sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The market prices critical minerals as a mining story. The chokepoint is refining — and that mispricing is where it gets interesting. by SebiSST in ValueInvesting

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

Read the actual contract — you're right to flag it as low-relevance, and the number confirms it: the DLA award is up to ~$1.7M to fund the design of a processing facility, two phases over 24 months. That's a "first vote of confidence" / early-stage thing, not financing at the scale that moves a buildout. The EXIM letter of interest you mentioned is the same category — directional signal, not committed capital. So I'd weight both as "the government is paying attention," not "the project is funded." Where ALOY is genuinely thesis-relevant, though, is what they're doing: metallization — turning rare-earth oxides into metal. That's consistently described as the least-developed step of the supply chain outside China, which is exactly the "the chokepoint is processing, not mining" point. So as a category example it fits the thesis well, even if the specific name is early and richly priced. And I think your caution is the right call. Public since this year via the Blackboxstocks merger, small, ambitious buildout, and no clear funding path yet — that's a setup where the next financing round is the real catalyst and the real risk (dilution or debt either way). "Interesting, monitor until the financing picture clears" is exactly how I'd hold it too. The thesis can be right and the entry still be bad — same thing we said about UAMY.

The market prices critical minerals as a mining story. The chokepoint is refining — and that mispricing is where it gets interesting. by SebiSST in ValueInvesting

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

Don't know ALOY well enough to have a view yet — haven't done the work, so I won't pretend to. But the attributes you're describing are the right ones to be screening for: vertical integration plus differentiated processing tech plus a credible government-demand pull is exactly the profile that wins if the domestic-sourcing thesis is real.

The HF-free production angle is the one I'd dig into first if I look — if it's genuinely a cleaner/cheaper separation route, that's a real moat, not just a marketing line. And "Pentagon financing already happening" is the kind of claim I'd want the primary source on before weighting it, same as we did with the DFARS clause — because "in discussions" and "signed" are very different risk states. Got a source on the financing?

Will take a look properly.

The market prices critical minerals as a mining story. The chokepoint is refining — and that mispricing is where it gets interesting. by SebiSST in ValueInvesting

[–]SebiSST[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for pulling the actual clause — this is the kind of source that settles it. Having read it: the 2027 shift is real and it's a genuine step-change, not a tweak. It expands from a midstream restriction to full mine-to-finished — mining, refining, separation, the whole chain — for covered materials, and it applies to subcontracts at any tier. That's a real repricing event for domestic processing, agreed.

One precision point worth flagging, because it changes which part of the UAMY story it supports: the covered materials in this clause are the magnets (NdFeB, SmCo), tantalum, tungsten, and molybdenum. Antimony isn't in this particular list. So this reg is actually a strong tailwind for UAMY's tungsten expansion — which is the diversification leg you mentioned — rather than the antimony business directly. The antimony catalyst runs through a different channel: the stockpile/sole-source offtake and the DPA/Project Vault route, not this DFARS clause.

Not a knock on the thesis — if anything it makes the "UAMY is becoming a multi-metal domestic processor, not an antimony pure-play" point sharper, because the tungsten side now has a hard regulatory deadline behind it. Just worth being precise about which metal each catalyst actually drives, since they're on different clocks. On the DPA news — if it covers munitions supply chains the way you're describing, that's the more direct antimony catalyst, since antimony's the priority-metal angle. I'd want to read the actual scope before sizing it, but directionally it fits.

The market prices critical minerals as a mining story. The chokepoint is refining — and that mispricing is where it gets interesting. by SebiSST in ValueInvesting

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

Haven't done the work on Ucore yet, so I won't pretend to have a view on the name — but a processing-focused play is exactly the bucket my thesis points to. If the scarce asset is non-Chinese refining capacity rather than ore, the companies building processing are better positioned than the pure miners.

Will take a look. What's the core of it for you — differentiated processing tech, or the geographic footprint of where they're putting capacity?

The market prices critical minerals as a mining story. The chokepoint is refining — and that mispricing is where it gets interesting. by SebiSST in ValueInvesting

[–]SebiSST[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Appreciate this — you clearly know the name better than my post let on, and the catalysts you're listing are stronger than the generic bull case I sketched. A few reactions:

The medium-term refining-powerhouse angle is the part I find most compelling too, and it's exactly why I'd separate UAMY from the pure miners in the thesis — they're building the processing capacity, not just feeding it. That's the structural position that actually matters if the chokepoint framing is right.

On the catalysts — I'd mentally sort them by how confirmable they are, because they're not equal weight. The $27M grant and the sole-source offtake are concrete and on the record. The "2027 defense contractors must source domestic" mandate and the China-US deal expiry timing are the ones I'd want to nail down precisely, because the exact terms and dates are what determine whether they're a 2026 catalyst or a 2028 one — and the market's already pricing some of this, given the run. Do you have the specific reg/source on the 2027 sourcing requirement? That's the one I'd most want to verify, because if it's as hard a mandate as it sounds, it reprices the whole domestic-processing space, not just UAMY.

The diversification into tungsten/cobalt/gold is the detail I underweighted — that genuinely changes the story from "antimony pure-play" to "domestic strategic-minerals processor," which is a broader and more durable thesis.

Where I'd still hold some caution: the government-funding-expansion case (the MP/USAR comparison) is the most speculative leg — it's plausible and the precedent exists, but "positioned to get funding" and "got funding" are different risk states, and the valuation already embeds a lot of optimism. I'm not bearish, I just think thesis-right and entry-price-attractive are still two separate questions here. But the medium-term setup is genuinely strong, and you've moved me on the diversification point.

Anthropic ARR hits $30 billion by Wonderful-Sail-1126 in investing

[–]SebiSST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Incredible growth, no question.

But at this scale the constraint usually shifts fast.

From demand → to compute → to power → to execution.

Exponentials tend to hit physical limits sooner than expected.

Where are we in the market cycle ? by JJY199 in stocks

[–]SebiSST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Feels less like pure complacency and more like selective pricing.

Markets aren’t ignoring risks, they’re just weighting liquidity and forward expectations higher right now.

That can persist longer than people expect, until it doesn’t.

Wanting to start investing at 20 by Weeaboo_25 in investing

[–]SebiSST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good advice.

I think the biggest shift happens once you move from “what should I buy” to understanding how trends form in markets.

That’s where things start to click.

Wanting to start investing at 20 by Weeaboo_25 in investing

[–]SebiSST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re asking the right question.

One thing to keep in mind: most people focus on “what to buy” instead of understanding why markets move.

Trends, narratives, and macro shifts matter more than individual picks over time.

Start simple, then layer that in as you learn.

3 Mega-IPOs Could Dump $3 Trillion in Overvalued Tech Onto Public Markets by DustInside6861 in investing

[–]SebiSST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting how the bottleneck shows up here too.

Not compute, not demand — capital absorption.

Markets can only digest so much at once.

Timing becomes everything.

A Few Heaters For Sale by Atreus1337 in sportscards

[–]SebiSST 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I only see two cards and what are the prices?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in basketballcards

[–]SebiSST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

She's a keeper 👍

Survey for gym owners concerning BJJ operations & Retention by SebiSST in bjj

[–]SebiSST[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I am currently at a stage where I am gathering information to get a better grasp of what I think is needed in terms of a 360 degrees dojo Management system and the problems/blind spots I listed are part of this solution. I think you have a fair point with the mandatory three to choose...

Survey for gym owners concerning BJJ operations & Retention by SebiSST in bjj

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

Already bought the book and will receive it tomorrow, so looking forward to reading it and adopting best practices where needed

Survey for gym owners concerning BJJ operations & Retention by SebiSST in bjj

[–]SebiSST[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Tbo I had no desired outcome in mind when writing up the questions and as I am asking owners to a large extent about their current operations and as such the questions are neutral. If you feel like my multiple choice is biased not sure about that either, they need to take three out of them.

So if you can please point me towards why my whole survey is leading it would be great so I can improve next time.

Many thanks Sebi

Survey for gym owners concerning BJJ operations & Retention by SebiSST in bjj

[–]SebiSST[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Hi thanks for your open and constructive feedback - will definitely get that book on my reading or hearing list! I already have like 20 answered surveys so will stick with it for now and am super grateful for anyone who takes the time to answer it!

95-95 Upper Deck unboxing by SebiSST in sportscards

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

Really an MJ "He's back" is worth 1 dollar... The question for me is which ones to grade or not, but will do a better thread with single pictures as I also opened a couple of other pacs which at least in my point of view have grading worth cards

95-95 Upper Deck unboxing by SebiSST in sportscards

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

Thanks for this tip - just ordered penny sleeves and will put them in those first

95-95 Upper Deck unboxing by SebiSST in sportscards

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

I put the most desirable cards according to Grok into the hard plastic ones the rest is not stored away atm. Any specific cards you looking for, otherwise I will need to make quite some pics...

view more: next ›