- Joined
- 7 October 2006
- Posts
- 877
- Reactions
- 0
NRZ - NeuRizer Ltd
- Thread starter Mistermoon
- Start date
- Joined
- 28 May 2004
- Posts
- 10,834
- Reactions
- 5,178
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
Halba,
Ramping has absolutely nothing to do with being wrong or right. Ramping is not providing detailed reasoning to back up your assertions. The truth is nobody knows what is going to happen on Monday. Perhaps you should stop making arbitrary price predictions if you don't want them removed?
Halba,
Ramping has absolutely nothing to do with being wrong or right. Ramping is not providing detailed reasoning to back up your assertions. The truth is nobody knows what is going to happen on Monday. Perhaps you should stop making arbitrary price predictions if you don't want them removed?
- Joined
- 25 February 2007
- Posts
- 838
- Reactions
- 1
- Joined
- 7 October 2006
- Posts
- 877
- Reactions
- 0
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
This week, I met a exploration director from a Canadian company, who is looking projects to invest all over the world. Surprise, and surprise, we talked about uranium. The way he is think about uranium ban in Australia is amazing. After I explained to him about the upcoming changes, he is so excited. Of course, we talked more in much details. Read my post, you might found some companies I mentioned to them.
There is no suggestion that a Canadian company is going to lunch a takeover on MTN. But the massive misunderstanding on Australian labor uranium policy could be resolved on April 29. It will open a floor-gate for investing in Australian uranium industry by fund, and company from Northern America. I believe MTN will be the prime target. So here is what I wrote based on our conversation:
MTN a $15 to $65 stock
Q: Is it going to be in a uranium friendly state?
A: It was, and it is.
Q: When a stock is only around $5, how can you predict it is $15+ stock?
A: Six months again, it was at 80c, I predicted it is $4+ stock by now. Now is $5.20, increased by 450%. Everything is possible, given another 6 months, it could triple, that is $15+ stock within six months.
Q: How about fundamental? Does it really worth $15+ now?
A: Yes. No doubt about it. Currently it has combined JORC and Non_JORC of 80mlb uranium at reasonable grade, with very easy metallurgical process. Full diluted with less than 60m share. Currently valued at less than EV$4/lb, while peer valuation ranged from $10 to $40 EV/lb. (NEL, DYL, PNN, AGS, SMM, EME, CUY)
At $10/lb, MTN worth $12.50, At $40/lb it is a $50 stock at right now.
Q: It only worth up to $50, how can you achieve the $65 up target?
A: The up limit of $50 is just for now. Things could change dramatically in next six months, like six months in the past. The extra $15 can be easily worked out with:
1. Resources upgrade to 100mlb+. The can easily be achieved with Mt Gee and satellite deposits only by either lower the cut-off grade, or more drilling.
2. Discovery of uranium in other tenements, or JV tenements;
3. Spot uranium price reach US$150 which I consider it as peak price. So peer valuation might go higher.
4. Takeover battle, better involved US people, not Chinese.
5. Sentiment shifting
6. Halba has predict it.
Any of the above could work to its favor. $65 per share might be conservative in a prolong uranium market.
Q: Why the current price is in deep discount?
A: Very big question. The current price is so depressed by three reasons:
1. False environment concern. A lot people mistakenly think Mt Gee is in a National Reserve, on Heritage List, or too remote. The most accurate description is that is on National Estate list for some natural beauties, and good access to infrastructure. There has no legal prohibition to mining activities because of National Estate Status. $10b in ground value of Mt Gee deposit can get most environmental issues cleared because it is significant to SA state interest. Mining in Mt Gee is not a possibility, it is a SURE thing, and it is SUPPORTED BY SA GOVERNMRNT NOW. Premier has mentioned MTN, along with AGS, CUY and PNN in recent speech as potential uranium miner. Watch this: http://www.investortv.com.au/player.aspx?id=CT15X77B2
2. Producing a JORC resource without drilling a hole. It caused very bad publicity, and draw criticism from geological society and investment circle. It is all cleared with published apology by the criticizer, and a serious of remarkable drilling results. Mt Gee could be bigger and better than current model.
