Geheime kasachische URAN-Rakete !
zu überlegen ist allerdings:
risikoärmer ist evtl. gleich in SXR zu investieren, weil sie in ein paar Wochen fusionieren...
ggf. muss bei Übernahme Urasia-Gewinn versteuert werden (wegen nicht 1-Jahres-Frist)...
bei Nichtannahme ist evtl. ein Nachschlag zu den 0.45 SXR möglich...
auf Long so oder so definitiv kein Fehler!
und der Merger wird zusätzlich Schub verleihen...
und der Uranpreis noch einmal...
also: es gibt an der Börse nicht viel, das sicherer ist!
ended December 31, 2006 amounted to approximately 980,000 pounds of
U(3)O(8) (377,000 Kg U). The Company's attributable share (70%) of
revenue from uranium sales amounted to $50.5 million. After the
deduction of production costs of $9.3 million, depreciation and
depletion charges of $8.4 million, the earnings from mine operations
were $32.7 million. Production (70% share) during the five months
ended December 31, 2006 was approximately 940,000 pounds of U(3)O(8)
(361,400 kg U).
- The average unit price obtained for sales during the five months
ended December 31, 2006 was $51 per pound U(3)O(8), the average spot
price during this period was approximately $60 per pound U(3)O(8).
The average production cost per pound of U(3)O(8) sold was
approximately $9.
- Net income for the five month period was $19.7 million ($0.04 per
share). This includes $24.7 million arising from non-cash income from
an exchange gain on the revaluation of future income tax liabilities.
Adjusted for this item, the Company incurred a loss of $5.0 million.
- Due to improved cash flow from uranium sales at Betpak Dala all
outstanding loans payable to the Company by Betpak Dala totalling
$62.6 million were repaid in the first quarter of 2007.
>>
During the five month period ended December 31, 2006 sales of Akdala
product (70% attributable) amounted to approximately 980,000 pounds of
U(3)O(8) (377,000 kg U) compared to 812,000 pounds of U(3)O(8) (312,000 Kg U)
for the year ended July 31, 2006. The Company's attributable share (70%) of
revenue from uranium sales amounted to $50.5 million. After the deduction of
production costs of $9.3 million, depreciation and depletion charges of
$8.5 million earnings from mining operations were $32.7 million. For the nine
months ended July 31, 2006 sales of Akdala product (70% attributable) amounted
to approximately $23.5 million. After deducting production costs of
$9.5 million, depreciation and depletion charges of $5.1 million, earnings
from mine operations were $8.9 million.
The average unit price obtained for sales during the five months ended
December 31, 2006 was $51 per pound of U(3)O(8) compared to the average price
of $29 per pound of U(3)O(8) for sales in the nine months ended July 31, 2006.
The spot price of uranium at December 31, 2006 was $75 per pound of U(3)O(8);
the spot price has increased gradually from $33 per pound at October 31, 2005.
...During the five months ended December 31, 2006 production costs were
$9.3 million or approximately $9 per pound of U(3)O(8) sold. During the year
ended July 31, 2006, which included the first nine months of operations,
production costs were $9.5 million or approximately $12 per pound of U(3)O(8)
sold.
.....At March 27, 2007, the Company had a cash position of approximately
$109 million that will be used to continue development of the South Inkai and
Kharassan uranium projects within the Republic of Kazakhstan and to continue
exploration drilling, which commenced this year, on the Company's Kyrgyz
uranium exploration licenses......
http://infoventure.tsx.com/TSXVenture/...O_ID=1087192&NewsReleases=on
wie Kicky richtig darstellte, werden Gewinne gemacht...109 Millionen$ Cash zur Exploration weiterer Ressourcen...Merger mit SXR zum Big Player mit mehreren hinzukommenden Produktionsstätten im Verlauf des Jahres...weiterhin steigende Urannachfrage und steigender Uran-Preis mit Lieferverträgen zu aktuellen Preisen...Uranpreis als Hebel für den Kurs, da die Kosten gleich bleiben...
die Story fängt gerade erst an...der Kurs auch...
morgen neuer Anlauf...an den Perspektiven ändert das natürlich überhaupt nichts...
