Key Gold Indicator Remains in Bearish Territory

The Grasberg-Saville Gold Rating (GSGR) spent its 8th week in bearish territory below 50. Nevertheless, the gold price remained fairly firm, which we perceive as generally bullish.

The GSGR bottomed out in the week of 9 September and has since made a higher low (10/21). This indicates a slight improvement in referenced fundamentals.*

*The Grasberg-Saville Weekly Gold Rating measures the following fundamental drivers:

  1. Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS)
  2. KBW Bank Index Inverse Change Ratio
  3. 30-Year/Dollar Ratio
  4. 30s/5s Yield Curve Change Ratio

Bill Banning Uranium Mining Near Grand Canyon Moves to Senate

If the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act becomes law, approximately 1 million acres of federal land will be closed to uranium mining permanently.

That being said, were the bill or a companion bill to pass the Senate, it would not be signed by Trump (or any sitting President), as it was never destined to become law. What is more, the future of the Grand Canyon’s mineral wealth is above Trump’s paygrade. Consequently, he’ll be asked to shred the bill like a good soldier and the federal lands in question will remain optionable by mining interests in the decades to come.

Early Q4 Updates

  1. $IMPUY — We exited Impala Platinum Holdings at our target of $7 for a return of 150%.
  2. $FCUUF — We doubled our stake in Fission Uranium on 22 October.
  3. $AAU — We took advantage of the Ixtaca permitting suspension to aggressively purchase shares on sale at $0.50 on 30 October.
  4. $GUYFF — We took advantage of the Halloween guidance scare to double our stake in Guyana Goldfields.
  5. $TGB — We like Taseko’s pipeline, especially the Florence Copper Project. We also like the way copper is behaving generally. We started to build a stake on 12 November.

“[Copper is] more strategic than cobalt, more strategic than lithium. You can’t replace copper on conductivity. It is a modern metal.”

Mark Bristow

The Russian Revolution, Starring…

Sacha Baron Cohen as Stalin, Stephen Dorff as Lenin and Seth Rogen as Kalinin.

8th Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Detail)

It’s doubtful that Intelligence has derived more enjoyment from any other paste-up in recent memory — at least since Sgt. Pepper’s. Speaking of which…

Take note of Mikhail Lashevich (Gaskovich) awkwardly pasted atop a bookcase on the far right. He is the distorted mirror image of Shirley Temple (below), perched atop a cloth grandmother figurine, which is, as it happens, also an inanimate object, which suggests both personages were created assets, propped up by artifice. Interestingly, Shirley Temple (a descendant of the Dunhams and possibly Richmond Fells via that cloth grandmother figurine, Cynthia Fell Temple) was born a few short months before Lashevich faked his death after sowing general discord and fomenting a sloppy revolt by the Mongols against the Manchurian Government. The year was 1928. Lashevich likely took his Gaskovich name back and emigrated to the States for his next assignment, as he was only 44 and had proven able to pull off midlevel hoaxes and pranks at home and in foreign lands.

It is improbable that this is a depiction of an actual event, for then, as now, the 8th Congress merely needed to live in the imagination of the public. This particular iteration of the 8th Congress portrait was released c. 2006; it probably undergoes regular updates to ensure that the Congress weasels its way into the imaginations of successive generations. Intelligence, however, has outdone itself this time by utilizing the visages of the above-mentioned actors, who do not remotely resemble the original thespians of the Revolution.

In fact, it looks like all of the Congresses were faked. Take the 5th (July 1918), for instance. Here is an alleged photograph:

This is a bad paste-up. Check out the lower left of the photograph where portions of two pasted-in participants are drawn in atop the rug on which Smilga and others’ feet rest. Also, no one in the picture can agree on the location of the photographer, because each pasted-in individual was photographed independently, elsewhere and under wildly different lighting and circumstances. You aren’t supposed to notice, but they used the exact same photograph of Lashevich in the 8th Congress that they used in the 5th. In the photo of the 5th (2nd row, 3rd fellow from right), he’s been made slightly darker and a hat has been pasted on his head. This doesn’t pose a continuity problem because these aren’t real historic photographs. They are fakes made much more recently in order to flesh out our synthetic historical narrative.