3. Low profile, with virtually no promotion. What is wrong with that? As a long term holder, I enjoy it.
When all this is cleared, the sky is the limit.
Q: How about valuation on NPV basis as a near term producer?
A: I don’t want to get into too much detail. Let professional do the dirty work. I just use a simple method, that is when an explorer moving up to a producer, the EV/lb can rise much higher to $20-40 /lb range depends on the spot uranium price, and production rate, etc.
Q: MTN is so cheap, why PDN or Canadians not take over it?
A: Good question. You should ask why PDN not take over SMM a year ago? For Canadians, Mega Uranium has got deposits in WA and QLD, Lamrade in QLD, which both are not as sure as SA about uranium mining. Do you trust their wisdom? Takeover MTN required $1bn+ scrap or money. There are a very few companies that is big enough.
People usually think something cheap must not good, or has some problems with it. It is a common sense. But common sense can only make you common profit, not super rich. I predict it is just a matter of time that a new offer could come from Canadian or US fund on MTN. Watch out. I hear things.
Q: How about technical aspect?
A: It is not too bad, with very few sellers. Just need a bit of volume to push it up into $10 range. It only took 150k shares to move up 20c, and still well on the uptrend. Massive sentiment is shifting. Within three months, the publishing of upgraded JORC resources, and final version of scope study could send MTN to $10+.
The End.
This week, I met a exploration director from a Canadian company, who is looking projects to invest all over the world. Surprise, and surprise, we talked about uranium. The way he is think about uranium ban in Australia is amazing. After I explained to him about the upcoming changes, he is so excited. Of course, we talked more in much details. Read my post, you might found some companies I mentioned to them.
There is no suggestion that a Canadian company is going to lunch a takeover on MTN. But the massive misunderstanding on Australian labor uranium policy could be resolved on April 29. It will open a floor-gate for investing in Australian uranium industry by fund, and company from Northern America. I believe MTN will be the prime target. So here is what I wrote based on our conversation:
MTN a $15 to $65 stock
Q: Is it going to be in a uranium friendly state?
A: It was, and it is.
Q: When a stock is only around $5, how can you predict it is $15+ stock?
A: Six months again, it was at 80c, I predicted it is $4+ stock by now. Now is $5.20, increased by 450%. Everything is possible, given another 6 months, it could triple, that is $15+ stock within six months.
Q: How about fundamental? Does it really worth $15+ now?
A: Yes. No doubt about it. Currently it has combined JORC and Non_JORC of 80mlb uranium at reasonable grade, with very easy metallurgical process. Full diluted with less than 60m share. Currently valued at less than EV$4/lb, while peer valuation ranged from $10 to $40 EV/lb. (NEL, DYL, PNN, AGS, SMM, EME, CUY)
At $10/lb, MTN worth $12.50, At $40/lb it is a $50 stock at right now.
Q: It only worth up to $50, how can you achieve the $65 up target?
A: The up limit of $50 is just for now. Things could change dramatically in next six months, like six months in the past. The extra $15 can be easily worked out with:
1. Resources upgrade to 100mlb+. The can easily be achieved with Mt Gee and satellite deposits only by either lower the cut-off grade, or more drilling.
2. Discovery of uranium in other tenements, or JV tenements;
3. Spot uranium price reach US$150 which I consider it as peak price. So peer valuation might go higher.
4. Takeover battle, better involved US people, not Chinese.
5. Sentiment shifting
6. Halba has predict it.
Any of the above could work to its favor. $65 per share might be conservative in a prolong uranium market.
Q: Why the current price is in deep discount?
A: Very big question. The current price is so depressed by three reasons:
1. False environment concern. A lot people mistakenly think Mt Gee is in a National Reserve, on Heritage List, or too remote. The most accurate description is that is on National Estate list for some natural beauties, and good access to infrastructure. There has no legal prohibition to mining activities because of National Estate Status. $10b in ground value of Mt Gee deposit can get most environmental issues cleared because it is significant to SA state interest. Mining in Mt Gee is not a possibility, it is a SURE thing, and it is SUPPORTED BY SA GOVERNMRNT NOW. Premier has mentioned MTN, along with AGS, CUY and PNN in recent speech as potential uranium miner. Watch this: http://www.investortv.com.au/player.aspx?id=CT15X77B2
2. Producing a JORC resource without drilling a hole. It caused very bad publicity, and draw criticism from geological society and investment circle. It is all cleared with published apology by the criticizer, and a serious of remarkable drilling results. Mt Gee could be bigger and better than current model.
