusiness/ ] - I wonder if it will have any effect on the sp?


----------



## MJSJ (22 April 2007)

MJSJ said:


> Some press - CTS was given a wrap by the MD of Far East Capital on Inside Business - the transcript hasn't been posted yet - maybe tomorrow!
> [ http://www.abc.net.au/insidebusiness/ ] - I wonder if it will have any effect on the sp?




Full transcript below:

ABC Online 

Inside Business - 22/04/2007: Analyst looks at uranium boom 

[This is the print version of story http://www.abc.net.au/insidebusiness/content/2007/s1903602.htm]

ALAN KOHLER: In another big week in the booming uranium sector, the besieged board of Queensland explorer Summit lowered the drawbridge and recommended shareholders accept a $123 billion offer from Paladin Resources, while the new boss at one of the world's largest producers, ERA’s Chris Salisbury, warned that the whole yellowcake boom looked overcooked to him. For his take, I spoke to one of the most highly regarded analysts of the sector, Warwick Grigor of Far East Capital. 
Well Warwick, perhaps you can just set the scene for us a bit, what's the uranium market been doing this year?
WARWICK GRIGOR: This year it's just been going up and up. It's part of a three, four-year bull market that we've been experiencing. Uranium has actually come from down around about $US10 a pound. A couple of months ago, it was $95 a pound and then it's suddenly jumped to $US113 a pound about a week ago.
ALAN KOHLER: And what's been driving that?
WARWICK GRIGOR: Basically, there's no uranium around. There's a major shortfall. The anticipated needs for uranium over the next five years can only be satisfied as to 60 per cent by mine production. The rest of the uranium is coming from reducing stockpiles, converting weapons-grade uranium back to power station uranium, but basically we've gone through a period of probably 20, 30 years where there's been no investment in the uranium sector. There's been no exploration. It's been a total departure from the industry and that’s left us in a critically short position today.
ALAN KOHLER: The chief executive of ERA, Chris Salisbury, says the market in uranium is looking overheated. Do you agree with that?
WARWICK GRIGOR: Well, it's certainly very strong. Whether it's overheated, there's nothing to suggest the uranium price is going to go any lower at this point in time. As far as ERA is concerned, I suppose they're not getting any benefit from these high uranium prices because they've got long-term contracts and they're getting substantially less so, as far as ERA is concerned, the way they look at it, I’m sure they'd say it would be overheated.
ALAN KOHLER: Well, how high do you think the price can go?
WARWICK GRIGOR: It could quite conceivably get to 150 a pound before the end of this year. At that level, it does start to look a bit toppy and there would be enormous profit margins to be made by producers that could come on stream, so if it peaks at 150, I would expect - what the managing director of ERA said was that in three years’ time, you would expect it to be somewhat softer than it is today and that is reasonable to expect if we do get a supplier response but there's not going to be much of a supplier response for at least two to three years and so the uranium price will stay strong for that period.
ALAN KOHLER: With the uranium price where it is now and what you think it's going to do in the future, do you think that uranium stocks generally are expensive or cheap?
WARWICK GRIGOR: You need to look at the difference between potential producers, which can actually cash in on the high prices and exploration stocks. We're seeing a lot of unsophisticated buying of uranium exploration stocks and a lot of them have got success already factored into their share price. You've got a number of companies that are selling for $150 million to $200 million and they don't have one pound of resources. Well, those stocks have to deliver or they'll come down a long way. On the other side of the equation, you've got a lot of emerging companies which, if you have a look at what they could earn, what their cash flows could generate at these prices, they're still cheap. So the market needs to become a bit more sophisticated and look for value and be careful about hype on the exploration side.
ALAN KOHLER: And what are your top three stocks?
WARWICK GRIGOR: Looking at the potential producer category, I think that a company like Uranium King, which is looking at bringing on stream one or two mines in the USA - very good value; Contact Resources has got a high-grade ore body in Peru which could well be a producer; and Monero Mining, a company in which I disclose a vested interest in as a director, I think that's got a lot of very under-priced uranium assets in the Kirgiz Republic and remember, that's a major uranium producing part of the world. So they're my top three.
ALAN KOHLER: Thanks very much for joining us, Warwick.
WARWICK GRIGOR: Pleasure, Alan.

© 2007 Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Copyright information: http://abc.net.au/common/copyrigh.htm
Privacy information: http://abc.net.au/privacy.htm


----------



## michael_selway (22 April 2007)

MJSJ said:


> Some press - CTS was given a wrap by the MD of Far East Capital on Inside Business - the transcript hasn't been posted yet - maybe tomorrow!
> [ http://www.abc.net.au/insidebusiness/ ] - I wonder if it will have any effect on the sp?




Or the video

http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200704/r138979_475594.asx

thx

MS


----------



## insider (22 April 2007)

I'm buying CTS shares tomorrow... wish me luck


----------



## UraniumLover (22 April 2007)

insider said:


> I'm buying CTS shares tomorrow... wish me luck



So am I ..
Hopefully this turns out like a MTN one day. You can only hope.


----------



## dj_420 (24 April 2007)

ok guys who is on this one now, i jumped on today at 0.625

this one looks great with high grade uranium and only the top 20 metres of resource been drilled, its open at depth and along strike!

we need drill rig up there to start extending that resource!

ill be calling company today, any particular questions that people want to know

ill be asking:

- access to deposit, how accessable it actually is (i figure if they got a drill rig up there should be ok)
- when can we expect drilling to start
- as far as insitu leaching testing goes when can we expect production

anything else just post it on this thread


----------



## Halba (24 April 2007)

Any other tenements if they are applying in Peru to expand their resources? Peru looks good.


----------



## dj_420 (24 April 2007)

waiting for director to call back guys he isnt in yet, will keep you posted


----------



## mick2006 (24 April 2007)

Here are some questions for you DJ420


I guess the main thing to ask is when the exploration will be in full swing. 

Also in the last quarterly they were awaiting some sampling assays have they received them yet.  

Also I can't remember where I read it there has been talk about a listing on the Canadian Stock Market is this a route the company is thinking of taking


----------



## dj_420 (24 April 2007)

ok guys i spoke to the exploration manager and he had a few good answers for me:

*How accessible is the resource?*
the resource is at 4200 metres which is below the permanent snow line which obviously means easier access by road all year round. right now they are able to get drill rigs up there easily so as far as roads are concerned it is well accessable. there is also a main trans oceanic highway been built which is expected to be completed by 2009 which will allow even greater access to these uranium rich areas. this would mean that you could easily truck the yellowcake all the way to eastern ports of the country.

http://www.npr.org/programs/re/archivesdate/2000/nov/001127.peruhwy.html

http://rainforests.mongabay.com/amazon/Transoceanic_Highway.html

http://www.biceca.org/en/Article.28.aspx


*When is next round of drilling to start?*
they are waiting for approval for the next round of drilling to start and it is expected very soon. big bonus however they have secured two drill rigs so once the drilling is approved can start straightaway.

*When can we expect production?* 
he laughed at this one. production would be dependant on expanding the resource but he did say that they could actually start small time production with what they have now, due to low extraction costs, no overburden, and using insitu leach would be very quick to setup. 

so i dont think he was expecting to be questioned about production yet, BUT from what i gather production is going to be very easy and cheap to setup DUE to the very high grade nature of the resource and its location (on surface).

*Are there any other tenements to be granted in Peru?*
obviously this one was going to be elusive BUT he did say that CTS are looking at further acquisitions in the area. he wouldnt tell me what they were BUT stated obviously the area is been very highly contested and CTS are focusing on the two that have already been granted. 

so i take that as they probably have some applications in but are just focusing on what they have for the meantime.


so showed me a little more about the company, they have some great deposits and now just need to continue expanding resource and then begin working on a BFS for production.


----------



## doogie_goes_off (24 April 2007)

Can everyone please stop trying to make money out of the Uranium boom, find a producer of something else, get value for money!


----------



## Pat (24 April 2007)

doogie_goes_off said:


> Can everyone please stop trying to make money out of the Uranium boom, find a producer of something else, get value for money!





Ha! 
The money will always be made where the money is being made.


----------



## doogie_goes_off (24 April 2007)

How many companies with tin pot resources like this will actually ever see production? I suppose it's better than Aust U stocks?!


----------



## Pat (24 April 2007)

To true. But, that's what sell buttons are for.
Making money will always be about buying low and selling high, too clique?
It becomes a risk very soon though, when the govt starts talking.


----------



## Pat (24 April 2007)

dj_420 said:


> ok guys i spoke to the exploration manager and he had a few good answers for me:
> ....
> 
> ....
> so showed me a little more about the company, they have some great deposits and now just need to continue expanding resource and then begin working on a BFS for production.




Thanks for that DJ,
Well one to look out for after the conference.


----------



## insider (24 April 2007)

dj_420 said:


> ok guys who is on this one now, i jumped on today at 0.625
> 
> this one looks great with high grade uranium and only the top 20 metres of resource been drilled, its open at depth and along strike!
> 
> ...




I got in on an average of 0.6213


----------



## Halba (24 April 2007)

doogie_goes_off said:


> How many companies with tin pot resources like this will actually ever see production? I suppose it's better than Aust U stocks?!




Better in Peru than Australia yep. Also anyone have an idea on just a ballpark of where they can extend resources to? Currently 10-15mil pounds ish? May be 20mil lbs?


----------



## elcruzy (25 April 2007)

DJ420 - thats great, I didnt think an investor could just ring up any company and start asking them questions. Good work.

I read about CTS in the AFR, it mentioned 20 or so uranium hopefuls and Contact was one that I never heard of but stated "possible producer in 2008". Obviously this is old news and hasnt been updated however I bought purely on a punt, afterall I missed out on Marathon @ 68c awhile back and if it is remotely close to producing then it is well worth it.

Just a note to all, Paladin was the first uranium mine opened in a decade and is now worth nearly 5 Billion dollars. (and I bought/sold at the $3-$4 mark!!! how was I to know it would charge up so much???)

Even if Contact just firm up a JORC complaint resource it will attract reasonable attention - just make sure your portfolio isnt made up of all these types of stocks!!

Good luck to all.


----------



## dj_420 (25 April 2007)

elcruzy said:


> DJ420 - thats great, I didnt think an investor could just ring up any company and start asking them questions. Good work.
> 
> I read about CTS in the AFR, it mentioned 20 or so uranium hopefuls and Contact was one that I never heard of but stated "possible producer in 2008". Obviously this is old news and hasnt been updated however I bought purely on a punt, afterall I missed out on Marathon @ 68c awhile back and if it is remotely close to producing then it is well worth it.
> 
> ...




you will find that a lot of directors are more than happy to answer investors questions, most of them are very approachable. 

after all they (directors) dont know how much money you may be potentially worth to them so a bit of investor relations is always good for a company


----------



## Sean K (26 April 2007)

Just ann farm in agreement with WAG (a reengineered shell that used to be an audio company - now directed by the Steinepreis brothers) in an EPL in WA. Histerical drilling on the EPL produced some interesting essays including returns such as 1.5% U, 2% Cu and 0,6% Zn and traces of Au and Ag. So, there's some mineralisation about, but it's pretty early days on this one. 

Another IT/Phone company turning into a U player! Concerning.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (26 April 2007)

kennas said:


> Another IT/Phone company turning into a U player! Concerning.




No Kenna,

Another Ascent Capital restructure turning to Uranium


----------



## Sean K (26 April 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> No Kenna, Another Ascent Capital restructure turning to Uranium



Yep, but they could have at least changed the name from WAG Audio to WAG Uranium or something with more cred. 

What do you think of the EPL?


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (26 April 2007)

kennas said:


> Yep, but they could have at least changed the name from WAG Audio to WAG Uranium or something with more cred.
> 
> What do you think of the EPL?




Crap! and yet look at the SP go, can't wait for RMG's turn!

Also they will call a meeting now with proposals to enter into farm-in agreement and change name keeping code WAG, probably *W*est *A*ustrlian *G*ama corp! :


----------



## nizar (26 April 2007)

kennas said:


> Another IT/Phone company turning into a U player! Concerning.




Why is this concerning?
Look at SRK (used to be tech stock and went as low as 2c) and PKT also.

Just because they werent born a U company, didnt seem to find the sp from going UP.


----------



## Sean K (26 April 2007)

nizar said:


> Why is this concerning?
> Look at SRK (used to be tech stock and went as low as 2c) and PKT also.
> 
> Just because they werent born a U company, didnt seem to find the sp from going UP.



Perhaps. I have fading memories of minerals explorers being turned into .coms in the 90s....Not all of them survived. Of course, this is different. Perhaps.


----------



## UraniumLover (26 April 2007)

What a dog. Soon as I get into it  goes down. Bad timing with the announcement  - farm in with WAG on its Mt. Cotton Project. WAG - don't think they have uranium mining experience as they are involved in the general media and communications industry and all of a sudden caught a u bug.

WAG -  they did well up 22 % at only 0.032 at the moment. I've put it in my watch list as you can make a bundle if you time these little ones correctly.


----------



## Brujo (27 April 2007)

kennas said:


> Just ann farm in agreement with WAG (a reengineered shell that used to be an audio company - now directed by the Steinepreis brothers) in an EPL in WA. Histerical drilling on the EPL produced some interesting essays including returns such as 1.5% U, 2% Cu and 0,6% Zn and traces of Au and Ag. So, there's some mineralisation about, but it's pretty early days on this one.
> 
> Another IT/Phone company turning into a U player! Concerning.




These Steinepreis brothers scare me a bit.  The couple of companies I've seen them involved with have been true penny dreadfuls - that RMC (can't remember for sure, but involved in debt collection or something), and Western Metals which was a basket case _before_ they got out of it.......what else are they involved in?  Have I just chanced upon a couple of the uglier ones?


----------



## Brujo (27 April 2007)

Apologies to RMC,  it wasn't them, but a similar code......I know it began with "R".......I remember I couldn't for the life of me figure out where the value was going to come from!!!


----------



## Brujo (27 April 2007)

I wish to retract my statement about the Steinepries brothers....I misunderstood the business they are involved in, of recapitalising and re-listing companies.

I didn't fully research before my comment, looking at the companies in isolation.

But I still remain wary of some of the companies they are involved in.


----------



## Halba (27 April 2007)

CTS resources are too small at this point in time, market won't push it any higher than current range without fresh news (drillholes).


----------



## elcruzy (27 April 2007)

it must be the location of the resource - high altitude and in Peru.
I have 15-20 Uranium companies on my watchlist with much smaller resource bases and some with just some exploration tenements.

anyone know the reason why for the recent drop in SP?


----------



## mick2006 (27 April 2007)

I think everybody is waiting for the approval to start drilling, once that is obtained the shareprice should start to firm up again.  Remember very high grade resource with plenty of upside, could be some good buying over the next couple of weeks till they announce they have started drilling.


----------



## Pat (27 April 2007)

Brujo said:


> These Steinepreis brothers scare me a bit.  The couple of companies I've seen them involved with have been true penny dreadfuls - that RMC (can't remember for sure, but involved in debt collection or something), and Western Metals which was a basket case _before_ they got out of it.......what else are they involved in?  Have I just chanced upon a couple of the uglier ones?






Brujo said:


> Apologies to RMC,  it wasn't them, but a similar code......I know it began with "R".......I remember I couldn't for the life of me figure out where the value was going to come from!!!





I think your refering to RMG???

Seems to of had a little bounce @ 55 cents, went to 59 cents then backed off into the afternoon. Could be a little upside to come... out of nowhere... It is U. Terrible looking chart.


----------



## Pat (27 April 2007)

Although the yearly chart looks ok.
Looks to of come back in line with he previous trend, just jumped out of the B band and returned to more normal levels.

I got in at 61.5 cents  

I need to practice some patients


----------



## mick2006 (30 April 2007)

Hopefully the quarterly report due out today will contain some good news in regard to the drilling permits for their Peru Uranium project, as they have two drill rigs ready to start as soon as they get the go ahead.

Might get a nice kick along once drilling has commenced, remember very high grade resource with significant exploration upside.  Could run very hard once drilling results start rolling in.


----------



## MJSJ (30 April 2007)

mick2006 said:


> Hopefully the quarterly report due out today will contain some good news in regard to the drilling permits for their Peru Uranium project, as they have two drill rigs ready to start as soon as they get the go ahead.
> 
> Might get a nice kick along once drilling has commenced, remember very high grade resource with significant exploration upside.  Could run very hard once drilling results start rolling in.




CTS's Quarterly report is available by Googling CTS Company Announcements. It not yet on their website - probably tomorrow.


----------



## bigdog (30 April 2007)

CTS ASX ANN was issued earlier

CTS 4:51 PM  Third Quarter Activities & Cashflow Reports 
http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20070430/pdf/3126njfh117j67.pdf

HIGHLIGHTS
 Ability to acquire final 20% interest in the Corachapi Uranium Project in southeastern Peru.
 Acquisition of direct 20% interest in uranium properties in Kyrgyzstan.
 Issue of 1,605,000 shares on conversion of listed options.
 Change of share registry to Computershare Investor Services.
Issued


----------



## mick2006 (1 May 2007)

Good reading from the quarterly report last night, now that they own 100% of the Peru uranium project they are sitting on over $1 billion worth of high grade surface uranium mineralisation. With plenty of upside potential to significantly expand the resource, just waiting drilling approvals with 2 drill rigs available to go straight away.

The most important thing about the Peru deposit is that it is at surface and very very high grade, so very little waste and low mining cost.

Once drilling resumes will possibly be re-rated higher in anticipation of further high grade results and also the possibility of quick lead time into a mining operation.


----------



## MJSJ (7 May 2007)

CTS today announced to the ASX the resignation of MD, Alan Maynard. How this will effect the share price of CTS the Market will determine! Do your own research on the company's future prospects.


----------



## insider (7 May 2007)

MJSJ said:


> CTS today announced to the ASX the resignation of MD, Alan Maynard. How this will effect the share price of CTS the Market will determine! Do your own research on the company's future prospects.





Not a good thing i believe...  This would lower the confidence of the holders and drag the price down...


----------



## Brujo (7 May 2007)

MJSJ said:


> CTS today announced to the ASX the resignation of MD, Alan Maynard. How this will effect the share price of CTS the Market will determine! Do your own research on the company's future prospects.





Note his departure at the same time from Artemis (ARV), a company based out of the same office as CTS..........


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (8 May 2007)

Guys I think most of you know I'm pretty good at picking undervalued stories,

CTS is my favoured Uranium play by far, regardless of current management etc, its just like MTN in its early days, while other JORC compliant companies rocket CTS's share price is lagging, well just like MTN it will only be a matter of time before a take over offer comes to cherry pick this company

With 110m shares on issue and 10mlbs of Uranium I see a take over offer of around $1.35 = $150m approx = $15 per lb JORC uranium

Wait and see


----------



## nizar (8 May 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Guys I think most of you know I'm pretty good at picking undervalued stories,
> 
> CTS is my favoured Uranium play by far, regardless of current management etc, its just like MTN in its early days, while other JORC compliant companies rocket CTS's share price is lagging, well just like MTN it will only be a matter of time before a take over offer comes to cherry pick this company
> 
> ...




Well possibly they dont need to offer a price that high. If the directors are dicks like OMCs then they mite sell out for much less  

(still not over it, LOL)

But yeh (without making your head any bigger LOL) i do agree the story here looks good. But i thought it reminded you more of URA early days as opposed to MTNs ?


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (8 May 2007)

An extract from "The Bulletin"

_Company consultant Jon Garvey said the company expected to complete its exploration commitment this year, with trial mining in early 2008 and an upgrade to full commissioning and mining in late 2008. *Preliminary costing suggests an initial capital cost of under $10m for a two-stage crushing plant and heap leach pad with a mining cost as low as $5-$7/lb of contained uranium.*

The company is also looking to seek a listing on the Toronto Stock Exchange later this year, where there is a lot more empathy for companies operating in South America._

With a cash cost of say $7 per lb and using a U price of say $87 per lb for the next few years the margin = $80 US lb = $100 AUD lb

For 10m lb's thats a net cashflow of $1Billion

Not too bad I say


----------



## ta2693 (8 May 2007)

not bad, I agree. but there are a lot of U shock,the question is which is better?
YML, ERN, BMN,MTN,ERL,PXR,NTU,EDN,DMA,ERL......


----------



## elcruzy (8 May 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Guys I think most of you know I'm pretty good at picking undervalued stories,
> 
> CTS is my favoured Uranium play by far, regardless of current management etc, its just like MTN in its early days, while other JORC compliant companies rocket CTS's share price is lagging, well just like MTN it will only be a matter of time before a take over offer comes to cherry pick this company
> 
> ...




I also made the call for MTN and i see some similarities in CTS, its too early to calculate  $$$ but if the board is legit and we can get to a JORC complaint resource then there is nowhere to go but up. i also read that there was a union revolt or some political unrest in Peru recently & also keep in mind that the landscape may make it difficult to mine / transport / get environmental approval.

Only time will tell. (plus a few decent announcements)


----------



## elcruzy (16 May 2007)

check out this article http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=32&ContentID=28631

while i dont subscribe to far east capital i have heard of them and they also think contact resources as one company with accessible Uranium. no doubt about it - i'm holding this one long term, the spike in the SP is just one ann away!!! its also pretty cheap compared to other prospective stocks especially some IPO's that open 275% on opening day.

Uranium hopefuls must act to maximise prices

14th May 2007, 9:00 WST



The race is on for uranium companies such as Deep Yellow and Marathon Resources to develop their projects within the next three years to cash in on the booming uranium market, according to a Far East Capital report to be released today. 

After comparing the potential profitability of emerging yellowcake producers based on standard industry economics, Far East Capital uranium analyst Warwick Grigor said there was fundamental value in emerging producers but companies needed to fast-track projects if they were to maximise the peak of the price cycle. 

The spot price for the radioactive ore has climbed nearly 180 per cent in the past 12 months to a record closing price of $US120 a pound last week, while Nymex December uranium futures are trading at $US153.90/lb. 

“Overwhelmingly the conclusion is that the economics are real and companies should be pushing ahead full steam to develop their projects,” Mr Grigor said. 

“The biggest winners on our table and in the stockmarket are those lowgrade companies that we had been dismissive of two years ago. Since then the uranium price has quadrupled, catapulting these companies into enviable positions.” 

He estimates that if all 19 Australian potential uranium producers were to reach production it would increase uranium supply by 17,000 tonnes a year, or up to 30 per cent over the next five years. If combined with increasing global supply, this could drag the uranium price back below $US100/lb. 

“This means that the highly leveraged, low-grade companies will need to be up and running as early as possible to maximise the peak of the uranium price cycle, sometime between today and three years time,” he said. 

One of the hurdles will be the high capital costs of up to $300 million to develop many of the low-grade projects. 

The report suggests that this could be a significant issue for Acclaim, Bannerman, Deep Yellow, Toro and Uranex, while better-placed companies include Contact, Energy Metals, Monaro and Uranium King. 

Mr Grigor warned many of the floats now hitting the market were opportunistic plays and that it would be difficult for even potential producers to negotiate their way through regulatory and compliance issues in the three-year time frame. “The ones in the USA are probably the most likely to go ahead because of the greater reliability of the data and the historical information ... but those mines are unlikely to big ones,” he said. 

Mr Grigor said he was constantly being asked if the uranium sector was “another dotcom boom” and the unreserved answer was no because it was possible to run fundamental analysis. 

“You can estimate rates of production, you have a market price for the product and you can reasonably estimate capital and operating costs,” he said. “This is a bull market based on hard factual economics, not fantasies and what-ifs. The conclusion is that at these uranium prices there are enormous cash flows that can be made.” 

Mr Grigor said there were still a number of unknowns in trying to determine the numbers for some companies. 

The main assumptions used in the absence of official numbers included capital expenditure per tonne of capacity of $85 and a spot price of $US113/lb.


----------



## jman2007 (27 May 2007)

A general word of caution for all,

As most of you probably know, it is absolutely vital that you do your own research and arrive at your own conclusions before parting with your hard-earned dough.  But with the number of comapnies jumping on the Uranium bandwagon at the moment, it can become difficult to weed out the potential producers from the pure opportunists.

The sad reality is that most of the new mineral companies claming to have "prospective" Uranium tenements are doomed to fail, although some do have potential.  Some Directors will have no intrest in mining or producing Uranium at all, but rather will wait till the market conditions suit them before cashing in on the boom and riding of into the sunset, leaving us; the humble investor, with a bunch of worthless shares.

In saying that, there are several companies which do have quality management and portfolios, and an obvious desire to reward their shareholders over the next few years.  With the Cigar Lake mine looking rather sick at the moment, all looks set for investors to strike while the irons hot.  Who knows, perhaps we will never see another investment opportunity like this in our lifetime?

But don't take my word for it, as I said, draw your own conclusions, and good luck!

Cheers
Jman2007


----------



## insider (27 May 2007)

jman2007 said:


> A general word of caution for all,
> 
> As most of you probably know, it is absolutely vital that you do your own research and arrive at your own conclusions before parting with your hard-earned dough.  But with the number of comapnies jumping on the Uranium bandwagon at the moment, it can become difficult to weed out the potential producers from the pure opportunists.
> 
> ...




This belongs in the uranium thread and not the CTS thread... It's like you're trying to down ramp... imo


----------



## bigt (30 May 2007)

Hey YT - what are your thoughts now on CTS? As you hold a large (unknown to me) quantity of CTS, what are your long term plans for this holding? 

Recent trading has been dismal, as has the lack of information coming out from CTS re drilling etc.

I'm holding long term, though would appreciate any thoughts or sharing of information re CTS. Thanks.


----------



## insider (30 May 2007)

Yes trading is terrible... last time i checked there was an individual selling 100,000 shares at 53.5 cents... that's a lot...


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (30 May 2007)

Guys all I can say is like MTN, the asset is there, how long the market takes to realise this is another matter, 

I'm looking to buy more at these levels as a re-rating will happen, right now at this mkt cap you can buy CTS, MRU or GBE, given MRU has nothing but dirt and Insto backing, GBE has a greenfields discovery and CTS has a high grade JORC'd deposit I think I know where my money is going


----------



## nizar (30 May 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Guys all I can say is like MTN, the asset is there, how long the market takes to realise this is another matter,
> 
> I'm looking to buy more at these levels as a re-rating will happen, right now at this mkt cap you can buy CTS, MRU or GBE, given MRU has nothing but dirt and Insto backing, GBE has a greenfields discovery and CTS has a high grade JORC'd deposit I think I know where my money is going




Timely sector rotation can be very profitable.