Ende der Aufwärtsbewegung nur für Urasia/SXR? Nein, denn alle wesentlichen Uran-Werte (Cameco, ERA, etc...) haben gestern einen kleinen Rückschlag nach vorher heftigem Anstieg mitgemacht - eine völlig normale Entwicklung.
Der Aufwärtstrend ist ungebrochen, eine Ende der Uranpreisentwicklung nicht in Sicht. Weiteres Potential ergibt sich aus der Tatsache, dass Urasia/SXR ganz wesentlich an dieser starken Preissteigerung aktuell profitieren. Daher waren auch die Zahlen für das GJ 2006 bei Urasia nicht so entscheidend - es war klar, dass ab Nov. 06 sich die ersten Uranabsätze bei Urasia niederschlagen - alles wie angekündigt.
ABER: die Zahlen für Q1 und Q2 2007 werden insbesondere bei Urasia hervorragend ausfallen. Ich bin sicher, dass wir darauf eine heftige Kursreaktion sehen werden. Die "good news" kommen also erst noch!
Optionen
| Boardmail an "Moneywasher" |
Wertpapier: Urasia Energy |
http://biz.yahoo.com/cnw/070329/uranium_one_results.html?.v=1
Total revenue 3,3 Millionen ??? und derartige Kapitalaufnahmen???Capital Raising
§ - Completed a private placement in February for net proceeds of
§ $137.6 million
§ - Completed a common share prospectus offering in October for net
§ proceeds of $143.4 million
§ - Completed a convertible debenture prospectus offering in December for
§ net proceeds of $128.9 million
§ - Through a subsidiary, raised ZAR 350.0 million (approximately
§ $45.1 million) under a futures-related term facility entered into
§ with Nedcor Securities of South Africa
laut CFO Jean Nortel 500 Millionen Kapitalaufnahme nur wegen der Aussicht auf Urasia Energy s.u. Interview???
und den Report von SXR vergleichen mit UUU s.Report auch v.30.3.2007
http://infoventure.tsx.com/TSXVenture/...O_ID=1087192&NewsReleases=on
irgendwie habe ich da ein komisches Gefühl bei dem angeblich grossen Player SXR,der bisher nur mit Gold was verdient hat,lächerliche 3,3 Millionen Umsatz in 2006.Womit bezahlt er denn all die Übernahmen?UUU ist ja nicht der einzige Übernahmekandidat...ist das wirklich im Interesse der Aktionäre von UUU oder mehr im Interesse der Hauptaktionäre von UUU,die richtig Geld machen wollen??
habe da ein interessantes Interview gefunden mit Jean Nortier CFO über die Übernahme:
http://www.moneyweb.co.za/mw/view/mw/en/page55?oid=69810&sn=Detail
....MONEYWEB:I think this is a reverse takeover, though – you guys are actually being acquired by a Canadian business?
JEAN NORTIER: Ja, technically a reverse takeover means you engineer yourself to be acquired, and then you end up with the management and the board. We are actually just buying a larger company. So technically it’s not …
MONEYWEB: But your shareholders are only going to have 40% of the enlarged company and the shareholders of the company called UrAsia are going to have 60%?
JEAN NORTIER: That’s quite right. But the holding company, the one that issues the shares, is still Uranium One.
MONEYWEB: I suppose the important thing is that your colleague, Neal Froneman, who is busy with an international conference call at the moment, getting investors more excited about it, is going to be the CEO and president?
JEAN NORTIER: Exactly right. And our board remains in control, and our management, the executive management, remains in. We bring one of UrAsia’s executive management in, but there’s a lot of synergies between the two management teams. So generally we are taking them over...
