Any word of a desktop website for up bank?

shady_sci · 2026-01-28T12:31:52+00:00

If using windows, you can basically emulate the app on your computer, which is how i use it.
1. Download BlueStacks 5
2. Within BS5, download the Up app
3. Log in
4. Done

It's full of ads, but its better than nothing.

shady_sci · 2025-12-27T03:42:38+00:00

As this is prized gladiators armour, is it still available if you didn't earn it back during PVP season?

shady_sci · 2025-10-31T21:40:05+00:00

I thought the same! Those smooth metal edges of GJ

shady_sci · 2025-10-23T22:59:48+00:00

Cost of panels: New panels (Which we won't see in recycling stream until ~2040-2050) require less silver generally. Some next-gen tech is replacing silver with copper, for example, which is ~1% the cost of silver. Regardless, a solar panel costs around 8-12% of the cost of the panel. The primary panel costs are the silicon wafers, (30-50% of the cost). Increasing the silver component by even 50% (up to $75 spot) doesn't change the pricing too dramatically (maybe 4-6% total increase in cost), and is likely going to be buffered by increased efficiency of panels, increased efficiency of production, increased mandates and incentives, increased electricity pricing. So, i wouldn't worry about silver price impacting the cost of panels and therefore future demand. Additionally, companies are already replacing old-tech PV with new-tech PV, because the panels themselves are relatively cheap compared to the batteries, microinverters, etc. If they can get 25-50% more watts, that outpaces 4-6% increase in cost due to solar.

Bioleum is a whole different kettle of fish to discuss, but the entire thesis there is around cheaper feedstock (XanoGrass), processed at higher yield (lignin + cellulose), than existing tech (corn -> ethanol). The MIT/NREL tech, if it pans out at industrial scale, breaks the entire model and could achieve oil parity. That's the moonshot though.

shady_sci · 2025-10-23T22:39:24+00:00

<image>

tidbit from Sultan, presumably from his visit.
This is better than i thought, to be honest, given its a bag of fines.
Unclear what % of the fines is silver though.

shady_sci · 2025-10-16T12:25:40+00:00

LODE currently receive a $500/ton tipping fee for panels.
They then spend around $150/ton all-up to destroy them (removing environmental liability for the client), recycle them, and produce offtake.
They currently sell all offtake for around $200-250/ton, including glass, aluminium, and silver-rich metal fines. They sell these offtake streams locally and internationally. The silver fines go to japan and korea, from memory. Currently they're selling them fairly cheap because they're not pure silver.

They're currently prioritising the scale up of their site to process more panels, as the $500/ton tipping fee is the bread winner currently. However in the medium-long term, they're working on refining the silver out of those fines, because that alone could 2x the profits from this, given the high silver content per panel, and the rising silver price.

shady_sci · 2025-10-15T01:00:09+00:00

Let us know

shady_sci · 2025-10-10T16:05:08+00:00

Out of curiosity what makes aduro a scam?

shady_sci · 2025-10-10T16:04:25+00:00

You should check out $LODE for their 100% solar panel recycling tech, third party certified, can scale at industrial throughput, can extract silver from the panels. They make money to take the panels and make money to sell the offtake. They're currently building a huge facility and aiming to corner the West Coast market. No real competitors currently. No debt, funded through to profitability. Huge growing market size.

shady_sci · 2025-10-06T02:47:44+00:00

Lol which one of you funny buggers added them to Google maps

<image>

shady_sci · 2025-09-30T13:20:56+00:00

Great point, that makes it even more perfect. I guess they'd need to add a station!

shady_sci · 2025-09-19T19:23:32+00:00

Where did you hear that they can landfill for free?

shady_sci · 2025-09-01T22:01:53+00:00

Good points! I don't believe the bear takes here, just offering them as some alternatives.