Is that why your avatar is so sad YT? LOL :
Coz youve still got your funds in the uranium sector while the oil&gas sector is going ballistic.

I dont think its the end for uranium, far from.

But right now sentiment is against it.

GO where the money is, and go there often. Right now thats NOT in uranium stocks...


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (30 May 2007)

nizar said:


> Timely sector rotation can be very profitable.
> 
> Is that why your avatar is so sad YT? LOL :
> Coz youve still got your funds in the uranium sector while the oil&gas sector is going ballistic.
> ...





I prefer to accumulate huge positions when I have very little competetion as the "sheep" are grazing elsewhere :

With the Uranium mkt staying strong for yonkes, this wil be a global asset by anyones measure, time will tell if I'm right


----------



## bigt (31 May 2007)

Well somethings stirred up some interest, single buyer in for half a mill @ 53c.

...that you YT??!


----------



## insider (31 May 2007)

bigt said:


> Well somethings stirred up some interest, single buyer in for half a mill @ 53c.
> 
> ...that you YT??!




DUDE YOU SCARED ME FOR A SECOND... It's $53,500 WORTH... I'M WITH YT ON THIS ONE... IT'S JUST A MATTER OF TIME UNTIL THE MARKET REALIZES THE VALUE...


----------



## bigt (31 May 2007)

Nah, gotta be $250 000 worth (approx)...500 000 @0.53c? 

Someone wants a big piece of yellowcake!


----------



## insider (31 May 2007)

bigt said:


> Nah, gotta be $250 000 worth (approx)...500 000 @0.53c?
> 
> Someone wants a big piece of yellowcake!




Appologies BIGT... I thought you were referring to my comment from yesterday... Yes very positive to see... Perhaps I can make some back eh


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (31 May 2007)

bigt said:


> Nah, gotta be $250 000 worth (approx)...500 000 @0.53c?
> 
> Someone wants a big piece of yellowcake!




It was actually 1 order, came on in the am for 500k at 50c, moved up to 55c to fill, got just under 500k, then dropped down to 53c and amended its volume to be another 500k = One buyer for 1m shares = $500k

Now last year I would have thought that that order was huge, but now, well its good, but not huge, we need a few more of these IMO to kick start things


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (20 June 2007)

Ann out regarding Uranium doesn't look like its ignited much interest must be one of their smaller projects or just average results.

Any thoughts ?


----------



## nizar (20 June 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Now last year I would have thought that that order was huge, but now, well its good, but not huge, we need a few more of these IMO to kick start things




Well i see you have raised your standards bro, you must be a big player by now if 500k is nothing, keep up the good work champ 

CTS starting to look the goods.
Looks like its about to break upwards from a descending triangle.

Market cap is a bit of a joke at $50m. I remember OMC when it was the same market cap at 50c. Wasnt there for long....


----------



## insider (20 June 2007)

I hope you're right Nizar... for my pockets sake of course... I have sooo many 21st birthdays this year with an average of 100 dollars going to each of them... damn my heart just skipped a beat...


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 June 2007)

nizar said:


> Well i see you have raised your standards bro, you must be a big player by now if 500k is nothing, keep up the good work champ
> 
> CTS starting to look the goods.
> Looks like its about to break upwards from a descending triangle.
> ...




800k CTSO, quiet a nice parcel if I do say so myself,

Totally agree re its undervaluedness on a comparative basis, Corachapi is worth $1.30 from memory at a take over of $15/lb

Now add to this the Kyrgyzstan drilling, looks like its a 2 project company


----------



## Sean K (20 June 2007)

I agree with Niz. Descending triangle, and looks like there is good support at 50, but not out of the woods. Stochs pocking up, MACD still flat, but there's long term supprt here. Will have to break the downward trend line and then at least 53, possibly 55 to be confirmed starting a new trend - sideways or up.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 June 2007)

Almost forgot, Intersuisse Invesment Bankers have a buy recommendation on CTS at 50c I think heres the link 

http://www.intersuisse.com.au/files/JRM Winter 2007 - May.pdf


Agree with Kennas and Niz, may take some serious announcements to get this out of sideways trending, would have thought todays would have created a bit more of a stir, 

Its clear Uraniums come off the boil, but the fundamentals are still there!

Annoyed because I paid an avg 35c for my opies

LT hold for me though


----------



## elcruzy (20 June 2007)

i'm still firm about my original statement before that this company is well undervalued. 

regarding the announcement however its not 'standout' news with the best thing being that it is a Extremely shallow deposit and mining should be cheap and easy. facilities close by also help.

the thicknesses are just a bit skinny to me and CTS has only 20% the Corochapi deposit is still the money make in my opinion - real news about that will push the SP up.


----------



## Sean K (26 June 2007)

Approaching resistance at 55 cents, and maybe be out of downtrend having found very good support at 50 cents. Looks to be limited downside chart wise here, unless it breaks down through that support, of course. Worth watching closely for a break up IMO.


----------



## insider (26 June 2007)

kennas said:


> Approaching resistance at 55 cents, and maybe be out of downtrend having found very good support at 50 cents. Looks to be limited downside chart wise here, unless it breaks down through that support, of course. Worth watching closely for a break up IMO.




Hey Kennas... have you ever considered writing a book... two more posts and you've broken the 5000 mark...


----------



## jman2007 (3 July 2007)

Peru update announcement out today, looks like it sparked some interest.  Hopefully can break through the $0.55 barrier, and at least hold there!


----------



## Sean K (12 July 2007)

kennas said:


> Approaching resistance at 55 cents, and maybe be out of downtrend having found very good support at 50 cents. Looks to be limited downside chart wise here, unless it breaks down through that support, of course. Worth watching closely for a break up IMO.



This looks to have changed direction IMO. Breaking some short term resistance after finding a definate floor at 50 cents. Looks likely to move either sideways or back up from this position. Breaking 57 probably more likely to be up, but for confirmation wait for a higher low. Indicators look very good.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (12 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Guys all I can say is like MTN, the asset is there, how long the market takes to realise this is another matter,
> 
> I'm looking to buy more at these levels as a re-rating will happen, right now at this mkt cap you can buy CTS, MRU or GBE, given MRU has nothing but dirt and Insto backing, GBE has a greenfields discovery and CTS has a high grade JORC'd deposit I think I know where my money is going




Yeah Kenna, does look to be heading North, but its so so undervalued its not even funny,

Just realised I haven't done one of my trade mark valuations for CTS, will do one when I get a chance,

I think mkt will still wait for something like a takeover offer before it pays up properly just like MTN, 

I think though its about time that an Insto got on the registry, I mean if you look at MRU there were 4 Insto's on the registry, 4! and they have dirt, promissing dirt at that, but dirt nevertheless,

With the recent placements at 50c and option exercise the company should have $10m minimum for an aggresive drilling campaign

Like I said, I'm holding a large parcel and waiting patiently


----------



## OK2 (12 July 2007)

Looks like the YT share followers just pushed CTS SP up to .615, just an observation.

I follow YT comments quite closely and there are definately a lot of followers who buy up on his posts. Must complement the guy for the respect he is earning, you may want to consider becoming a broker!


----------



## ta2693 (12 July 2007)

Just some personal view about CTS, if you want to jump on CTS, you have to pay about 30% premium compared to the price 3 days ago. I think it is a little bit late. Besides U sector is not hot anymore. It is very hard to make investos and ordinary investors excited by Uranium right now other than YT's blind followers.


----------



## Sean K (12 July 2007)

ta2693 said:


> Just some personal view about CTS, if you want to jump on CTS, you have to pay about 30% premium compared to the price 3 days ago. I think it is a little bit late. Besides U sector is not hot anymore. It is very hard to make investos and ordinary investors excited by Uranium right now other than YT's blind followers.



ta, yes, YT's 'blind followers' may follow if he produces some detailed analysis here. Such a shame that this has occurred IMO. YT has been on this for quite some time. In regard to the uranium sector, I agree, not the flavour of the month, so perhaps a good opportunity to critically analyse something out of flavour in a sector out of favour.  

TA wise, looks OK short term, and I haven't factored in any jump today after my previous post.

PS, perhaps the market has responded to my TA? LOL


----------



## ta2693 (12 July 2007)

kennas said:


> ta, yes, YT's 'blind followers' may follow if he produces some detailed analysis here. Such a shame that this has occurred IMO. YT has been on this for quite some time. In regard to the uranium sector, I agree, not the flavour of the month, so perhaps a good opportunity to critically analyse something out of flavour in a sector out of favour.
> 
> TA wise, look OK short term, haven't factored in any jump today after my previous post.
> 
> PS, perhaps the market has responded to my TA? LOL




Technically, it fits my criteria to buy, but I know who is buyer (probably YT's follower). I think there is more wisdom on the seller side. So I am still out. 
But the momentum is very strong. If you want to do intraday trading, I think that is the time to punt.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (12 July 2007)

ta2693 said:


> Just some personal view about CTS, if you want to jump on CTS, you have to pay about 30% premium compared to the price 3 days ago. I think it is a little bit late. Besides U sector is not hot anymore. It is very hard to make investos and ordinary investors excited by Uranium right now other than YT's blind followers.




I doubt it Ta, as Kennas said I've been holding CTS for 2 months now, so nothing new here,

But the company has continued to deliver results at its Kyrgyzstan project (which I really like) and has raised $7.5m in cash meaning they are well funded,


----------



## kitehigh (12 July 2007)

Yes It is nice to see the jump up in price today.  I have been holding for a few months now and reminds me of the challening period last year when I brought into a number of companies only to have to weather the storm for a few months.  But patience was rewarded with over 200% returns on 2 of my companies.  Just wish I could have been a bit more patience with TZN and EQN, would have made alot more money if I had.
I think patience will again be the key for a good return on this company.


----------



## moses (12 July 2007)

This isn't exactly new news, but it didn't get a mention on the thread...

<snip>

Australian resources company Artemis Resources Limited (“Artemis” or “the Company”) has acquired another significant equity stake in a fellow resources company, following the execution of a placement agreement with Contact Uranium Limited (“Contact”) (ASX: CTS) that will see the Company take 5,000,000 shares (at A$0.50) and options in Contact, for a consideration of A$2.5m.  

Following this transaction Artemis will hold approximately six per cent of Contact. 

Contact Uranium Ltd is an Australian-based exploration company with a portfolio of exceptional uranium projects in Peru, Kyrgyzstan and Western Australia.  

Contact’s most advanced project is the shallow, high grade Corachapi uranium deposit in Peru, which has a JORC compliant Inferred Resource of 9.2 million lbs of U3O8 – with an in situ metal value in excess of A$1 billion. Contact recently announced exceptional results from radiometric surveys over its Peruvian licenses, identifying anomalies that demonstrate potential to significantly expand the resources at Corachapi and at its second Peruvian project, Kihitian.  

During the third quarter of 2007 Contact anticipates commencing an extensive drilling program to enhance and increase this known mineralisation at the resource (refer Figure 1).  In the Kyrgyz Republic Contact’s operating partner is drilling its Kamushanovskoe uhas recorded significant anomalism - maximum value of 0.287% uranium over 0.5m.  

<end snip>


----------



## ubid (15 July 2007)

I Know of a few broking firms in Perth are picking this up also, should be a good week ahead.

Still very cheap in my books, YT when is your valuation coming???


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (16 July 2007)

Hey mate,

Re valuation, put it this way, today CTS have announced 11m lbs of Uranium JORC, takeovers were being done at $15lb but the last few have been as high as $30lb

11m lb's U @ $15lb = $165m = $1.20

11m lb's U @ $30lb = $330m = $2.40

As I have always said this company will get a takeover offer at these levels, its another MTN waiting to happen mark my words


----------



## Sean K (16 July 2007)

kennas said:


> This looks to have changed direction IMO. Breaking some short term resistance after finding a definate floor at 50 cents. Looks likely to move either sideways or back up from this position. Breaking 57 probably more likely to be up, but for confirmation wait for a higher low. Indicators look very good.



Might pause around these levels under 65 resistance, but looks like momentum definately on the up to push it through eventually. I think breaking through 65 will definately be the end to the sideways movement even though all time high 70ish will also be resistance. Looking good atm, but of course anything can and will happen. 

Good break though 55 in retrospect.


----------



## insider (16 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Hey mate,
> 
> Re valuation, put it this way, today CTS have announced 11m lbs of Uranium JORC, takeovers were being done at $15lb but the last few have been as high as $30lb
> 
> ...




yay... This company finally went up... I bought some of these in April right before the correction began at about 62 cents with my Birthday money... And yes we are onto a good thing


----------



## greenfs (16 July 2007)

kitehigh said:


> Yes It is nice to see the jump up in price today.  I have been holding for a few months now and reminds me of the challening period last year when I brought into a number of companies only to have to weather the storm for a few months.  But patience was rewarded with over 200% returns on 2 of my companies.  Just wish I could have been a bit more patience with TZN and EQN, would have made alot more money if I had.
> I think patience will again be the key for a good return on this company.




I am fully expecting the sp to run towards its true current value of $1.50 within the next 6 months as ann re Peru resource continue to happen. This opinion is based upon all info freely available on the company's website and herein. 

In addition, I note that I understand that a recent change within senior management has probably assisted the company in moving forward more quickly than may have been the case in recent times.

Hopefully, a takeover can be avoided so that even greater shareholder value can be achieved through commencement of mining in early 2008. If this occurs, a higher long-term sp of $5 is a definite possibility.


----------



## jman2007 (17 July 2007)

Interesting article in the WA newspaper from Saturday, predicting that many uranium stocks that have been on a slippery slide recently will bounce back.  Investment bank UBS particularly bullish in their outlook for the price of uranium, tipping it will hit $200/lb next year.

I quote from UBS spokesperson: "Production problems from primary producers continue to underscore the prospect for continued market imbalances for the next several years".

Also good to see CTS advancing with their projects in Kyrgyzs with JORC figure out today, thay may have the jump on Monaro now.  Have to agree with YT about CTS being currently undervalued, but for me the real key with this company lies in Corachapi.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (18 July 2007)

CTS looks to be begging to break upwards past 65c and then finally 70c after that its blue blue sky, or is that yellow sky? :

Has been along time coming IMO,

About 2 weeks ago when CTS came out with its Kyrgyzstan drilling I thought wow I can't believe the mkt doesn't like this,

You see the problem with CTS is that the market is ill informed, just like it was with MTN, but a takeover offer sorted that out,

Corachapi is worth at least $1 CTS fully dilluted based on a take over per lb of $15/lb

Now over at Kyrgyzstan, the company has alot of 1-2m intersections grading 0.1%, too small widths you say? Well given that all of the mineralisation is within 6m of surface you could just go out there with a bunch of dozers and take the top 6m's of dirt and process it,

I'd much prefer that sort of project vs the Nambian style 20m grading 0.02% U thats about 50m down!

Give  me high grade  near surface ore anyday!

Mark my words CTS is still undervalued and should be at least $1.25 based on peer comparisons!


----------



## nizar (18 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> CTS looks to be begging to break upwards past 65c and then finally 70c after that its blue blue sky, or is that yellow sky? :
> 
> Has been along time coming IMO,
> 
> ...





I would have to buy this when it closes above 65c.

Theres significant resistance at 65c as its failed there 4 or 5 times in the past 12 months.

The question is 2mrw will it get shut down or will it gap up and run like a champion.

I'll be waiting.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (18 July 2007)

I forgot to add that as with Corachapi, CTS has now acquired 100% of the Kyrgyzstan projects and just released a *JORC 2.079Mt@0.037% U3o8* as a first pass JORC from very limited drilling,

If you check the assays most were 0.1% U so I expect the grade to go up as should the tonnage,

From my estimates they have 4 areas, each is 3.5km's x 0.5kms x 2m(avg intersection) = 10Mt's @0.1% U

4 potential deposits = Could be 40Mt's @0.1% U = 88M lb's U

Even if they only firm up 1/4 of this = 22M lb's U! @ $15/lb = $2.75c more value to CTS

So you can see why I constantly compare CTS to MTN


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (18 July 2007)

nizar said:


> I would have to buy this when it closes above 65c.
> 
> Theres significant resistance at 65c as its failed there 4 or 5 times in the past 12 months.
> 
> ...




Gee Niz, you've gone totally techie, no fundamentals play into your decisions anymore ? ? ? 

What happened to the good old days of EVE? ?

Even if it fails tomorrow it won't change my mind one bit on the fundamentals


----------



## jtb (18 July 2007)

ubid said:


> I Know of a few broking firms in Perth are picking this up also, should be a good week ahead.
> 
> Still very cheap in my books, YT when is your valuation coming???




Hogans had a spruik on them in the local sunday rag too (weekend just gone) which seems to have added to the renewed enthusiasm from Monday.

Looks interesting


----------



## nizar (19 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Gee Niz, you've gone totally techie, no fundamentals play into your decisions anymore ? ? ?
> 
> What happened to the good old days of EVE? ?
> 
> Even if it fails tomorrow it won't change my mind one bit on the fundamentals




Bro it was EVE, OMC, CBH, KZL, ZFX, OXR, i knew them all back to front :

Not anymore though, im thinking for the future, i dont wanna spend time doing research. So now i just trade the price action, doesnt matter to me (nor should it to anyone) if there are fundamentals behind share price appreciation or not. As long as the sp goes up you make money.

Its nice to find value but you know how the market works. Some companies stay undervalued for ages, and others just keep shooting up from overvalued to even more overvalued.

I just take this approach now because it works for me, and is much more time efficient. Im not gonna have much time to do company research in the future and i want to design a mechanical system that runs in the background. 

And YT if you are interested in a job at Goldman Sachs, PM me. Iv got connects  

But different approached work for different people. Your fundamental analysis is tops, and works for you (clearly).

HAve you got the Porsche 911 yet??

Anyway i bought some CTS this morning at .67. Sell side thin on this one


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (19 July 2007)

Hey Niz,

Glad to have you aboard, I'm surprised that you didn't wait for a break above 70c, given twice before that was resistance as well,

Re Job Offer, unless the salary has SIX ZERO's on the end of it no thanks, I did my time in Shawshank 5 years ago as an Law Intern and I ain't going back 

Re car, not yet, torn between M3, 911 and Maserati 3200GT, decisions decisions

Whats your breakout target for CTS? 




nizar said:


> Bro it was EVE, OMC, CBH, KZL, ZFX, OXR, i knew them all back to front :
> 
> Not anymore though, im thinking for the future, i dont wanna spend time doing research. So now i just trade the price action, doesnt matter to me (nor should it to anyone) if there are fundamentals behind share price appreciation or not. As long as the sp goes up you make money.
> 
> ...


----------



## j4mesa (19 July 2007)

Hi YT and Niz,

Either type of trader you are, IMHO the more you know the better off it is.......

It depends on the circumstances that you are having, in Niz case , he might be working while trading  , therefore techies suits him....

However,each has its own benefits and drawbacks......
For me, I more to the techies analysis, as the entry point,to the strong the fundies of the shares I wanted.......I used to be fundy trader but now I am mixed of both.....


----------



## ta2693 (20 July 2007)

I still doubt who is buying cts. But I think they are not longterm investor and can not be sophisticated trader. 
There is a share call ARV available on market. 
ARV has 500000 shares and 500000 options of CTS
The market value of 3.5m+ and 2.5m+ according to current CTS market price 73c for head, 52c for option.
That made up of 6m in ARV
ARV's market cap is only 8m. 
If I were the trader going to hold CTS for longterm gain. I will choose ARV as vehicle. But ARV is down 1.56% today. 
So, I doubt the buyer is for longterm and for value. It is more likely to be momentum trader from my point of view.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 July 2007)

ta2693 said:


> I still doubt who is buying cts. But I think they are not longterm investor and can not be sophisticated trader.
> There is a share call ARV available on market.
> ARV has 500000 shares and 500000 options of CTS
> The market value of 3.5m+ and 2.5m+ according to current CTS market price 73c for head, 52c for option.
> ...




Momentume traders? I doubt it Ta, when it was 60c you said



ta2693 said:


> Just some personal view about CTS, if you want to jump on CTS, you have to pay about 30% premium compared to the price 3 days ago. I think it is a little bit late. Besides U sector is not hot anymore. It is very hard to make investos and ordinary investors excited by Uranium right now other than YT's blind followers.





Its good to play devils advocate and to have arguments for and against etc etc, but surely you must now see that this run up is not just my blind followers, I honestly think that its not just momentum trader either,

Intersuisse and Warrick Grigor have done research reports on CTS and both had it as they're favoured exposure to the Uranium market,

Also CTS have no real Insto's on the registry, compared with something like MRU which had 3-4 and were nowhere near as advanced as CTS,

I know that 2 months ago my Pato's and Hartleys brokers didn't really know about CTS, now they do,

I'm not saying this run will continue, I hope it consolidates,

But I have been saying that CTS (like MTN) was far far to cheap on an EV comparison to its peers and now is being re-rated, good luck buying at 60c my friend


----------



## ta2693 (20 July 2007)

Momentum traders can push the price up as well, no matter 60c and 70c. The only difference is they will sell and drive the price down as quick and they push it up. But it does not matter, ppl who long at 60c have made some money.

My argument is 
Given the value of CTS is true, why they do not buy ARV which is obviously better in value than CTS.

Logically, the answer is either CTS's value is not true, or the buyers are unsophisticated.I can not argue with you on CTS' value. I am not prepared to do that. So I think the buyers are only traders for momentum.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 July 2007)

ta2693 said:


> Momentum traders can push the price up as well, no matter 60c and 70c. The only difference is they will sell and drive the price down as quick and they push it up. But it does not matter, ppl who long at 60c have made some money.
> 
> My argument is
> *Given the value of CTS is true, why they do not buy ARV which is obviously better in value than CTS.*
> ...




Mate companies that hold shares in other companies *NEVER* trade at fair value,

Cases TAS holding EDE
JRL holding EME
MEP holding multiple companies


----------



## juw177 (20 July 2007)

ta2693, so your argument is that just because one company holds shares in another company, and they are both young in the resource sector, they should be treated the same?


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 July 2007)

ta2693 said:


> I still doubt who is buying cts. But I think they are not longterm investor and can not be sophisticated trader.
> There is a share call ARV available on market.
> ARV has 500000 shares and 500000 options of CTS
> The market value of 3.5m+ and 2.5m+ according to current CTS market price 73c for head, 52c for option.
> ...





Also why did you think ARV's market cap is $8m?

They have 51m shares on issue listed and unlisted,

Even at current price of 36c = $18m Mkt Cap

So I guess your whole theory was wrong as it was based on a miscalculation


----------



## Sean K (20 July 2007)

ta2693 said:


> Given the value of CTS is true, why they do not buy ARV which is obviously better in value than CTS.



ta, can you expand on this a little bit more please? Sounds like an interesting premise to me. I have seen companies with investments in others trade way under a valuation like you propose. Not sure exactly why. Might be leverage, or influence over the project, or their other investments being cr@p. Perhaps that's it. Might need a total valuation on ARV to be done and then compare it.


----------



## ta2693 (20 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Mate companies that hold shares in other companies *NEVER* trade at fair value,
> 
> Cases TAS holding EDE
> JRL holding EME
> MEP holding multiple companies




Ok, I understand. I just feel strange why companies that hold shares in other companies have to be trade at high discount. 
In long term, there is no difference.


----------



## ta2693 (20 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Also why did you think ARV's market cap is $8m?
> 
> They have 51m shares on issue listed and unlisted,
> 
> ...




I read it from etrade website. You can check it if you have etrade account. if it is the case, etrade mislead me.


----------



## ta2693 (20 July 2007)

kennas said:


> ta, can you expand on this a little bit more please? Sounds like an interesting premise to me. I have seen companies with investments in others trade way under a valuation like you propose. Not sure exactly why. Might be leverage, or influence over the project, or their other investments being cr@p. Perhaps that's it. Might need a total valuation on ARV to be done and then compare it.




Check ARV's announcement on 10/07/2007 Artemis will receive 5,000,000 ordinary shares plus options for a consideration of A$2.5M.


----------



## ta2693 (20 July 2007)

juw177 said:


> ta2693, so your argument is that just because one company holds shares in another company, and they are both young in the resource sector, they should be treated the same?




Not really. 
My argument is Same shares, no matter who is holding it should be treated the same. If one is substantially overvalue the other, someone must have payed too much for being impatient.


----------



## jtb (20 July 2007)

ARTEMIS TAKES SIX PER CENT STAKE IN CONTACT URANIUM
FOLLOWING A$2.5M PLACEMENT
Key points:
• Artemis Resources agrees to placement in Australian uranium company Contact Uranium
Limited (ASX: CTS) equal to around 6% of Contact share capital;
• Artemis will receive 5,000,000 ordinary shares plus options for a consideration of A$2.5M;
• Contact has exposure to promising Uranium Projects in Peru and Kyrgyz republic; and,
• Artemis recently reached an agreement with South Australian focused Apollo Minerals
Limited (Apollo) to sub underwrite up to A$4,000,000 of the minimum A$8,000,000 to be
offered in a proposed Initial Public Offering (IPO).


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 July 2007)

ta2693 said:


> I read it from etrade website. You can check it if you have etrade account. if it is the case, etrade mislead me.




Yes but Etrade, Commsec etc Don't include unlisted shares in their Calcualtion


Fact: ARV has 51m shares on issue, at 36c = $18m mkt Cap

Fact: ARV holds 5m shares + 5 m *50c options* not the listed 20c kind = at 73c *$4.8m* value,


I'm not sure how much cash or other assets they have, but the fact is they hold just under $5m worth of CTS and their Market Cap is $18m, so there is a $13m shortfall

But hey if your CTS play is ARV good for you


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 July 2007)

Anyway back on CTS, Niz was spot on,

65c was the breakout and 70c was smashed,

Its funny, I would have thought that 70c would have been the real hurdle,

Well so far 500k bought above 70c with another 500k on the bid above 70c, 

The sell side looks pretty thin,

I hope it consoldiates a little at these levels


----------



## resourcesman (20 July 2007)

ta2693 said:


> Ok, I understand. I just feel strange why companies that hold shares in other companies have to be trade at high discount.
> In long term, there is no difference.





