URL - Universal Resources

[tgwm]

I too have some of these and can't understand why they aren't a bit healthier.

Their tenaments look outstanding and they should start producing Cu in 2008 (I think ...).

Anyone know what is happening with the future partnership with XSTRATA ?

cheers

 

[greggy]

I too have some of these and can't understand why they aren't a bit healthier.

Their tenaments look outstanding and they should start producing Cu in 2008 (I think ...).

Anyone know what is happening with the future partnership with XSTRATA ?

cheers

I was trying to find more info myself with URL, but this company never returned any of my phone calls.
DYOR

 

[spitrader1]

I was trying to find more info myself with URL, but this company never returned any of my phone calls.
DYOR

i agree there is a positive in uranium, but, this is NOT what this stock is about. The future of this stock is all about the option xstrata has to own 51% of the roseby copper project and there disussions with ZFX. We should know by the end of january or not weather they have taken up this option, as it was a 90 day option from when the feasability study was given to them, which was in october.

 

[sydneysider]

i agree there is a positive in uranium, but, this is NOT what this stock is about. The future of this stock is all about the option xstrata has to own 51% of the roseby copper project and there disussions with ZFX. We should know by the end of january or not weather they have taken up this option, as it was a 90 day option from when the feasability study was given to them, which was in october.

U are right about the Xstrata deal and the stock seems to have suffered accordingly BUT U is so hot and the address is so "hot". GSE even use this term in discussing the areas controlled by URL, which I found very unusual.

 

[sydneysider]

Lots of buyers came into the stock yesterday afternoon and IMHO this buying will continue

 

[Sean K]

There's not a real lot in the chart for me.

It was a shame this couldn't hold the momentum when it looked like breaking through $0.17 ish resistance. This is going to be even harder to crack now. MACD shows that it's generally heading up the past 3 months but has recently started to fall over and converge, although this looks to be flattening out. RSI has just kicked back up.

Possible support and resistance shown.

The chart isn't telling me to buy it, but surely the upcoming ann is going to give it a boost?

 

[exgeo]

I agree with SydneySider; it's a cheap Uranium play with a free attaching option for a copper mine. 278m shares * 14.5c = $40m market cap. Information below from ann of 20/12/2006:

• Janet Maude-Mount Harold prospects rock chip values up to a peak of 6.18% U308;
• Godkin prospect costean rock samples gave grades in the range of 0.3-0.4% U308,
including 0.3 metre channel sample at 1.32% U308.
• Previous workers attempted three percussion drill holes at Janet Maude and two percussion drill holes at Mt Harold. Drilling failed to adequately test the anomalism, terminating before reaching target depth due to drilling difficulties and excessive water. The highest drill assay recorded was 0.6% U308 (NB. SMM's drilling has been getting grades of the order of 0.2% U308 - exgeo). Additional drilling was proposed to properly evaluate the mineralisation at Mount Harold – Janet Maude. No evidence has been found of this having been completed.
• Malakoff prospect - Ongoing review of Universal’s regional tenements has identified Mesozoic sediment-hosted possible “roll front” uranium mineralisation located at Glen Isla within the Malakoff tenement. Mineralisation appears to lie within a channel which is between 500 – 700 metres wide and 1500 metres long. Exploration located mineralisation between 35 to 45 metres below surface ranging from 1 to 4.3 metres thick. Several encouraging intercepts were reported, including 2m @ 0.118% U308 and 1.4m @ 0.162% U308.

 

[mmmmining]

The Australian tipped URL and HGO. So I did spend some time on it, check a few things out.

I have got "The Investors' Australian Uranium Hot Play Map" in front me, URL'a land fit in the gap between SMM and MRX/DYL, and GSE, around the famous address, such as Mt Isa, Valhallaa, Bikini Skal and Mary Kathleen.

I might not give a dime about its copper, but for speculation purpose, the uranium prospect might worth a punt.

Today DYL paid about $10m in stock for 51% of MRX's uranium asset around the area, and MRX don't need to spend a nickel, Easily valued the total uranium asset around $20-30m.

Ironically both classified as copper near producers' market cap is around $60m.

I decide to spend some money on it, as usually, not betting on my house...

