Sprott seems to have started his trust as a publicly traded vehicle at the end of a third Elliott wave, not long before the start of an Elliott fourth wave (sideways triangle). It's now entering the fifth of five waves up. Who knows how long that wave will last -- perhaps a year. That might or might not be the end of this new bull market. Personally, I doubt it. Price retracement with the 2000s bull market gives it a lot more runway to go.
I've heard the huge bull case is nations shifting over to nuclear power, especially given what's going on in energy markets. That's possible, but what's the time frame, and can prices dip with broader commodities before then?
Please interview Marin Katusa about the story around Uranium Energy Corp (UEC). UEC has more permitted uranium pounds than any other US company. And please ask why US keeps buying uranium from Rosatom (Founder: Putin)...
Sprott is taking advantage of the energy “crisis”. Nuclear will/must play a larger role in the future of energy thx to political pressure brought on by the carbon-free narrative, the current war, green new deal initiative etc. Approximately 70 million lb shortfall in 2022. War is only accelerating the inevitable. At the very least, this is an opportunity worth considering. Doomberg Knows…
Another’s man’s garbage will be another’s pearl, as we are seeing from the use of the earths fossil fuels, (Waste trees and plants), recycled rubber, wood and steel from dumps, pyrolysis of tires, wood and organic garbage, etc. Plants are the biggest beneficiary of the earths natural carbon cycle increase as a non toxic friendly fertilizer. Heck we breathe out 40,000 ppm of CO2 and politicians and activists are afraid of 400 ppm of invisible non warming CO2
A serious question, with major implications for the "invest in uranium space": What about fusion? From my research, my current hypothesis is that safe, commercially viable fusion is not possible. (It is a very complicated engineering problem, with a massive explosive downside). If this hypothesis is proven wrong, uranium (and oil, gas) investments will be down hard. Thoughts?
I find it quizzical that in all the suddenly revived talk about nuclear as an alternative solution to the emerging energy supply problems ahead, 2 key issues that have always been issues in the nuclear power debate seem to be ignored in the current hoo ha:
First, I don't see how the politics of nuclear power have changed lately. Anyone want a nuclear power station built in their area? Didn't think so.
So the politicians can talk all they want about it, I can’t see it actually get off the ground. I expect the politicians will blow hot area about it in the immediate term, but more to be “seen to be doing something”, than actually achieving anything practically viable.
“Reactivating” mothballed plants may be viable, as in the case of Germany, but in other countries the “not in my neighbourhood” rule at the voting booth will determine any actual action (or lack thereof).
Of course, soaring energy prices may change that political dynamic. How would you feel about a new nuclear power plant if it wasn’t in your neighbourhood & your power bill was 3 times higher a year from now & power price driven inflation was 5%+ on everything from food to clothing to consumer goods? You’d do the math. And so will the politicians – they’ll give up the votes lost in the areas affected, if they can win the votes elsewhere.
Secondly, is nuclear really "green" energy solution in practicality? Yes, nuclear power doesn’t produce greenhouse gases, but is does produce nuclear radioactive waste. My memory is that the nuclear waste issue is a real & significant one. Has that problem just magically gone away now?
So the talk about a “nuclear solution” just seems to me to be more “kicking the can down the road” on an important environmental issue. Well, that does fit perfectly with the political dynamics of the day, so I expect the politicians will try & latch onto that talking point with enthusiasm.
Sadly, I can see us dealing with a nuclear waste crisis 10 years from now. So when we talk about building a new nuclear power station, lets also talk about building a new nuclear waste disposal site. Lets see how voters like a nuclear waste plant in their neighbourhood.
It is bad that an interview like this is even needed to explain the opaque details of the uranium trust. Shouldn't this clear explanation be posted on Sprott's web site? I'm not a shareholder but I would find tihs all offensive if I were. As it is, it is a reason to avoid Sprott products. I've had other issues with Sprott.