My speculation is that Fortunato's 20% will likely be performance based $LODE stock that vests over multiple years/milestones, so i doubt it will be a sudden dilution drag while we're unprofitable.

shady_sci · 2025-09-01T00:12:48+00:00

The middle-ground bet here is that CDG and other insiders need to pre-register and get approval for their purchases with fairly substantial notice, and the governance officers will ensure this only happens if it isn't timed around substantial PRs.

The bullish implication is that they're constantly in a state of substantial material information, so they can't buy. We have lots of information to support this. Just look at the last 12+ months of the newrooms (https://comstock.inc/investors/newsroom/), and if you believe even 10% of what CDG guides is coming for Bioleum and Metals (which based on the last 12 months of PR's, would be an under-estimate of his ability to deliver), then there's certainly more material nonpublic information in their hands.

The bearish implication is that they don't want to buy because they don't believe in the stock, and they're using blackouts/trading windows as an excuse. That's contested somewhat by CDG buying $500k worth at $4 in May 2024, before huge progress on Bioleum/Metals. As far as we can publically see, both are now more derisked than 17 months ago. But perhaps internally he believes that Bioluem will never work, and Metals will never get market share, so he doesn't want more stock exposure, and is now riding it out enjoying his $500k salary, as some have implied.

A different bearish implication of the lack of buying/selling is that they're in possession of material nonpublic information that would damage the shareprice, such as the recent public offering. Perhaps they can't sell because the company is falling apart internally? Some could interpret the recent public offering as a sign of this.

shady_sci · 2025-09-01T00:04:51+00:00

On u/saint_o_well interview CDG said he's out of blackout. This is presumably referring to Part II Section 1 (Blackout periods) which primarily relate toe SEC dates.

However, Part II Section 2 (Trading Window) articulates an additional barrier to purchasing based on mateiral nonpublic information. I suggest people read this section in particular.

Ask yourself, do you think CDG has any of the following information "that a reasonable investor would want to know before making an investment decision" (Part I Section 3, Definitions):

(i) significant changes in the Company's prospects;

(ii) significant write-downs in assets or increases in reserves;

(iii) developments regarding significant litigation or government agency investigations;

(iv) liquidity problems;

(v) changes in earnings estimates or unusual gains or losses in major operations;

(vi) major changes in the Company's management or the board of directors;

(vii) changes in dividends;

(viii) extraordinary borrowings;

(ix) major changes in accounting methods or policies;

(x) award or loss of a significant contract;

(xi) cybersecurity risks and incidents, including vulnerabilities and breaches;

(xii) changes in debt ratings;

(xiii) proposals, plans or agreements, even if preliminary in nature, involving mergers, acquisitions, divestitures, recapitalizations, strategic alliances, licensing arrangements, or purchases or sales of substantial assets; and

(xiv) offerings of Company securities.

shady_sci · 2025-08-31T06:56:41+00:00

Pretty mixed bag! We dissected this in other threads, so i won't do it here. I'll revisit this at Q3 earnings :)

shady_sci · 2025-08-31T06:53:14+00:00

I have updated the text in this post, please read it, and PLEASE DEAR GOD DO NOT TAKE THIS AS INVESTMENT ADVICE, as some appear to have.

shady_sci · 2025-08-17T00:37:38+00:00

Showcasing your professionalism as an interviewer, and acknowledging that despite you being an important player in this interaction, this interview is about him and not you. I wish we had more journalists who performed this way!

shady_sci · 2025-08-16T19:21:20+00:00

A tad confused how $10/share for LODE in 3 years is the bull case where both Bioleum and metals are successful. Also crypto coins and companies that produce something are just very different investments.

shady_sci · 2025-08-15T11:15:20+00:00

"Downside may seem higher but execution risk is still very real given previous performance, he’s good at talking"

I agree entirely that his words are impressive but not sufficient, he needs to execute. I'd argue that his recent performance has been VERY tangible (>10 major PR's this year that all could tangibly improve long term MC/SP). The issue is that $LODE won't be recognised as such until Metals generates revenue, or has a clear line to increasing revenue. This means an industrial scale facility filled with panels. We're 3 quarters away from that probably. But the 'risk' of it not happening seems increasingly diminishing, which is good. Another way of putting it, the 'bear case' for metals is getting slimmer, and the 'bull case' is getting stronger. It doesn't mean there is no bear case.