Actually, there is a difference in the longer term... the difference is known as agency costs...... there is a risk that the extra layer of management (in this case ARV's management) does funny things with with their investments or does things that are not in the shareholder's best interest.... this would explain a small amount of the divergences, but i guess it shouldnt be that large

GLI/GLC was a case where the NTA per share was consistently above the share price...... there was a risk that management would screw up, which they did at the end, so the price of the shares was always lower than if the whole portfolio were dissolved and the assets were paid back to shareholders


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 July 2007)

Amazing,

Theres about 400k buying above 70c yet there's only 200k on the entire sell side!

I've had long chats with brokers today, they all like the look of CTS's breakout, they also think that my $1.20 target is reasonable given the projects,

I just laughed, I liked CTS when it was 50c and the opies 30c, they didn't why because it was trending sideways, now it breaks out and they love it, lol


----------



## ideaforlife (20 July 2007)

Hey. YT. how to get to chat to brokers? Sorry that I've been in the game for only a few months and haven't really understand the rules yet.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 July 2007)

lol, I think your misunderstanding,

I use a number of brokers, Bell Potter, Patersons, Hartleys, I always tlak to them, aske them their opinions and thoughts,

I was just saying that now that CTS has broken out they like it, I find it funny, because I always think its best to get set before the breakout, 

But then look at Niz, he bought like 2 days ago on confirmation of the breakout and must be doing well, especially since its only been 2 days


----------



## springhill (20 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Well so far 500k bought above 70c with another 500k on the bid above 70c,




YT can you tell me where you access this information ie. the number of buyers/sellers and buys/sells and at what price?


----------



## nizar (20 July 2007)

springhill said:


> YT can you tell me where you access this information ie. the number of buyers/sellers and buys/sells and at what price?




You can view it with WebIress or any other platform which offers dynamic information with full market depth, detail, course of sales.

Alternatively, you can get half an hour delayed course of sales from:
http://stocknessmonster.com

CTS looking good today. From here hard to say, id favour a pullback, maybe a tail to 70c to confirm the support is there. Or maybe it'll go to the moon, lol


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (20 July 2007)

nizar said:


> You can view it with WebIress or any other platform which offers dynamic information with full market depth, detail, course of sales.
> 
> Alternatively, you can get half an hour delayed course of sales from:
> http://stocknessmonster.com
> ...




420k on the buy above 70c about 150k all up on the sell, buying has been relentless and sustained,

I too would favour consolidation but will not complain if it goes to the moon lol


----------



## deftfear (21 July 2007)

ta2693 said:


> I read it from etrade website. You can check it if you have etrade account. if it is the case, etrade mislead me.




I wouldn't rely on Etrade for market cap, a few months ago they didn't even have the market cap for BHP right...the biggest company on the stock exchange. If they can't get that right, how are they meant to get a small company right? 

Right now they have market cap around $128 Billion AUD, when yahoo has it around $200 Billion USD


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (21 July 2007)

deftfear said:


> I wouldn't rely on Etrade for market cap, a few months ago they didn't even have the market cap for BHP right...the biggest company on the stock exchange. If they can't get that right, how are they meant to get a small company right?
> 
> Right now they have market cap around $128 Billion AUD, when yahoo has it around $200 Billion USD




As a rule of thumb, when i want to work out market caps I only look at *APPENDIX 3B statements* because they by law have to disclose all shares, options, warrants and convertible notes, listed unlisted or escrowed

CTS made a really good break out this week and although the sell side is non-existant I expect profit takers to emerge this week, 

I will be looking for it to _maybe_ retrace back towards 70c to confirm support there,

I will do a thorough write up this weekend as I have a bit of spare time

Cheers


----------



## ubid (21 July 2007)

Im sure that would be much appreciated y t from all the CTS followers.

I only bought some oppies on the 12th of July @ 37c following a big rap from my broker, couldnt be happier atm.

I think the share price has a long way to go, next drill results should be interesting. 

Cheers Ubid.


----------



## bliimp (22 July 2007)

Reading the CTS thread from the beginning, I noted the following on 7th May :-



Brujo said:


> Note his departure at the same time from Artemis (ARV), a company based out of the same office as CTS..........




This comment related to the resignation of the Managing Director (MD) of CTS ... who was also a non-executive director of ARV!

OK ... so what is the significance? ... let's get a time perspective.

1. On 13 March 2007, ARV the diversified Australian resources company lists on the ASX following an IPO
2. On 7th May, the MD resigns from both ARV and CTS positions
3. On 10th July, ARV takes on a 6% stake in CTS

Perhaps the MD had a conflict of interest (the ASX announcements by CTS and ARV mentioned no reason for resignation) ... so if that was the case, then the intention to take a stake in CTS must have been made between the 7 week period from 13 March to 7 May ... or it may have been on the agenda from the beginning ... with Mega Uranium in the know!

Why should Mega Uranium be in the know?

Mega Uranium, the TSX listed company, through its wholly owned subsidiary Redport Ltd holds a 10% interest in ARV ... and has held that interest from day 1!

In fact, in the 10th July ASX announcement by ARV on their 6% stake in CTS, ARV footnotes with _ "ARV  Special Adviser Tony Grey has been appointed to assist Artemis in the development of the Company’s assets. Mr Grey has over 30 years experience in the resource sector including as founder of Pancontinental Mining Ltd, Chairman of International Ferro Metals Ltd and director of Mega Uranium Ltd"_.

How convenient! A director of Mega Uranium giving "specialist advice" to ARV!

And Mega Uranium has been very, very active in the past year or two with acquisitions of uranium juniors in both Australia and overseas ... and is currently cashed up with a $112m warchest ... refer to http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=272102.

All I am doing is hypothesising ... and don't want to turn this into a Sherlock Holmes saga ... I suppose there is nothing wrong in a company having an interest in a takeover target ... in this case Mega Uranium really has "10% of 6%" which is really a 0.6% interest in CTS ... but the things that stand out are 

1. The CTS-ARV-Mega Uranium connection
2. How ARV appears to have had the intention from day 1 to quickly take the initial stake in CTS
3. The guiding hand of a Mega Uranium director to assist ARV
4. The sudden increase in SP and Volumes in CTS since the initial stake ... when nearly all other uranium stocks have been out of favour

Add this to Young Trader's fundamental analysis, and I start to think that a  _takeover_ is imminent!


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (22 July 2007)

wow, Bliimp,

I haven't even started doing my write up, but I doubt that I would have made the Mega Uranium link,

You may really be onto something here, I was always curious why ARV took a stake in CTS, I mean its not like its an obvious fit or anything, ARV's main project is near MOL's Molybdenum Spinefex project, whereas CTS is just one of the most undervalued U plays in the ASX on a peer comparison,

Its informative _"Sherlock Holmes"_ : posts like yours that may me so thankful I am a member of ASF,

And looking at the charts of other U plays you're absolutely right, CTS is one of the few to have risen so strongly in a flat U market, 

If it is a takeover offer I'm betting that the intial offer will be $1-$1.20 (using $15 per Lb of Uranium as an EV)

Thanks again Bliimp 

p.s. Ubid, I'm curious who's your broker? And what exactly was the rap?





bliimp said:


> Reading the CTS thread from the beginning, I noted the following on 7th May :-
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (22 July 2007)

Before I put up my full analysis (about to do it) 

I think I should give a bit of background info re CTS's Peru Uranium projects

The 2 main projects in Peru are *Corachapi* and *Pinochio*, are located in the *Macusani District of Peru *where companies such as *Solex, Vena, Frontier Pacific, Strathmore Minerals *and other Canadian Uranium companies have been working away for a few years now,

Whats amazing though is of the entire Macusani DistricT, *Corachapi* and *Pinochio* are by far the best and most advanced projects,

*Corachapi*, or *"Chapi"* as its referred to in historical IPEN reports I dug up, was the second most advanced deposit and had a JORC resource of 1.6Mt's @ 0.15% U which was based mostly on the extensive work done by *IPEN* (Peruvian Institute for Nuclear Energy) and *IAEA* (UN International Atomic Energy Agency) these invloed drilling, trenches and adits

Natuarally I was sceptical of the "historic" figures, as if this deposit was sop good, how did CTS manage to get it so cheap? 

Well lots and lots of digging up greatly increased my confidence, particularly one report which was prepared for the Canadian companies Frontier Pacific Mining and Solex Resources also greatly increased my confidence,

See report here http://www.frontierpacific.com/pdf/report_macusani.pdf


Moreover work done by CTS, trenching, assaying etc constantly verified the historical results, also if you check the other companies web sites you will see that they too are having results similar to what the historical reports suggested,

http://www.frontierpacific.com/macusani.php

http://www.solexresources.com/s/Home.asp

http://www.strathmoreminerals.com/s/Macusani.asp

http://www.venaresources.com/Peru/Divisions/Macusani/

What you will see is that Macusani is fast emerging as the new Uranium province of the world, kinda like Nambia, only the grades are much much higher,

So with my confidence almost 100% in *Corachapi*, or *"Chapi"* as it was originally known as being a very high grade deposit thats very shallow ie within max 20m of surface, lets move on to *Pinochio* which was the most advanced deposit, historical *IPEN* and *IAEA* reports suggest this was a trial mining site where several hundred tonnes of hige grade Uranium was easily produced back in the 1970's and 1980's

So with all that said, I think you can see why I compare CTS with MTN,

Both have deposits which are worth Billions of dollars, and like CTS, MTN's was based on nearly all historical work, as such the market never properly valued MTN, letting its share price languish at 60c when I knew all along a peer comparison suggested that fair value was many many multiples of that, today MTN is at $6! thats a 1000% return in little over 12months, IMO the only Uranium stock that offers such fundamental potential is CTS,

Working off a base of 50c, I would not be surprised to see CTS return similar returns, time will tell.

Anyway CTS analysis to follow shortly, enjoy chewing the fat, questions welcome,

I encourgae everyone to read the report and visit the websites attached to see how the other Canadian companies have been fairing in Peru


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (22 July 2007)

I have had a few quries and would like to clarify something,

Firstly I am not comparing CTS to MTN as a peer comparison or anything like that,

My use of MTN is that many should recall that MTN's share price languished at 60c, giving it a mkt cap of $36m even though it held a deposit worth Billions, the key was that there was little to no mkt confidence in the JORC and as such MTN's SP lagged all others on a Peer comparison, I firmly knew then that MTN was undervalued, but it took a price catalyst which was the take over offer to make the mkt wake up to its potential,

I see the same with CTS, its deposit is real, just like MTN's always has been, but just like MTN, for whatever reason people question Corachapi's validity etc etc,

From my research CTS's Corachapi is real, so eventually the mkt will value CTS in line with its peers as it did with MTN, a price catalyst will come along  like I said it would for MTN, it maybe a takeover offer, an Insto getting on the share registry, Mega buying some shares, drilling resluts who knows,

It may happen in 1 day, 1 week  month 1 year, it may have laready began, point is when the fundamentals are real, *its a matter of when not if*

Hope this clarifies the reference to MTN


As for peer comparisons, past takeovers have been done at a value of $15 lb Uranium, however recently a takeover was done at $30 lb Uranium so my guesstimations will begin with current takeover value and then move on to production profiles 

Also see these research reports

http://www.intersuisse.com.au/files/JRM Winter 2007 - May.pdf

http://www.uraniumanalyst.com/images/FEC_Contact11April07FINAL.pdf


A quote from Grigor,

The Bottom Line
CTS seems anomalously underpriced at these levels. It would not be difficult to justify a multiple of the current capitalisation, perhaps into the range of $100- $200m even at this speculative stage, in contrast with the current figure of $50m.


----------



## resourcesman (22 July 2007)

Hi YT, 

I noticed that there are 75M options outstanding, and hence on a fully diluted basis, isn't the market capitalisation already $100mill?


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (22 July 2007)

*CTS*​
*
Mkt Structure*
*
Shares*
80m +55m 20c 30/6/08 opies + 10m 50c 30/06/08 opies

*
Cash*
$10m + $15m in options, as I'm assuming all options get exercised o work out mkt cap, I add it to cash balance = *$25m in cash* 


Mkt Cap @ 70c = $100m Current
Mkt Cap @ $1.44 = $210m Target 1
Mkt Cap @ $2.70 = $390m Target 2 



*
Projects*


*
Corachapi* _Uranium, 100%, Peru_
*JORC 3.8Mt@ 0.115% U = 9.6M lb's U*

This is 1 of the 2 main projects in Peru and is located in the *Macusani District of Peru *where companies such as *Solex, Vena, Frontier Pacific, Strathmore Minerals *and other Canadian Uranium companies have been working away for a few years now,

Whats amazing though is of the entire Macusani District, *Corachapi* and *Pinochio* are by far the best and most advanced projects,

*Corachapi*, or *"Chapi"* as its referred to in historical IPEN reports I dug up, was the second most advanced deposit and had a JORC resource of 1.6Mt's @ 0.15% U which was based mostly on the extensive work done by *IPEN* (Peruvian Institute for Nuclear Energy) and *IAEA* (UN International Atomic Energy Agency) this involved drilling, trenches and adits

Natuarally I was sceptical of the "historic" figures, as if this deposit was so good, how did CTS manage to get it so cheap? 

Well lots of researching  increased my confidence, particularly one report which was prepared for the Canadian companies Frontier Pacific Mining and Solex, 

http://www.frontierpacific.com/pdf/report_macusani.pdf

Also the fact that CTS's follow up work yielded results consistant with the historical estimates, and this was found to be the same for the other companies working in the area.

http://www.frontierpacific.com/macusani.php
http://www.solexresources.com/s/Home.asp
http://www.strathmoreminerals.com/s/Macusani.asp
http://www.venaresources.com/Peru/Divisions/Macusani/

*Valuation*
9.6M lb's U @ $15 lb = $144m = $1.10c CTS
9.6M lb's U @ $30 lb = $288m = $2.20c CTS

These are takeover values, based on peer takover etc,

For project production Grigor assumed the following parameters

• capital expenditure US$25m, I say US$40m• operating cost US$15/lb, I say US$20 lb
• head grade 2,500 ppm, I say 1,250 ppm
• recovery rate 85%, I agree
• annual prod’n 640 tpa U (1.4 mill lb) I agree 
• uranium price of US$95/lb, I agree

So I will use more conservative/negative estimates than Grigor

*JORC 3.8Mt@ 0.115% U = 9.6M lb's U*
85% Recovery = 8.16M lb's U recovered at cost of US$20/lb sold US$95/lb Margin = 8.16M x US$75 = US$612m

Less Cap Ex = US$612m - $40m 
Less $72m contingency etc, cost blow outs blah blah
= $500m USD = $625 AUD (USD 80c)

So a rough NPV of the project = $600m AUD = $4+ CTS *Note this is a very very rough calculation to highlight the potential of the project if its brought into production,* 

For now I prefer to use the $15 lb value figure
*
Pinochio* _Uranium, 100%, Peru_
No real figures to crunch, but this was the only site of historical production by *IPEN* so there must be some real value here

*
Kyrgyzstan Projects* _Uranium, 100%, Kyrgyzstan_
*JORC 2.079Mt's @ 0.037%U = 1.71Mlb's U*
First pass JORC and although its low grade its within 6m of surface and to quote the company is _"easy to extract, lies on the doorstep to power, water and labour infrastructure, and is in *close proximity to the Kara Balta uranium processing facility.*"_

The JORC's low grade and small size is a bit misleading thoug, see from the drill results, I saw many 1-2m hits at grades of 0.1% U to a max depth of 6m. This would make these deposits some of the shallowest I have ever seen.

All up their are 4 _potential_ deposits, each 3.5km's long by 0.5km's wide, and if we assume 2m's thick of Ore = 10Mt's @0.1% U 

4 potential deposits = Could be 40Mt's @0.1% U = 88M lb's U

Even if they only firm up 1/4 of this = 22M lb's U! @ $15/lb = $2.75c more value to CTS


*Valuation*
Most of the above was *POTENTIAL UPSIDE* ie nothing really firm yet, so lets just work with the JORC

1.71M lb's U @ $15 lb = $25m = 17c CTS
1.71M lb's U @ $30 lb = $50m = 34c CTS


*
Management*
This appeared to be the weakest part of the company, as Grigor was sceptical of thier abilities,

However I disagree, CTS has managed to source the 2 former senior *IPEN* Geologists/Engineers  who worked on Corchapi and Pinochio, so that is a major bonus in my view,

In addition to this, the companies current Exec Chariman Dr Richard Napier, is also heavily involved with IMCI the group that CTS acquired the Kyrgyzstan projects from, so for the Kyrgyz side of things this is also very positive, in addition to these recent projects, CTS has the automatic right to earn 20% in any of the projects pegged by IMCI

I will agree that CTS needs some better know people on the board, Twiggy or Kiernan may help :

My biggest gripe with management would be a lack of PR, but then I thought the same about MTN management, I have learnt though that eventually mkt will awake to a companies potential


*
Summary*

*- Corachapi is worth between $1.10c - $2.20c depending on the EV per lb value applied
- Pinochio adds alot of potential value but can't be quantified at present
- The Kyrgyzstan projects have alot of upside to but for now the JORC adds 17c to 34c in value again depending on the EV used.
- A connection to Mega Uranium has been made, although not 100% established
- Some excellent ex IPEN geo's/techies who discovered and developed the Peru projects
- Exec Chairman's other company IMCI will continue to generate projects for the company in Kyrgyz
- Cash + Opies of $25m = 17c


Total Value = $1.44c - $2.70c
I prefer to use the $15 per lb figure so $1.44 is my value for now*

Research reports

http://www.intersuisse.com.au/files/... - May.pdf

http://www.uraniumanalyst.com/images...ril07FINAL.pdf


----------



## toc_bat (23 July 2007)

ubid said:


> Im sure that would be much appreciated y t from all the CTS followers.
> 
> I only bought some oppies on the 12th of July @ 37c following a big rap from my broker, couldnt be happier atm.
> 
> ...




i bought some (well with my dads money - for him) on the 19th, around the 47c mark (CTSO), 

i came across it o the 17th, chart just looked very good, in fact after coming across it on the 17th my memory was jogged and really i followed the cts thread in april and then saw it retrace, only to say to myself that CTS had died in the ****. I was wrong of course, ... mostly wrong when it comes to trading/investing.

ps looking at depth now there are 90,000 shares on offfer for sale! I assume sellers will cme out of the woodwork tho. hope they dont tho.


----------



## Sean K (23 July 2007)

26 June:


kennas said:


> Approaching resistance at 55 cents, and maybe be out of downtrend having found very good support at 50 cents. Looks to be limited downside chart wise here, unless it breaks down through that support, of course. Worth watching closely for a break up IMO.




12 July:


kennas said:


> This looks to have changed direction IMO. Breaking some short term resistance after finding a definate floor at 50 cents. Looks likely to move either sideways or back up from this position. Breaking 57 probably more likely to be up, but for confirmation wait for a higher low. Indicators look very good.




16 July:


kennas said:


> Might pause around these levels under 65 resistance, but looks like momentum definately on the up to push it through eventually. I think breaking through 65 will definately be the end to the sideways movement even though all time high 70ish will also be resistance. Looking good atm, but of course anything can and will happen.
> 
> Good break though 55 in retrospect.




No pausing around 65, which was good for those taking a position on breakout through 55. 65 and 70 were impotant breaks as has been mentioned. Now, TA is less reliable except for support levels on any pullback.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (23 July 2007)

Was expecting a bit more feedback re my research,

Queries, comments etc

Anyway Kennarico is right, 65c and 70c look like really strong support levels, 70c particularly,
*
There's nearly 800k buying at or above 70c
vs
225k on the sell all up!*


----------



## greggy (23 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Was expecting a bit more feedback re my research,
> 
> Queries, comments etc
> 
> ...



CTS has been well and trluy overlooked by the market.  Over the next couple of years it is likely to become a low cost uranium producer without the political constraints that we have here. Your research as always is top notch. Thanks YT.
DYOR


----------



## Sean K (23 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Was expecting a bit more feedback re my research,
> 
> Queries, comments etc
> 
> ...



YT, the crowd is assessing and probably distributing to their mates. Uranium is off the boil at the moment, which may be another factor. 70 should be some support, but it did leap pretty quickly, don't discount the day trader influence of T+3, momentum buying, etc. When all things considered 65 looks to be best support pending any unusual market action. Like a devastating earthquake here in Peru! Not feeling like it right at this moment.


----------



## Dr.Stock (23 July 2007)

Appreciated your research once again YT. When u becomes the flavour of the month again then this stoc may gather more momentum. However, oil needs to keep rising as this is the only way the heads of govt. will really consider altenate energy. if oil drops in price industry considers better the devil you know and plod along as such and if more oil strikes are discovered ( unlikely) then oil as a whole will decrease in price  so once again a negative for U .
Oil hits 80 the gloves come off with more press worldwide for alternate sources and up goes cts.


----------



## Sean K (23 July 2007)

Dr.Stock said:


> Appreciated your research once again YT. When u becomes the flavour of the month again then this stoc may gather more momentum. However, oil needs to keep rising as this is the only way the heads of govt. will really consider altenate energy. if oil drops in price industry considers better the devil you know and plod along as such and if more oil strikes are discovered ( unlikely) then oil as a whole will decrease in price  so once again a negative for U .
> Oil hits 80 the gloves come off with more press worldwide for alternate sources and up goes cts.



Dr.S, Your premise is based on which country and oil? Australia? This is an international company not mining or trying to sell in Melbs.....

Perhaps I'm missing some detail here...


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (23 July 2007)

I don't know Kenna,

I reckon 70c is stronger than 65c for 2 reasons,

First I always considered 70c as the confirmation/breakout level not 65c

Second all the buy depth is above 70c,

Also Dr Stock, I don't want momnetum on this stock,

Just feedback on what I posted, thoughts etc, helps me to check, re-check research, correct errors, etc etc

I think the post by Bliimp was particularly interesting, I have spoken to my broker about this link

He agrees, CTS is not a fit for ARV at all and is intrigued by the Mega connection


----------



## danewbee (23 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Was expecting a bit more feedback re my research,
> 
> Queries, comments etc
> 
> ...




Disappointing? I am disappointing it too. A reality Check:

80c Aussie dollars?, have not sent it for a long time, and won't see it in the near future.

$15-$30/lb valuation? You are stilling living in April

Plus statement like "$500m USD=$625 AUD", and confusion between dollar and cent, $1.44c-$2.70c, $1.10c, $2.20c.

Very disorganized analysis, like cut and paste from somewhere else.

I cannot find YT's trademark here. I believe YT can do much better than this.

Before I draw intensive fires from YT supporters wasting everybody's time,  I have to say, I only look at negative aspects. Considering I agree with everything else YT said.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (23 July 2007)

What are you on about Dane?

I'm being conservative

I'm using 80c AUD/USD

If I use 70c/75c its more value for us, so I choose to be conservative


Uranium price, $15lb - $30lb is TAKEOVER VALUE! Not Spot price

I spent hrs doing the research so don't appreciate cut and paste comment

$500m USD = $625 AUD @ 80c AUD/USD

Not sure what your on about,

So much for constuctive feedback


----------



## doctorj (23 July 2007)

danewbee said:


> Disappointing? I am disappointing it too. A reality Check:
> 
> 
> 80c Aussie dollars?, have not sent it for a long time, and won't see it in the near future.
> ...



What's your valuation?  It's easy to criticise, much harder to contribute.  

EV per pound is going to be highly subjective and is going to be the material driver for this kind of valuation.  What EV/lb would you use?

I also think that using 80c is reasonable given AUDUSD is currently at almost an ATH.  However it won't materially effect the valuation given the EV/lb is so subjective.


----------



## insider (23 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> What are you on about Dane?
> 
> I'm being conservative
> 
> ...




Unfortunately some people will always destructively criticize your efforts. It would be better to not even acknowledge the behavior. It reminds me of all the crap I was copping from people in my 5000 to 50,000 thread in twelve months. Just keep it impersonal... I didn't read all your research but it basically says many good reasons to Buy... which is something I did a while ago (buy that is)... Kudos


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (23 July 2007)

doctorj said:


> What's your valuation?  It's easy to criticise, much harder to contribute.
> 
> EV per pound is going to be highly subjective and is going to be the material driver for this kind of valuation.  What EV/lb would you use?
> 
> I also think that using 80c is reasonable given AUDUSD is currently at almost an ATH.  However it won't materially effect the valuation given the EV/lb is so subjective.




Hey Doc, 

Your absolutely right, its the takeover EV that will drive the valuation for now as production is not an option ... yet,

Thus as the last round of takeovers were done at $15lb I was happy to use that, however, I remember that the last U takeover was done at an EV equivalent of $30 lb

I'll try and dig up who it was,

For now thought I'm happy to use the $15 lb EV figure


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (23 July 2007)

I found my post re the last takeover, was in Uranium raging bull thread,

Take over offer was actually at $35lb not $30lb, but then not sure about cash and other assets so maybe $30 lb was right 



*Another take over, US $1.75Billion = $2.2 Billion AUD for 61m lb's Uranium = SXR paid $35 AUD for each pound of Uranium!*


Uranium just got hotter
Merger capitalizes on a metal that has soared 500% since 2003 
ANDY HOFFMAN 

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

June 5, 2007 at 4:11 AM EDT

In the rapidly shifting uranium sector, where the price of the metal used to make nuclear fuel has soared more than 500 per cent since 2003, the aggressive deal maker has prospered.

Few have been more willing to pull the trigger on a takeover than Toronto's sxr Uranium One Inc. [SXR-T] , which yesterday unfurled its latest purchase, a *$1.75-billion, all-stock offer* for Vancouver's Energy Metals Corp. [EMC-T] , which owns a slew of uranium projects in the United States and a processing facility.

If successful, the deal will create an $8.2-billion entity, amalgamating two of the most active players in the industry, which through a series of rapid-fire acquisitions, have each capitalized on the surge of interest in all things radioactive.

"We believe in our product more so than some people who have been in this business for a long time," Neal Froneman, Uranium One's president and chief executive officer, said in an interview.

Energy Metals


SXR Uranium One


 A nearly bankrupt South African gold company with no production to speak of three years ago, deal making has vaulted Uranium One to its position as the second largest publicly traded uranium producer, behind industry stalwart Cameco Corp. of Saskatoon.

A $3.8-billion merger with UrAsia Energy Ltd. last year gave Uranium One much-needed production assets in Kazakhstan to complement its Dominion mine in South Africa and Honeymoon project in Australia. 

