Buy
Sell
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Geiger Counter Limited LSE:GCL London Ordinary Share GB00B15FW330 ORD NPV
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 16.15 15.80 16.50 16.15 16.15 16.15 85,357 08:00:00
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Nonequity Investment Instruments 0.1 -0.2 -0.3 - 15

Geiger Counter Share Discussion Threads

Showing 2626 to 2649 of 3000 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  108  107  106  105  104  103  102  101  100  99  98  97  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
03/2/2019
10:18
Ok my last response to your bonkers statement that 5 companies represent the average uranium company performance. URA was until very recently a pure play uranium etf and their performance is 2015 -37%2016 +2%2017 +10%2018 -23%In total, since 2015, URA the uranium etf is down 60%. Think about it. That's the average as it held all/most of the pure play uranium companies.And againCameco - shut down McArthur River and won a high court tax case. Energy fuels has risen off the back of the vanadium market not the Uranium market.I can't make it anymore simple. You cannot expect a Uranium focused managed fund to have only invested in the top 5 performing stocks in the sector. Since 2015 GCL is completely flat and the uranium sector (URA) is down 60%. That's the judgment of management performance not the 5 best performing stocks. That's enough on the subject. If you can't understand my point there's no point continuing the discussion. I wish you luck in individual stock picking but please don't say the management performance is poor. Because it just isn't.
andyforster1
03/2/2019
10:00
Come on, play fair - your table went back to 2015. I don't see any "+60%" here (CCJ, USD): 2015 - 16.37 2016 - 12.33 2017 - 10.47 2018 - 9.23 2019 - 11.15 (I've no axe to grind either way with GCL.)
jonwig
03/2/2019
09:30
Wow anybody with any understanding of the uranium sector would MOST CERTAINLY BE looking for a positive return within the last 1, 2 and 3 years. Unfortunately Geiger does not oblige. But if you're happy with zero share price performance on Geiger, that's cool and fine by me. I think it is poor and unacceptable performance by Geiger. I prefer +60% on Cameco and more on others in this sector over this time-frame since the recovery in U3o8 began. But each investor to his own. Good Luck to you
quepassa
03/2/2019
09:20
re post #975 - it would be more meaningful to overlay the GCL share price with the spot U price (USD/lb at start of year): 2015 - 36 2016 - 34 2017 - 22 2018 - 24 2019 - 29 Source; Https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/uranium So I'm not sure what point you're making unless it's that uranium investments haven't been great.
jonwig
03/2/2019
08:04
For info GCL is sitting on some Ur-Energy warrants with a $1 strike price. If you believe like me that the US will enforce a quota/tariff system in favour of the US producers these warrants will be in the money. It's those opportunities that I as a private investor cannot get access to.
andyforster1
03/2/2019
07:36
Wow anybody with any understanding of the uranium sector would not be looking for a positive return within the last 5 years. Your bellwether of the industry Cameco is down 30% from its 2015 high. Like I said, you cannot say the portfolio has underperformed just because it hasn't matched your choice of the top 5 top performing shares in the industry. That's just a ridiculous thing to say. The Sectors go to fund URA is down 46% in the same period.
andyforster1
02/2/2019
17:56
Yes an excellent structure to their portfolio. You are absolutely right. Share price performance reflects this outstanding construction of their portfolio 2015 - 20p 2016 - 20p 2017 - 20p 2018 - 20p 2019 - 20p
quepassa
02/2/2019
15:33
@ andyforster - the latest share price of YCA is 236p vs a 31/12 NAV of 253p. A straightforward share issue would be impossible, but there might be ways to get round that (eg. warrants). I imagine YCA thought their shares would go to an immediate and permanent premium (along with the rest of the über-bulls). It did go to an immediate premium but that didn't last. Perhaps the conclusion to be drawn is that YCA is a bargain!
jonwig
02/2/2019
15:19
I'm sure YCA have a plan to exercise the option otherwise why would they have negotiated it.
andyforster1
02/2/2019
15:13
Interesting that you think we'd see a discount to NAV considering there's never been a discount in around 15 months and we're on the verge of a major uranium supply deficit ??
andyforster1
02/2/2019
14:55
@ andyforster - not easy for YCA to take their KAP option, as they'd need to issue more shares to get the cash, and their share price is sitting at a discount.