3. Low profile, with virtually no promotion. What is wrong with that? As a long term holder, I enjoy it.
When all this is cleared, the sky is the limit.
Q: How about valuation on NPV basis as a near term producer?
A: I don’t want to get into too much detail. Let professional do the dirty work. I just use a simple method, that is when an explorer moving up to a producer, the EV/lb can rise much higher to $20-40 /lb range depends on the spot uranium price, and production rate, etc.
Q: MTN is so cheap, why PDN or Canadians not take over it?
A: Good question. You should ask why PDN not take over SMM a year ago? For Canadians, Mega Uranium has got deposits in WA and QLD, Lamrade in QLD, which both are not as sure as SA about uranium mining. Do you trust their wisdom? Takeover MTN required $1bn+ scrap or money. There are a very few companies that is big enough.
People usually think something cheap must not good, or has some problems with it. It is a common sense. But common sense can only make you common profit, not super rich. I predict it is just a matter of time that a new offer could come from Canadian or US fund on MTN. Watch out. I hear things.
Q: How about technical aspect?
A: It is not too bad, with very few sellers. Just need a bit of volume to push it up into $10 range. It only took 150k shares to move up 20c, and still well on the uptrend. Massive sentiment is shifting. Within three months, the publishing of upgraded JORC resources, and final version of scope study could send MTN to $10+.
The End.
- Joined
- 29 August 2006
- Posts
- 909
- Reactions
- 148
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
No it is not a SURE THING.
MTN has just recieved its scoping study and released its "summary" to the market. I look forward to reading the complete study.
MTN will also have the tough enviromental concerns that need to be addressed (even with an underground mine)
Lots to do .....Far from a SURE THING IMO
No it is not a SURE THING.
MTN has just recieved its scoping study and released its "summary" to the market. I look forward to reading the complete study.
MTN will also have the tough enviromental concerns that need to be addressed (even with an underground mine)
Lots to do .....Far from a SURE THING IMO
- Joined
- 7 October 2006
- Posts
- 877
- Reactions
- 0
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
I hear people say MTN cannot be mined, or not a SURE things 6 months ago, only see the SP goes up 450%. We need more people like you, when considering 99%+ chance is not a sure thing in a real life.
Keep say not sure, and not sure, the more people say it, the more I am sure that MTN's SP is far from peak.
When people are in doubt, it is a good thing for stock price.
I hear people say MTN cannot be mined, or not a SURE things 6 months ago, only see the SP goes up 450%. We need more people like you, when considering 99%+ chance is not a sure thing in a real life.
Keep say not sure, and not sure, the more people say it, the more I am sure that MTN's SP is far from peak.
When people are in doubt, it is a good thing for stock price.
- Joined
- 29 August 2006
- Posts
- 909
- Reactions
- 148
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
I`m not blind mmmmining ........I can see the percentages thanks.
Care to comment on the subject at hand which is MTN being a SURE THING with regards to mining Mt Gee.
I`m not blind mmmmining ........I can see the percentages thanks.
Care to comment on the subject at hand which is MTN being a SURE THING with regards to mining Mt Gee.
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
Great post mining.
Your best so far.
Agree wholly.
I was reading one of PDNs presentations compared uranium companies with on a EV/lb basis, MTN right at the bottom of the scale at $4/lb. Bit of a joke really.
Great post mining.
Your best so far.
Agree wholly.
I was reading one of PDNs presentations compared uranium companies with on a EV/lb basis, MTN right at the bottom of the scale at $4/lb. Bit of a joke really.
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
yes mmmmining, my $65 target was based on production. Once a development entity gets into production there is another 200-300% jump in stock price. But good analysis mmmmining. Case in point: PALADIN. I agree nothing is a sure thing, but trend is your friend? Its quite feasible that my $65 target which was based on current uranium prices can be exceeded when uranium prices increase when they produce?
yes mmmmining, my $65 target was based on production. Once a development entity gets into production there is another 200-300% jump in stock price. But good analysis mmmmining. Case in point: PALADIN. I agree nothing is a sure thing, but trend is your friend? Its quite feasible that my $65 target which was based on current uranium prices can be exceeded when uranium prices increase when they produce?