I'm not an expert on the nuclear physics of closed-end funds, but if they keep growing at this pace, could their AUM become supercritical? I feel like that could lead to an exponentially accelerating drop in NAV...
Seems as if the full transcript should be offered to all paid subscribers.
Just a thought...
Note: The full transcript of our conversation with Ciampaglia – including his reaction to the AMC/Hycroft Mining deal and the mechanics of physical redemption in PHYS and PSLV – as well as our thoughts on the potential investment consequences of the consummation of the URNM deal, will be emailed to Doomberg Pro members tomorrow, Sunday, April 10th.
Did you guys notice Russia displaying to the world the vulnerability of having nuclear power plants as wartime potential shields/targets in Ukraine? That was not subtle or unintentional. That will remain as an existential issue and threat to nuclear power going forward. We’re seeing that former rules based tactics of war are off the table with US confiscation of Sovereign reserves, Hypersonic missiles, threats of Nukes, Killer drones, Cyber warfare, etc….Nothing is off the table and game theory favors unintended consequences and therefore the unthinkable is no more.
Thanks for this great article. Big fan of Sprott for a little over a year now. In true amateur fashion I got into SRUUF at the first spike to 14 - FOMO, it’s a biatch - but then avg down in 11s. I am a believer that uranium could be a generational opportunity. Keeping an eye out for the miners etf and NYSE listing. You guys are alright.
Love the work Doom. Thanks for the heads up on the uranium, does Sprott see any disruption with Thorium reactors long term or have any plans to disrupt any of the other parts of the metals exchange after the nickle market blow up?
Will save up for the sub. Probably be a year. Working for oneself cut my budget, and fifth child on the way, means it takes a little work to squeeze this one on the coop! I'll follow on Twitter, and may even start a Twitter account back up after I deleted my old one just to follow your team.
Sprott seems to have started his trust as a publicly traded vehicle at the end of a third Elliott wave, not long before the start of an Elliott fourth wave (sideways triangle). It's now entering the fifth of five waves up. Who knows how long that wave will last -- perhaps a year. That might or might not be the end of this new bull market. Personally, I doubt it. Price retracement with the 2000s bull market gives it a lot more runway to go.
I've heard the huge bull case is nations shifting over to nuclear power, especially given what's going on in energy markets. That's possible, but what's the time frame, and can prices dip with broader commodities before then?
Please interview Marin Katusa about the story around Uranium Energy Corp (UEC). UEC has more permitted uranium pounds than any other US company. And please ask why US keeps buying uranium from Rosatom (Founder: Putin)...
Sprott is taking advantage of the energy “crisis”. Nuclear will/must play a larger role in the future of energy thx to political pressure brought on by the carbon-free narrative, the current war, green new deal initiative etc. Approximately 70 million lb shortfall in 2022. War is only accelerating the inevitable. At the very least, this is an opportunity worth considering. Doomberg Knows…
Another’s man’s garbage will be another’s pearl, as we are seeing from the use of the earths fossil fuels, (Waste trees and plants), recycled rubber, wood and steel from dumps, pyrolysis of tires, wood and organic garbage, etc. Plants are the biggest beneficiary of the earths natural carbon cycle increase as a non toxic friendly fertilizer. Heck we breathe out 40,000 ppm of CO2 and politicians and activists are afraid of 400 ppm of invisible non warming CO2
A serious question, with major implications for the "invest in uranium space": What about fusion? From my research, my current hypothesis is that safe, commercially viable fusion is not possible. (It is a very complicated engineering problem, with a massive explosive downside). If this hypothesis is proven wrong, uranium (and oil, gas) investments will be down hard. Thoughts?
I find it quizzical that in all the suddenly revived talk about nuclear as an alternative solution to the emerging energy supply problems ahead, 2 key issues that have always been issues in the nuclear power debate seem to be ignored in the current hoo ha:
First, I don't see how the politics of nuclear power have changed lately. Anyone want a nuclear power station built in their area? Didn't think so.