 

[richdad]

ann out
URANIUM EXPLORATION SUCCESS
The directors of Universal Resources Limited (Universal) are pleased to report high grade
uranium and rare earth results obtained from a surface sampling exploration program within
Universal’s wholly owned tenements adjacent to the former Mary Kathleen uranium mine in
the Mt Isa Inlier of North-West Queensland.
HIGHLIGHTS
The recent exploration programmes targeted uranium mineralisation north-east of the former
Mary Kathleen uranium mine where historical production was 9.2 million tonnes of ore
grading 0.13% U308. The very pleasing results generated by this initial program of mapping,
rock chip sampling, broad band gamma ray scintillometer and soil surveys are presented
below. Sampling has confirmed the presence of uraniferous and rare earth mineralisation in
rocks and soils at Janet Maude and Mount Harold prospects and also identified a new
uraniferous prospect at Mount Harold South.
Some of the better results from rocks selected on the basis of scintillometer screening include:
Mt Harold
• 4.76% uranium, 2.07% cerium, 3.04% lanthanum, 0.78% yttrium;
• 4.36% uranium, 1.79% cerium, 2.66% lanthanum, 0.77% yttrium;
• 2.42% uranium, 1.13% cerium, 1.62% lanthanum, 0.45% yttrium ;
Mt Harold South
• 3.59% uranium, 1.42% cerium, 2.33% lanthanum, 0.50% yttrium;
• 2.93% uranium, 1.16% cerium, 1.67% lanthanum, 0.46% yttrium;
Godkin and Godkin Extended
• 2.96% uranium, 0.72% cerium, 0.94% lanthanum, 0.18% yttrium (Godkin);
• 1.81% uranium, 0.59% cerium, 0.67% lanthanum, 0.14% yttrium (Godkin);
• 1.69% uranium, 0.49% cerium, 0.53% lanthanum, 0.13% yttrium (Godkin);
• 1.74% uranium, 0.75% cerium, 0.93% lanthanum, 0.35% yttrium (Godkin
Extended).

 

[greggy]

ann out
URANIUM EXPLORATION SUCCESS
The directors of Universal Resources Limited (Universal) are pleased to report high grade
uranium and rare earth results obtained from a surface sampling exploration program within
Universal’s wholly owned tenements adjacent to the former Mary Kathleen uranium mine in
the Mt Isa Inlier of North-West Queensland.
HIGHLIGHTS
The recent exploration programmes targeted uranium mineralisation north-east of the former
Mary Kathleen uranium mine where historical production was 9.2 million tonnes of ore
grading 0.13% U308. The very pleasing results generated by this initial program of mapping,
rock chip sampling, broad band gamma ray scintillometer and soil surveys are presented
below. Sampling has confirmed the presence of uraniferous and rare earth mineralisation in
rocks and soils at Janet Maude and Mount Harold prospects and also identified a new
uraniferous prospect at Mount Harold South.
Some of the better results from rocks selected on the basis of scintillometer screening include:
Mt Harold
• 4.76% uranium, 2.07% cerium, 3.04% lanthanum, 0.78% yttrium;
• 4.36% uranium, 1.79% cerium, 2.66% lanthanum, 0.77% yttrium;
• 2.42% uranium, 1.13% cerium, 1.62% lanthanum, 0.45% yttrium ;
Mt Harold South
• 3.59% uranium, 1.42% cerium, 2.33% lanthanum, 0.50% yttrium;
• 2.93% uranium, 1.16% cerium, 1.67% lanthanum, 0.46% yttrium;
Godkin and Godkin Extended
• 2.96% uranium, 0.72% cerium, 0.94% lanthanum, 0.18% yttrium (Godkin);
• 1.81% uranium, 0.59% cerium, 0.67% lanthanum, 0.14% yttrium (Godkin);
• 1.69% uranium, 0.49% cerium, 0.53% lanthanum, 0.13% yttrium (Godkin);
• 1.74% uranium, 0.75% cerium, 0.93% lanthanum, 0.35% yttrium (Godkin
Extended).

