@IsotopeEconomy nice recap. one quick note: it’s 44 month development process including pre-breaking-ground activities i think. otherwise 2028 build start & 2030 nameplate capacity reached does not corroborate with 44 month build time.
as an aside, economics look monstrous at current gas prices
@rekurencja@mountaingoat672@PraiseKek in the long run this all gets resolved by sufficiently high prices. but over the next decade the new personnel that’s going to be joining to bolster a workforce facing rapid retirement is going to be drawn to tier 1 projects like arrow, not tier 2 back pocket projects imo.
@rekurencja@mountaingoat672@PraiseKek we’ve also learned time and time again that sufficiently enticing conditions does not guarantee that it happens in any reasonable timeframe. arrow or phoenix would print cash if they existed today, yet progress is slow. there is a shortage of personnel in the industry
@rekurencja@mountaingoat672@PraiseKek we already can’t count on planned mines like arrow, triple R or dasa to come in as expected, cameco struggles to smoothly sustain their existing production at 2 tier one assets, yet you want to factor in miscellaneous deposits with no plans to be put into production into S&D??
@piterloskot82 wise move. academic partnerships seems like a potent strategy for facilitating permitting, establishing pieds-a-terre in a jurisdiction, and leveraging cheap/free research expertise while developing a talent pipeline
@kkz8gs6cyh@piterloskot82 because ryno is an expert in fluorinated chemistry and it’s another large market to serve. $QLE wouldn’t supplant existing enrichment tech and render conversion redundant even in the most wild upside scenarios
$ASPI at 4 just feels like a gift if you think they execute.
Could definitely be wrong, but the asymmetry here seems kind of insane to me.
Everyone’s focused on the Q3 risk, but there are just so many things potentially coming over the next few quarters.
@TRW_18 they were converted at a 500% premium because they $QLE valuation went up 500% between raises from $80M to $400M.
equity from an equity raise would’ve also appreciated 500% and no one would consider extra dilution
$ASPI ASPI shareholders gave the noteholders:
approximately 15.1% of the post-transaction ASPI share count; and
exposure to ASPI’s other assets, not just QLE.
In return, ASPI/QLE received:
🧵
@TRW_18 The 2024 notes were exchanged for approximately $147.66 million of new 2025 QLE notes. QLE also raised approximately $69.6 million of new cash through $72.2 million of additional notes.
you seem to be missing the fact that a majority of the $210M is from the old notes.
this is less of an obvious fluke than people make it out to be. it dilutes at the aspi level but materially increases exposure of aspi shareholders to QLE
cancellation of $109.2 million of QLE note principal;
cancellation of the associated accrued interest;
roughly $8.7 million less annual interest accrual at an 8% coupon;
less future dilution at the QLE level;
a cleaner QLE cap table for an IPO or eventual distribution.
$ASPI dipped into the 3 dollar price range a few months ago then was back in the 8s shortly thereafter. this stock mean reverts hard. macro is more constructive, sentiment is worse. i think all weak hands have been washed out. buying now seems like it’ll be a gift in retrospect
first Helium contract already came in.
QLE seems to be nearing IPO readiness.
They’re testing U enrichment at Pelindaba. Si and Yb both seem to be in the final stages of prep. Regulatory progress in the US/UK. Potential Westinghouse announcement by EoY.