So the politicians can talk all they want about it, I can’t see it actually get off the ground. I expect the politicians will blow hot area about it in the immediate term, but more to be “seen to be doing something”, than actually achieving anything practically viable.
“Reactivating” mothballed plants may be viable, as in the case of Germany, but in other countries the “not in my neighbourhood” rule at the voting booth will determine any actual action (or lack thereof).
Of course, soaring energy prices may change that political dynamic. How would you feel about a new nuclear power plant if it wasn’t in your neighbourhood & your power bill was 3 times higher a year from now & power price driven inflation was 5%+ on everything from food to clothing to consumer goods? You’d do the math. And so will the politicians – they’ll give up the votes lost in the areas affected, if they can win the votes elsewhere.
Secondly, is nuclear really "green" energy solution in practicality? Yes, nuclear power doesn’t produce greenhouse gases, but is does produce nuclear radioactive waste. My memory is that the nuclear waste issue is a real & significant one. Has that problem just magically gone away now?
So the talk about a “nuclear solution” just seems to me to be more “kicking the can down the road” on an important environmental issue. Well, that does fit perfectly with the political dynamics of the day, so I expect the politicians will try & latch onto that talking point with enthusiasm.
Sadly, I can see us dealing with a nuclear waste crisis 10 years from now. So when we talk about building a new nuclear power station, lets also talk about building a new nuclear waste disposal site. Lets see how voters like a nuclear waste plant in their neighbourhood.
It is bad that an interview like this is even needed to explain the opaque details of the uranium trust. Shouldn't this clear explanation be posted on Sprott's web site? I'm not a shareholder but I would find tihs all offensive if I were. As it is, it is a reason to avoid Sprott products. I've had other issues with Sprott.
I'm not an expert on the nuclear physics of closed-end funds, but if they keep growing at this pace, could their AUM become supercritical? I feel like that could lead to an exponentially accelerating drop in NAV...
Could POTUS spoil the party by using the DPA to declare uranium a strategically important mineral, as he’s done recently for other critical materials?
Re: Sitting Down With Sprott
Seems as if the full transcript should be offered to all paid subscribers.
Just a thought...
Note: The full transcript of our conversation with Ciampaglia – including his reaction to the AMC/Hycroft Mining deal and the mechanics of physical redemption in PHYS and PSLV – as well as our thoughts on the potential investment consequences of the consummation of the URNM deal, will be emailed to Doomberg Pro members tomorrow, Sunday, April 10th.
can someone explain to me how a fund dedicated to buying uranium is different from cornering the market?
Did you guys notice Russia displaying to the world the vulnerability of having nuclear power plants as wartime potential shields/targets in Ukraine? That was not subtle or unintentional. That will remain as an existential issue and threat to nuclear power going forward. We’re seeing that former rules based tactics of war are off the table with US confiscation of Sovereign reserves, Hypersonic missiles, threats of Nukes, Killer drones, Cyber warfare, etc….Nothing is off the table and game theory favors unintended consequences and therefore the unthinkable is no more.
Off topic, but Sprott is still firing people for not taking the jab - disgraceful.
Thanks for this great article. Big fan of Sprott for a little over a year now. In true amateur fashion I got into SRUUF at the first spike to 14 - FOMO, it’s a biatch - but then avg down in 11s. I am a believer that uranium could be a generational opportunity. Keeping an eye out for the miners etf and NYSE listing. You guys are alright.
Love the work Doom. Thanks for the heads up on the uranium, does Sprott see any disruption with Thorium reactors long term or have any plans to disrupt any of the other parts of the metals exchange after the nickle market blow up?
Will save up for the sub. Probably be a year. Working for oneself cut my budget, and fifth child on the way, means it takes a little work to squeeze this one on the coop! I'll follow on Twitter, and may even start a Twitter account back up after I deleted my old one just to follow your team.
Take care!