JEAN NORTIER: It’s a Kazakhstan operation. They produced 1.8m pounds of uranium last year. The combined group will produce three million pounds this year.
MONEYWEB: How big is that? What’s the total production of uranium in the world?
JEAN NORTIER: You know what, the total production of uranium in the world is about 80, 90m pounds. So it's still a small number. But you know what, Alec, this is why it makes so much sense in putting the two together. We both have very good growth profiles. So based on our feasibility study numbers, we will have 11m pounds on line by 2012. And with the expansions, both on our and their side that we are looking at, we will have 19m pounds on line by 2012. Now to give you an indication, Cameco produced 20m pounds last year.....
....MONEYWEB: And the decision to take your prime listing to the Toronto Stock Exchange? You have a secondary listing here on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange. Did that give you the ability to do today’s deal, and in fact the deal earlier on where you did acquire the Canadian company, SXR?
JEAN NORTIER: It also enabled us to raise C$500m last year. The South African market is not ready for the type of model where you put out a feasibility study and you discount future cash flows, based on a feasibility back to today, and say “this is the value of he company”. And the higher the risk of the company, the higher the discount rate. This is how the international markets operate. And because an asset manager sits on the Canadian market and he has 15 or 20 to choose from, he can actually diversify his risk and his own portfolio. That opportunity is not in South Africa. So we had to go offshore to fit into that profile of company to raise the cash and to be able to build this. But that afforded us the opportunity to grow and buy.
wer hier gewinnt ist ja wohl klar!
TSX and JSE-listed sxr Uranium One is to buy UrAsia, a Canadian-based investment holding firm with uranium prospects in Central Asia, creating a $5bn company and the world's second largest uranium firm by market capitalisation.
The all-share transaction is worth R22bn....sowohl der CEO als auch sein Vize und der der CFO sind seit Dezember 2005 in dieser Position bei SXR,vermutlich ebenfalls durch reverse takeover
http://www.moneyweb.co.za/mw/view/mw/en/page55?oid=83598&sn=Detail
...JEAN NORTIER: You know what, Alec, when we complete the UrAsia merger then we will have cash costs in the new group of somewhere between $10 and $12/pound, so that gives us 900% margins. Unbelievable.
MONEYWEB: Will you be able to sell what you produce?
JEAN NORTIER: Yes, we'll definitely be able to sell what we produce. It's interesting that we have buyers from all over. Obviously the utilities that produce electricity using nuclear are our major customers, but we've seen some of the major producers that have had calls in terms of their previous sales contracts - what you've found is that in terms of these contracts a buyer could elect to have an over-delivery at the buyer's behest, and suddenly the producers have found themselves short. So they had to buy uranium into their own production units.
MONEYWEB: Jean, so this set of financial results released today, that's for the year to end December - we mentioned earlier that it's a bit of a bookkeeping exercise. The next year's results, or 2007's results, will you already start showing some impact of this screaming uranium price?
JEAN NORTIER: We will - once the merger is complete with UrAsia, we'll show UrAsia's operational results from the Akdala Mine, so that you will definitely see. We will be getting to commercial production only towards the back end of this year on Dominion. Now "commercial production" is an accounting term, and that's the point at which we actually start showing operational results. So not much from Dominion. And then the two other mines in Kazakhstan will be coming on line - also not much this year. So this year you will see some profits, but next year is going to be the big year.
Angehängte Grafik:
Nortier.gif
Nortier.gif
January 24, 2007
By James Finch We recently spoke with SXR Uranium One Chief Executive Neal Froneman in a tape-recorded telephone interview. The problem with Froneman is which to choose from the many ‘news headlines’ he provides during the course of an interview. At least one industry trade reporter told us she thought he was a ‘showman.’ We agree,....