Investment bankers at BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. have guided the company's transformation, facilitating transactions, a Toronto Stock Exchange listing and a move of its headquarters from Johannesburg to Toronto.

Energy Metals or EMC has also been a keen consolidator.

Amid the rocketing price of uranium concentrate, or yellowcake, EMC snapped up several U.S. uranium properties in 2005 and in 2006 pulled off three acquisitions; Standard Uranium, Quincy Energy and High Plains Uranium. 

The spot price of uranium has more than doubled over the past year to an all-time high of $138 (U.S.) a pound.

"It's really a race to production," Paul Matysek, EMC's president and CEO, said in an interview.

For Uranium One, EMC offers the potential for a major presence in the United States, where demand for yellowcake from U.S. utilities is about 50 million pounds a year, outstripping the annual domestic production of approximately four million pounds by roughly 11 times. Nuclear-generated electricity has returned to favour amid concerns about emissions from coal-fired plants and worries about dependence on energy from foreign sources.

EMC is developing uranium projects in Texas, Wyoming, New Mexico and Utah, among other states, and is expected to begin a modest level of production in Texas next year, followed by a mine startup in Wyoming in 2009 or 2010. *The company, which was advised on the deal by GMP Securities LP, has roughly 61 million pounds of measured and indicated resources.*
"This transaction results in the creation of a powerhouse in the U.S. uranium sector and goes a long way towards reaching our goal of releasing uranium to U.S. utilities," Mr. Matysek, who will stay with the combined company to lead operations in the Americas, said on a conference call.

Mr. Froneman expects U.S. uranium demand to increase and predicts between six and 10 new reactors will be approved for construction in the next few years.

"I do believe we are seeing a U.S. nuclear renaissance," he said.

The bulk of EMC's assets will use "in-situ recovery" or ISR -- a process that uses ground water to leach uranium from deposits. Uranium One's operations in Kazakhstan also use ISR.

Despite Uranium One's rapid growth, Cameco remains the industry giant, with a market value more than double Uranium One's and 10 times its 2007 production. 

Cameco has ignored the flurry of sector takeovers, concentrating instead on its own development projects, including the troubled Cigar Lake mine.

"This transaction results in a larger, higher-growth alternative to Cameco," Mr. Froneman said.

SXR URANIUM ONE:

Close: $16.10, down 53 cents

ENERGY METALS:

Close: $18.44, up 15 cents.

*****

The Deal

sxr Uranium One is offering 1.15 of its shares for each Energy Metals Corp. share or $18.51 based on yesterday's closing price. EMC shareholders will own 21 per cent of the new company.

The Deal Makers: sxr Uranium One

December, 2005: Neal Froneman's Aflese Gold and Uranium Resources completes a reverse takeover of Southern Cross Resources.

July, 2006: Uranium One starts negotiating purchase of U.S. Energy Corp.'s uranium assets. 

February, 2007: Announces $3.8-billion stock-swap takeover of uranium producer UrAsia Energy Ltd.

Energy Metals Corp.

December, 2004: TSX Venture-listed Clan Resources Ltd. changes name to Energy Metals Corp. 

January-November, 2005: EMC stakes or acquires dozens of U.S. uranium properties in Utah, Wyoming, South Dakota and Oregon. 

Nov. 10, 2005: Announces stock deal to buy Standard Uranium Inc., giving it Hobson Plant uranium facility in Texas.

Nov. 16, 2005: Announces all-stock deal for Quincy Energy Corp.

August, 2006: All-stock deal for High Plains Uranium.

The Result

Valued at roughly $8.2-billion, the new company will be the second-largest publicly traded pure-play uranium producer, but still a distant second to Cameco's $19.9-billion market capitalization.


----------



## greggy (23 July 2007)

danewbee said:


> Disappointing? I am disappointing it too. A reality Check:
> 
> 80c Aussie dollars?, have not sent it for a long time, and won't see it in the near future.
> 
> ...



Danewbee, 

I've seen some of your other posts including inciteful ones.  You are attacking his analysis.  Where is yours?  If you are going to attack his "disorganized analysis" with nothing in reply other than what looks like another bitching session, then I suggest you take up another hobby!  Those who know the FWL thread will know what I mean. Yes,sentiment is not in uranium's favour at present, but YT has alerted people to what is an overlooked story with substance. I haven't bought any as yet.
DYOR


----------



## BUY&SELL (23 July 2007)

Hi YT,
thanks for the research.

Do you know when the IPEN testwork was done? am I right in saying it was early 80's ???. I also see that CTS used a independent geologist commissioned to examine this "historical" data and that he found it to be JORC compliable. To me that's  a bit thin, I know you've done some research on this. Did you find anything about the company or person (Phil Jones) that compiled the report, such as track record & reliability. 

Thanks for your time (this is my own sticking point on CTS hope it doesn,t sound silly)


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (23 July 2007)

BUY&SELL said:


> Hi YT,
> thanks for the research.
> 
> Do you know when the IPEN testwork was done? am I right in saying it was early 80's ???. I also see that CTS used a independent geologist commissioned to examine this "historical" data and that he found it to be JORC compliable. To me that's  a bit thin, I know you've done some research on this. Did you find anything about the company or person (Phil Jones) that compiled the report, such as track record & reliability.
> ...




Hi buy,

Not silly at all as this was my main sticking point too,

If you check through the research I put up you'll see this,

1. Both IPEN and IAEA worked on "Chapi"

2. The recent reults that CTS found at Chapi were consistant with what IPEN and IAEA claimed

3. Unlike Oil and Gas which migrates/leaks, Uranium like most other ore types doesn't (unless its close to the surface in which case it may weather away, or leach) so if there's a historical JORC as was the case with MTN's deposit, then its fairly likely that the resource is there

4. Historical IPEN/IAEA reports are being proven accurate by the other Canadian U companies working in the area

5. CTS also now has the Kyrgyz projects


But until drill assays are back from Corachapi we won't know the full extent of the deposit, that would be a definate cause for re-rating imo


----------



## danewbee (23 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> What are you on about Dane?
> 
> I'm being conservative
> 
> ...




1. YT, Aussie Dollar is 88c, could be par with US dollar soon;
2. The latest take over with significant size is Areva takeover UraMin, paid about US$10.5/lb. Besides, it is last month. Afterwards, the uranium market has suffered significant correction.
3. You cannot spot the mistake "$500m USD=$625 AUS? 1 AUS is worth $800,000 US? not bad for even a poorest guy in Australia.
4. How can you apply takeover premium to valuate a company without any sign of being taken over? I don't know which school are you graduated, or have different agenda?

Don't want to upset you, as I said agree with most of your staff. Cannot believe there are still some people attack me using FWL example. Why people cannot accept a different view? 

Does it hurt FWL, or CUL at all after we settle our difference? NOT AT ALL. 

OK, CTS's advantage is high grade (but erratic), and relative easy to mine and extract, could be a producer in a very short period. The EV/lb is not a good valuation method. NPV, or Discount Cash Flow will be more suitable.

I think you get it covered. Just a bit disorganized. It's not easy to read. The $15-30/lb EV staff won't help your valuation, and could be laugh stock. The NPV will justify whatever valuation you have put on.

If you use $15-30/lb EV, you don't need to buy CTS. Just close your eye, pick an uranium stocks on ASX to invest. It is not the right time to use it.


----------



## Pommiegranite (23 July 2007)

danewbee said:


> 1. YT, Aussie Dollar is 88c, could be par with US dollar soon;
> *2. The latest take over with significant size is Areva takeover UraMin, paid about US$10.5/lb. Besides, it is last month. Afterwards, the uranium market has suffered significant correction.*
> 3. You cannot spot the mistake "$500m USD=$625 AUS? 1 AUS is worth $800,000 US? not bad for even a poorest guy in Australia.
> 4. How can you apply takeover premium to valuate a company without any sign of being taken over? I don't know which school are you graduated, or have different agenda?
> ...




Areva's purchase of Uramin hasn't been finalised yet. Therefore, if it does go through, despite this 'Uranium correction', this nullifies your point.


----------



## resourcesman (23 July 2007)

danewbee said:


> 1. YT, Aussie Dollar is 88c, could be par with US dollar soon;
> 2. The latest take over with significant size is Areva takeover UraMin, paid about US$10.5/lb. Besides, it is last month. Afterwards, the uranium market has suffered significant correction.
> 3. You cannot spot the mistake "$500m USD=$625 AUS? 1 AUS is worth $800,000 US? not bad for even a poorest guy in Australia.
> 4. How can you apply takeover premium to valuate a company without any sign of being taken over? I don't know which school are you graduated, or have different agenda?
> ...




Danewbee, EV is a proxy for NPV. The NPV would be difficult to calculate at the moment given insufficient info on the company's plans for production volumes etc. In CTS's case, with production being so close and presumably easy, then the NPV per pound would be higher compared with companies that can only start up later and have higher production costs. This would also indicate that the EV/lb should be higher for CTS than for companies with projects that have a later startup, higher risks and higher production costs per pound. 

Having said this though, I have read somewhere that Paladin was currently being priced at $24/lb (dont know if it is true since I'm not planning to invest in uranium in the next few months). Given that PDN is almost at production with minimal risks to achieving production, would $15/lb be fair price for CTS at this stage?


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (23 July 2007)

danewbee said:


> 1. YT, Aussie Dollar is 88c, could be par with US dollar soon;




So your LT USD/AUD would be 1:1 



danewbee said:


> 2.  Afterwards, the uranium market has suffered significant correction.




What significant correction? Spot price dropping from $135/$136 lb to $129/$130 lb, yeah real big correction there 



danewbee said:


> 3. You cannot spot the mistake "$500m USD=$625 AUS? 1 AUS is worth $800,000 US? not bad for even a poorest guy in Australia.




lol, so I left an 'm' off you get the point, well here's one for you, spot the mistake my perfect friend! :



danewbee said:


> Don't want to upset you, as I said agree with most of your *staff*.






danewbee said:


> 4. How can you apply takeover premium to valuate a company without any sign of being taken over? I don't know which school are you graduated, or have different agenda?




What premium? What are you on about? Agenda? Mate if you read my post correctly, it says if CTS were to get a takeover.

Its funny, I rarley see you post, except after I put out a detailed post, strange isn't it and then your all about picking holes ....

Some of your points are valid, but most are petty nit picking.

Sorry mate, but not really going to take your comments seriously, I detect too much of a personal attack rather than analysis,

Why don't you come up with a valuation, seeing as you sound so highly *edumacted *  and all.

I look forward to reading it.


----------



## Miner (24 July 2007)

Dear YT

I followed yours and others exchange of opinions. I became brave and put some hard earned $ on CTS today. I am hopeful and thankful for research reports from people like you and others. Ironically we get them free and some do the nit picking. Just ignore them.
Even looking into reports like Huntleys which I pay to get I find the quality of information are rather sketchy compared to some of the analysis I read in ASF.
For example Huntley said Buy SIP at more than $2 just to retract to sell next report, Same was with PSV. I asked the analyst never responded to explain. Why people then whinge against YT or likes. 

Keep it up YT and thanks again.

Miner


----------



## insider (24 July 2007)

Well somebody clearly has sand in their vagina. Stop the slagging and just focus on CTS... you know who you are! 

Now discussing CTS, in the short term today they fell -1.99% which is about the average price fall today for the Uranium Sector, so as a retrace I'd consider it to be non existent as some companies such as AAR and URA went up about 18% on speculation and and an announcement for URA. Today CTS will most likely begin it's climb again however IMO there will most likely be relentless last minute buying on Friday afternoon... There really isn't much else to say seeing as YT wrote a thesis... I hope I don't repeat anything

There is also Speculation that CTS's Peruvian deposits may actually be much larger than anticipated as it is believed that drilling was conducted close to the surface rather than 200 meters deep like MTN. Locals do not approve of Uranium Mining (who really does?) however the Corrupt Government is willing to do anything for money which is possibly what really worries the people most. Peruvians have a High rate of birth defects... fused bones, no limbs etc.  Anyway again as stated by everyone CTS is very cheap compared to its peers. 

With a current resource/Company value of $5.55 per pound if CTS went up ten fold it would still be cheaper than AGS which from memory was about $60 per pound. If AGS doubled it would be almost enough to buy already mined Uranium.

It just recently broke it's all time high will most likely form a foundation for positive growth in SP...

I'm going to sleep...


----------



## bliimp (25 July 2007)

In yesterday's   24th July ASX notice of the AGM, noted the following:-

_"Resolution 6 seeks Shareholder approval for the allotment and issue of 1,000,000 Shares at an issue price of $0.50 each and 1,000,000 free attaching Unlisted Options exercisable at $0.50 each on or before 30 June 2010 to *Far East Capital Limited*, to raise $500,000."_

Looks like Warwick Grigor of Far East Capital is beginning to get serious!

Refer to his article on _"The Gem from the Paydirt Uranium Conference"_ as highlighted earlier by Young Trader http://www.uraniumanalyst.com/images/FEC_Contact11April07FINAL.pdf


----------



## greggy (26 July 2007)

danewbee said:


> 1. YT, Aussie Dollar is 88c, could be par with US dollar soon;
> 2. The latest take over with significant size is Areva takeover UraMin, paid about US$10.5/lb. Besides, it is last month. Afterwards, the uranium market has suffered significant correction.
> 3. You cannot spot the mistake "$500m USD=$625 AUS? 1 AUS is worth $800,000 US? not bad for even a poorest guy in Australia.
> 4. How can you apply takeover premium to valuate a company without any sign of being taken over? I don't know which school are you graduated, or have different agenda?
> ...




Here I go again.  As per usual, you are wasting peoples time.  You come here looking for a fight and then play the victim. "Some people attack me" you say.
Take a look at your own backyard before commenting on others.  Its clear to me that you love attacking other peoples' analysis and then can't take the heat in return. You seem to single out YT in particular. I gather the reason for this is that you are jealous and contribute nothing of substance to this forum. 
Sorry to all the mods, but I'm sick and tired of certain characters who like taking low shots at people that I respect.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (26 July 2007)

bliimp said:


> In yesterday's   24th July ASX notice of the AGM, noted the following:-
> 
> _"Resolution 6 seeks Shareholder approval for the allotment and issue of 1,000,000 Shares at an issue price of $0.50 each and 1,000,000 free attaching Unlisted Options exercisable at $0.50 each on or before 30 June 2010 to *Far East Capital Limited*, to raise $500,000."_
> 
> ...





Hey Bliimp,

I saw that too ...... interesting,

Well CTS fell below 70c, but bounced off 65c so looks like that was ultimate support,

I think games are being played though, there is huge accumulation going on in the options today.

Back up above 70c today though,

Watching with interest


----------



## danewbee (30 July 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> So your LT USD/AUD would be 1:1
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Cannot agree with you any more, I am "nit picking". OK, I can give you some heavyweight:

1. A question you have not asked, what is the latest purchase price for the Peru deposits?  $50K+$35K+2 million shares for 20% of Peru deposits (ann. Mar 28, 2007)

Or the Peru deposit is worth $340k+10m CTS shares. At 70c/share, it only worth about $10m.

You think CTS is too smart to get such wonderful asset at deep discount, right? Why not think it differently? Why the seller is are so stupxd? Or somebody else? The deposit might be an erratic one.

2. $30/lb takeover premium for a company with such small deposit? In your dream. 

3. You are totally surreal. The uranium sector correction started from May. Most uranium stocks has suffered 30-60% loss. Of course, the spot price only dropped from $139 to $120? Are you buying yellowcake, or uranium stocks?

4. CTS is no longer cheap even with your lofty valuation. You can pick a dozen uranium stocks that is cheaper than CTS use same analysis. 


When the music stops, you know what happen.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (30 July 2007)

Dane,

Just have the guts to be here in 3months time to see where CTS is, ok?

I will be, so make sure your here.

Kinda like CUL, you fought with my valuation when its was sub 10c, where is that now? 

My takeover value for CTS is *$15 a lb*, $15lb not $30lb $15lb get it right!

As for Uranium rout, lol, yep your right, world has switched of the Nuclear switch, and Uranium supply has come on strong, heck I even heard Cameco's mine was all back to normal :


----------



## Sean K (30 July 2007)

Gents, stop playing the man, and play the ball. Objective analysis without personal insults, period. If disagreeing with a valuation it's easy to provide your own valuation with your own numbers without derogatory remarks. Please try, it's of more benefit to all members. Cheers! kennas


----------



## arkady (30 July 2007)

You're a true legend YT! You've made me a happy man with your excellent research that you're willing to pass onto fellow ASF members. Things were looking down with my stock picks until I picked up on your posts. There's always going to be negative people with minimal facts ready to take you down but ignore them and keep up the great work.


----------



## greenfs (30 July 2007)

danewbee said:


> Cannot agree with you any more, I am "nit picking". OK, I can give you some heavyweight:
> 
> 1. A question you have not asked, what is the latest purchase price for the Peru deposits?  $50K+$35K+2 million shares for 20% of Peru deposits (ann. Mar 28, 2007)
> 
> ...




If you think that you can name a dozen stocks cheaper than CTS, I will accept 4 stocks (33%) with brief comments at short notice. If you do not respond I will in future ignore your comments as Bxxxsxxt rhetoric.


----------



## Vicked (31 July 2007)

Fourth quarter results out today.

I don't think there is much in there that the market isn't already aware of.


----------



## greggy (1 August 2007)

greenfs said:


> If you think that you can name a dozen stocks cheaper than CTS, I will accept 4 stocks (33%) with brief comments at short notice. If you do not respond I will in future ignore your comments as Bxxxsxxt rhetoric.



Hi greensf,

Why don't you just save yourself a lot of trouble and put this "character" on your ignore list.  Back on the subject of CTS, I notice that Intersuisse recently put out a Buy rating on CTS thinking that it is cheap. 
DYOR


----------



## Miner (3 August 2007)

Hi Guys
All CTS lovers why there is a silence once the share has fallen so low.
Do not worry it is not only market pull down but also now there are too many players in uranium sector. 
Though I feel there was some ramp up in CTS and it is consolidating around 65 cents I can not ignore the fact that my investment on CTS was 73 cents and I am too nervous to sell it now.
Any encouragement for me to hold and not to panic sell ?

Regards


----------



## Sean K (3 August 2007)

Miner said:


> Hi Guys
> All CTS lovers why there is a silence once the share has fallen so low.
> Do not worry it is not only market pull down but also now there are too many players in uranium sector.
> Though I feel there was some ramp up in CTS and it is consolidating around 65 cents I can not ignore the fact that my investment on CTS was 73 cents and I am too nervous to sell it now.
> ...



Unlucky to have picked it at the top miner. The fundamentals are still there, and you are correct to say that this has been punished like everything else in the market. In addition to the fundaments, that have been covered, 55 _should _be support, and 50 _probably _worst case. Personally, I sell things when they have broken down through significant support, or when the fundamentals have changed for the worse. You need to work out what your investment/trading plan is and act accordingly. What was your 'plan' for this?


----------



## Sean K (3 August 2007)

I've just been advised that there's some insto buying going on behind the scenes with CTS. If you have a full service broker, you would be able to see that in the past month:

UBS bought 1.5m shares + bought 3.5m options

Meryl Lynch bought 1.9m shares but sold 1m options

Toll Hurst sold 1m shares but bought 1.1m options

Many conspiracy theories may be drawn from this. Personally, I find it unusual for 3 big brokers/managers to be buying into such a small cap 'explorer'. Although, we do see their names on a few registers around the place. UBS's position seems especially odd to me. Why more than double the options? And Toll Hurst switching to options...

Conspiracy theorists?


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (3 August 2007)

Hey Kenna,

Well one thing I know is that when an Insto buys stock and reaches a 5% holding it must release a becoming a substantial shareholder notice, I suppose by buying options they avoid this as their is no requirement for option holdings

I have also seen that lately there has been a high conversion of the options, another 1m+ where convereted in todays ann, about 10m have been converted on memory in the last 2 months which is significant I think

One things for sure the SP has not escaped the carnage of the overall mkt


----------



## jman2007 (6 August 2007)

bliimp said:


> In yesterday's   24th July ASX notice of the AGM, noted the following:-
> 
> _"Resolution 6 seeks Shareholder approval for the allotment and issue of 1,000,000 Shares at an issue price of $0.50 each and 1,000,000 free attaching Unlisted Options exercisable at $0.50 each on or before 30 June 2010 to *Far East Capital Limited*, to raise $500,000."_
> 
> ...




Cheers Bliimp,

Makes interesting reading, the following quote from the report has a bit of a cloak and dagger feel to it though.   According to Warwick Grigor, the management is the weakest link:

"We see a lack of transparency with the management and corporate governance and are unsure of the intentions of some of the key shareholder groups."

Would someone like YT or Kennas care to speculate on this statement?  I'm not exactly sure what it means by "intentions" of key share holder groups.  How would these groups exert their intentions?... through voting rights?

Oh and one more thing, would you techies out there recommend this stock as a long-term hold?  I jumped on at 51c a few months ago hoping for a slow but steady return as the news from Coarachapi filtered out, but this recent roller coaster ride has made me think that perhaps this stock isn't suitable for conventional investors?  There were some mutterings earlier in this thread that CTS has been ramped a bit, but I don't agree... 

Thoughts?..


----------



## Sean K (6 August 2007)

jman2007 said:


> Cheers Bliimp,
> 
> Makes interesting reading, the following quote from the report has a bit of a cloak and dagger feel to it though.   According to Warwick Grigor, the management is the weakest link:
> 
> ...



Yes, through voting rights. I believe this is a good correction for most stocks that had to happen in a healthy economic environment. (Sorry to sound like PK.) I am cautious however, at those stocks inextricably linked to the US housing market, which I shorted last week, but bought back too early.  The effect and extent of the US credit market is still unknown really, but looks more bearish atm. There is too much noise for anyone to make a qualified assessment right now. What I think will naturally occur from now is a tightening of credit, reduced buying on margin, and ultimately a beneficial effect for world economies. As far as individual stocks go: those who rely on funding from the market with highly speculative futures, will suffer. You have to decide whther this is a quality play or not.


----------



## jman2007 (6 August 2007)

kennas said:


> Yes, through voting rights. I believe this is a good correction for most stocks that had to happen in a healthy economic environment. (Sorry to sound like PK.) I am cautious however, at those stocks inextricably linked to the US housing market, which I shorted last week, but bought back too early.  The effect and extent of the US credit market is still unknown really, but looks more bearish atm. There is too much noise for anyone to make a qualified assessment right now. What I think will naturally occur from now is a tightening of credit, reduced buying on margin, and ultimately a beneficial effect for world economies. As far as individual stocks go: those who rely on funding from the market with highly speculative futures, will suffer. You have to decide whther this is a quality play or not.




Cheers Kennas,

Would've been good to go along to shareholder meeting in Perth in a couple of weeks, but I be back out on site then.   As far as the geological story goes, Corachapi seems reasonably straightforward, and metallurgical testwork looks good.  As far as trading strategy goes, that's a good question!

What would be your thoughts re this stock as a long-term hold? I jumped on at 51c a few months ago hoping for a slow but steady return as the news from Corachapi filtered out, but this recent roller coaster ride has made me think that perhaps this stock isn't suitable for conventional investors?  There has been some shrewd trading going on recently, do you think CTS is susceptible to pump and dump?


----------



## bliimp (6 August 2007)

jman2007 said:


> Cheers Bliimp,
> 
> Makes interesting reading, the following quote from the report has a bit of a cloak and dagger feel to it though.   According to Warwick Grigor, the management is the weakest link:
> 
> ...




Regards the management issue, the key points I can make relate to the following timeline :-
1. Late March ... Paydirt conference in Adelaide attended by Warwick Grigor of Far East Capital
2. 11 April ........ Far East Capital details its assesment of CTS (with Mgmt concern) in _The Gem from the Paydirt Uranium Conference _
3. 7 May ......... Managing Director (MD) resigns (from ARV as well)
4. 24 July ........ CTS announces the share/options issue to Far East Capital

It may be inferred that the MD resignation and the subsequent appointment of the highly credentialled Dr Richard Napier was a means of strengthening the  _management and corporate governance _ issue.

Obviously, Warwick Grigor of Far East Capital must have been satisfied! ... he has put his money where his mouth is!!!

If he still had concerns with management, I very much doubt he would have shown any interest at all ... what with the 100s of other junior uranium plays that exist today.

And jman2007 ... if Warwick Grigor has jumped in at 50c and you at 51c ... well, I get the feeling that you have probably done ok and will do ok if you continue to hold!


----------



## jman2007 (6 August 2007)

bliimp said:


> Regards the management issue, the key points I can make relate to the following timeline :-
> 1. Late March ... Paydirt conference in Adelaide attended by Warwick Grigor of Far East Capital
> 2. 11 April ........ Far East Capital details its assesment of CTS (with Mgmt concern) in _The Gem from the Paydirt Uranium Conference _
> 3. 7 May ......... Managing Director (MD) resigns (from ARV as well)
> ...




Well Bliimp

Fair point, Grigor has obviously had a good look at CTS over the past few months and likes what he sees.  Grigor is also on the Board for Monaro mining (another Uranium play) , so he knows a thing or two.  I still think "potential management risk" is a very hard issue for individual investors to quantify, as it could be quite subjective.  
At the end of the day, there are a lot of Uranium stocks around that are in serious damage control at the moment. CTS has done well do weather the storm, which is probably due both to the quality of its assests and the "discounted" value it is trading at cf to its peers.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (6 August 2007)

kennas said:


> I've just been advised that there's some insto buying going on behind the scenes with CTS. If you have a full service broker, you would be able to see that in the past month:
> 
> UBS bought 1.5m shares + bought 3.5m options
> 
> ...





We all know that a large mkt correction is upon us, we also know that as a result most stocks are dropping like flies, Why MBL was $92 a few weeks back today $67 I think, ouchhhhhhhhhhh!

Anyway, my comments are purely based on the fact that I think this is a short term correction, so with that in mind has anybody bothered to ask themselves why UBS Meryl Lynch and others are buying (and selling) CTS?