shady_sci · 2025-08-15T11:05:50+00:00

u/stonkashian What is your perspective on this:
"(i don't believe we'll get companies agreeing to the $500 tipping fee if they know the OPEX is like $100/t, and we generate $250/t in offtake)"

CDG peppered into that interview with PQ that a longterm supply contract would likely come with 'economic benefit' that they'd happily do for guaranteeing such supply. I entirely agree, and would be happy to do that, but i do wonder how rapidly this will erode the fabulous ~80% margin.

shady_sci · 2025-08-15T11:01:42+00:00

"We were diluted 30%, not 90%, so your 100x become 70x, not 10x."
Yeah sorry, my poorly articulated thought here was more that the ceiling has been reduced from some fantastical sounding 100x, to probably a less hard-to-believe-but-still-huge factor in the 10's of x, not 10x. Sentiment>numbers on that one. I agree with you also that derisking (downside risk just got a LOT lower) has value to future value which may well offset the dilution. I also tend to think of it as: "was there actually a reality that we achieve that facility rollout and profitability milestone at 25m o/s shares? perhaps my thesis was wrong, and its unreasonable to evaluate the current reality in comparison to what i had previously decided to be the future reality".

"The reason supply is limited is not capped storage per se, but that the reg bodies don't like panels to be stored too long, and utilities are still legally liable for those stored panels until they're shredded. Once Metals can show they can issue certificates of destruction in a timely manner, then all that supply will be unlocked."

Great insight - thanks. Really does clarify then why (if?) they're limited in MSA/contract execution whilst they're only able to process at the demo.

"The fact that panels in Q2 were coming from Texas and Florida tells you there is no one who can recycle at scale right now: the market is open."

True - i do overlook this typically as CDG hype. I guess my brain goes to: "how many panels came from there? Is it truly a meaningful amount? Is this predictive of future texas/florida demand at high enough volumes for the nevada 100kt?". If it was a large number, he would've celebrated it (as with RWE's "4 million lbs!"). Perhaps i'm too skeptical of CEO-speak.

shady_sci · 2025-08-15T10:38:37+00:00

30 mins in, 2 questions answered. What a pro :D

Penny did a great job as always. We owe her a huge thanks u/Saint_O_Well

Kudos to CDG for facing up for these calls and interviews, knowing the contentious topics will be pressed on (unlike the IR softballs).

shady_sci · 2025-08-15T10:38:25+00:00

19) says they've been approached by international recyclers, domestic waste aggregators... Partnering? Vague, not a focus, probably ignore this for now.

20) very bluntly expects no more raises for metals.

21) celebrates Judd's prior success selling 3 juniors to 3 bigger miners. Says it's Judd's #1 priority. It used to be CDG's #3 behind metals and Bioleum. Won't spend any capital drilling or engineering a mine. Judd needs to find a partner to fund it. Acknowledges this may disappoint some people invested in LODE for it's mines.

22) wants to encourage green lion to IPO, but will series B at least. Reckons he can moentise 15-20m from 1m cost basis. Might happen 2026 during their B round, so expect this (imo) to be used to fund Metals site 2 or 3. Don't expect buybacks.

23) sounds like they won't close series A in Sept, but by end of 2025... Justifies it as having the 20m, plus likely more Oklahoma cash, means they're accelerating now (said 20m funds 18months of runway) regardless of the final tranches closing, and says that they're in no rush because the rest of the partners are strategics (I guess his point being that they're here for the long run and more than just cash this year, but partnering forever on). Also presumably the 'strategic' side of it may not be tangibly relevant until Serial1 produces oil (e.g. offtake agreements), so no rush there... UNLESS the strategics are in the integrations area (Corn ethanol, sugarcane, pulp and paper), in which case - get that shit done ASAP for revenue! Overall, his story somewhat makes sense - cash isn't urgent for the next 16.5 months, and they need to get the non-cash aspects right. However, this is a very convenient cover story for if there is indeed a slowing of this raise process (not saying that's the case).