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
I keep following this thread not because I own MTN, although I do, more for the comedy gold that it is providing. I would love to see MTN take off even more than it has but let's face it - there is no such thing as a free lunch. If MTN is at $5.20 a share it's because that's what it's assessed as being worth. Granted this can change any time the market is open but, barring news that come out after market close, putting a higher price than that, or lower for that matter, is nothing but speculation. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with speculation, one might have very good reasons for feeling a share is under/over valued, whether that is using TA or FA. However, I am not comfortable with the idea of "sure things".
I keep following this thread not because I own MTN, although I do, more for the comedy gold that it is providing. I would love to see MTN take off even more than it has but let's face it - there is no such thing as a free lunch. If MTN is at $5.20 a share it's because that's what it's assessed as being worth. Granted this can change any time the market is open but, barring news that come out after market close, putting a higher price than that, or lower for that matter, is nothing but speculation. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with speculation, one might have very good reasons for feeling a share is under/over valued, whether that is using TA or FA. However, I am not comfortable with the idea of "sure things".
Sean K
Moderator
- Joined
- 21 April 2006
- Posts
- 22,018
- Reactions
- 11,006
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
I have a few retorts however, aimed at trying to accuartely determine what MTN should be valued at now, or into the future.
I will raise just one at this time, which has been glossed over a little, but will significantly effect your valuation. That is, dilution of the stock due to the need to raise funds, or take on a JV partner, in order to get to production. The company has stated that this will cost somewhere between $100 and $200m. (PDN took $92m at old prices) So, for just a start, can you please revise your valuation based on that? Or, if this should not be a factor, I would be happy for someone to refute this.
Firstly mmmmming, thank you for your efforts in putting this post together. Cheers.
I have a few retorts however, aimed at trying to accuartely determine what MTN should be valued at now, or into the future.
I will raise just one at this time, which has been glossed over a little, but will significantly effect your valuation. That is, dilution of the stock due to the need to raise funds, or take on a JV partner, in order to get to production. The company has stated that this will cost somewhere between $100 and $200m. (PDN took $92m at old prices) So, for just a start, can you please revise your valuation based on that? Or, if this should not be a factor, I would be happy for someone to refute this.
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
Kennas. this issue has been dealt with before by me. I have said the market does not care about share dilution now. Even so you fail to understand that raisings are not all done through share issues. When mtn hit $20 a share it will only have to raise 5 million shares to fund the mine.
Kennas. this issue has been dealt with before by me. I have said the market does not care about share dilution now. Even so you fail to understand that raisings are not all done through share issues. When mtn hit $20 a share it will only have to raise 5 million shares to fund the mine.
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
Oh Yeah!!!
Not to mention bank loans and Talbots involvement will come in handy when it comes to setting up
Oh Yeah!!!
Not to mention bank loans and Talbots involvement will come in handy when it comes to setting up
Sean K
Moderator
- Joined
- 21 April 2006
- Posts
- 22,018
- Reactions
- 11,006
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
The issue seems to be fundamental analysis, not what the market 'cares' about. Yes, this has been discussed, but mmmmmining has not considered it in his valuation. Share dilution is only moments away, relatively. So, he needs to consider the $100m dilution as part of the valuation doesn't he? For a start. You failed to do this yourself in your $15 valuation, which was based off a flawed peer comparison with SMM.
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
kennas i have a far superior understanding than you in the uranium market generally. You are nitpicking my valuation and simply wasting time. It is starting to get annoying but i am responding to each nitpick for i don't know why. I could simply choose to not waste my time and just enjoy the stock price gains. Your credibility kennas is extremely poor especially after you nitpicked both chris and my posts on BMN and ERN when they were like 1/2 the current price.