Many 'conspiracy theories' can be made, but one thing is for sure, the other Uranium plays that I have seen get Insto support have all risen very very strongly indeed, for example, MTN Insto's got on at about $1 and who can forget MRU, Mantra, the U company with just dirt but I think 4 or 5 Into's on its share registry whose price has gone from 20c to $1

Once this correction is over and the dust has setlled it will be interesting to see how much more UBS and others have bought (or sold for that matter)

As for my conspiracy theory, well I've always felt at these levels CTS is a clear takeover target, a few weeks back *Blimp* made the connection between CTS -ARV - Mega Uranium and now we have Insto's getting on board, with UBS particularly accumulating CTSO, draw your own conlcusions

Anyway like I said we need to wait for the dust to settle


----------



## elcruzy (8 August 2007)

Young Trader - the dust is settling somewhat...do you know where or can you post the current major shareholders of CTS? there's alot of good buys out there but before i decide to top up with a medium term hold like CTS i'd like to know. thanks.

deep yellow DYL is looking interesting, Palading PDN just took up a shortfall for $15mill. DYOR


----------



## Sean K (8 August 2007)

elcruzy said:


> Young Trader - the dust is settling somewhat...do you know where or can you post the current major shareholders of CTS? there's alot of good buys out there but before i decide to top up with a medium term hold like CTS i'd like to know. thanks.
> 
> deep yellow DYL is looking interesting, Palading PDN just took up a shortfall for $15mill. DYOR



elcruzy, the first place to look is a company's web site. 

http://www.contactresources.com.au/corporate-top20share.html

Also, nice that DYL is going OK today, but please don't be tempted to try and hijack threads in the future. Only comment on other stocks like this unless they are interrelated in some way. Mining U is not enough. Cheers! kennas


----------



## insider (9 August 2007)

A nice floor is forming at 56 cents however there is a ceiling at 60 cents... It'll be interesting to see how quickly this stock will return to it's high once market confidence returns... Unless the XAO says different


----------



## exgeo (22 August 2007)

Latest presentation shows a drilling rig in Peru, along with a natty 3D flyaround animation of what and where they intend drilling (link to YouTube on the CTS website). If their hypothesis is correct, then the current JORC represents only a small portion of the possible resource. Let's see what the rotary lie detector comes up with ("Phase one drilling to be complete, or nearly complete by Dec 2007")


----------



## moses (23 August 2007)

By E-Lodgement 
Excellent  Uranium Bulk Sample and  Recovery Results from 
Kyrgyzstan 

Key points: 

• Bulk sample results return average uranium grades of 0.048%. 
• Recoveries of uranium up to 93%. 
• Results indicate potential expansion of current JORC resource of 0.94Mlb of 
Inferred uranium and 0.771Mlb of Indicated uranium. 
• Resource is at surface, lending itself to cost effective mining and near to 
processing facility. 
• 240 hole shallow auger drill program planned to recommence in September.   

Australian based uranium development company Contact Uranium Ltd 
(“Contact” or the “Company”) remains on track with the development of the 
Kamushanovskoe project in Northern Kyrgyzstan, following the results of bulk 
sampling which show highly encouraging uranium grades and recoveries.  

The results were provided by the Company’s geological consultants, IMC, who 
coordinated the sample on the company’s behalf.  

The latest bulk sample was a composite of five 30kg samples collected from 
pits dug at the sites of drill holes drilled in the 2007 program, with typical grade 
and peat composition. These samples were taken from the surface down to 
the base of the mineralisation as indicated by drilling.   

The average grade of the bulk sample was 0.048% U, which is significantly 
higher than the average 0.037% grade calculated in the current JORC 
resource. 

The latest tests also measured the recovery of uranium from the peat ore, at 
various temperatures and concentrations of sulphuric acid.  Recoveries as 
shown in Table 1 ranged from 77% at lower acid concentrations and 
temperatures up to 89% at higher acid concentrations and temperatures, 
reaffirming earlier excellent recoveries obtained by Soviets ranging from 80- 
95%.


----------



## insider (23 August 2007)

I don't think its much at all Moses... 1 Million Pounds is nothing... No offence but the market isn't reacting... Corachapi is the one to watch I guess


----------



## moses (23 August 2007)

I'm not impressed either, just keeping ASF up to date with the news. 

In fact I sold CTS this morning, not because of the ann but because I'm selling everything to go bargain hunting next week.


----------



## insider (23 August 2007)

Well I guess that makes two... Only i sold CTS last week  (This Message must be at least one Hundred Characters)


----------



## resourcesman (23 August 2007)

bargain hunting next week? looks like you guys are anticipating an imminent fall.... any TA indicators saying this is about to happen?


----------



## moses (23 August 2007)

I think there's enough info on the thread XAO Analysis to suggest that today is a great candidate for being a weak top before the next dive down.


----------



## exgeo (29 August 2007)

Hallelujah, the Peru drilling programme finally starts. CTS expect it to take about 3 months to complete.


----------



## bliimp (30 August 2007)

The momentum has been with CTS today!

Made it to 60c with 500k share turnover and 1000k buy to 275k sell (with 1hr to go today).

"Word" has it that UBS has been quietly accumulating shares and options and to quote Young Trader _ ...  when an Insto buys stock and reaches a 5% holding it must release a "becoming a substantial shareholder" notice .... so, by buying options they avoid this as there is no requirement for option holdings_

Kennas quoted on 3rd August that 

_UBS bought 1.5m shares + bought 3.5m options
Meryl Lynch bought 1.9m shares but sold 1m options
Toll Hurst sold 1m shares but bought 1.1m options_

Is anyone with a _full service broker_ broker able to confirm insto purchases for both shares/options for month of August!

If UBS is buying, could it be on behalf of Mega Uranium! (a possibility mentioned earlier in the thread due to the relationship between Mega-ARV-CTS)


----------



## toc_bat (31 August 2007)

It has been mentioned by some people here that CTS is a possible take over target, so how are options treated when a takeover bid is made, are they simply valued at bid price minus excrecise price? or are people expected to convert their shares?

bye


----------



## dubiousinfo (31 August 2007)

toc_bat said:


> It has been mentioned by some people here that CTS is a possible take over target, so how are options treated when a takeover bid is made, are they simply valued at bid price minus excrecise price? or are people expected to convert their shares?
> 
> bye




There will usually be an offer made for the options as well as the shares.
At times this can result in arbitrage situations arising. However you need to be quick.
The MFS takeover of S8 was a good example. Early on in the offer period the price of the oppies made it better to buy oppies and accept that offer, however during the closing weeks this turned around and it was more profitable to convert the oppies and accept the offer for the heads.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (1 September 2007)

Hi guys just thought I'd let you all know that CTS has a really good video/google earth type presentation on the Corachapi Uranium project

http://www.contactresources.com.au/investorinfo-presentation.html


Also re who's been buying etc

I know that UBS has continued to buy the options at a much greater rate than the shares ie 3-4 options for every share they buy, Meryl's has continued to buy as well as had Toll Hurst but they aren't going crazy, I was also surprised to find out that Macquarie and Citi Group have also been dabbing their toes in, I'll try and find out more,

Also re the Mega uranium connections, we have all covered (courtesy of Bliimps research) that Mega owns alot of ARV and ARV took a 6% stake in CTS, we also know that one of Mega's directors (exploration I think) is 
(I think) the head of ARV's team, so that makes one go hmmmmmm, but what I didn't realise untill recently is that one of CTS's directors (a Mr Robert Grover) was a former director of RPT and as we all know RPT was taken over by .... you guessed it Mega, so if you join the dots a picture starts to emerge and it looks "Mega" lol

Anyway all that aside, they have a very high grade uranium project thats at surface and drilling has commenced, with a JORC upgrade due out in 3 months, this would explain why the Insto's seem to be getting on board now rather than later




YOUNG_TRADER said:


> *CTS*​
> *
> Mkt Structure*
> *
> ...


----------



## Miner (13 September 2007)

An open letter to those who argued heavily for CTS

What do you think of the CTS future. When PDN has struck a fall where CTS will end upto ? A suicidian nuclear explosion by itself killing all investors?

It is unlikely that CTS will be able to offer any thing in next 5 years or wait for a takeover.


----------



## insider (13 September 2007)

Miner said:


> An open letter to those who argued heavily for CTS
> 
> What do you think of the CTS future. When PDN has struck a fall where CTS will end upto ? A suicidian nuclear explosion by itself killing all investors?
> 
> It is unlikely that CTS will be able to offer any thing in next 5 years or wait for a takeover.




When I was just a little girl
I asked my mother what will I be?
Will I be pretty, will I be rich?
That's what she said to me:

Que sera, sera. What ever will be will be
the future's not ours to see.
Que sera, sera. What will be, will be.

When I was just I child in school
I asked me teacher, what should I try?
Should I paint pictures, should I sing songs?
This was her wise reply:

Que sera, sera. What ever will be will be
the future's not ours to see.
Que sera, sera. What will be, will be.

When I grew up and fell in love
I asked my sweetheart, what lies ahead?
Will we have rainbows, day after day?
That's what my sweetheart said:

Que sera, sera. What ever will be will be
the future's not ours to see.
Que sera, sera. What will be, will be.

Now I have children of my own,
They ask their mother, what will I be?
Will I be handsome, will I be rich?
I tell them tenderly:

Que sera, sera. What ever will be will be
the future's not ours to see.
Que sera, sera. What will be, will be.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (13 September 2007)

Miner said:


> An open letter to those who argued heavily for CTS
> 
> What do you think of the CTS future. When PDN has struck a fall where CTS will end upto ? A suicidian nuclear explosion by itself killing all investors?
> 
> It is unlikely that CTS will be able to offer any thing in next 5 years or *wait for a takeover*.




I have already posted in detail why CTS is a takeover target, just like MTN it will be ignored and its share price will struggle until a takeover offer comes and Mega seems to be the prime candidate,

I am bullish on Uranium long term because the fact is over the last few years the world has trended towards nuclear power, many nations are building nuclear reactors which will need plenty of uranium, Uranium is a long term Bull period.

U say CTS won't be able to supply anything for 5yrs? I'd say probably 2, but then name another company whose mkt cap is under $100m who stands a serious chance of supplying U in the next 5 yrs?

Bottom line even though CTS's deposit is in Peru on top of a mountain, its at surface unlike some Nambian hopefuls whose ore is 100ms+ below surface!  Also the grade of its deposit is *0.1%-0.3% U* vs the nambian hopefuls who are around the 0.01-0.03% mark, thats *10x higher*

Anyway in volatile mkts such as these I don't think fundamentals matter




YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Hi guys just thought I'd let you all know that CTS has a really good video/google earth type presentation on the Corachapi Uranium project
> 
> http://www.contactresources.com.au/investorinfo-presentation.html
> 
> ...


----------



## jman2007 (3 October 2007)

No news for a while,

Well should be 5 weeks into the drilling program by now, anyone know if it is a RC or an aircore drilling program?  Difficult to see any clear trends emerging in the chart recently, other than the strong baseline support around 50c mark which the techies have picked up.


----------



## greenfs (3 October 2007)

jman2007 said:


> No news for a while,
> 
> Well should be 5 weeks into the drilling program by now, anyone know if it is a RC or an aircore drilling program?  Difficult to see any clear trends emerging in the chart recently, other than the strong baseline support around 50c mark which the techies have picked up.




If you like I could sell my holding and then the sp would assuredly move in a positive direction. My broker has been a 1+ year supporter of this stock and is convinced that one day it will be taken over $1+ price. What do they say - patience is a virtue - I think.


----------



## jman2007 (3 October 2007)

greenfs said:


> If you like I could sell my holding and then the sp would assuredly move in a positive direction. My broker has been a 1+ year supporter of this stock and is convinced that one day it will be taken over $1+ price. What do they say - patience is a virtue - I think.




Nah,

I recommend you keep them under your mattress for a rainy day mate, unless you're a majority shareholder in the company! I'm a firm believer in this stock as well, not to sound like a broken record or anything, but it doesn't take a genius to work out that the shallow, high-grade Chapi deposit would be amenable to a low cost, open-cut, heap-leach treatment operation.  

There is also enough tech analysis on this thread for me to be satisfied that this project would definitely fly.  IMO, to state the obvious, sp triggers would have to be a revised resource estimate following completion of the drilling programm and/or any verifiable connection to Mega.


----------



## juw177 (10 October 2007)

Nice rise on the highest volume since the July correction. Having another go at breaking 60c? Any news down the line?


----------



## greenfs (10 October 2007)

juw177 said:


> Nice rise on the highest volume since the July correction. Having another go at breaking 60c? Any news down the line?




There will be news coming out of Peru at some point in the next 6-8 weeks, but I thought that it is still too soon unless they determine to start making progress reports, but this seem to not make much sense to me.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (10 October 2007)

Hey guys,

RCR research put out a report on them a few days back and have a buy recommendation with a price target of $1.05 ish fully diluted

Take a look

www.contacturanium.com.au/analyst-reports.asp 

Cheers


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (11 October 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> RCR research put out a report on them a few days back and have a buy recommendation with a price target of $1.05 ish fully diluted
> 
> ...




CTS has recieved another research report with another buy recommendation,

The intital price target is $1

Take a look

www.contacturanium.com.au/analyst-reports.asp


----------



## insider (11 October 2007)

Hmmm... looks like the quick profit takers have moved in... Nice little ramping report... CTS are trying their best to push the SP up... I think the $1.00 value is conservative too... we will see how things go... I don't hold CTS anymore...


----------



## nothing (13 October 2007)

Their annual report was posted after trading on Friday.

Has anybody had a chance to read over it. Is there anything positive or new in there which is of interest?


----------



## ta2693 (15 October 2007)

Another great wall at 60c. 
CTS find a big pressure of selling at 60c. What do you think? Kennas.  Is it wise to wait until CTS breaks 60c?


----------



## Sean K (15 October 2007)

ta2693 said:


> Another great wall at 60c.
> CTS find a big pressure of selling at 60c. What do you think? Kennas.  Is it wise to wait until CTS breaks 60c?



ta, always depends on your own trading/investment plan of course. Most may say it's the exit that's actually more important in managing a position. Looking at this, seems 50 is a pretty solid floor, so there may not be much downside if you get in anywhere between there and 60 waiting for the break...Looks like some higher lows happening confirmed with the MACD saying momentum's up, so perhaps it is set to break through. Also, are you looking at this in the bigger picture on the fundamentals, or just a chart trade? I generally use the chart to confirm a fundamental picture, so while this is still tracking sideways (been 12 months now) I'd personally wait. But, if you have a longer term view and the funnies are there, why wait?

So, sorry to be too politically correct, but depends on your overall situation and plan, risk tollerance, and belief in the funnymentals.   

Am I on the fence enough there? 

(PS, Then there's the YT factor to consider too.  LOL  )


----------



## roland (15 October 2007)

This may sound like a newbie question, but what are loyalty options?

CVI are going to offer loyalty options at $0.15. This means we get cheap shares - right?

" It is intended that the options will be exercisable by option holders at any time prior to 30 November 2009, at an exercise price of 15 cents."

So, we can sell at any time prior to the above date .... sounds like a good way to dilute other shareholdings .....


----------



## Pat (16 October 2007)

roland said:


> This may sound like a newbie question, but what are loyalty options?



Is CTS offering loyalty options? Perhaps the CVI thread? or a new thread so I can find out instead of just thinking I know. I assume they are options paid to existing share holders. I'm guessing you can only sell them if there exchange traded options. So the oppies are free, but when you convert the you pay the conversion price.

YT I am interested why CTS holds so much potential after the U bubble has bust? 
During the hype the market seemed to overlook CTS, sure the SP doubled, to a degree, however this seems insignificant to the co's that held tenements in Australia... SMM, MTN even CUY which did maybe 400%+.
Peru and Kyrgyzstan seem risky to an extent, with Peru having logistical problems, and the later having potential 'Putin' issues. (Just don't trust that dude)

That said, CTS has held up well and not lost the same $$$ as the above co's mentioned, including PDN which saw 45% lost approx. CTS just settled into a 50 cent to 65 cent trading range.

I need to grasp an understanding.

Agree 50 cents seems like a concrete floor. I got burned with U, lost too much profit. So I see U as a bunker buster!!!

So for the moment yellow cake is not for me... still healing.


----------



## greenfs (30 October 2007)

I would be interested if someone could give me their opinion regarding the current chart on this one, especially the corealtion between increased volume leading to sp increases and the possible future direction(s) from here.

Are we looking at a continuing sideways movement?


----------



## kitehigh (30 October 2007)

Strong volume on CTS with a rise of 14.5%.  CTSO was even better with a rise of 18.5% and volume of almost 2.9 million.  The strongest volume we have seen on the options since April.
Still no news out yet about how the drilling is going.  Could be the old buy the rumour going on here at the moment.  
Although it has done this in the past 8 months only to fall back in the following days.
So I think unless we hear some news from the company in the next few days, we will get a retractment and some more side ways movement.  Than again we are getting further down the track in regards to the drilling program so hopefully bodes well for the company.

Disclaimer: I hold options.


----------



## sharechaser (31 October 2007)

kitehigh said:


> Strong volume on CTS with a rise of 14.5%.  CTSO was even better with a rise of 18.5% and volume of almost 2.9 million.  The strongest volume we have seen on the options since April.
> Still no news out yet about how the drilling is going.  Could be the old buy the rumour going on here at the moment.
> Although it has done this in the past 8 months only to fall back in the following days.
> So I think unless we hear some news from the company in the next few days, we will get a retractment and some more side ways movement.  Than again we are getting further down the track in regards to the drilling program so hopefully bodes well for the company.
> ...




I hope not, but i think you might be right, seen cts get up these levels a few times only to drop down to low 50's - hopefully as we get further along with the drilling program any retracements will be not as severe (fingers crossed )


----------



## insider (1 November 2007)

sharechaser said:


> I hope not, but i think you might be right, seen cts get up these levels a few times only to drop down to low 50's - hopefully as we get further along with the drilling program any retracements will be not as severe (fingers crossed )




I KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN... IMO IF IT DOES RETRACE AGAIN THEN I'D SAY IT WOULD HIT 55 CENTS AT MOST... ITS LOOKING GOOD AT THE MOMENT IMO (CHARTING WISE)


----------



## juw177 (1 November 2007)

We are seeing highest ever volume in one day so this leg up to 60c may just be a little different. The next days will see.


----------



## kitehigh (1 November 2007)

Yep, another good day for cts today with strong volume again.   
Yesterday saw some profit taking and a retraction, but with todays stong buying again hopefully we are seeing most of the weaker hands being brought out.  With all this volume there must be some information leaking out....


----------



## juw177 (1 November 2007)

kitehigh said:


> Yep, another good day for cts today with strong volume again.
> Yesterday saw some profit taking and a retraction, but with todays stong buying again hopefully we are seeing most of the weaker hands being brought out.  With all this volume there must be some information leaking out....




Why do you say that? It is quite obvious from the volume and price range that today was the profit taking day and there were not enough buyers to keep it above 60c at close.

If tomorrow closes above 60c then I take that back.


----------



## kitehigh (1 November 2007)

Well just looking at the ctso chart (which is what I follow as I don't own the actual shares), we have been getting higher highs and lower lows on a massive increase of volume.  Drilling started back in August and I think we will see some updates being released shortly.  How shortly, I don't know, maybe someone who lives in Australia could give the company a ring and ask them if they have any updates due out soon.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (2 November 2007)

I'm still waiting for CTS to reach its "true" value, which I have already espoused,

Its taken alot longer than I thought but I am confident that the fundamentals will eventually shine through here guys


----------



## EZZA (4 November 2007)

anyone with any idea when these guys will eventually be producing the stuff?

looks like a matter of time when cts will eventually move out of the range, struggling to get over the 60c mark though. interesting to watch how it pans out.


----------



## shinobi346 (5 November 2007)

The price of U isn't working favourably for them.. but I  dont think we'll be seeing much action happening here until after the election and the govt affirms their position on U.

It would be good to have a crystal ball.


----------



## bliimp (16 November 2007)

Just a couple of videos doing the rounds on CTS

a) http://www.investortv.com/stories/6868,806-18401,36652.html

This one's an interview with Napier (exec chairman); and in particular, take note of his final comment :-

“_At the moment we are spending about $2 million on exploration programmes and drilling programmes in Peru and Kyrgyzstan. Next year we are going to increase that to around $5 million, and I think we’d be disappointed if we didn’t at least double the size of our resources after that next phase of exploration, and we’re aiming for much higher than that.” _

b) http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=xvl5iEVWjdg

This 'silent film' has been out for a while now and is quite an impressive graphical presentation of the Peruvian tenements


----------



## bliimp (16 November 2007)

bliimp said:


> Just a couple of videos doing the rounds on CTS
> 
> a) http://www.investortv.com/stories/6868,806-18401,36652.html
> 
> ...




Further to the above post, where Napier talks of 'at least doubling resource size' for all tenements, he mentions the Corachapi deposit specifically in the following article :-

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22403926-21703,00.html

where he says that, *'We actually think we can easily triple that resource' *

Is he just ramping his beloved CTS? 
Maybe he's just a positive, exuberant and excitable type? (irrational exhuberance!)
Or does he already know something that we dont know?

I mean, 
a) it's not a case of just _'thinking'_, he is _*actually thinking*_ ... does _'actually thinking' _mean you _'know'_
b) it's not a case of _'we can'_, but *we can easily *
b) it's not a case of _'increase'_ or _'double'_ the resource, but  _*triple*_ the resource.

Boy, I might appear to be pedantic here ... I suppose he is allowed to think aloud, but afterall, he is the executive chairman and he has made a BIG statement! 

Oh well! ... the annual report did say that we should _'expect a flow of positive results coming through in the last quarter of 2007' _... and taking CTS literally, I suppose they still do have another 6 weeks to deliver the positive results!

But it would be interesting to know _*if they actually think they can easily deliver the positive results ON TIME!*_


----------



## bliimp (22 November 2007)

Spoke to a CTS spokesperson in Perth this morning ... they are perhaps a week or two away in announcing Peru drilling results ... samples caught up in laboratory testing delays in Peru.

At least drilling has occurred!

At least samples are in the laboratory!

And at least they will be true to their earlier announcements when they indicated that results will be out by end of year!


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (22 November 2007)

bliimp said:


> Spoke to a CTS spokesperson in Perth this morning ... they are perhaps a week or two away in announcing Peru drilling results ... samples caught up in laboratory testing delays in Peru.
> 
> At least drilling has occurred!
> 
> ...




Well it has been a long long wait for me, I am starting to lose patience with CTS 

But 2 weeks more isn't that long, thats if its only another 2 weeks


----------



## bliimp (22 November 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Well it has been a long long wait for me, I am starting to lose patience with CTS
> 
> But 2 weeks more isn't that long, thats if its only another 2 weeks




Agree ... I cannot  understand why companies in general do not give progess reports ... especially if they are experiencing delays ... just simple announcements to keep the market better informed!

And to quote CTS from previous announcements .... they _'expect a flow of positive results coming through in the last quarter of 2007' _

Well ... I don't think ONE announcement in early December consitutes a FLOW!!! ..... It better be good!!!


----------



## IOT (26 November 2007)

Announcement out: trading halt until Wednesday!  
Hopefully some good news coming re results and the wait will pay off!


----------



## juw177 (26 November 2007)

Drill results here we come. And the halt comes at a time where the shareprice breached the longterm support of 50c which is strategic. Whether CTS will finally be revalued and stay above 60c after the drill results (if this announce is about that) is another story.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (26 November 2007)

juw177 said:


> Drill results here we come. And the halt comes at a time where the shareprice breached the longterm support of 50c which is strategic. Whether CTS will finally be revalued and stay above 60c after the drill results (if this announce is about that) is another story.




I sure hope its the drill results, we've been waiting for what seems like forever!!!!!!!!


----------



## Gurgler (27 November 2007)

Correct me if I'm wrong but trading halts are more likely to occur before negative price sensitive ann's about drill results, fundraising or positive ann's about JV's.

Positive drill results seem to just be announced. Am I right there?


----------



## IOT (27 November 2007)

They seem to be getting used alot on stocks I watch even for positive announcements, I think it's another way of preventing news leaks driving the price up before the announcement.  

FDL comes to mind where there was no price rises, a halt, and then a massive jump up.  As opposed to other stocks where theres a massive rise pre announcement, then the announcement comes and the price falls!


----------



## Santoro (28 November 2007)

Drilling results are up.

Key points:-
· Very long eU3O8 intersections include:-
54.73m @ 0.026% eU3O8
41.34m @ 0.034% eU3O8
35.09m @ 0.033% eU3O8
34.17m @ 0.056% eU3O8
· Mineralisation at or near surface
· Mineralisation significantly thicker than previously estimated
· New mineralisation also identified in areas between
resource blocks
· Highest mineralisation grade is 2.07m @ 0.425% eU3O8


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (28 November 2007)

Santoro said:


> Drilling results are up.
> 
> Key points:-
> · Very long eU3O8 intersections include:-
> ...




Hmmm well the grades are about 1/3rd what I was expecting so I am somewhat confused and dissapointed,

However the grades are comparable to BMN and BLR, both of which have mkt caps many multiples of CTS's, however unlike BLR and BMN, CTS's mineralisation is at or near surface , not 100m's-200m's underground so this is a big advantage as CTS's deposit will be amneable to open pit mining

The other positive thing is that I was only expecting 10m hits , not 50m hits, so this should easily allow for a trippling of the resource




bliimp said:


> Further to the above post, where Napier talks of 'at least doubling resource size' for all tenements, he mentions the Corachapi deposit specifically in the following article :-
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22403926-21703,00.html
> 
> where he says that, *'We actually think we can easily triple that resource' *


----------



## Santoro (28 November 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Hmmm well the grades are about 1/3rd what I was expecting so I am somewhat confused and dissapointed,




Correct me if i'm wrong but there are some very high grades 4250ppm @ 2m and 1190ppm at 2.2m, be happy to see more of these results in future drilling results


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (28 November 2007)

Santoro said:


> Correct me if i'm wrong but there are some very high grades 4250ppm @ 2m and 1190ppm at 2.2m, be happy to see more of these results in future drilling results




No your right, its just the avg grade is probably 0.03% where as I was expecting an avg of at least say 0.075%

But yes there are high grade hits, we'll  have to wait for more results to see how much high grade ore there is,

I think todays sell off is people fed up with waiting, they've waited and waitied saying to themself, wait for the drill results, wait for the drill results and now they're selling, or dumping should I say

I'm still holding, CTS looks cheap compare to peers


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (28 November 2007)

Also technically speaking, CTS has very strong support at 50c,

over the past year, any trading below 50c has been a momentary dip,

So I'd say CTS is sitting just below support and 50c should provide a safety level,

But we'll see,


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (28 November 2007)

yeah the grades are on the lower end of things but i think coupled with the country of the tennemants and access issues will make this project a dud.

coincidently off topic MHL has some historic U results which cr@p all over CTS's grades


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (28 November 2007)

KIWIKARLOS said:


> yeah the grades are on the lower end of things but i think coupled with the country of the tennemants and access issues will make this project a dud.
> 
> coincidently off topic MHL has some historic U results which cr@p all over CTS's grades




I don't think u realise how many Canadian companies are working around CTS my friend,

There's about 5, if you dig back through this thread you'll see I put up all the research on them,

Time will tell, but I woudln't write off the project at all


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (28 November 2007)

yeah there are a few but i think that the fact that other people around them have operations doesn't really make that much of a difference to CTS. Uranium supplies aren't that sparse at the moment sure the spot price is high but realistically there aren't more reactors been built or proposed to be built than there are reactors due to be decommissioned. The U market is nowhere near as strong as the iron ore market is and CTS's grades just aren't that good.

