Geiger Counter Share Discussion Threads

[bmcb5] 01/5/2018 15:59

I couldn't resist topping up today. Average buy price is now <20p.

My portfolio is now looking a bit U308-heavy, especially after moving some other investments into cash. If this starts to move, i'm going to have to top-slice, just to maintain some portfolio balance. That would be a nice problem to have

[quepassa] 01/5/2018 15:52

It is interesting to note that Cameco has been performing very strongly recently.

Up 4% today.

And since mid February, Cameco has risen by a whopping 30%, from under C$11 to more than C$14.

That is great news and augurs very well indeed for the sector and for the prospects of uranium.

ALL IMO. DYOR.
QP

[greedfear] 30/4/2018 09:00

When uranium is going to take off it will do so with incredible force and intensity. The whole uranium sector is a springed coil.
I would strongly recommend people to follow John Quakes at twitter (quakes99) to get a good sense of what is happening on the uranium market. Once getting it, it’s impossible not to take a long position in this market.
All IMHO.

[ronconomics] 27/4/2018 07:34

What's the price monitoring extension all about please ?

[greedfear] 17/4/2018 15:01

Maybe someone can explain how the managers could state that the newly issued shares @18p were issued at a premium while NAV was 18.22p according to the last RNS?
That's not a premium but a discount. :(

[brugen] 17/4/2018 10:46

......because more shares mean more money for New City Investment Managers.

[greedfear] 17/4/2018 10:29

Hm. Although the new shares have been issued at a premium to NAV I don't like it. Why not let people pay up the offer price (as I have to)?

[greedfear] 17/4/2018 08:24

Added. Nav should be >18p now. Uranium shares started to really move yesterday. Russian threats to cut off US from uranium supply. This just might have been the spark that was needed to get the fire started.

[greedfear] 08/4/2018 10:52

Just to be (more) clear. Not 55% of my portfolio is invested in just GCL. I'm holding something like 12 different uranium shares. Mostly the URA ETF (something like 20% of my portfolio). GCL (new) are more like 4%.
I'm going to swap some URA ETF into individual shares though as I don't like them changing their investment strategy.
I will only add GCL in future if the share price is closer to the NAV.

[tonsil] 08/4/2018 09:50

And I thought 10% is sticking my neck out!

[wskill] 08/4/2018 09:22

55% of the portfolio is a big bet too much for me I am afraid puts my 2% to shame best of luck with your investment hope it goes well.

[quepassa] 07/4/2018 14:40

Cameco - the bellwether- shooting up in last ten days.

GLA.

Fortune favours the brave.

All imo. DYOR.
QP

[greedfear] 07/4/2018 14:17

Well that's it. Fully packed (55% of portfolio) and having a window seat on the uranium rocket. Counting down....

[tonsil] 31/3/2018 08:49

EDITORIAL: Glimmers of hope for uranium minersIt's been an eventful past couple of weeks in the uranium subsector, even if the spot price for uranium oxide has shown little positive response.In the U.S., the Trump administration's Department of Energy (DOE) has suspended sales from its uranium oxide stockpiles for the rest of the government's fiscal year (until Sept. 30, 2018).The Portsmouth gaseous-diffusion uranium enrichment facility in Piketon, Ohio. Credit: U.S. Department of Energy.In a process dubbed "barter," the DOE had been selling uranium from excess inventories for years to fund the environmental cleanup of the department's former Portsmouth gaseous-diffusion uranium enrichment facility in Piketon, Ohio.The DOE had been bartering roughly 4.6 million lb. U3O8 equivalent annually to fund the Portsmouth activities and for downblending of highly enriched uranium from decommissioned nuclear weapons.This new suspension will remove 1.6 million lb. U3O8 equivalent from the market over the coming months.Energy Secretary Rick Perry has said he would prefer a complete halt to the sales, with the Portsmouth cleanup funded as an ordinary budget item.Perry told the Senate Natural Resources Committee on March 20 that the DOE's uranium bartering process was poorly designed: "I'd like to see it stopped completely ... our efforts should be focused on letting the uranium marketplace work as it should while continuing without disruption the important work that is taking place at the Portsmouth site."The budget appropriates US$840 million for DOE expenses related to nuclear decontamination and remediation activities, which would include work at Portsmouth.The policy change on DOE uranium sales was contained in the US$1.3-trillion omnibus spending bill that was passed by both houses of Congress and signed by President Donald Trump on March 23.The DOE and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's requests for appropriations to restart licensing for the proposed but politically contentious Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository in southern Nevada were not included in the final draft of the budget, nor was the proposed funding for an interim nuclear waste storage program.The Uranium Producers of America association has long lobbied for the end of the DOE's uranium barter program, and applauded the changes.The association noted that the 1.6 million lb. of uranium that will be kept off the market in the coming months is "more uranium than our entire domestic industry produced in 2017. At a time when our industry is providing less than 2% of the fuel needed to power our domestic nuclear reactors, halting DOE uranium transfers is the right policy, and we look forward to working with Congress and the Administration on a long-term plan for the inventory, as well as other actions to ensure we have a strong and stable domestic industry."With the latest suspension of the DOE barter program and recent production cuts by major uranium miners such as Cameco and KazAtomProm, some 30 million lb. of annual uranium oxide supply has been taken out of the market over the past year.Meanwhile on the demand side in Japan, two more nuclear reactors have come back online after a virtual stasis in the country's nuclear power industry since the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster. There are now seven reactors up and running in Japan, out of a total of more than 40 reactors.A Japanese district court also rejected a lawsuit to halt construction of the Ohma nuclear plant, which had been delayed since 2011 and is now due to come online by 2025.