I think that if you are going to be a uranium company of substance in the space, you have to focus on the advanced projects. I would say it’s not smart to buy assets that are in the early stage of development. I think that the traditional uranium areas in the United States are the ones that I find still exciting. Wyoming is a great place to hold uranium mines. Utah? We are already there. There is great potential in Arizona. I like New Mexico. I think that New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Utah and Wyoming are specifically very nice targets. The assets of interest, and probably should be of interest to most people in our space, are assets that are pretty well advanced. These are the ones that have got good historical assets that you can take through the permitting and feasibility study phases quite quickly. Or assets that are already in the process of being permitted. I would suggest this as a smart strategy, and one that we would be doing.
Angehängte Grafik:
SXR-Neal_Froneman.gif
SXR-Neal_Froneman.gif
Our primary listing will be TSX - Neal Froneman
AFLEASE, a junior mining company, received the legal go-ahead to merge with Southern Cross Resources, a Canadian based company, enabling it to list on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) said Aflease CEO Neal Froneman.According to Froneman, a primary listing in Canada is all about investor's appetite for risk. "There just seems to be a resistance to investing in junior mining companies like ourselves here inSoutAfrica," Froneman said, adding that the Canadians "understand the investment scenario" http://www.miningmx.com/mining_fin/527536.htm AFLEASE Gold & Uranium Resources (Aflease) claims to be fighting a “dirty tricks” campaign and has identified veteran financial journalist, David Gleason, as its mouthpiece.And in a development that is likely to add further spice to the unravelling of Randgold & Exploration’s (RG&E’s) financial results, Aflease CEO, Neal Froneman, says the dirty tricks were aimed at forcing him to withdraw the requisitioning of a shareholders meeting of RG&E...He revealed that a representative of Brett Kebble had contacted an Aflease staff member at the beginning of September, to warn that Kebble intended to keep Froneman very busy, because the RG&E CEO was concerned that he was being targeted by Froneman....In addition to questioning Aflease’s reserves statements in his article, Gleason also asked whether Aflease had had a role in the arrest of former director, Peter Skeat. In September, Skeat was arrested on charges of defrauding R40m from New Diamond Corporation along with fellow board members, Tiego Moseneke and Gopolang Makokwe. “Neither Aflease, nor its directors, nor its employees have any knowledge of or involvement in the case against Messrs Skeat, Moseneke and Makokwe,” Froneman said....According to Gleason, Skeat needed to be kept quiet by Froneman because the former was threatening to rake up long-standing criticisms of the takeover of New Kleinfontein, a gold firm that Froneman had bought in a consortium with other businessmen, and which was subsequently sold on to Aflease.
http://www.miningmx.com/mining_fin/744367.htm
Heading for court next year is a civil action against sxr Uranium One (formerly Aflease) CEO Neal Froneman and other associated parties brought by former minority shareholders in New Kleinfontein Mining Company (NKMC).NKMC is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Aflease - formerly Afrikander Lease - and the summons was delivered in July this year although the details of the suit are only now becoming more widely known.It involves a complex deal carried out in 2002 through which Aflease acquired NKMC which owned a gold project on the East Rand where Aflease is consolidating a strategic position. sxr Uranium One's gold subsidiary, Aflease Gold, recently merged with Sub Nigel.The guts of the case concern the activities of what was known as the Neal Froneman Consortium (NFC) and its actions in negotiating a deal through which NKMC ended up being taken over by Aflease which was run at the time by Peter Skeat.
NKMC needed cash badly. Cresswell - who owned about 28.5% of the company - approached Froneman for help. Froneman called in accountant Steyn to assist with the evaluation of NKMC.Froneman then established the NFC which included Steyn, Dods, Nel and, later, Skeat through his private company Benoryn Investments which provided initial funding to the NFC. That was until Afrikander Lease could take over the funding requirements directly at a later stage.