I think the U op's that will make good returns in the near term are those with high grades and in established areas. That been said though that doesn't mean you can't make a profit trading CTS these days all you need is a fav ann or two or a bit of spec rumours and you can make dollars.

I just don't believe CTS will be a U miner anytime soon and would require improvements in things outside of its control to turn its deposit into an operation.


----------



## Iceman23 (28 November 2007)

KIWIKARLOS said:


> yeah there are a few but i think that the fact that other people around them have operations doesn't really make that much of a difference to CTS. Uranium supplies aren't that sparse at the moment sure the spot price is high but realistically there aren't more reactors been built or proposed to be built than there are reactors due to be decommissioned. The U market is nowhere near as strong as the iron ore market is and CTS's grades just aren't that good.
> 
> I think the U op's that will make good returns in the near term are those with high grades and in established areas. That been said though that doesn't mean you can't make a profit trading CTS these days all you need is a fav ann or two or a bit of spec rumours and you can make dollars.
> 
> I just don't believe CTS will be a U miner anytime soon and would require improvements in things outside of its control to turn its deposit into an operation.




Hi Gents,

I don't usually post, but there is SO much factually incorrect information in above post that I feel I need to set the record straight:

*1. I think that the fact that other people around them have operations doesn't really make that much of a difference to CTS. *

CTS' tenements are surround by Solex Resource's (TSX) tenements which have been coming up with some decent hits. I am not a geologist but I highly doubt that the mineralisation will somehow stop or dilute just precisely on CTS' land. It could but to dismiss this factor out of hand is unwise I believe.

*2. Uranium supplies aren't that sparse at the moment.*

Current deficit between supply and demand is about 70m lb of U308 per year with supply problems in existing mines (Ranger, Cigar Lake). PDN is the first U308 mine to open in over 20 yrs and the nearest new contenders will start operations in 2010 at the earliest. 

*3. Realistically there aren't more reactors been built or proposed to be built than there are reactors due to be decommissioned.*

India has recently ran out of U308 for their reactors. The Amercians are approving new plants to be built and the Chinese just signed a $14b deal to built 2 reactors from Areva.... the tip of the iceberg in my opinion if China is seriously about meeting its future energy demand via clean sources. By the way the initial amount of U308 required to start a reactor is about 300t or 675,000 lbs.

*4. I think the U op's that will make good returns in the near term are those with high grades and in established areas.*

Rossing, one of the world's largest uranium mines, operate on a cut-off of 100ppm or 0.01%. Uramin recently taken over by Arvea in a $2.5b transaction works off 70ppm. Most of the Nambian hopefuls with completed PFS or BFS are in a similar situation.

*5. MHL's grades cr@p over CTS.*

From what I can tell, MHL's uranium project in Kyrgz is at infant stages and based upon the company's 6 Aug announcement, "sampled grades are 0.03%-0.04% and upgrade to 1.4% in some areas". Aren't these grades similar to CTS' results?

Apologies for the long post.

Cheers


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (28 November 2007)

Thanks IceMan (TopGun fan?)

I'm glad someone else did it because I couldn't be bothered,

Iceman has rebutted most of the negatives put up, if anyone disagrees, go ahead and put up copunter arguments, but the key word is arguments, ie back them up with proof like he has, not just random statements,

Mavrick out


----------



## Iceman23 (28 November 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Thanks IceMan (TopGun fan?)
> 
> I'm glad someone else did it because I couldn't be bothered,
> 
> ...




Anytime Mav 

The Iceman lost his cool when he saw the blatantly misleading statements that were posted.

Cheers


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (28 November 2007)

Iceman23 said:


> Hi Gents,
> 
> I don't usually post, but there is SO much factually incorrect information in above post that I feel I need to set the record straight:
> 
> ...




1. So your saying if I put a caravan next to kirribilly house it'll be worth 10 mill aswell  doesn't matter what your neighbours have unless your sitting on pay dirt to. Geological structures son't just extend across invisible boundaries in all cases. Look at the pilbara region apparently if you have dirt their you have an iron ore operation then. BS! Half these juniors with plots will never eventuate as producers.

2. Sure there isn't enough U to keep up with supply but what commodity isn't in short supply at the moment. 

3.You have done a great job at listing a couple reactors to be built in the near future but left out the many many more that are way past their service life and are just sitting there waiting to be decommissioned but now people are realising they are much more expensive to decomission than they thought.
Australia is certainly not going to be building reactors now that Rudds in!

4. Rossing operates in a secure country on a massive economy of scale with little overburden and already established infrastructure. You can not deny setting up operations now are much more expensive than when Rossing was established, material and labour costs are much higher. Not to mention CTS's territory is in a place where Russian, US and chinese interest converge and has never historically been secure for investment and is only an developing economy. 

5. MHL's grades are marginally better than CTS and we could argue the pro's and con's of each's business till the cows come home CTS is in a more advanced stage.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (28 November 2007)

Sorry one more point you mentioned Nuclear energy as a clean source of energy?

It may produce less carbon at the power plant but how about digging up millions of tonnes of dirt to recover 0.01% U308 then building massive underground storage for 10000 Years not to mention the side effects and proven non carbon related problems such as the huge amount of depleted uranium ammo which has caused health effects in many countries.


----------



## Iceman23 (28 November 2007)

KIWIKARLOS said:


> 1. So your saying if I put a caravan next to kirribilly house it'll be worth 10 mill aswell  doesn't matter what your neighbours have unless your sitting on pay dirt to. Geological structures son't just extend across invisible boundaries in all cases. Look at the pilbara region apparently if you have dirt their you have an iron ore operation then. BS! Half these juniors with plots will never eventuate as producers.
> 
> 2. Sure there isn't enough U to keep up with supply but what commodity isn't in short supply at the moment.
> 
> ...




1. I agree with your comments regarding the iron ore hopefuls, but the key difference is that CTS has a JORCed resource and promising (in my opinion) drill results which most of the former companies lack eg. FDL.

2. Of course every single commodity is in short supply, but you originally stated that uranium wasn't in short supply, and that is blatantly wrong. You also said that uranium prices were unrealistically high, but if you accept the current supply deficit scenario, please explain why current prices unrealistic? Especially since U308 only makes up 7% of the cost of running a reactor, it can hit $500 per lb and still not make a major impact.

3. Germany and several other European countries are actually delaying the decommissioning of their nuclear reactors as they realise with them off, they can't meet the increasing energy demand. I am a proud Australian but when it comes to nuclear reactor demand, Australia with its tiny population makes ZERO impact to the equation. What you need to monitor is the situation in India, China, USA, Russia and Europe, and there are clear signs of a nuclear revival there. Don't take my word for it, visit www.uraniumseek.com for a few weeks and you will see the headlines come through.  

4. Costs are definitely exploding but generally speaking, as long as the spot price holds, low grade, high tonnage projects will work. CTS' hits today remind me of BMN's results (probably slightly inferior) but the key thing is that the widths are good. BMN has done a scoping study that says the project is economic based upon a spot price of $45/lb. As long as CTS keeps coming up with thick widths, you can afford to lose some grade, especially since its shallow. The project is also close to a power grid and water supply. It's still early days yet but for you to imply that the project is a write off is misleading.

Nambia is definitely safer than Peru. It is rated safer than Australia! However, if the sovereign risk is so great why is a major like Cameco and numerous Canadian explorers doing there?

5. MHL's project is so early, it does not deserve a comparison with CTS.

To be honest I think your due diligence on CTS and the uranium industry in general is less than complete. You are definitely entitled to your say; just be prepared to be pulled up for misleading comments.

Cheers


----------



## Iceman23 (28 November 2007)

KIWIKARLOS said:


> Sorry one more point you mentioned Nuclear energy as a clean source of energy?
> 
> It may produce less carbon at the power plant but how about digging up millions of tonnes of dirt to recover 0.01% U308 then building massive underground storage for 10000 Years not to mention the side effects and proven non carbon related problems such as the huge amount of depleted uranium ammo which has caused health effects in many countries.




Statistically, more people have died from coal mining than comparable to U308 mining. In China alone, it is estimated than 5,000 died annually. I shudder to think about the actual number.

U308 waste is definitely nasty, but if you believe in global warming, then there is no other current existing technology that can address the issue. France (80% nuclear powered) scientists did a report whereby it was estimated that the country would need build a windmill every 50m (?) all along the border of the country to replace nuclear power.... what about future demand increases?

About 2billion in China and India want electricity right now. Did you watch the soccer game yesterday? There was a crowd of 80,000. Now mutiple that by 20,000x and you get about 80% of the population of China & India. Both countries are crowded places, there is no way you can build sufficient wind mills or solar panels to meet demand. I shudder to imagine the CO2 if they use coal plants solely. 

Since when does U308 mining automatically translate to depleted uranium ammo. That's the work of military industrialists and warmongering govts. and a pretty long bow to draw.

Cheers


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (29 November 2007)

Iceman23 said:


> Statistically, more people have died from coal mining than comparable to U308 mining. In China alone, it is estimated than 5,000 died annually. I shudder to think about the actual number.
> 
> U308 waste is definitely nasty, but if you believe in global warming, then there is no other current existing technology that can address the issue. France (80% nuclear powered) scientists did a report whereby it was estimated that the country would need build a windmill every 50m (?) all along the border of the country to replace nuclear power.... what about future demand increases?
> 
> ...





Mate statistics can be manipulated and viewed in numerous ways to give different results how many people have dies in chernobyl, Hiroshima and nagasaki from the after effects of radiation. Not to mention the thousands of people in the US military that have been exposed during testing and at nuclear weapons plants in the US (not power stations) Thing is coal mining deaths are attributed to accidents and exposure close the mine no probs. Nuclear waste is around for ten's of thousands of years ! more than people have existed in modern form!

You keep saying nuclear will prevent global warming that is baloni. There have been many many studies done that show over the life time of the nuclear process from mining to storage for ten thousand years it actually produces more Co2. Who said that windmills were the best source of renewable energy? Geothermal in oz has the potential to provide BASE load generation for hundreds if not thousands of years. France coincidently has some of the best geothermal resources in europe.

Nuclear is a silly option we are already contemplating a disaster from PEAK OIL and your saying we should link our new economic and energy policies to another finite (if the world went nuclear there wouldn't be enough U308 for 100 years!) and much more polluting energy source. You would think we would have learnt our lesson from fossil fuels! 

Depleted Urainum is a by product of power generation and right now the US and russia have hundreds of thousands of tonnes of the stuff its used in aviation for counter weights for planes but there is just so much of the stuff they have to think up new ways to get rid of it and what beeter way than to dipose of it and kill people at the same time. Youy say its war mongers that are the problem but when in history has there not been a war monger? Everyday of every year for the whole of human existing someone somewhere has been fighting. So lets say china and india do start going nuclear do you think they will simply store all the waste or maybe they will make nuclear arsenals  that would make an even better world a new arms race. so instead of two countries with the power to destroy the entire planet we may have a dozen!


----------



## Santoro (29 November 2007)

KIWIKARLOS said:


> Mate statistics can be manipulated and viewed in numerous ways to give different results .......There have been many many studies done that show over the life time of the nuclear process from mining to storage for ten thousand years it actually produces more Co2.




KiwiKarlos point taken, this excerpt from the chairman of BHP Don Argus's presentation at AGM yesterday: (I haven't seen the slides Don Argus refers to)

"Some critics say that the benefits of using nuclear power are outweighed by the lifecycle emissions of mining, converting and enriching the uranium to produce fuel rods.
This is not the case. The savings in emissions from using uranium to fuel power stations greatly exceed the emissions associated with the uranium lifecycle.
The direct and indirect emissions that are associated with a range of different power stations are shown in this slide.
Direct emissions, shown in green, are associated with the burning of fossil fuels in coal, oil and gas fired power stations.
The indirect emissions shown in white are the lifecycle emissions associated with mining and producing fuels and building power stations.
As you can see, nuclear power stations have no direct emissions of carbon dioxide and the indirect emissions from the mining and production of the fuel rods and other parts of the lifecycle are also relatively low and in the same order as renewable energy."


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (29 November 2007)

The one thing missing from that equation though is the increased cost. Lets say nuclear does generate as much co2 as renewables it is far more expensive and produces highly toxic pollution where renewables dont. So if the co2 savings are comparable but the actual cost is higher why would you not just go renewable. 

The other thing is that the nuclear industry has been around for 60 years and has made alot of advancments renewables are fairly new and there is alot of room for increased efficiency and economic improvements. Technological improvements will undoubtedly make renewables a better alternative.


----------



## Iceman23 (29 November 2007)

KIWIKARLOS said:


> Mate statistics can be manipulated and viewed in numerous ways to give different results how many people have dies in chernobyl, Hiroshima and nagasaki from the after effects of radiation. Not to mention the thousands of people in the US military that have been exposed during testing and at nuclear weapons plants in the US (not power stations) Thing is coal mining deaths are attributed to accidents and exposure close the mine no probs. Nuclear waste is around for ten's of thousands of years ! more than people have existed in modern form!
> 
> You keep saying nuclear will prevent global warming that is baloni. There have been many many studies done that show over the life time of the nuclear process from mining to storage for ten thousand years it actually produces more Co2. Who said that windmills were the best source of renewable energy? Geothermal in oz has the potential to provide BASE load generation for hundreds if not thousands of years. France coincidently has some of the best geothermal resources in europe.
> 
> ...




Oh dear, you think uranium will run out in 100 years if the entire world switches? Uranium is the 8th most common element on the planet... There are even minute traces of it seawater. There is only a shortage because prices have been depressed for so long it wasn't financially viable to go explore for it. 

Nuclear waste can be stored safely several km underground, and it's utter rubbish to say it produces more CO2 in the long run. Tell me how come the founder of Greenpeace (the king of greenies) have come out in support of nuclear power in the last few years? 

Geothermal power? Yeah, right. Most geothermal sources will struggle to cover 1 major Indian or Chinese city to say less than providing for a whole country. Geothermal can't even cover the needs of Australia with its 18m population.

You keep using the threat of nukes in your scaremongering, but do you realised that spent uranium has to be further processed into plutonium before it can be used as in nuclear weapons, a technological feat that has been accomplished by probably no more than 10 nations. I have news for you. If countries are bent on wiping each other out, they don't need to use nukes. Massive carpet bombing will decimate the population eventually, albeit at a slower rate.

Finally one last question. If you are so concerned about uranium mining leading to depleted uranium ammo and nuclear weapons (a link that I strongly disagree with), have you ever invested in uranium stocks? If so, don't you feel a little morally responsible for indirectly contributing to potential death and suffering around the world then given your strong vocal objections?


----------



## Wantitnow (29 November 2007)

It's a CTS thread folks... not a debate on the merits or consequences of uranium in general.  Let's try to keep things relevent here.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (29 November 2007)

Iceman23 said:


> Oh dear, you think uranium will run out in 100 years if the entire world switches? Uranium is the 8th most common element on the planet... There are even minute traces of it seawater. There is only a shortage because prices have been depressed for so long it wasn't financially viable to go explore for it.
> 
> Nuclear waste can be stored safely several km underground, and it's utter rubbish to say it produces more CO2 in the long run. Tell me how come the founder of Greenpeace (the king of greenies) have come out in support of nuclear power in the last few years?
> 
> ...





Where are you getting your facts mate?

A 2006 report by MIT, that took into account the use of Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS), concluded that it would be affordable to generate 100 GWe (gigawatts of electricity) or more by 2050 in the United States alone, for a maximum investment of 1 billion US dollars in research and development over 15 years.[14]

The MIT report calculated the world's total EGS resources to be over 13,000 ZJ. Of these, over 200 ZJ would be extractable, with the potential to increase this to over 2,000 ZJ with technology improvements - sufficient to provide all the world's energy needs for several millennia.

one chinese city aye, well the experts certainly feel otherwise


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (29 November 2007)

Also this stuff about U been the 8th most common element 
Its actually about number 92 on the list below gold, titanium amounst other "common" elements.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundances_of_the_elements_(data_page)

are you making this stuff up? dont mean to be rude but seriously 8th, we would all be glowing and have three heads :


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (29 November 2007)

i lied its not 92nd its actually about No.35, my bad :

Anyways back to CTS, the canadian prospectors have hit good grades but there is a chance either way that CTS deposit is no where near as good, these deposits are typically very strong in a localised area and grades go lower over a vast area


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (29 November 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Well it has been a long long wait for me, I am starting to lose patience with CTS
> 
> But 2 weeks more isn't that long, thats if its only another 2 weeks




At first I couldn't believe this sell off, I mean the stock was trading well above 50c for a whole year, 

The drill results weren't amazing, but they were comparably good ie WME, BLR, BMN, I thought maybe because those are all African operations and CTS is Peru its get discounted, but that wouldn't explain the dump

Upon reflection I think I understand the selloff, firstly, I have noticed a trend which another ASF'er JUW177 has put forward,

Its a kinda stag the ann or dump on the ann type mentality,

And in CTS's case the drill results were wayyyyy overdue and so add to that this stag the ann mentality and its not hard to see why many holders just dumped after the ann


But as I keep saying the drill results weren't bad, they just weren't amazing,

I will be very very surprised if we're not back at the 50c level soon, but then I've been calling things wrong a bit lately, maybe I'm losing my touch


----------



## Santoro (29 November 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> At first I couldn't believe this sell off, I mean the stock was trading well above 50c for a whole year,
> 
> The drill results weren't amazing, but they were comparably good ie WME, BLR, BMN, I thought maybe because those are all African operations and CTS is Peru its get discounted, but that wouldn't explain the dump
> 
> ...




Yeah, must say I'm a bit surprised too and the depth of buyers is not impressive hence the drop in sp/ I get a sense that the money is moving from speculative, non produing stocks to well developed income generating stocks in case the slow down in the US turns into a recession. Their is plenty of caution around at the moment. I mean the US rose 500 odd points our market net over two days...what 25 points??


----------



## Santoro (29 November 2007)

Been looking at Solex drilling results.....on average higher grade but much less depth...Contact have the highest grade at 0.425 @ 2.2m


----------



## Iceman23 (29 November 2007)

KIWIKARLOS said:


> i lied its not 92nd its actually about No.35, my bad :
> 
> Anyways back to CTS, the canadian prospectors have hit good grades but there is a chance either way that CTS deposit is no where near as good, these deposits are typically very strong in a localised area and grades go lower over a vast area




Ah, I was mainly working off the top of my head, so I stand corrected. I am allowed to get 1 or 2 wrong! :

I think we'll just agree to disgree. Truce.


----------



## Iceman23 (29 November 2007)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> At first I couldn't believe this sell off, I mean the stock was trading well above 50c for a whole year,
> 
> The drill results weren't amazing, but they were comparably good ie WME, BLR, BMN, I thought maybe because those are all African operations and CTS is Peru its get discounted, but that wouldn't explain the dump
> 
> ...




I think there was also a mismatched expectations with holders expecting an "AGS" (shortish widths, but high grades) which was what they marketed, but the drilling results threw up a "quasi BMN" (long widths, low grades).

Projects falling into the latter category are probably less well understood and harder to get off the ground as well.

Hopefully the next set of drills throw up some 700ppm+ hits otherwise there could be more pain.


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (30 November 2007)

I do think CTS has alot going for it i just think that in the current market environment its having a bit of a hard time 12 months ago ann like this would see a jump in SP. But i think people are wary of investing in anything atm and even holding over night.

Hopefully they do get some better results from the next round of drilling, Im sitting in a cash position waiting for good buying opportunities and im keeping a close eye on CTS amoungst others.


----------



## jman2007 (3 December 2007)

Looks like a recovery back to baseline support of around 50c might be underway, I'm guessing that a few investors got a bit angsty once the drilling results actually came out and were a bit disappointed with the grades.... I haven't actually had a detailed look at the results myself, but from what YT is saying they are comparable to industry peers, and this IS a shallow deposit.

jman2007


----------



## rhen (11 December 2007)

_Salman forecasts that the spot price of uranium will average $102/lb this year, $162.50 in 2008, $186.85 in 2009, and $191.87 in 2010. Goldie predicted that the world's top uranium producer, Canada's Cameco, will realize average prices of $38.69/lb this year, $71.92 in 2008, $88.94 in 2009, and $106.25 in 2010.
Recommended stocks include Denison Mines (TSX: DML), Paladin Resources (TSX: PDN) and Uranium One (TSX: UUU). _


----------



## STRAT (18 December 2007)

I have been watching CTS for some time and looking to time an entry. Today looks like a good day. Of course another day on the DOW like the last two and they will be even cheaper tomorrow. 

Disc : Although this post lacks any real substance it is intended as genuine and in no way constitutes a ramp


----------



## jman2007 (18 December 2007)

Ouch,

this one is really beginning to hurt me now after coming in at 51.5c. I'm not completely sure what sparked the mini-rout after this held around 50-52c for so long, but the chart is starting to look a bit tenuous.  The trading volumes haven't been huge this morning, but do I intend to hold this long term, so my current position remains unchanged. Current levels around 37c might provide a good entry for the brave investor.


----------



## IOT (15 January 2008)

new results out anyone wish to give an opinion?  Sounds positive but I am not sure how to analyze them.


----------



## Sean K (15 January 2008)

IOT said:


> new results out anyone wish to give an opinion?  Sounds positive but I am not sure how to analyze them.



Outstanding grades and much thicker than previous. Should be the basis for a significant upgrade to the JORC. Need to look at it a bit more to see the strike length and depth changes. Looks like they'll be able to move on to a PFS and probably BFS on this.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (15 January 2008)

I think the results were great, well outstanding if you go off what the company said

The company appears to have a very large good grade deposit ie 500ppm-800ppm (0.05% U - 0.08% U) but also has a very high grade core 1000ppm - 3000ppm (0.1% u - 0.3%U)

Here's an extract from the ann, note the words "*Based on initial drilling results, the resource is expected to increase significantly and a prefeasibility study is planned.*"


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (15 January 2008)

Hmmm CTS have certainly been busy

The Chairman Richard Napier has done some inteviews etc re the project

To view the interview video link please visit: http://www.finnewsnetwork.com/Display.aspx?Site=FNN117&Vs=DIR&Vc=IV&Vm=Int_CTS_150408.wmv
To view the audio link please visit: http://www.finnewsnetwork.com/Display.aspx?Site=FNN117&Vs=DIR&Vc=IV&Vm=Int_CTS_150408.wma


And Warrick Grigor of FAR East Capital has also done an updated research report on CTS, see below for a link and extract

http://www.contacturanium.com.au/_content/documents/623.pdf


----------



## bigt (30 January 2008)

Any thoughts on the 3 000 000 (yes 3 million) sell at 59c??

Thats a big slice of pie! Could this be someone trying to push down the price by scaring holders, having no intention to sell?


----------



## prophet174 (30 January 2008)

bigt said:


> Any thoughts on the 3 000 000 (yes 3 million) sell at 59c??
> 
> Thats a big slice of pie! Could this be someone trying to push down the price by scaring holders, having no intention to sell?




If its UBS nominees selling then holders/traders are in big trouble! Can anyone see who the seller is?


----------



## bigt (31 January 2008)

WOuldnt have thought UBS would "advertise" such a big sell, with the potential impact of knocking down the price and having no hope of getting 59c. They'd sell parcels over a period of time, probably into some strength. I'm no insti expert though, it may be a tact to snap up more.


----------



## Sean K (7 February 2008)

That's not uranium, that's krypronite!!

Minor intersection, but geeesh! 



> KIHITIAN, PERU UPDATE: THREE NEW PROSPECTSKIHITIAN, PROSPECTS IDENTIFIED, *GRADES UP TO 34.75% U3O8*
> 
> Highlights:
> •
> ...



Around 5% is the highest grades I've seen before. Surely they jest?


----------



## KIWIKARLOS (7 February 2008)

It was only a tiny pocket 0.8 m wide by 0.8 m deep maybe a few hundreds metres of the stuff would be spectacular and probably visable from space:


----------



## pk_wasp (7 February 2008)

Is 34.75% = 34,750PPM?

Because that is huge rock/chip sample, biggest I've ever seen so far.


----------



## dj_420 (7 February 2008)

Perhaps they just chipped out the visible lumps to be tested for rock chip samples.

It has been suggested before that they do that to dress up results.


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (7 February 2008)

dj_420 said:


> Perhaps they just chipped out the visible lumps to be tested for rock chip samples.
> 
> It has been suggested before that they do that to dress up results.




I thought so too,

I mean at those levels of U it would be dangerous to humans wouldn't it?

CTS are still plugging away but with the market in subprime/credit fallout and U out of flavour not many


----------



## pk_wasp (7 February 2008)

Opps I got it wrong

345 000PPM uranium lol.

Whats the high ever record value?

But u all are right, there is no sentiment in Uranium at the moment, plenty of time to accumulate this one.


----------



## jman2007 (7 February 2008)

Well a stunning intersection,

But representative of the overall grade here?  Probably not.  Glad to see that investors are finally starting to be more objective with these types of releases. I get the impression they were desperate to get some "feel good" news out in light of the recent sp performance.

If you want a high-grade uranium deposit, then check out Cameco's Macarthur River mine, approx 20% grade and they use remote controlled robots to mine the ore after freezing it with liq nitrogen.

Sorry a bit off topic there, but thought it would be worth mentioning.

jman


----------



## IOT (19 February 2008)

Becoming a substantial holder from RRS after the close today... 8million shares or 8.36%...but it's dated 28/11/2007 anyone able to explain what is going on?