[greedfear] 14/3/2018 15:11

Currently I like the uranium stocks with large vanadium deposits (vanadium is hot and/or heating up). AURA (LSE quoted) being a company with large, very large, deposits (not only V, but other battery related stuff too). AURA is quoted on the ASX too (LSE is doing a discount to ASX of 10% currently). AURA had a sudden run up of 40% or so yesterday.

I like Plateau Uranium too (quoted in Canada). Also large V. deposits.

Surely there are more, just remembered those to because off adding them to my portfolio last week.

I apologize if people think I'm ramping those shares. I'm not, I don't care less if people don't buy them. Just trying to inform.

Frankly, I feel it's difficult to pick a wrong uranium share. All are at almost rock bottom prices.
I believe it will be like having made "only" 4x your investment in 3 years time or 10,20, 100 (?) times the original investment.

Makin "only" 4x would be good enough for me. :)

BTW: I'm trying to pick up GCL subscription shares if possible. Everyday I request a quote but almost never get one.

[ronconomics] 13/3/2018 06:58

Interesting conclusion greedfear. Seeking optionality I also found it difficult to discern between companies. Lots of compelling stories but it's a complicated picture. Wasn't sure if the US strategic resource argument would play. Risk of picking the wrong stocks. So GCL seemed the way to go and kept the subscription shares for the longer term. Topping up below 5.5p should build nicely. Price should raise all boats to some extent. I'd like to see which juniors are in their tail and why.

[steve73] 13/3/2018 01:26

I've been with I-dealing for over 15 years, and no complaints. Maybe not the cheapest (5GBP/qtr per account & dealing fees of around 10GBP, although you can save 20% if pre-bought if you're a frequent trader).
Customer service is excellent, and I've only rarely been unable to trade what I've wanted when I've wanted. Definitely worth a look.

[bigtbigt] 12/3/2018 19:14

codydotcom - IG currently. Who were excellent. But recently they've instigated extortionate charges. So again looking to change

[greedfear] 10/3/2018 09:33

Cody-makes sense. Because of doing research I find myself buying different uranium stocks for different reasons. In the end holding the same shares as GCL and Global Uranium ETF? :) Concluding that I could have saved myself a lot of time just buying those two from the start.

Anyway, GL!

[codydotcom] 09/3/2018 16:43

Cheers BigT

I've probably used them more in the past 12 months than the previous 10 years. They've been ok, but I'm open to alternatives. Who do you use now?

[bigtbigt] 09/3/2018 16:37

Selftrade sucks buddy
I was with them for some period, but their offering and customer support really are not good
They also disrespected lots of clients when they had their own internal governance problems, insisting on resupply of information, re-registration, etc.
Then when people wanted to leave they made it difficult and held funds for many, many months
Plus as you say - the range of stocks/markets they offer is far from comprehensive

[codydotcom] 09/3/2018 16:23

No. Tbh, I don't really have the time to research in enough detail (and don't have enough sector knowledge) to be confident I was choosing the best bets. Also not sure I can get international stocks on my Selftrade platform? Never tried. I'd rather spread my options with this.

I did trade Kalahari Minerals and Extract Resources about 10 years ago, and did very well from them, so the sector has been kind to me.