For comparison, here’s a random class picture taken in 1918.

These lads all know where the camera is and they are all lit uniformly by a window, flash bulb or combination of the two from the right. More importantly, none of the guys are listing oddly to the left or right, as though getting photographed on a ship that’s about to capsize. Now you know how to tell the difference between a paste-up and a real photograph.

Finally, lest you forget, this is 1918, 80 years after Louis Daguerre shared his process with the public. Autochrome had already been broadly used for nearly a decade. In other words, the worst mass production cameras were taking better pictures than those we are asked to believe produced the Congress photos, the quality of which is on par with those produced by Niépce 100 years earlier.

The 8th Congress Portrait that has been broadly disseminated over the last decade is hosted by Wikipedia: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Delegates_of_the_8th_Congress_of_the_Russian_Communist_Party_(Bolsheviks).jpg

And here: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/5/54/20060428145150%21Stalin-Lenin-Kalinin-1919.jpg

Urenco to Upgrade 12,000 t Depleted UF6 at UEChK

Since May of this year, 3,600 t UF6 travelled by rail to Yekaterinburg where the depleted uranium will be re-enriched to reactor grade. This is the first such shipment of depleted U from Gronau for re-enrichment since 2009. An additional 8,400 t has been scheduled for transport through 2022.

The 12,000 t depleted U (average assay = 0.30% U-235), once returned to Urenco, translates to just under 2,000 MT natural uranium (4.4 Mlbs), or a little over 2% of annual demand.

Gym, Unreconstructed

“I don’t want to be too comfortable. Once you get used to it, it’s hard to give up. I’d rather stay hungry.”

Joe Santo

4’ x 8’ Deadlift Platform Construction

Materials

  • (2) 2’ x 8’ 3/4” Pieces of Plytanium Plywood (1st Layer, Platform Foundation) — Lowe’s (4’ x 8’ Ripped Lengthwise) … $42.98
  • (2) 4’ x 4’ 3/4” Pieces of Plytanium Plywood (2nd Layer, Platform Foundation) — Lowe’s (4’ x 8’ Ripped Widthwise) … $42.98
  • (1) 4’ x 4’ 3/4” Maple Plywood (Third Layer, Lifting Base) — Lowe’s (4’ x 8’ Ripped Widthwise) … $50.98
  • (1) 4’ x 6’ 3/4” Rubber Horse Stall Mat (L&R Plate Landing Pads) — Tractor Supply … $44.99
  • 1 1/4” Construction Screws … $18.95

Total Cost = $200.88

Equipment

  • Drill
  • Coping Saw

Construction

Lay down the 4’ x 4’ Plytanium boards atop the 2’ x 8’ Plytanium boards; attach with construction screws (I used 42 screws). This is the Platform Foundation, so use lots of screws in order to ensure that it is rigid.

Lay down the 4’ x 4’ Maple Plywood Lifting Base atop the Platform Foundation. Center it and attach with screws around its perimeter (I used 16 screws).

Measure the Stall Mat into two 2’ x 4’ sections and rip slowly with the Coping Saw along chalked line. The Stall Mats are heavy and difficult to cut with razor blades. The Coping Saw proved an exceptional and almost effortless alternative.

Lay down one 2’ x 4’ Stall Mat on each side of the centered Lifting Base and attach with construction screws (I used 8 screws on each mat). You’ll have one 2’ x 4’ piece of Stall Mat left over. It makes a good 3/4-in step in front of the Deadlift Platform.

Start Lifting!

Notes: This Platform was designed to ensure that all materials would fit in a small van; you won’t need to rent a U-Haul truck.

By building your own Deadlift Platform, you’ll likely save ~$200.

The squat rack in the background of the first photograph was manufactured by Titan Fitness. In addition to squats, it’s used for pull-ups, seated presses and bench presses. We chose the Titan X-3 over the Rogue SML-1, as it enabled us to save an additional $200, which was invested in a Rogue Ohio Power Bar.