jonwig
02/2/2019
14:53
@ makeamillion - thanks for your observations (post #965). In 'cost of production' vs 'total cost', the latter will have a fixed cost element, so as more is mined, the more the marginal cost drops down to the former. And remember that KAP has achieved positive earnings (ie. PAT) from 2015 through H1 2018. (Prospectus p18 ... yes, I know it's complicated!) I suspect (but can't prove) that the reason for the current weakness of GCL is down to stale bulls. YCA went to an early big premium thanks to a flurry of publicity on various sites about the 'imminent' surge in uranium prices. YCA has now settled to around par to its NAV. As for individual miner holdings, with around 3% of my portfolio in uranium I wouldn't see the point - I'd rather buy GCL with all its faults. If I'm right, there's a chance GCL will fall to a discount, and there's a chance for a contrarian buy.
jonwig
02/2/2019
14:16
andyforster1...I agree with your comments. The timing of URA rebalancing was a disaster, having said that it has enabled many who know these companies and the Uranium market to capitalise in the firesale and I am extremely pleased overall with what I have personally accumulated and still buying at these levels. The decoupling from spot will result IMO in a violent move upwards in related stocks. ETF's such as URA & GCL these will benefit also maybe to a greater extent due to overall sentiment in the sector changing.
makeamillion1
02/2/2019
14:07
And, as for your 5 companies making up 75% of the investable uranium space. GCL holds 41 companies on last count, so I'm not sure you picking the 5 top performers as a good comparison for the average of the sector.
andyforster1
02/2/2019
13:58
Cameco has had its own news and Energy Fuels has risen off the back of its vanadium asset. The holders of the Physical commodity have risen strongly over the last 12 months due to the commodity price and this is where the decoupling of equities from spot has occurred. I personally put this down to URA as a major shareholder in the large Canadian developers Nexgen, Fission and Denison, GCL's largest holdings. The outflows from the ETF during tax loss selling period had a devastating affect on the bigger players thus causing the decoupling from spot. If you want your investment to replicate the performance of 5 stocks then put your money in 5 stocks but if you'd have told me 12 months ago spot would be up 40% whilst NExgen, fission and Denison trade at their yearly lows I wouldn't have believed you. Again, I'm not saying I'm happy with the performance but I can 100% understand why the portfolio is constructed the way it is.
andyforster1
02/2/2019
11:38
Jonwig...I would not believe too much what miners say their cost of production is, while KAP may say they can extract Uranium at $20 lb the All In Cost of Production believe me is significantly higher. Plus KAP is moving from a capitalised subsidised company to a a shareholder driven model. This is precisely why they have reduced production the last 2 years by 20% and will continue to do so going forward 2 years as reported by the company yesterday and on Bloomberg. Needless to say I believe this company has significant upside which is why I also hold KAP. I maintain that 90% of the Uranium miners & explorers require $50 - $60 to make a profit and will not consider production below this or restarting production. Cameco the worlds largest mine and one of the highest quality grades in the world has openly said they will not restart McArthur River until spot price is north of $40 lb, if spot price is above this level then long term contracted prices will be IMO in the range of $50-$60 plus. The reason why companies publish the lowest cost of extraction is simply to make them seem more attractive to investors, it is not misleading as in situ and open pit mining is clearly less cost than underground mines but the grade of Uranium is also a high denominator in the overall cost. But these costs do not include total costs! The top 5 /6 companies GCL hold are very good companies and those seeking an easy way into U investments will benefit and will not loose IMO by holding these. Those that wish to do more DD may take a different approach.
makeamillion1
01/2/2019
17:59
Good discussion on here, after weeks of no posts. I'm broadly in agreement with all of you :-) KAP does have a lower cost base, but that is at least partly down to the huge devaluation of the Tenge over recent years aiui. I go along with the view that the majority of producers need $50+. Collectively, you've highlighted the downside of this as an investment, and it's good that we have a board where it can be discussed maturely. Gains will be lower due to fund size constraints and management charges. But against that, it is a simple (and in my view low risk) way to gain sector exposure.
bmcb5
01/2/2019
17:53
So what you are saying is that basically APART FROM, AND REMOVING FROM THE EQUATION:- CAMECO +60% EFR +120% URG + 50% YELLOWCAKE +15% PHYSICAL HOLDING COMPANIES +15% Can$ + 10% Geiger at + 0% over two years is doing fine!!!! You have effectively excluded 75% of the investable uranium sector. In which case, as measured against the bottom 25% of the sector ( and ignoring the top 75% of the sector and currency gains ) I fully agree that Geiger is doing fine. Good Luck. ALL IMO. DYOR. QP
quepassa
01/2/2019
16:52
I think @makeamillion means any new mine will need $50 plus to come online. I believe 70% of current world production is currently unprofitable.
