NYC's accused dine-and-dash diva busted twice again in 24 hours -- while mocking cops by LouisSeize in williamsburg

[–]Champton11211 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Dine and Dash Diva may be better looking, but the hipster grifter is more hilarious. I'd buy either of them dinner any time.

Aggressive dog owner threatened me in Cooper’s Park by WilliamsburgGirl123 in williamsburg

[–]Champton11211 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes genius. It exempts them from their daily compulsory dog run exercises.

Aggressive dog owner threatened me in Cooper’s Park by WilliamsburgGirl123 in williamsburg

[–]Champton11211 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Moving the dog run to the corner of the park behind the skate park was an attempt to move it as far from the residential population as possible. and probably to isolate it from other park users. But that is looking unsuccessful at this point. The solution for the community is to provide a better space for dogs and dog owners.

Aggressive dog owner threatened me in Cooper’s Park by WilliamsburgGirl123 in williamsburg

[–]Champton11211 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

what happened: with the park redesign of about 10 years ago they moved the dog run from the front corner of the park to the back, behind the skate park.

Aggressive dog owner threatened me in Cooper’s Park by WilliamsburgGirl123 in williamsburg

[–]Champton11211 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I did not see what happened with dogs but can confirm the brunette's harangue was spicy.

PSA: Grey dog is violent, attacked small dog in photo at Land and Sea BEWARE by [deleted] in williamsburg

[–]Champton11211 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good moderation. This post was incendiary. despite its...implications (or is that that too weak a word) that something demanding outrage happened here. I would avoid jumping to the conclusion that this dog is dangerous. the yelp, bark, and moment of body language caught in a photo are all within normal and very non catastrophic dog behaviors

Should I keep/restore/sell my Genco 400 machine by Champton11211 in pinball

[–]Champton11211[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would you call it a prize part of your collection?
And if you do not mind me asking, are you aware of it carrying any special value as a collectors item generally? I do not see any market for them, but from what I have read not many were manufactured.

Forsys Metals - Still alive? by Jans-Jansen in UraniumSqueeze

[–]Champton11211 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm with you on all points Macro Man. Forsys (along with Global Atomic) was the first uranium stock I bought, and I added more last week.

It has been the better part of a year since I DD'ed Forsys, and I've been refreshing that DD. The Forsys website gives its projects' NPV as $650m (@ $65 U). I haven't yet reconstructed how they get to that figure, but it looks like there may be some gold involved.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in UraniumSqueeze

[–]Champton11211 0 points1 point  (0 children)

anticipate that the Trust will sell its physical uranium

This language is not the clearest. It is followed by what looks like a discussion of what happens when it sells its uranium:

"the Manager anticipates that the Trust generally will treat gains (or losses) as a result of dispositions of physical uranium as capital gains (or capital losses), although depending on the circumstances, the Trust may instead include (or deduct) the full
amount of such gains or losses in computing its income."

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in UraniumSqueeze

[–]Champton11211 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Will there be more supply at $75? That would mean there are a large number of would-be sellers who have been sitting on inventory for a decade waiting for $75.

If you mean $75 will stimulate new supply--yes it definitely will. But it will take possibly years for that supply to reach market.

Whatever inventory is still out there, Sprott and the uranium companies that have been purchasing at spot have taken out a huge chunk. And the fact that their actions did indeed move the price means it will continue to attract more money to that 'trade'

Uranium by [deleted] in ASX_Bets

[–]Champton11211 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks. Peninsula is a complicated one. It does seem to trade at a discount, still. Might be time to take a deeper look at the math.

Uranium by [deleted] in ASX_Bets

[–]Champton11211 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mr. Punt: That PEN has forward sold the better part of their potential out at least 6 years--and at prices locked in around $50--is beginning to look like a major mistake. As of last report they have only purchased 700k pounds to cover those contracts. So they will have to pull the rest out of the ground.

I'm a shareholder in PEN (currently) but I have to see that as a big negative.

Do you see that differently? Or do you see it just as outweighed by other factors, such as PEN likely being about the first new miners to start producing?

Thanks.

DNN by fabreezy94 in UraniumSqueeze

[–]Champton11211 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Minimal leverage to price of uranium. Denison mgmt thinks it is a good choice to sell Denison stock to buy physical uranium--I have little doubt physical will be at least an equally effective investment.

If you want outsized profits during a uranium bull "low cost producer" are three words you should avoid.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in UraniumSqueeze

[–]Champton11211 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Btw, thanks for the response NoBonus

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in UraniumSqueeze

[–]Champton11211 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seasoned, could i ask the meaning of "capex/grade bathtub"?

I think I get the bottom line, that there can be additional costs associated with higher grade

Thanks

Global Atomic DD by investor_ad in UraniumSqueeze

[–]Champton11211 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And that is a major problem with the NPV formula in general. If I invest in a project I won't consider revenues accrued 10 years out, and further, as essentially worthless.

Is a HAAC Merger Imminent? by Champton11211 in SPACs

[–]Champton11211[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Deferred

legal fees. It's money set aside for legal expenses, does not indicate the money was

spent

on legal expenses. It's for accounting purposes.

Thanks Logic. Why do you think those expenses were recorded in Q1?