The minorities allege that, from about June 2002, there was an agreement between Froneman, Steyn, Dods and Nel for control of NKMC to be vested in the NFC consortium through a hostile takeover of NKMC and that the shares would be on-sold to Aflease at: "... a substantial profit for the benefit of the Neal Froneman Consortium."The NFC proposed and implemented an issue of shares for cash by NKMC to raise up to R10m for the company through the issue of NKMC shares at 10c each to the NFC.
The issue included a "claw back" clause allowing NKMC minorities to buy back up to 83% of the shares issued to the NFC at 10c share on a one-for-one basis. The allegation is that minorities were not informed that the NFC already had in place the agreement to on-sell those shares to Aflease at an effective 54c per NKMC share.
Kebble ,der über Afleasse im Streit lag mit Froneman wurde in diesem Jahr übrigens ermordet
http://www.mg.co.za/...icleid=272768&area=/insight/insight__national/
Alles also halb so schlimm - kleine allgemeine Korrektur damit schon beendet?
Optionen
| Boardmail an "Moneywasher" |
Wertpapier: Urasia Energy |
Optionen
| Boardmail an "skunk.works" |
Wertpapier: Urasia Energy |
Angehängte Grafik:
charting.png (verkleinert auf 95%)
charting.png (verkleinert auf 95%)
Optionen
| Boardmail an "Moneywasher" |
Wertpapier: Urasia Energy |
Completion of the Plan of Arrangement remains subject to receipt of final court approval and other regulatory requirements. The transaction is expected to close mid
April, 2007.
und die Approval vom Court liegt auch seit 13.4. vor:VANCOUVER, April 13 /CNW/ - UrAsia Energy Ltd. ("UrAsia") announced today that it obtained the Final Order from the Supreme Court of British Columbia onApril 12, 2007. UrAsia currently expects the proposed Plan of Arrangement with sxr Uranium One Inc. to become effective in the second half of April 2007, upon receipt of the remaining required government and regulatory approvals.Under the terms of the Plan of Arrangement, UrAsia shareholders will receive 0.45 common shares of sxr Uranium One Inc. for each issued share of UrAsia.Registered shareholders of UrAsia will be required to submit their share certificates and Letters of Transmittal to Pacific Corporate Trust Company prior to receiving the sxr Uranium One Inc. shares to which they are entitled upon completion of the Plan of Arrangement.
http://www.tsx.com/en/mediaCentre/mediaKit/index.html UUU und News
in anderen Threads (nicht bei ARIVA) wird Froneman vergöttert...
ich habe momentan gewisse Schwierigkeiten bei der Einordnung aller Fakten und Interpretationen...
Froneman...Übernahme...
etwas Offizielles sollte da schon für die Aktionäre folgen...
ich glaube aber dennoch, dass unsere Urasia erst einmal die Lokomotive sein wird, wenn in der Folge auch Uranium One Dampf gibt, sollte unser Engagement nicht erfolglos sein...
TORONTO, April 13 /CNW/ - Standard & Poor's will make the following
changes in the S&P/TSX Venture Composite Index after the close of trading on
Friday, April 13, 2007:
- Inspiration Mining Corporation (TSXVN:ISM) will be removed from the
index. The company will graduate to the TSX to trade under the same
ticker symbol.
- UrAsia Energy Ltd. (TSXVN:UUU) will be removed from the index
following completion of a plan of arrangement with SXR Uranium One
Inc. (TSX:SXR).
Also wird UUU wohl nicht mehr in Toronto gehandelt, nachdem die Übertragung der Aktien zu 0,45 Anteilen - rein buchmäßig - erfolgt ist. 10.000 Urasia-Aktien werden dann also zu 4.500 SXR-Aktien.
Ich muss zugeben, dass ich die Zustimmung der Urasia-Aktionäre so verstanden habe, dass sie grundsätzlich dem SXR-Angebot zustimmen, jeder Aktionär aber zusätzlich entscheiden muss, ob er das Angebot tatsächlich annimmt oder Urasia behält, die dann separat weiter gehandelt wird. Die große Mehrheit pro Übertragung wird von den Großaktionären getragen.