----------



## peteai (24 February 2008)

CTS Appears very good value although admittedly being a Uranium explorer it is by definition a high risk.

However using very rough metrics  

they state on their homepage (contactresources.com.au)
10 million pounds of resource (likely to grow)
Spread over different countries and regions
An Analyst (Far East Capital) estimates cost roughly $20/pound

estimate of total earning $50 (profit per pound) * 10mill = *$500 million*
company now valued at about $27 million

Can I ask for opinions on chances the projects will go ahead ?

Is it unlikely any of these project will not be economic ?

________
Thanks,
PETEAI


----------



## copper_hot (6 March 2008)

20.5c. testing all time lows

found this article on Mega Uranium and found it interesting given previous suggestions that it could takeove CTS:



Mega Uranium, the listed Toronto, Ontario-based uranium entity, may acquire more than one junior uranium company, said President Stewart Taylor. 
"We've got a shortlist of companies that we are looking at and we're looking worldwide," Taylor said. Companies that currently have properties with drill holes would be considered "advanced stage," he explained. In an ideal situation, Mega would like to acquire companies with advanced stage uranium projects and resources in countries in which it is currently operating, he said.
With a market cap of CAD 588.5m (USD 596.4m), Mega currently has operations in Australia, Argentina, Bolivia, Colombia, Mongolia, Canada and Cameroon. It is focused on advancing its projects in Queensland and Western Australia. It has a total of 47m pounds of historical reserves in Australia. 
The company has cash and cash equivalents of CAD 88m (USD 89.1m). Taylor said Mega will go to the capital markets to fund its acquisitions. "Our previous acquisitions were done mainly through shares transactions. Our preferred way is through shares," he noted. The CAD 88m will be used for exploration and drilling purposes, he explained. 
The company is not actively seeking advisors but gets proposals from various sources, Taylor said. The company's corporate counsel in Australia is Minter Ellison. 
At the same time, Mega is looking to divest its base and precious metals assets, Taylor said. "Our focus is uranium. The other properties are not a priority. The time has come to look at them and decide what to do with them," he explained. Taylor said the company is in the early stages of this process and has not hired advisors for this purpose. He said the company would be open to proposals regarding this. Mega has interests in non-uranium properties including a copper-nickel project in Guinea, West Africa and several gold and base metal projects in Ontario, Canada and Brazil.


Cheers


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (6 March 2008)

Yeah, they're smart,

Instead of moving back in the heat, they've sat back and waited, now CTS is like you said near all time lows, perfect time to pounce, bastards they are! 



copper_hot said:


> 20.5c. testing all time lows
> 
> found this article on Mega Uranium and found it interesting given previous suggestions that it could takeove CTS:
> 
> ...


----------



## peteai (4 April 2008)

Strange trading today over 500,000 shares changed hands all at $0.14
Resource Capital Research released the report on 17th March which an extract below shows they think it is very good value.  There is lot of uranium that would be easy to access, which I have heard in another report that this could be an option to generate cash, for a larger scale mine.

Cheers
Peteai


_Investment Comment: CTS is led by a well qualified management team that is demonstrating an ability to grow through acquisition, targeting near surface projects that have low exploration costs and good upside resource potential in favourable, pro uranium mining jurisdictions. With an adjusted EV/resource value of US$4.18/lb U3O8 (fully diluted) CTS appears modestly priced on a peer basis given the anticipated exploration success - price target $1.04/share. A capital raising is required 1H08, prior to expiry of ~54m options at A$0.20 in July ‘08 which could provide funding of A$10.8m._


----------



## juw177 (4 April 2008)

CTS was on the list of Opes holdings. But who ever has been selling the last few days has found plenty of buyers. This stock has been in a constant downtrend and it was only a matter of time before the price is right and the buyers come in.

(I went long based on the past few day's action with demand is soaking up supply.)


----------



## peteai (7 April 2008)

juw177 said:


> CTS was on the list of Opes holdings. But who ever has been selling the last few days has found plenty of buyers. This stock has been in a constant downtrend and it was only a matter of time before the price is right and the buyers come in.
> 
> (I went long based on the past few day's action with demand is soaking up supply.)




It appears a large chunk of the ANZ holding in CTS has been sold today (they held 5% of CTS) Despite this there seems to enough buyer demand to keep the share price from falling.

I would imagine once ANZ has finished their selling, the Contact Uranium SP wll rise - basic demand vs supply, I have bought more myself - believing the Contact Uranium is too good value to resist (not that anything is certain)

Cheers,
PETEAI


----------



## juw177 (7 April 2008)

Yep. i saw today's action. ANZ (I assume) at one stage was putting up 300k+ parcels on the sell side at 0.13 and 0.135. All of which was quickly taken out by equally big orders.

The ultra high volume and price support provides a strong buy signal from VSA point of view. ANZ should be about done with the selling now and whoever bought most of them will either keep accumulating or try to mark up the price.


----------



## grace (7 April 2008)

Just had a brief look at these (haven't held for a few months)
-  any thoughts on money at the bank - only $650 000 at end of December07 (any come in since then?)
-  Options to expire June 08 at 20 cents to convert are currently 'out of the money'.

I have not kept up to date recently on this one, but I am wondering what other holders thought about their cash position, and the fact that the options are out of the money and expire fairly soon.

Options trading at less than a cent (gosh I think I sold mine last year at +30cents and they had less uranium then!).  Just concerned about their cash position.....any thoughts?


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (7 April 2008)

I'm on a nice big loss on this one,

Partly due to subprime, partly due to Uranium collapse and partly due to me being an idiot

I'm pretty sure they will have to raise funds and at these levels that will = alot of dillution

Its such a shame really, they have such an amazing project in Peru

and a very good one in Kazakstan, 

Hopefully it will rebound and I can cut some losses


----------



## jman2007 (7 April 2008)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> I'm on a nice big loss on this one,
> 
> Partly due to subprime, partly due to Uranium collapse and partly due to me being an idiot
> 
> ...




YT,

I've well and truly taken a bath with CTS.

Yep, to raise some decent cash at these levels will require a _serious_ volume of shares to be issued. I think the lack of shareholder commincado whilst they were extending the mineralisation at Corachapi toward the end of last year really hurt them.

The results were so eagerly awaited and anticipated, and the while the grades were certainly solid(?) they were perhaps less than what some people had expected.

Corachapi looks great if you just take the numbers into account, but there is still some uncertainty over whether an operation could realistically be set up in this environment...i.e become almost the highest mine in the world.

Cheers
jman


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (7 April 2008)

So I'm not alone, well at least tthats something

Want to form a Lynch mob?? pretty sure Kennas will help us, heck we can launch the attack from his Peruvian abode :

I asked him to throw some Donkey dung at the CTS peeps if he ever sees em!

Yeah you hit the nail on the head Jman



jman2007 said:


> * I think the lack of shareholder commincado* whilst they were extending the mineralisation at Corachapi toward the end of last year really hurt them.




That was it in a nutshell, the complete lack of communications is what ruined

And yeah I too am expecting a largish issue of shares, I mean they need at least $5m - $10m going forward = 35m shares at 15c? gul 50m at 10c? who knows

Now about that Lynch mob


----------



## jman2007 (8 April 2008)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> So I'm not alone, well at least tthats something
> 
> Want to form a Lynch mob?? pretty sure Kennas will help us, heck we can launch the attack from his Peruvian abode :
> 
> ...




Lynch mob?...

Lol...well we'll probably need to pack our climbing gear and oxygen tanks to get up to Corachapi YT....and then er...pelt them with small pebbles and alpaca dung 

The half yearly was rather vague and didn't really shed to much light on the strategy going forward, other than "carrying forward exploration at CTS's key projects  with a view to upgrading and expanding the known resources" (or words to that effect)...pretty broad terms really.  

I guess one factor Coarachapi does have in its favour is that the straigraphy appears to be flat lying and the mineralisation fairly close to the surface, perhaps this could offset the infrastructure difficulties in setting up an operation at this altitude in the future.

Cheers
jman


----------



## Sean K (8 April 2008)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Want to form a Lynch mob?? pretty sure Kennas will help us, heck we can launch the attack from his Peruvian abode :
> 
> I asked him to throw some Donkey dung at the CTS peeps if he ever sees em!



May be back up that way in a couple of weeks. Perhaps I should drop in? Do they have an office in Lima? I'll take the Buro as backup.


----------



## peteai (29 April 2008)

Has CTS reach its bottom ?  I sure hope so

After months of steady decline it has had a stable stretch arounf 13c - 15c.
I also heard that they have arranging some extra financing (called their office )

Cheers,
Peteai


----------



## 56gsa (8 May 2008)

the threat of donkey dung seems to have done the trick - CTS starting to look like a nice round bottom...  5dMA crossed the 20dMA for the first time since Nov07.

options ex price 20c on 30Jun08 almost in the money and at 2/2.5c today could make an interesting play with 6 weeks to go?


----------



## jman2007 (10 May 2008)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> I'm pretty sure they will have to raise funds and at these levels that will = a lot of dillution.




Looks like what we feared has come to pass YT.  26,000,000 new shares to be issued at 11c....and to raise only $2.86M. Half of the issue will be subject to shareholder approval so they might have a bit of a bun fight (or a dung fight ) on their hands to pass this motion. Hit very hard in trading today, down 13.5%

Being backed into a corner as they are, I'm not really sure what their other options would be however. Even Warwick Grigor might be getting a crack over the knuckles, as I think FEC took up a placement at 50c, so even the big boys didn't see this coming....

Where to from here?...

jman


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (10 May 2008)

Uranium is out of flavour it seems

I don't know about you but I can't do anything but hold, I'm down over $100k on this

Thank god for IRC ACS and MXR else I'd be an unhappy camper lol


I'm gonna just bottom draw these and wait for the U Bomb to explode

An SPP to all of us at these levels with some bonus options would have been better you ****s!!!!!!!


----------



## jman2007 (17 May 2008)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Uranium is out of flavour it seems
> 
> I don't know about you but I can't do anything but hold, I'm down over $100k on this
> 
> ...




YT,

I really don't like bagging a company that's already in enough pooh already, but I am getting increasingly frustrated with the situation and am beginning to question the leadership of Richard Napier. I always get suspicious when I see guys with phD's putting "Dr" before their names. 

How much are we paying this guy?....probably in the order of $300-350K, and he seems to have single handedly overseen the collapse of the CTS sp to a fraction of what it was worth 10 months ago. I know many U companies have suffered, but CTS has probably been one of the hardest hit. I think this places us all in a precarious position, if they continue to prove up the JORC resource and undertake engineering scoping studies, _and_ there is no material improvement in the sp, CTS imo would become vunerable to takeover at a bargain basement price. 

The next question; what can we do about it? We could begin to bomabard these guys with e-mails and vent our disatisfaction that way, or potentially, if there is enough shareholder discontent a EGM could be called and a vote of no confidence passed in this guy...oh sorry, I mean "Dr" Napier. Although being the executive chairman as well, that may be tough (?)  Not sure what the exact rules are there.

Sorry to hear about your sizeable loss here YT, I see what you mean.... you really just have to hold these for the time being. I am really trying to see positives here, but they seem few and far between atm.

jman


----------



## diamond h (23 May 2008)

Hi,unfortunately bought into this Company following positive comments on another chat site. I have not had a computer for over two months so have got a bit of a shock to see the current share price. Not the same $s as you Y.T. but have a few options which are virtually worthless now. Would like advice as to whether it is worth holding the head shares for the long term or dumping them at a 65% loss and looking for other opportunities.


----------



## peteai (23 May 2008)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Uranium is out of flavour it seems
> 
> I don't know about you but I can't do anything but hold, I'm down over $100k on this
> 
> ...






diamond h said:


> Hi,unfortunately bought into this Company following positive comments on another chat site. I have not had a computer for over two months so have got a bit of a shock to see the current share price. Not the same $s as you Y.T. but have a few options which are virtually worthless now. Would like advice as to whether it is worth holding the head shares for the long term or dumping them at a 65% loss and looking for other opportunities.




Hey YOUNG TRADER & diamond h,

I think a lot of us are in the same boat as you.
Previously, with less resource the SP was at 0.70 it just goes to show that valuing shares are a black art.

IMHO shares tend to eventually revisit previous highs unless something fundamentally devalues the company - given that, I believe there is a lot more upwards potential than downwards BUT with any share there is a always risk.

I just wish there was a more clearer picture from the company about their plans.  Actually we should demand more info & especially YOUNG TRADER why don't you call them as you deserve an explanation and a plan for the future ?. 

I've called twice, the first time they told me they were getting finance and that it was just being  sorted out (& they said a share issue was only an option if needed - well its seems they took this option) The second call they suggested I email them which I have just done this morning.


Cheers,
Peteai


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (23 May 2008)

I have tried to call them repeatedly i the past and a few times more recently, 

I always just get the receptionist/front desk

Everyone else is always "out of the office" or "in a meeting"

I don't know what to say other than the old adage its better to have great management over an average project than average management over a great project (CTS unfortunately being the latter)

Still the project is amazing and alot of U stocks are rebouding, just not CTS  ....... yet


----------



## bliimp (27 May 2008)

Refer to the 9th May Placement and Appendix 3B 

_Contact Uranium Limited (“Contact” or “the company”) is pleased to announce a placement of 13,000,000 ordinary fully paid shares to raise $1,430,000 before placement costs to sophisticated and institutional investors. The placement shares will be completed under the company’s 15% capacity

A further placement of 13,000,000 ordinary fully paid shares to raise $1,430,000 before placement costs, to sophisticated and institutional investors will proceed subject to shareholder approval._

Just trying to get my head around this placement; and just “thinking aloud”, I just find it "bizarre", for the following reasons :- 

*1 . Discount *

A placement at 11c per share equals a 42% discount to 9th May opening price of 18c … You don’t have to be too “sophisticated” to accept a deal like that!!!

*2. Impeccable timing*

OK … So Napier probably negotiated the price smack-bang in the middle of the Opes Prime debacle when a mere 5% of CTS got dumped by ANZ forcing the price down from the 20-25c to 13-15c range! … I mean what was he thinking? … You negotiate when you are in a position of strength!

*3. Give Existing Shareholders a Fair Go*

So the poor existing retail shareholders who have supported the company and seen the price plummet from above 50c are treated with utter contempt.

The measly $1.43m could have been raised from existing shareholders who are “not sophisticated” by allowing an allotment of up to $5000 in shares (the maximum amount allowed to the "non-sophisticated", without the time and cost of a prospectus)

And because, the 15% capacity of placements is reached within the one financial year, Napier has the gall to ask for shareholder approval to “give away” and further dilute existing shareholder equity with a further placement.

And if approved will again be at the bargain-basement price of 11c! 

Give me a break!!! How CRUDE … and how RUDE!!!

*4. Who are these Sophisticated Investors*

I find it absolutely bizarre that current ASX rules do not make it mandatory for  sophisticated investors to be named in any share placement.

And while there is no transparency, I can’t help but bring out the cynic in me.

Just who is benefiting from this placement?

*5. Warwick Grigor’s Concerns*

Refer to Warwick Grigor’s  article dated 11 April 2007 on "The Gem from the Paydirt Uranium Conference" as highlighted earlier by Young Trader http://www.uraniumanalyst.com/images...ril07FINAL.pdf

In particular, I quote the following :-

_Background_
_CTS is a company that has come from the group of accountants/promoters affectionately known as the “Balcatta Boys” due to the location of their offices in Balcatta, Perth. This group has been active and successful with many companies over the past 10-20 years._

_Management is the Weakest Link_
_While we can get excited about the geological Potential (of CTS), it remains to be seen whether the current management has the experience to be able to fully realise the potential, to the benefit all shareholders equally. We see a lack of transparency with the management and corporate governance and are unsure of the intentions of some of the key shareholders groups. Great projects can make mediocre management look good, but poor management can also ruin a good project_. 

Let’s face it, within one month of Grigor raising his concerns about management, the then MD of CTS abruptly resigned “to pursue other business interests”, and be replaced by the preeminent PhD geologist Napier ... and 2 months later Grigor’s Far East Capital gets 1m shares at 50c each (with 1m free options).

Impeccable timing!

*5. My assessment*

I am beginning to get the feeling that Napier is just a “front man”, working on the operational side of CTS (albeit, not doing a good job in communicating the current Corachapi drilling)  ... and it is probably the “key shareholder groups” or the “Balcatta Boys” that are really "pulling the strings".

There appears to be this incestuous relationship between companies such as Artemis (current owners of 5m shares in CTS) who are operating from the same building in WA.

It will be interesting when the next Top 20 Hit Parade is published (though it can be misleading as multi-entity ownership and “wife” ownership can easily hide a large holding).

Have the "Balcatta Boys" been recipients?

Has long-time fan Grigor been given a better deal than the last one, to at least average down his current 1m share holding at 50c per share?

I just get the idea that “something is brewing”!

Sure, CTS needs cash to keep operations moving along, but these “sophisticated types” would NOT throw away $1.43m in the first instance, and soon after, another $1.43m (on shareholder approval) … There is a "buck to be made" here, and I believe they are utilizing (and maybe creating) the current CTS share price predicament to substantially improve their foothold into CTS at the expense of the retail investor!

Lets face it, when there is director buying of any listed company, the share price usually moves up in anticipation of some positive announcement … Well, in CTS’s case, there are share placements to the tune of nearly 30% of the company’s current net worth! … to the “sophisticated types”, whose purchase you may argue, should have as much if not more significance!

And only last week there is the appointment of another director (another "Balcatta Boy" Accountant ?) … Why would this guy waste the time of day and impact his CV if CTS did not have a future?

In my opinion, GAME ON!!!


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (27 May 2008)

Interesting theory bliimp and some very in-depth analysis there, made for a good read 

I sorta see what your saying as lots of companies try and pull rabits out of the hat to get the otpions across the line, ie MDX- 800Mt Iron Ore target, MXR 3Bt Mag target, EMR new Oil projects etc etc, I'm sure there are more but these 3 companies released ramp style ann's recently to get thier SP above 20c and thus there options in the money

I wonder if CTS has a rabbit in its hat?

Cheers


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (27 May 2008)

Hmmm just looked at the chart 

What the? Volume spike and price rise, 

Bliimp did you see this? Is this what caused your post? I didn't even realise, maybe something is up, bloody insiders, probably those "sophisticated investors"

Jman maybe we can call off the Lunch Mob? have em ready just in case :


----------



## alankew (27 May 2008)

Nearly commented on this earlier.Was picked up on HC,what was more interesting was the options.They have been driven down lately but have had some reasonable buys in the last day or so(not in your league though YT)Might not be dead and buried yet


----------



## peteai (27 May 2008)

bliimp said:


> Refer to the 9th May Placement and Appendix 3B
> 
> _Contact Uranium Limited (“Contact” or “the company”) is pleased to announce a placement of 13,000,000 ordinary fully paid shares to raise $1,430,000 before placement costs to sophisticated and institutional investors. The placement shares will be completed under the company’s 15% capacity
> 
> ...




Very Interesting read bliimp!!

Is it possible that those in the know have intentionally pushed the price down - sold down in the last few months -knowing that they would get placements at cheap prices e.g 11c  Didn't Artemis sell on the day of the placement - Maybe this is a strategy for insiders to build up the stakes before it gets expensive to buy in.

Maybe us "unsophisticates" should organise to stop shares being offered at 11c Is it likely we could stop the 11c and demand better ways to raise cash ?

Vary large volume today ? Was there any news to prompt this ?


----------



## fgzq88 (27 May 2008)

Quarterly Activites Report said:
1. CORACHAPI
period of extremely adverse weather including snow and heavy rainfall in the region, the company was not able to expedite its chemical sampling and gamma probe programme for approximately nearly two months, though managing to continue its drilling activities. As a result the company had 61 holes awaiting results during the quarter, the balance of which had been reported previously.
Sampling has now recommenced and new results are expected shortly. *The company expects to publish an updated resource during the coming quarter *and commence an engineering scoping study.

this might be the reason


----------



## bliimp (27 May 2008)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> I sorta see what your saying as lots of companies try and pull rabits out of the hat to get the otpions across the line, ie MDX- 800Mt Iron Ore target, MXR 3Bt Mag target, EMR new Oil projects etc etc, I'm sure there are more but these 3 companies released ramp style ann's recently to get thier SP above 20c and thus there options in the money
> 
> I wonder if CTS has a rabbit in its hat?
> 
> Cheers




YT

Interesting! ...  about getting "their options in the money". 

And CTS at this stage may not want the price to run too fast (as per today's trading) ... they are making their next placement at 11c per share again ...  and I wonder when (or if) they get shareholder approval! 

But then again it may be fait accompli ... based on how the major shareholders vote!


----------



## peteai (28 May 2008)

fgzq88 said:


> Quarterly Activites Report said:
> 1. CORACHAPI
> period of extremely adverse weather including snow and heavy rainfall in the region, the company was not able to expedite its chemical sampling and gamma probe programme for approximately nearly two months, though managing to continue its drilling activities. As a result the company had 61 holes awaiting results during the quarter, the balance of which had been reported previously.
> Sampling has now recommenced and new results are expected shortly. *The company expects to publish an updated resource during the coming quarter *and commence an engineering scoping study.
> ...



Hi fgzq88,

This is quite old news, this would not explain the sudden jump in volume and price yesterday  You wouldn't be one of the “Balcatta Boys” would you Throwing in a red herring to hide what's really going on ? 

Cheers,
Peteai


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (29 May 2008)

peteai said:


> You wouldn't be one of the “Balcatta Boys” would you Throwing in a red herring to hide what's really going on ?
> 
> Cheers,
> Peteai




lol, hmmm I'm suss of all you fella's 

As I said earlier though, it wouldn't surpise me if CTS pull a ramp out of their hat ala MXR/MDX/EMR to get their options over the line,

Just how big the resource upgrade would have to be to create a serious run well I'm thinking a boubling which is a very hard target to meet, but then again you never know


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (2 June 2008)

hmmm not sure what to make of todays ann

given the plight of current shareholders, we're getting a 1:2 15c 2010 option for 0.005 which seems good as they should list at a nice premium say 5c = 10 bagger on them at the subscription price,

Not to happy with some consulting firm being given 50m options as part of a "PLACEMENT" maybe this is the Balcatta back doof that others were discussing?


----------



## bliimp (2 June 2008)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> hmmm not sure what to make of todays ann
> 
> given the plight of current shareholders, we're getting a 1:2 15c 2010 option for 0.005 which seems good as they should list at a nice premium say 5c = 10 bagger on them at the subscription price,
> 
> Not to happy with some consulting firm being given 50m options as part of a "PLACEMENT" maybe this is the Balcatta back doof that others were discussing?




YT

I know what you mean!

In fact, the "consulting firm",  Exchange Minerals Limited (EML) had me intrigued mid last year, at the same time as the placement of shares to Far East Capital.

*1. Refer to the 23 July 2007 ASX announcement “Notice of Meeting*”.

In particular refer to  Resolution 4 pertaining to EML 

_On 14 June 2007, the Company entered into a consultancy agreement with Exchange Minerals Limited (EML) pursuant to which the Company agreed to engage EML as a consultant to provide specialist agency services with particular focus on the identification and facilitation of potential Company acquisitions.

That, for the purposes of ASX Listing Rule 7.1 and for all other purposes, approval is given for the Company to allot and issue to Exchange Minerals Limited …1,883,658 Shares together with one (1) free attaching EML Option for each Shar eissued _


*2. Do an ASIC company search for Exchange Minerals Limited*
http://www.search.asic.gov.au/cgi-bin/gns030c?acn=126_696_713&juris=9&hdtext=ACN&srchsrc=1

And you find they are registered just 1 day after the ASX announcement ie 24/7/2007


Oh well ... specialist services must come at a specialist price!!!