On the face of it, these are excellent results. The only problem is that URL is valued as being a copper explorer. When the market settles down its uranium assets should be floated in a separate vehicle. I don't hold any and don't intend to buy back into this stock as I don't like the management's attitude in relation to building shareholder wealth. Plus, I've been previously burnt playing this one.
DYOR

 

[Mousie]

Hey greggy

Other than management not returning your phone calls Re post #62 here, why did you not like their attitude in building shareholders' wealth?

 

[greggy]

Hey greggy

Other than management not returning your phone calls Re post #62 here, why did you not like their attitude in building shareholders' wealth?

Hi Mousie,

I hjust don't like the fact that URL has some very intersting leases that are highly prospective for uranium yet its directors haven't given a spin off of its uranium interests any thought at all. A spin off would no doubt have boosted URL's share price. Also, as a separate entity, the uranium company would have attracted more market interest and been given a premium. The problem is that URL is largely seen as a copper vehicle and judging by other spin offs, URL could well have missed the boat here.
DYOR

 

[Mousie]

Well, I did note that at the Chairman's address last year (on page 3 of the Chairman's & MD's Address to AGM), Peter Ingram did note they might JV or spin-off. Holders must prefer the latter I assume...

 

[greggy]

Well, I did note that at the Chairman's address last year (on page 3 of the Chairman's & MD's Address to AGM), Peter Ingram did note they might JV or spin-off. Holders must prefer the latter I assume...

Hi Mousie,

Would you have preferred a spin-off? Peter Ingram just sat on his hands whilst many other companies spun off their uranium interests, laughing all the way to the bank.
To prove my point I bet the share price will do well today on the back of the uranium ann.
DYOR

 

[Mousie]

Well greggy,

Honestly, I didn't follow this company for very long (yet), so I haven't get a feel for how management communicates with its shareholders. I mean some management promise the world and this hypes that particular stock up, and they answer questions later. But some don't play up their companies, preferring to announce something only when it's more or less definite. I don't know that feel in respect to URL's management yet, but they did announce their available options. Call that small comfort or something else, I don't know. Since you dabble in URL before, you might have a better idea as to how they do things, but not returning shareholder phone calls definitely is a negative mark. Still, that's not the only factor I take into consideration when deciding whether to monitor a particular company.

 

[greggy]

Well greggy,

Honestly, I didn't follow this company for very long (yet), so I haven't get a feel for how management communicates with its shareholders. I mean some management promise the world and this hypes that particular stock up, and they answer questions later. But some don't play up their companies, preferring to announce something only when it's more or less definite. I don't know that feel in respect to URL's management yet, but they did announce their available options. Call that small comfort or something else, I don't know. Since you dabble in URL before, you might have a better idea as to how they do things, but not returning shareholder phone calls definitely is a negative mark. Still, that's not the only factor I take into consideration when deciding whether to monitor a particular company.

Hi Mousie,

If you're a shareholder, the share price is up nicely today. My father is still a shareholder. This company has underperformed for a while. Not returning shareholder's is a negative and URL is by no means the only offender in this regards. It just seems to me that when thee company has a uranium ann. the price goes up whilst any ann. dealing with its copper project the price seems to fall overall. I also take other factors into account, the company's projects, cash levels, management, potential etc.
DYOR

 

[mmmmining]

I bet the current ann. is the prelude for a spin-off. Watch out, there is no harm to own a slice of this company for both copper and uranium assets.

 

[greggy]

I bet the current ann. is the prelude for a spin-off. Watch out, there is no harm to own a slice of this company for both copper and uranium assets.

Yes, a spin off would be very beneficial for existing shareholders.
DYOR

 

[Mousie]

Hi Mousie,

If you're a shareholder, the share price is up nicely today. My father is still a shareholder. This company has underperformed for a while. Not returning shareholder's is a negative and URL is by no means the only offender in this regards. It just seems to me that when thee company has a uranium ann. the price goes up whilst any ann. dealing with its copper project the price seems to fall overall. I also take other factors into account, the company's projects, cash levels, management, potential etc.
DYOR

No greggy, I'm not a holder, but given the previous hullabaloo over copper and uranium in Mt Isa & Cloncurry, who can afford not to pay attention to anyone drilling some holes there LOL

 

[Halba]

Rock chip samples. So they chipped off the good bits? Laughable