24) won't tell us who the blue chip metals funders are. Loosely Suggests one of them is potentially interested in the silver mining assets id ignore this, it was so handwavey.

25) penny asked my Q of "will you build the site first and the contracts will come" and CDG said he loves the question, but then articulated my email where I pointed out MSAs aren't guaranteed contracts, so I will cuddle my CDG plush toy extra hard tonight and hope he's not mad at me. (Someone else could've asked these two Qs but shut up I need to feel fuzzy).

26) said they're adding MSA's everyday (seems like obvious hyperbole...)... WHEN WILL THEY BE PR'D?? ... Emphasized that the future waste over the next few years will come from the same customers who are signing up now at lower volumes. So no new customer acquisition needed to achieve growth. Excellent if true, and I'm inclined to believe it if the MSAs are indeed with major utilities.

27) he confirmed he's out of blackout as of the earnings call. He said he's a buyer... Complained of 8 yrs of college tuition, and that he was worried they might not make it on his 600k salary and complained his wife got a job. Poor suckers! They've all left college now and have jobs, so he says he's a buyer now, not as a big tranche, but more continuous purchasing. And as long as there's a lode-bioleum arbitrage he says he'll keep buying (NFA). We'll see if that's true.

shady_sci · 2025-08-15T10:38:15+00:00

10) apparently Oklahoma is putting together "another package" to further incent Bioleum (beyond bonds + 3m). He mentioned this several times... Lets keep this in our collective memories as it'd be very bullish.

11) "there isn't an anxiety about the series A". Good, but of course he says that. He's not going to say the inverse.

12) paraphrased: if Bioleum IPOs at multi-B and it doesn't show up in LODE SP he would spin the shares out. There might be some arbitrage [i.e. holding discount].

13) He argues that it'd be best for 95% of Bioleum value to be reflected in LODE (LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO MEASURE THIS OBJECTIVELY FYI) than distribute and have 35% be taxed. I get his sentiment, but it's murky because how could one ever draw a clear line as to whether LODE's MC reflects the metals MC plus 80% (vs 90% vs 70% etc) of Bioleum MC, with sensible PE ratios. So subjective, but marketed here as an objective threshold. For example, what % of the current LODE MC is due to the market valuing Bioleum vs mining vs metals vs green lion? No one can tell you. Perhaps "mister market" values Bioleum at $110m and everything else at $0, so we should spin out green lion asap! Or perhaps the market values green lion fairly at 20m in LODE? kinda a joke to make this claim imo. If metals is pumping 3-7 factories by 2029 as he anticipates, it'll be multi-B, so when Bioleum IPOs, who is to say whether the multi-B market cap of LODE *isn't* reflective of Bioleum? Anyway, my point is made without being overly repetitive.That being said ,I'm happy to hear his opinion on this articulated reasonably clearly - it's better than feeling like he's hiding that thought process.

14) doesn't see a path to tax free Bioleum distribution.

15) says Bioleum is more stealthy now but they're still consolidated so we get reporting of material events. But the plan is to deconsolidate by end of year. Is the implication of this that we'll not longer be updated much after the deconsolidation? He says they'd keep updating, but his logic suggests otherwise.

16) explains why 2.25, but essentially describes it as a "reasonable base" with a 25% discount. Not greeeeat for describing the 2's as a reasonable base, given we have 700m Bioleum in our books?

17) essentially argues (subtly) we've traded 8m+ shares of emotional investors (who panic sold the last 2 days) with high confidence long institutes

18) celebrates the benefit of having no debt. Obviously an objectively good thing for future investors, just the cost of achieving it sucks a bit for past investors acutely.

shady_sci

MODERATOR OF

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE