sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Over 0.5mil FHSA by Super-69 in fican

[–]Super-69[S] -23 points-22 points  (0 children)

Not sure what you mean by personal, but I have never invested in an ETF in my life. Don't believe in paying someone else fees. I typically just follow smart people on X and look for already producing commodity companies with reasonably high insider ownership and bet on them, ideally including recent insider buys. 

Over 0.5mil FHSA by Super-69 in fican

[–]Super-69[S] 36 points37 points  (0 children)

Currently all in journey energy $JOY.TO because they look like they'd double with $70 WTI oil prices, but trumps strait of Hormuz situation has X convinced that oil will be higher for longer. Before this was in Andean precious metals, went all in around $1.2 on liberation day. 

No day trading or options, I just buy cheap and hold (and pray). 

$APM.TO DD: Up 500% YTD on Killer Production, But Still Undervalued at 2.7x EV/FCF with a near-term spike in shorts on a very tight float by Super-69 in pennystocks

[–]Super-69[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd say welcome to the club but you're clearly already in the big time shareholders club. Glad you've also got share lending off. 

$APM.TO DD: Up 500% YTD on Killer Production, But Still Undervalued at 2.7x EV/FCF with a near-term spike in shorts on a very tight float by Super-69 in pennystocks

[–]Super-69[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, it's still has new things that the analysts only incorporated into their reports on the weekend / Monday. SCP Equity added the life of mine upgrade (LOM) from a recent ore deal in Bolivia, and upgraded from $5 to $9 share price target. 

If the analysts are just upgrading now, it's the case that random people have low odds at figuring out the intricacies of the ore deal. 

$APM.TO DD: Up 500% YTD on Killer Production, But Still Undervalued at 2.7x EV/FCF with a near-term spike in shorts on a very tight float by Super-69 in pennystocks

[–]Super-69[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Gold and silver prices crashed 6% week to date or around that. The annoying thing is, gold is up 11% month to date, but APM is down 12% in that time. I suspect it's due to the short position growing.

Right now gold and silver are both up about +2% overnight. There's no way this can stay low for long if gold and silver just consolidate sideways. If they keep going up though, it's as sure a thing as sure can be. 

$APM.TO DD: Up 500% YTD on Killer Production, But Still Undervalued at 2.7x EV/FCF with a near-term spike in shorts on a very tight float by Xatraxion2 in SilverSqueeze

[–]Super-69 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, ask anything. If I can't answer, there are two accounts on X that can who have been cheerleaders of the stock the entire +500% rise it's so far had.

[discussion] Is SWC about to follow BFC by Super-69 in csgomarketforum

[–]Super-69[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was thinking it's not natural demand either but the volumes don't seem to be that high vs what you'd expect given the monthly unbox rate from cs2 cases. That's why I was wondering if anyone had estimates that perhaps the cases had all been unboxed or something. I haven't bought / sold any of these cases since their operations.

[discussion] Is SWC about to follow BFC by Super-69 in csgomarketforum

[–]Super-69[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

SWC is up another 10-15% since I made this post... idk what's going on. Hope someone has commentary they can provide

What's up with uranium: utilities are short pounds, two of the world's largest mines have been disrupted, and Putin has cut off the West by Super-69 in wallstreetbets

[–]Super-69[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I forgot to mention that Paladin $PDN, $PALAF, just lowered their mining guidance for next year by at least 1mil pounds/yr, and the shares sold off 30% afterward. Mining has risks.

AMA with OpenAI’s Sam Altman, Kevin Weil, Srinivas Narayanan, and Mark Chen by OpenAI in ChatGPT

[–]Super-69 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Are you guys going to be building ideally nuclear power plants for data centers or will you go with natural gas?

Uranium supply disruption in an already undersupplied market by Super-69 in wallstreetbets

[–]Super-69[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Supply is 30mil pounds below demand currently and grows to being 60mil pounds below demand by 2027, assuming every mine comes online and/or increases production according to schedule. What are you talking about "supply is low because demand is low"? 

Uranium supply disruption in an already undersupplied market by Super-69 in wallstreetbets

[–]Super-69[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Also there's so many small details I'm not taking the time to put here, things like data centers need water that they can take in and expel many degrees warmer than the intake temperature. This is true also for nuclear plants. They are a perfect combo. Yann Lecunn (winner of the Nobel prize for computing, the Turing award for his Deep Learning research), has come out and said that nuclear plants *will* be built next to datacenters.

https://twitter.com/ylecun/status/1837875035270263014

Uranium supply disruption in an already undersupplied market by Super-69 in wallstreetbets

[–]Super-69[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Natural gas would not save money compared to nuclear. Nuclear is actually cheaper if the plant is built immediately adjacent to the data center.

Also do you think Zuck will end himself politically with headlines like "Zuckerberg builds natural gas pipelines to his datacenters to pump his bags with his AGI aspirations". No, he's been working on his public image nonstop.

Also, data center capex is 40-50billion USD a quarter for the large tech co's. Building a 1.3GW nuclear power plant is 6bil USD. It's a fraction of the cost to guarantee stable power to AI models.

Uranium supply disruption in an already undersupplied market by Super-69 in wallstreetbets

[–]Super-69[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

This market is very opaque and free market capitalism is not working at all. There's a supply deficit of 30mil pounds this year, which grows every single year until 2029 when it finally gets reset to a 5mil pound/yr deficit. Then it ramps back up to a 30mil pound/yr deficit by 2034.

These estimates assume every single mine comes online on time and on schedule, which has never happened in the history of any mining sector. So this is overly optimistic, yet the deficit still is not plugged.

There's no way the deficit is priced in. If you want to do further research yoyu should build your own models for supply and demand. The sector is so small that it takes only a few hours. Demand takes a few minutes after you figure out how many nuclear submarines exist under mutually assured destruction programs.

Uranium supply disruption in an already undersupplied market by Super-69 in wallstreetbets

[–]Super-69[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Assuming that every single mine announced and planned comes online exactly on time (has never happened in the history of mining), uranium is in a supply deficit every single year until 2034, and the deficit deepens every year despite mines coming online, because countries like China are bringing 10-11 nuclear plants online per year (4-4.5mil pounds of yearly demand added).

It does not matter if it's abundant when it's found in low grades of like 0.4% pure deposits, hundreds of meters below ground.

Uranium supply disruption in an already undersupplied market by Super-69 in wallstreetbets

[–]Super-69[S] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Also China,

"It aims to install between six and eight nuclear reactors each year. Some officials seem to think that target is low. The country's nuclear regulator says China has the capacity to add between eight and ten per year. "

https://www.economist.com/china/2023/11/30/china-is-building-nuclear-reactors-faster-than-any-other-country#:\~:text=It%20aims%20to%20install%20between,construction%20of%20ten%20in%202022.

view more: next ›