andyforster1
01/2/2019
16:46
It's not a case of if I like the funds performance it's about you saying the performance of the management is terrible considering It hasn't matched Cameco. Besides EFR, URG, Cameco and the physical holding companies. The rest of the sector is sitting at the lows so unless the fund consisted of probably 5 names it would never match your bellwether.
andyforster1
01/2/2019
16:40
@ makeamillion - cost of production is above $50-60/lb. Really? KAP is profitable around $20. BKY in Spain even lower (if/when it can actually produce). The whole point about buying miners over metal is the gearing: successful ones will make levered gains over the price, unsuccessful ones won't be able to afford the capex. So an IT of U miners needs to do the right stock picks, and buying GCL is an act of trust that they will deliver that. Maybe yes, maybe no. For myself, I've a big holding in YCA (which won't deliver geared returns) and a smaller one in KAP (which probably will but has a political angle).
jonwig
01/2/2019
16:28
Unfortunately GCL has very very little liquidity & volume, I have held these but when I noticed the high fees and additional performance fee I took what little profit I had and remain in the only global USA ETF URA. I also hold these in a SIPP. I have held URA for a few years, as well as numerous U stocks. I have also received (except last year) very good dividends and the fees are only 0.69% from the fund per year. IMO contrary to many who have been critical of URA rebalancing their portfolio over the last year they are now much more attractive to institutional and private investors.. They hold 60% of U Miners, explorers and physical holders of U308 and the remaining 40% is with Nuclear industry such as reactor manufacturers who have actually performed very well. To give the ETF a lower risk profile they also have 4.8% in Gold. When investor sentiment comes back which again in IMHO will be soon especially with s232 progress to be announced by April 2019 and whatever the result utilities worldwide have not been buying awaiting the result...that is why the Spot Price has gone up circa 40% leaving behind U companies which is almost unheard of. Spot Prices have to rise at least to cost of production which is north of $50-$60 lb. Pretty much double where they are now! At those levels expect to see many shares at least 6-10 times current values. Research 2007 & 2011 spot price graphs of Uranium and individual stocks such as URA & those held by GCL. IMO at some point during 2019 the U sector will start to see share rises similar to 2007 / 2011 and the share graph will mirror those times...really its like a Bitcoin share price movement. This is a classic contrarian play and volatility can be significant rising exceptionally fast but also fall harder. There maybe a fortune to make, I certainly believe so but I am also reminded of a quote from Cornelius Vanderbilt "Any fool can make a fortune. It takes a man of genius to keep it after it's made" GLA
makeamillion1
01/2/2019
16:27
Everything cool. If you are happy with Geiger's performance, that's great. Go for it Good Luck. PS. TWO THINGS IN CLOSING:- 1. Cameco isn't the only one which is UP NexGen (WHERE GEIGER HOLDS 16% AND IS THEIR BIGGEST PORTFOLIO HOLDING) 30/1/16 C$ 1.61 Today C$2.25 UPLIFT + 40% 2. Please think carefully about what you just wrote about the pound being DOWN vs C$.:- " I don’t see you mentioning the £ is down 10% vs CAD where 90% of the fund is invested." This should be HIGHLY BENEFICIAL TO A FUND INVESTED MAINLY IN CAN. DOLLARS: SO EVEN WITH A MASSIVE 10% GAIN DUE TO FAVOURABLE CURRENCY MOVEMENTS, GEIGER STILL CAN'T DO BETTER THAN REMAIN FLAT OVER MORE THAN TWO YEARS. YOU SEE THE PICTURE DOESN'T STACK UP:- CAMECO + 60% NEXTGEN + 40% C$ +10% vs GBP GEIGER + ZERO%
quepassa
01/2/2019
15:52
Thanks for the updated model it looks very well thought out so thank you. With regards the fees, it was about paying brokerage fees, fx fees and the duty personally, but yeah I guess the fund will also invoke most of these also. My broker also doesn't offer many of the indices that the Uranium equities are listed. I don't think the vehicle is "cheap" but I don't believe the managers to be doing the wrong thing. I look at the portfolio and with the exception of I'd like more US exposure I can understand their thinking.
andyforster1
Chat Pages: Latest  108  107  106  105  104  103  102  101  100  99  98  97  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
GCL
Geiger Cou..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20200702 13:21:15