I follow canadian listed companies and my "flawed comparisons" with SMM you say are not flawed. In fact most TSX listed producers trade at similar values to SMM.
kennas i have a far superior understanding than you in the uranium market generally. You are nitpicking my valuation and simply wasting time. It is starting to get annoying but i am responding to each nitpick for i don't know why. I could simply choose to not waste my time and just enjoy the stock price gains. Your credibility kennas is extremely poor especially after you nitpicked both chris and my posts on BMN and ERN when they were like 1/2 the current price.
I follow canadian listed companies and my "flawed comparisons" with SMM you say are not flawed. In fact most TSX listed producers trade at similar values to SMM.
- Joined
- 7 October 2006
- Posts
- 877
- Reactions
- 0
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
Thank you for not chipping off my post.
Anyway, based on the peer analysis that MTN should worth between $12.5 to $50 dollars. I mean just right now, not tomorrow, not next month. So no need to revise my statement on this part to take into account dilution. For dilution part, please see my previous analysis on this thread.
For $65 dollars upend, as I said it depends on a lot of factors (include Halba's prediction. If Halba revise it I will revise it accordingly, just highlight it is anyone's guess ).
I can compile a list of negative impacts, including capital base dilution, but it would not help me to argue my point, would it?
The only thing I can revise is that the upend $65 could be +-50%.
Cheers.
Firstly mmmmming, thank you for your efforts in putting this post together. Cheers.
I have a few retorts however, aimed at trying to accuartely determine what MTN should be valued at now, or into the future.
I will raise just one at this time, which has been glossed over a little, but will significantly effect your valuation. That is, dilution of the stock due to the need to raise funds, or take on a JV partner, in order to get to production. The company has stated that this will cost somewhere between $100 and $200m. (PDN took $92m at old prices) So, for just a start, can you please revise your valuation based on that? Or, if this should not be a factor, I would be happy for someone to refute this.
Thank you for not chipping off my post.
Anyway, based on the peer analysis that MTN should worth between $12.5 to $50 dollars. I mean just right now, not tomorrow, not next month. So no need to revise my statement on this part to take into account dilution. For dilution part, please see my previous analysis on this thread.
For $65 dollars upend, as I said it depends on a lot of factors (include Halba's prediction. If Halba revise it I will revise it accordingly, just highlight it is anyone's guess
). I can compile a list of negative impacts, including capital base dilution, but it would not help me to argue my point, would it?
The only thing I can revise is that the upend $65 could be +-50%.
Cheers.
Sean K
Moderator
- Joined
- 21 April 2006
- Posts
- 22,018
- Reactions
- 11,006
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
Your flawed comparison with SMM has nothing to do with the Canadian market. You have valued the entire company on Valhalla, which is just plain wrong.
Yes, you obviously know much more about the uranium market than me. You are the best.
I have NEVER said anything should be less or more, I have only ever asked for objective analysis. That is all. There is no matter of my credibility here. I have NEVER made a sp prediction on this stock, up or down. All we ask for at ASF is objective analysis.
Your flawed comparison with SMM has nothing to do with the Canadian market. You have valued the entire company on Valhalla, which is just plain wrong.
Yes, you obviously know much more about the uranium market than me. You are the best.
Re: MTN - Marathon Resources
Easy boys and girls... Just chill
After the No new mines policy is lifted we will see a wave of international companies jumping in on the ASX with take over bids... They prefer to pay a premium to eliminate risk... The market will shift in sentiment and anything can happen... Both Dreams and nightmares for some... I too about 2 months ago predicted $15 and with all the issues discussed previously about MTN is a substantial analysis
The main reason IMHO for MTN not growing as much as predicted is the lack of Advertising the management has produced... But this has also lead to steady growth in the past 6 months or so... Imagine what might happen if they advertised...
Just My opinion
Easy boys and girls... Just chill
After the No new mines policy is lifted we will see a wave of international companies jumping in on the ASX with take over bids... They prefer to pay a premium to eliminate risk... The market will shift in sentiment and anything can happen... Both Dreams and nightmares for some... I too about 2 months ago predicted $15 and with all the issues discussed previously about MTN is a substantial analysis
The main reason IMHO for MTN not growing as much as predicted is the lack of Advertising the management has produced... But this has also lead to steady growth in the past 6 months or so... Imagine what might happen if they advertised...
Just My opinion