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (2 June 2008)

Well at least we get some free, well almost free options ( half a cent ain't much to pay) and given the long expiry 2010 and the 15c exercise if the company gets its act together we could really make a motza on these

I expect the sp will start to get bought up once people realise how much these are worth


----------



## tigerboi (3 June 2008)

*Re:contact,artemis,range...look dodgy*

Here is a story on the goings on over in perth with these miners getting all greedy,hard to follow all the dealings but last nights 4 corners on jci shed some light on the shonky business going on..tb

*Perth office link to the tale of gold and guns*

Date: June 03 2008

*Mark Hawthorne* 


"LOCATION, location, location," is the mantra of property investors around the world. For West Australian mining hopefuls, you don't get a better real estate location than *34 Parliament Place*, West Perth.
The building, once owned by the WA Government, is a stone's throw from Parliament House. It's a cosy and tangled little group that does business behind the high security walls at the property.
One company based there is *Range Resources*, the
small-cap oil and mineral explorer that is drilling for oil in Puntland, Somalia.
Range Resources has come across *Full Disclosure*'s radar before, in the aftermath of the collapse of *Opes Prime*.
Melbourne day trader and GT Falcon collector *Leo Khouri*, who lost tens of millions of dollars worth of shares in the collapse of Opes Prime, is a shareholder and consultant to the company.
Range Resources' executive director is *Peter Landau*, formerly of Melbourne. Landau's private company, *Lacka Consulting*, has its offices at 34 Parliament Place.
A lot of hiring must be done around the water cooler, because Lacka has a good track record of its staff becoming the company secretaries of other listed companies that work out of the building.
Former Range Resources company secretary *Joanna Kiernan* worked for Lacka before she departed the country. Lacka employee *Jane Flegg* is the joint company secretary of another listed mining explorer based at 34 Parliament Place - *Contact Uranium*.
It's interesting to note that Flegg is part-owner of a private company called *Thirteen Eleven Pty Ltd*, which is registered to 34 Parliament Place. Before she left Range Resources, Kiernan was also a part-owner of Thirteen Eleven. In December, Thirteen Eleven was one of the top 20 shareholders of another listed company called *Continental Capital*, with 1.975 million shares, or 1.24%, of the stock on issue.
Sure enough, Continental Capital operates out of 34 Parliament Place, and Peter Landau is the executive chairman.
Khouri's private super fund, *Bejjal Super*, was listed as owning 6.2 million Continental Capital shares in December.
Listed mineral explorer *Artemis Resources* is another company operating out of
34 Parliament Place.
Back on March 31, Continental Capital announced that Contract Uranium became a substantial shareholder in Artemis - you'll find the signatures of Flegg and Artemis director *Barry Woodhouse* on the documents filed with the ASX.
All three companies operate out of 34 Parliament Place.
But, even with all that intermingled mess, the chatter around 34 Parliament Place this morning will focus on another who works from the building - British mining millionaire *John Stratton*, who was the subject of last night's episode of _Four Corners_ on the ABC.
_Four Corners_ reported that Stratton has been named a
co-conspirator in the murder of former *Randgold & Exploration* chief executive *Brett Kebble* in Johannesburg in 2005. Shortly before his death, it emerged Kebble was part of a plot to strip three companies - *Randgold*, *Western Areas* and *JCI* - of shares and that an estimated $400 million had been plundered.
Stratton was a director of R&E and JCI, and has since been named in a $US1 billion lawsuit against *PricewaterhouseCoopers* by the new directors of R&E.
R&E alleges that PwC was negligent in its auditing of the company's books from 2000 until 2003. PwC plans to fight the claim.
Also named in that affidavit is one *Hendrik Buitendag*, the former financial controller of R&E, who also resides in Perth. The affidavit alleges the directors of JCI, including Kebble, Stratton and Buitendag, "acting in their capacities as directors of JCI and in their personal capacities, devised a scheme, which scheme was intended to wrongfully through theft, deprive Randgold" of 2 million *Roodepoort Deep Ltd* shares.
Stratton has denied the allegations in South Africa, and would not comment when contacted by Full Disclosure.
Of course, lots of companies can share premises and never do business - but that rarely seems to be the case at
34 Parliament Place. Back in 2004, before they found their new offices, the three directors of listed *Continental Goldfields* were John Stratton, Peter Landau and Hendrik Buitendag.
In the light of the _Four Corners_ program, and claims of the raiding of South African stock, Continental Goldfields had an interesting range of investments.
According to an ASX announcement signed off by Landau back in January 2005, Continental Goldfields held 60 million shares in JCI, which was 2% of the issued capital. Continental Goldfields also owned substantial shareholdings in *Western Areas Ltd* and R&E.
Stratton and Buitendag were directors of South African companies that Continental Goldfields held shares in, and companies that had shares go missing. In his letter to the ASX, Landau described the holding in JCI as a "strategic acquisition". By the middle of 2005, allegations that shares of Western Areas, JCI and R&E had been stolen started to emerge in South Africa.
In August 2005, Kebble was deposed as a director of the companies. In September, he was killed, shot seven times from close range.
Stratton and Buitendag departed as directors of Continental Goldfields in 2005, and the company's name changed to Continental Capital. Landau remains executive chairman. And it's address? 34 Parliament Place, of course.
Landau did not return calls from Full Disclosure


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (3 June 2008)

Ahhhh negative publicity,

So thats why CTS was getting sold off today,

I found it strange given the bonus options which should add 2c-3c value if they list at 5c/6c

Well call me crazy but I'm actually thinking of buying more for those bonus options


----------



## tigerboi (3 June 2008)

*Re:CONTACT,ARTEMIS,RANGE,PETER LANDAU.SMELLS*



YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Ahhhh negative publicity,
> 
> So thats why CTS was getting sold off today,
> 
> ...





Dont do it YT,this mob gotta bad smell coming from them..go look up the management of peter landau...view res,cnf,neo,kkt,blz,rrs,artemis

cnf got 60m JCI shares the company on 4 corners last night & tonight at 11.30,re:john stratton fighting extradition to south africa.for murder,stripping companies,robbing shareholders blind...

rob a bank get 20 years,strip $400m from a company...cool go back to your seaside mansion.GOT TO THE NAUGHTY STEP!

the rort of overseas gold & uranium mines is about to come unstuck as punters are just getting sucked in,ive said it heaps...overseas is over the seas & too big a risk..

artemis,range,contact,continental goldfields & peter landau be wary of these companies...all got overseas projects...


----------



## bliimp (3 June 2008)

*Re: CONTACT,ARTEMIS,RANGE,PETER LANDAU.SMELLS*



tigerboi said:


> Dont do it YT,this mob gotta bad smell coming from them..go look up the management of peter landau...view res,cnf,neo,kkt,blz,rrs,artemis
> 
> cnf got 60m JCI shares the company on 4 corners last night & tonight at 11.30,re:john stratton fighting extradition to south africa.for murder,stripping companies,robbing shareholders blind...
> 
> ...





Tigerboi

I hear what you say, and you can love them or you can loathe them, but CTS has managed to get hold of some pretty good turf out there in Peru!

And Peru appears to be getting its act together, as per the following APEC agreement

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22403926-21703,00.html

Interesting times ahead!

I still believe that there is a "buck" to be made with this CTS ... and I suppose the question is "who will make the buck?" ... hopefully, there will be enough for the good (us) ... the bad ... and the ugly!


----------



## tigerboi (4 June 2008)

*Re:OVERSEAS IS OVER THE SEAS.NO CONTROL FOR YOU*

Go for your life but what does the average punter know about the landaus & strattons of the world?if you watched 4 corners last night you would never ever invest in a company with overseas projects again...way too big a risk...

peru of all places my god sounds like a money pit for the directors,me i stick to our own aussie based miners,at least i can jump in the truck,car or plane & go see for myself...but you dont know crap about this peru operation other than what the directors tell you....1 big rort to lighten the dopey punters who think of yeah peru u308,indonesian gold(have a look at arx..).

best to stick with our own in our backyard...tb


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (4 June 2008)

Yeah, I hear what your saying TB but unfortuantely when it comes to Uranium Australia ain't the best place to be other parts of the world are,

In any event those bonus options should add some life to the share price, I reckon they'll list around 5c = 2.5c value less 0.5c cost = 2c value to shares at current levels

Also I find it very interesting that with such a short time to go ie 20 days or something the CTSO's are being bought up so heavily, maybe someone knows something we don't?


----------



## tigerboi (4 June 2008)

*Re:AUSSIE IO OR AFRICAN/SOUTH AMERICAN U308?*



YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Yeah, I hear what your saying TB but unfortuantely when it comes to Uranium Australia ain't the best place to be other parts of the world are,
> 
> In any event those bonus options should add some life to the share price, I reckon they'll list around 5c = 2.5c value less 0.5c cost = 2c value to shares at current levels
> 
> Also I find it very interesting that with such a short time to go ie 20 days or something the CTSO's are being bought up so heavily, maybe someone knows something we don't?




Crazy people going anywhere near these shonky outfits,why go very risky on a peru project when you can get plenty of aussie io firms with much better credentials.?? its a dumb play imo...i wouldnt go near these with someone elses money...YT mate the risk v reward on these projects are way too much,but good luck to others who are prepared to have a go,odds are around the same as the pokies i reckon...tb


----------



## grace (4 June 2008)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Also I find it very interesting that with such a short time to go ie 20 days or something the CTSO's are being bought up so heavily, maybe someone knows something we don't?




Isn't the resource upgrade due this qtr?  It would be a priority to get that out in relation to the options about to expire.....one would think


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (4 June 2008)

*Re: AUSSIE IO OR AFRICAN/SOUTH AMERICAN U308?*



tigerboi said:


> Crazy people going anywhere near these shonky outfits,*why go very risky on a peru project when you can get plenty of aussie io firms with much better credentials*.?? its a dumb play imo...i wouldnt go near these with someone elses money...YT mate the risk v reward on these projects are way too much,but good luck to others who are prepared to have a go,odds are around the same as the pokies i reckon...tb




Again TB, this ain't an IO play its a Uranium play, the deposit in Peru and Kyrgyzstan are Uranium not Iron ore

I personally don't like Aust when it comes to U, much prefer the rest of the world, too many Greenies and tree huggers here in Aust

p.s. Grace you'd think so but you  never know


----------



## tigerboi (4 June 2008)

*Re: AUSSIE IO OR AFRICAN/SOUTH AMERICAN U308?*



YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Again TB, this ain't an IO play its a Uranium play, the deposit in Peru and Kyrgyzstan are Uranium not Iron ore
> 
> I personally don't like Aust when it comes to U, much prefer the rest of the world, too many Greenies and tree huggers here in Aust
> 
> p.s. Grace you'd think so but you never know




yeah i know what it is mate,im saying that as opposed to plays in your own backyard re:iron ore...the risk carried by these u308 off shore projects are way beyond the reward offered...they give a real good cover for shonkies to rob people blind,well aware of the u308 processes that get aussie companies seeing big $$$...re:lack of regulations,low wages= low start up costs...& thats the rub...no one knows what goes on...perfect scenario for the strattons & kebbles to lighten unsuspecting punters of their $$$...tb


----------



## alankew (6 June 2008)

Nice ann from these boys yesterday to clarify the recent free options ann.Oops when mentioned option holders what they actually meant is that you have to exercise your options in order to get the new free optionsHow simple is it to say what they actually mean rather than try and muddy the waters with the original ann.The rights issue is fully underwritten by the same company that they gave 50m shares to the other day-nice work if you can get it.Sorry here are the links
http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20080605/pdf/319hkfh4zbdjry.pdf
http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20080602/pdf/319f68ynl44x4f.pdf


----------



## prawn_86 (6 June 2008)

Cant say i have ever followed these guys, but here is something of interest for those that do.

A bit more background on the underwriter:


> Shemesian - under the alternate spelling "Michael Shamazian" - is a director of Mining and Petroleum Projects Limited, a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands.
> 
> Mining Petroleum Projects has its head office in Ashgabad, Turkmenistan, and its website states that "Exchange Minerals Limited of Dubai" is an "associated unlisted company






> Exchange Minerals Ltd of Dubai has just agreed to underwrite a rights issue of 53 million options to shareholders of Contact Uranium, for which it will receive a placement of 50 million options itself, subject to shareholder approval.
> 
> Options seem to be the preferred trading platform of Shemesian's company. One of Contact Uranium's major shareholders just happens to be Range Resources. Exchange Minerals is a major holder of Range Resources options too.




http://business.theage.com.au/gun-day-trader-picks-himself-up-postopes-20080605-2mcx.html?page=2


----------



## peteai (6 June 2008)

RE: The Placement at 11c to sophisticated investors

Does anyone know if that already occurred ? 

Thx,
Peteai


----------



## peteai (12 June 2008)

Now the sp is below the placement price
Does anyone know why the recent drop has occured ?
Volumes are not huge but the sp is half the price of a few weeks ago ??


----------



## ta2693 (12 June 2008)

look at the little cash they are on hand and the country where their projects located. and the market sensitivity now. I would not be so surprise at the falling in price.


----------



## peteai (12 June 2008)

ta2693 said:


> look at the little cash they are on hand and the country where their projects located. and the market sensitivity now. I would not be so surprise at the falling in price.




Peru is where there main project is - & I thought that country was OKwith development  and mining ?

I can understand market sensitivity , but they have 10 million pounds of JORC uranium - it has a market cap of $10 million -that works out to $1 per pound of uranium (if not less)  I know it is a little high but the fact that it is near surface and their is good access should cancel out the height issue.


----------



## alankew (18 June 2008)

Bloody hell check out the grades on that  http://imagesignal.comsec.com.au/asxdata/20080618/pdf/00851951.pdf and still near surface,is this a final push to try and get some action on some of the oppies.Ground round there must positively glow


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (18 June 2008)

Yeah Alan was impressed with the Uranium hits, but look what the SP did 

I'm guessing CTS will have to turn water to wine before their SP rises,

I wonder if Mega are still looking at them? 

The low and falling U price isn't really doing them any favours either


----------



## IOT (19 June 2008)

how are people voting on the resolutions at the general meeting?  I usually don't bother with these things..but in this case?!


----------



## jman2007 (19 June 2008)

YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Yeah Alan was impressed with the Uranium hits, but look what the SP did
> 
> I'm guessing CTS will have to turn water to wine before their SP rises,
> 
> ...




YT,

Our esteemed leader "Dr" Richard Napier also happens to be the Managing Director of a London-based consulting company called gfms mining (richard.napier@gfmsmining.com). So basically we are paying this clown 350K per year for a part-time position, and one in which he undoubtedly spends a fair bit of his time in London.

This 50 million option issue to this Dubai-based consulting firm which can be exercised within two years at 15c is an absolute disgrace. Why the hell aren't CTS developing their own in-house expertise and skills instead of screwing everyone over with these bum deals and ludicrously expensive consultants fees? Or here's a novel thought...how about Napier actually gets his own a$$ over to Peru himself, and find out what a drilling rig looks like? . The meeting early next month should be an absolute bun fight, there are going to be some extremely irate shareholders turning up.

Do we really want some Dubai-based company entering in the backdoor and effectively controlling 27% of the company when/if those options are exercised? 

On a somewhat less "cough" irate note.., some of the recent intersections looked very nice, which in a lot of ways is equally as galling when you look at the mess management have gotten us into..."sigh" 

jman


----------



## jman2007 (23 June 2008)

There was an interesting update on a new virgin discovery in "Corachapi East" in an area called Quebrada Coral. Some of the grades are actually quite impressive, with the best result from the 24-hole drill programme being 0.53m @ 1.19% eU3O8.

Just quite why it has taken CTS this long to follow up on the gamma anomaly which extends at least 1.5km in strike is beyond me. The presence of former government workings should have given at least some kind of impetus to a more regional exploration approach.

Heading into the Peru field season, hopefully we can look forward to a few more positive releases from CTS. That's one of the problem with CTS I find, the apparent inability at times, to keep the market clearly informed and interested. I always remember when I heard: "Good management can make a bad project look good, but bad management can ruin a good project".

I still maintain the Corachapi is a great project, whether CTS has the goods or not to drive this thing along is another matter unfortunately.

jman


----------



## peteai (24 June 2008)

jman2007 said:


> There was an interesting update on a new virgin discovery in "Corachapi East" in an area called Quebrada Coral. Some of the grades are actually quite impressive, with the best result from the 24-hole drill programme being 0.53m @ 1.19% eU3O8.
> 
> Just quite why it has taken CTS this long to follow up on the gamma anomaly which extends at least 1.5km in strike is beyond me. The presence of former government workings should have given at least some kind of impetus to a more regional exploration approach.
> 
> ...




Yeh Jman,

It all looks good & but clearly sentiment for CTS is not good with the SP so low. However,  Bad sentiment does not make the U3O8 disappear.
I would feel a lot better if there was some sort of plan and some sort of indicative information e.g  An option would be to use an XX type mine like the've done in X (given the conditions it would cost roughly X to build and X per pound to extract.

Bannerman has had such guidance for a long while & CTS should do this to build up some confidence in the market.

Maybe I am naive ?? But the market has been left guessing for too long  

Cheers,
Peter


----------



## alankew (28 June 2008)

Bloody hell its good news week at CTS,ann on JV on their Kyrgyzstan project and the real clincher,the good Doctor Richard Napier has resigned.Their is hope yet,pity the poor option holders as its come about a week too late


----------



## jman2007 (28 June 2008)

alankew said:


> Bloody hell its good news week at CTS,ann on JV on their Kyrgyzstan project and the real clincher,the good Doctor Richard Napier has resigned.Their is hope yet,pity the poor option holders as its come about a week too late




Bloody 'ell! 

At last, some hope for us it seems. All I can say to Richard Napier is "don't let the door hit your a$$ on the way out". It was fairly obvious he wasn't nearly as committed to the company as he should have been, and that CTS was more of a side-line distraction for him. 

The JV agreement is probably the first intelligent corporate decision they've made in a long time, at least this raises the possibility of providing more funding to advance exploration/development at Corachapi without the problem of massive dilution from further cap raisings, and the Kyrgyz projects get some life in them again.

Great news.

jman


----------



## stock nub (1 July 2008)

Anyone else think this may be in for a bounce finally??

Firstly New Executive Director: Mr Michael Drew

Secondly New Company Secretary: Ms Shannon Coates 

Both these people look quality and that is what we need as this had been going downhill for a while now.

Thirdly they have JV'd out their Kyrgyzstan projects to Pangaea Energy who are going to fund $1.3 of exploration for a 37.5% part of the projects, which will allow Contatct to focus on the better peruvian projects. Now if Pangaea Energy decide to go to 80% they will have to pay $1.75m in cash to contact as well as another $.95m in exploration.

Finally the companies offices have moved to Level 1, 173 Mounts Bay Road
Perth WA 6000, away from any funny business going on at previous offices with links to so called "balacatta boys


----------



## jman2007 (1 July 2008)

stock nub said:


> Anyone else think this may be in for a bounce finally??




Could be sn, could be.... 

However I wonder perhaps if mortal damage has not been done to CTS this year, the chart looks absolutely awful and until the new-look management can prove their worth, I believe we'll continue to see a cagey approach from the market. The way this gets hammered every time it approaches 12c is also concerning, there are a substansial number of investors sitting on large losses here, perhaps to try and establish some support at 14-15c could be an initial target.

A positive outcome of the engineering and scoping study may provide a positive sp trigger, but there are still enough logistical concerns re Corachapi and uncertainties in the short-term U price to probably keep investors in check for a while. The scoping study could alay some of those concerns however. Definitely moving in the right direction with the Kyrgyz jv and new management, but unfortunately I remain somewhat reserved in my short-term outlook  .... for now .

jman


----------



## Captain Haddock (30 August 2008)

Hi all,
anyone got any thoughts on what has happened over August?  Is CTS a dead duck or can they bounce back?  What's going on with the rights issue?


----------



## plk (16 September 2008)

Why are they acquire New Prospect in Peru?
wont it be better they can start their production asap on what they have for years but still dont have nothing produced???

anyone still have thought on this company..... falling from 70c to 7c in 1 year.

I had them for 50c... because a research value it 1 dollar.
I guess that was a really long way to go....lol

keep fingers cross.

have fwl aar rmi cts
all young_trader's pick from last year when I first start my trading in ASX.


----------



## jman2007 (16 September 2008)

plk said:


> Why are they acquire New Prospect in Peru?
> wont it be better they can start their production asap on what they have for years but still dont have nothing produced???




Probably not, they haven't got a snowballs chance in hell of going into production at the moment, and I stress _at the moment._

Essentially, cash is very tight for CTS these days, and it is inconceivable that they would go back to the equity markets to raise capex (given the miserable sp) and/or that anyone woould be willing to finance the development of Corachapi, given the uncertainty in the financial sector... not a situation entirely of CTS's making, but one in which they will have to struggle through if they want to remain viable as a serious uranium explorer.

Essentially, it may signal a change of strategy by the CTS Board, of which we haven't heard a peep out of for a while. The new prospect appears to have some potential, but the announcement needs to be read carefully, because the assay results quoted in the release are from other companies prospects in the adjoining tenements. Acquiring some new land not a bad option, given that CTS really do not have that many cards to play atm anyway...

New Resource model for Corachapi out soon hopefully, something else to look forward too.

jman


----------



## peteai (7 October 2008)

jman2007 said:


> Probably not, they haven't got a snowballs chance in hell of going into production at the moment, and I stress _at the moment._
> 
> Essentially, cash is very tight for CTS these days, and it is inconceivable that they would go back to the equity markets to raise capex (given the miserable sp) and/or that anyone woould be willing to finance the development of Corachapi, given the uncertainty in the financial sector... not a situation entirely of CTS's making, but one in which they will have to struggle through if they want to remain viable as a serious uranium explorer.
> 
> ...




My guess at the reasoning behind it is that if they can increase the resource size they may interest other parties to joint venture & help with financing - at the moment with the current credit crisis they could not finance what they have on their own. If they could increase the resource they might be in a better bargaining position if the overall potential was bigger.

It is only a theory but it might explain why they do it when they don't yet have the finance to develop what they've got


----------



## exgeo (22 October 2008)

I wonder if it means anything that CTS's new address, announced today, is the same as Artemis Resources who invested in CTS last year?


----------



## jman2007 (24 October 2008)

peteai said:


> My guess at the reasoning behind it is that if they can increase the resource size they may interest other parties to joint venture & help with financing - at the moment with the current credit crisis they could not finance what they have on their own. If they could increase the resource they might be in a better bargaining position if the overall potential was bigger.
> 
> It is only a theory but it might explain why they do it when they don't yet have the finance to develop what they've got




Well they do need to pretty much put all their eggs into one basket if they want to ride this storm out. They could barely buy toilet roll for the bogs without going insolvent at the moment, and Corachapi is their best asset by a country mile, their Parry Range holdings were pretty much just nuisance value for a company in their position. I'm pretty much pinning my hopes on the Coracahpi Resource figure due to come out er.. sometime(???)  being able to draw in a partner or at least CTS being able farm-out a portion of the project. 

Bear in mind though, my expectations for CTS are not excatly sky-high atm... Let's see what the new management team can accomplish after the cluster###k of a mess Napier left behind. Idiot.

jman


----------



## barrett (24 October 2008)

Sorry to hear this one didn't work out well - one of the most valuable things here might be a lesson - look at management first!  

The first thing Napier did when he took over in May 07 was to call a meeting and print up shares and options like confetti... there was a similar follow-up exercise in about July.  Apparently the shareholders didn't mind being rinsed.  I spent half an hour on the phone to Jane Flegg at the time and she couldn't even tell me who the people were who were getting the printed shares/options or anything, it was ridiculous!  It turned out in the first printing they were basically buttering up an old wheel-greaser for WA exploration licences  - to the tune of about *half a million bucks *mind you!  

CTS have always shared an office with ARV, AKA lawyer-of-sorts Sevag Chalabian (anyone even put that name into google?  God save us!)  
http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/barista-paid-75-of-aztec/2006/10/24/1161455720353.html
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...-cremorne-block/2006/11/02/1162339989135.html

CTS has good assets and the involvement of Geoff Blackburn was a plus but there's a valuable lesson here...... look at the bloody management! Make it #1, whatever company you look at.


----------



## peteai (24 October 2008)

jman2007 said:


> Well they do need to pretty much put all their eggs into one basket if they want to ride this storm out. They could barely buy toilet roll for the bogs without going insolvent at the moment, and Corachapi is their best asset by a country mile, their Parry Range holdings were pretty much just nuisance value for a company in their position. I'm pretty much pinning my hopes on the Coracahpi Resource figure due to come out er.. sometime(???)  being able to draw in a partner or at least CTS being able farm-out a portion of the project.
> 
> Bear in mind though, my expectations for CTS are not excatly sky-high atm... Let's see what the new management team can accomplish after the cluster###k of a mess Napier left behind. Idiot.
> 
> jman



Yes  I feel much the same as you do. Had to laugh at the way you put it though - I would like to think they could say to someone Hey I've got a bunch of U up here - you dig it out & I'll pay you $2?? per pound - & CTS makes the margin

But I know I'm thinking is  too simplistic


----------



## Gurgler (5 November 2008)

jman2007 said:


> I'm pretty much pinning my hopes on the Coracahpi Resource figure due to come out er.. sometime(???)




Err, Nov 10 with an ann that Coracchpi is *substantially less *than predicted.

Not good! Awaiting but not hopeful of much in the way of good news.


----------



## jman2007 (12 November 2008)

barrett said:


> Sorry to hear this one didn't work out well - one of the most valuable things here might be a lesson - look at management first!
> 
> CTS has good assets and the involvement of Geoff Blackburn was a plus but there's a valuable lesson here...... look at the bloody management! Make it #1, whatever company you look at.




Hi barret,

Yes I've definitely learned a thing or two during this debacle. Napier was obviously miles out of his depth here, his predictions last year of doubling or even tripling the Coracahpi Resource now look to be largely on the ridiculous side given the wording from the recent CTS release warning us of a "substansially" smaller resource from Corachapi. Just when we all thought CTS couldn't sink any lower in the uranium-bubble swamp, they've managed to sink underneath the deepest layer of llama turds in existence.

This calls into question the _competent person_ who signed off on the Coracahpi Resource, the QAQC procedures, the accuaracy/precision of the assay lab and above all, whether there is case for pursuing Napier for gross negligence and misleading the market? Under the JORC code, if the competent person is found to have signed off on a resource that was clearly shonky, then they can be hauled in front of a panel of industry peers and cross examined.

I don't bear any grudges against current senior management, they've been handed the hospital pass from hell, and are probably still trying to understand the mess the comapny has gotten itself into. I was only a small-time investor in CTS, but I do feel for people who have lost a lot more than myself. I can't see me getting any of it back at this stage unfortunately. 

jman


----------



## plk (18 November 2008)

anyone read their lastest report for the JORC result?

what is the reading for U now??
and How bad is it compare to the previous one? can anyone explain.

thanks


----------



## Sean K (18 November 2008)

plk said:


> anyone read their lastest report for the JORC result?
> 
> what is the reading for U now??
> and How bad is it compare to the previous one? can anyone explain.
> ...



Significant downgrade. Deposit on ice and they're looking to offload it. 

This company has committed seppuku....


----------



## jman2007 (18 November 2008)

kennas said:


> Significant downgrade. Deposit on ice and they're looking to offload it.
> 
> This company has committed seppuku....




Yeah it's all over for CTS unfortunately - Coracahpi looks to be a dud afterall. I think Basil Fawlty would have made a better MD than some of these clowns. Perhaps they should rename themselves "Fawlty Towers Resources - serious about making you laugh".

jman


----------



## plk (19 November 2008)

With respect to your query below the JORC inferred resource at Corachapi
is 6.47 Million tonnes at an average grade of 257ppm for a total
estimated uranium content of 3.675 million pounds.

We are currently re-evaluating the project, and looking to bring a JV
partner into the project. Upside remain to expand the resource further
with additional drilling.

Regards

Mike Drew


----------



## The Barbarian Investor (24 July 2009)

Looking at the Management here and in line with comments here 

Mr R GROVER

CERVANTES CORPORATION 

CONTACT URANIUM 

REDPORT

BOSS ENERGY

 :engel:


----------



## shinobi346 (16 November 2010)

hmmm I just remembered I owned this share. >_>

I'm a bit embarassed to have lost track of it, somehow, all this time... I can still remember back then having very high hopes for their U resource. Contact Resources.. the name still rolls off the tongue, thinking how god this share would be.. I can't believe how badly they failed.

Anyway, might be good for this thread and for anyone else tracking down this share, they've changed names a couple of times and are now RMR (I was wondering where I got that share from...)

RAM RESOURCES LIMITED (RMR) 	12/12/2008 	Currently Listed
CONTACT URANIUM LIMITED (CTS) 	26/06/2007 	12/12/2008
CONTACT RESOURCES LIMITED (CTS) 		26/06/2007


----------