Wir sind Kleinaktionäre, für die auch Aspekte wie die Besteuerung eine wichtige Rolle spielen. Und genau die ist das Problem! Wenn diese Form der Übertragung - ohne meine eigene Zustimmung - tatsächlich wie ein Verkauf der Aktie bewertet wird und somit zur Versteuerung nach dem Halbeinkünfteverfahren führt, dann ist das mal ein ganz großer Bockmist.
Den Froneman muss man sicher nicht mögen wegen seiner Machenschaften, aber er wird als erfolgreicher Geschäftsmann gefeiert. Das ist nicht unbedingt ein Widerspruch, solange wir als Aktionäre davon profitieren. Eure Meinungen?
Optionen
| Boardmail an "Moneywasher" |
Wertpapier: Urasia Energy |
UrAsia übernimmt SXRUranium One
London 16.04.2007 (www.emfis.com)
Der kanadische Uranproduzent UrAsia Energy Ltd. gab heute bekannt, vom Höchsten Gericht in British Columbia die Genemigung zur Übernahme des Konkurrenten sxr Uranium One erhalten zu haben. Die UrAsia erwartet, dass die Übernahme in der zweiten Hälfte dieses Monats abgeschlossen werden könne, abhängig von den noch ausstehenden Genehmigungen anderer Behörden.
Liebe Freunde von emfis... da scheint euch wohl die Sonne zu stark auf den Kopf, oder?
Optionen
| Boardmail an "Moneywasher" |
Wertpapier: Urasia Energy |
April 13, 2007
Urasia Energy Announces Court Approval For Plan Of Arrangement
--------------------------------------------------
Vancouver, Canada, April 13, 2007 -- UrAsia Energy Ltd. ("UrAsia") announced today that it obtained the Final Order from the Supreme Court of British Columbia on April 12, 2007. UrAsia currently expects the proposed Plan of Arrangement with sxr Uranium One Inc. to become effective in the second half of April 2007, upon receipt of the remaining required government and regulatory approvals.
Optionen
| Boardmail an "Moneywasher" |
Wertpapier: Urasia Energy |
also ein bisschen mehr Transparenz wäre hier seitens des Managements schon angebracht...
wenn Urasia sxr übernähme, würde das meiner Einschätzung nach mehr den Realitäten entsprechen (der Große den Kleinen und nicht umgekehrt)...aber:der Wunsch ist der Vater des Gedankens...
Wird Zeit etwas Licht ins Dunkel zu bringen. Hier macht im Moment nur die Kursentwicklung Spaß, das Drumherum nicht.
JEAN NORTIER: Ja, technically a reverse takeover means you engineer yourself to be acquired, and then you end up with the management and the board. We are actually just buying a larger company. So technically it’s not …
MONEYWEB: But your shareholders are only going to have 40% of the enlarged company and the shareholders of the company called UrAsia are going to have 60%?
JEAN NORTIER: That’s quite right. But the holding company, the one that issues the shares, is still Uranium One.......
http://www.moneyweb.co.za/mw/view/mw/en/page55?oid=69810&sn=Detail
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/reversetakeover.asp
A reverse takeover can also refer to situation where a smaller company acquires a larger company.In business, situation where a smaller company takes over a larger one....
ist schon etwas unklar, ...offenbar übernimmt die grössere Urasia die sxr Uranium One und nennt sich dann Uranium One....Philipp Shirvington ,President and Chief Executive
Officer von UUU ,sagte auf der Hauptversammlung: "the overwhelming vote in favour of this arrangement by UrAsia shareholders, demonstrates clear support for the business combination with Uranium One. The new Uranium One will be the pre-eminent growth Company in the uranium sector. I look forward to continuing as a Director with Uranium One." ...der hat sein Schäfchen ins Trockene gebracht,jedoch die Mehrheit des Managements ist von SXR Uranium one und der neue CEO heisst Froneman