Home Gym Cost Breakdown

  • DL PLATFORM … $200.88
  • FULL BAR JACK … $55.30
  • OHIO POWER BAR … $302.40
  • SQUAT STAND … $334.36
  • BENCH … $71.99
  • PLATE RACK … $53.75
  • OLYMPIC BAR + WEIGHT PLATES … $520.94
  • EVA MATTING … $79.83

TOTAL COST = $1,619.45

IRR = 1.7 Years

$DNN : Denison Mines — Independent Economic Analysis

Long-Term Price Case$65/lb. U308 $65/lb. U308
Flagship ProjectPhoenixGryphon
Project Percentage90% 90%
Mineral Reserves98,460,000 lbs. 98,460,000 lbs.
Shares Outstanding589,100,000589,100,000
Market Cap$342,267,100$342,267,100
Average Annual Production5.966M lbs.7.648M lbs.
Recovery98.5%98.2%
LoM10 Years7 Years
Payable Product58.767M lbs.48.817M lbs.
True All-in Cost (TAIC)$39.20/lb.$47.83/lb.
Gross Revenue$3,819,855,000$3,173,105,000
Saskatchewan Revenue Royalties & Surcharges + Resource Credit($276,939,487)($230,050,112)
Total Operating Cost($194,347,597)($567,610,551)
Operating Profit$3,348,567,916$2,375,444,337
Saskatchewan Profit Royalties ($502,285,187)($356,316,651)
Income Taxes($904,113,337)($641,369,971)
Total Capital Costs($425,950,000)($539,660,498)
Net Income (Denison Share)$1,364,597,453$754,287,495
Net Profit Margin36%24%
Absolute Cost Structure (ACS)60%74%
MTQ Score (Higher is Better)0.60.3
True Value$3.60/sh.
True Value Discount (TVD)86%
PhoenixGryphon
Cash Flow Multiple10x5x
Net Annual Cash Flow$138,530,520$118,184,544
Future Market Cap Contribution$1,385,305,200$590,922,720
Total Future Market Cap Growth477%
Target$3.35/sh.

Notes: All Values in U.S. Dollars

We boosted our stake in Denison Mines this morning by 25% following an updated analysis in which the company achieved a maximum in-house Composite Rating of 5. Denison Mines excelled in the following categories: Net Profit Margin (Phoenix), Absolute Cost Structure (Phoenix), True Value Discount, and Market Cap Growth. Our Target, however, has been lowered by 20%, as our updated calculations implied a True All-In Cost (TAIC) that was higher than expected for Phoenix, while Net Profit Margin and Absolute Cost Structure for Gryphon were average.

MTQ Scores & Composite Ratings — Study Group Comparison

$NTGSF : Golden Predator — Independent Economic Analysis

Long-Term Price Case$1,700/oz. Au
ProjectBrewery Creek
Mineral Resources577,000 ozs.
Shares Outstanding132,981,088
Market Cap$49,163,108
Average Annual Production53,853 ozs.
Recovery84%
LoM9 Years
Payable Product484,680 ozs.
True All-in Cost (TAIC)$1,291/oz.
Gross Revenue$823,956,000
Freight & Marketing($1,938,720)
Smelter Deduction($4,119,780)
Royalties($32,958,240)
Gross Income$784,939,260
Total Operating Cost($377,081,040)
Operating Profit$407,858,220
Income Tax($122,357,466)
Total Capital Costs ($116,973,363)
Net Income$168,527,391
Net Profit Margin20%
Absolute Cost Structure (ACS)76%
MTQ Score0.3
True Value$1.27/sh.
True Value Discount (TVD)72%
Cash Flow Multiple5x
Annual Cash Flow$22,025,877
Future Market Cap$110,129,385
Future Market Cap Growth124%
Target$0.83/sh.

Notes: All Values in U.S. Dollars

ACS Curve Impact on MTQ Score

For stocks under study, Absolute Cost Structures (ACS) above 70% are associated with rapid falloffs in MTQ Scores and low MTQ Scores are predictors of low Net Profit Margins.

We will be monitoring stock price performance of a basket* of stocks over the next 24 months in order to establish whether or not there is a statistically significant correlation between price performance and MTQ Scores.

If we are able to ascertain that MTQ Scores serve as predictors of price performance, those scores will become cornerstones of our stock selection process.

*Fahy Capital Management does not necessarily own shares of the stocks under study.