Jump to content

Jim Dines, Mr.Uranium, has winning ways


Recommended Posts

Dines authors Investment Letter of The Year 2006

 

Peter Brimelow, MarketWatch ... Jan 1, 2007

 

NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- James Dines' The Dines Letter is our Investment Letter of the Year 2006.

Dines is probably the most arrogant, egotistical, aggressive and abrasive of all the investment letter editors monitored by the Hulbert Financial Digest.

...

Dines is now working on his annual forecast issue, which will be mailed in mid-January. (He says it's too big to email). Much of his January issue is devoted to the uranium sector, which has done very well for him this year. He expects it to continue and writes:

 

"A uranium leap of this magnitude, up 92% in only nine months, we thought would surely attract the attention of the world to this phenomenal bull market, but we are again amazed that it has yet to appear in America's headlines! As we have been reporting to you all the way up from $8/lb, according to the rules of Mass Psychology, this bull market's figurative 'invisibility' means that we are still early in the move! We wonder to ourselves, how high does this suggest uranium might go eventually? At $8/lb our "initial target" was an admittedly unlikely-looking $50/lb (US), but when that was achieved we posited our final target of $70/lb to $100/lb...."

 

Although uranium has now reached $70/lb, Dines says:

"The very fact that uranium has not had a single Pullback -- or even a flat Consolidation -- all the way up is astonishing for any commodity, and adds credence to our expectation at rock bottom that uranium's was to be one of the biggest bull markets in history."

Dines also says a strong January would be a good sign for stocks -- but that the Dow Jones Industrial Average is "overbought" and that a decline could come "out of the blue." He is bullish on bullion for the short and intermediate term.

 

...more: http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/dine...=bigcharts&

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

'but i dont think many punters will be having a go.'

 

Of course punters will be having a go...its the hot sector (by that i mean volatile, not neceesarily oneway traffic upwards), and thats where punters belong.

 

I'm not a punter, so im steering clear, probably miss out on a lot of $s, but least ill sleep easy.

 

I do however have indirect exposure thru a non-uranium company that has spun off a U play and has retained a sizeable holding in it (see post on metals thread)...if the U company goes up (and it is going up) then the spin off will go up eventually when market realises its asset backing is higher than market cap...meanwhile it has upside from its own mining prospects.

 

BuffetJr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

When looking at uranium related companies

 

What percentages would be suggested to spread risk between

- explorer

- resource developer

- near production

- producer

- service

- geographical diversity (including Asian opportunities)

and

- uranium commodity investments - eg nufcor, uranium participation

 

How to evaluate companies with resources 'in the ground' - when I looked at this market back last summer, Uramin on AIM (now also TSX) was a near producer that appeared by my poor calculations to have by far some of the cheapest resource (in terms of simply dividing market cap by Ur). Uramin's fairly recent web presentation subsequently outlined this still to be the case, and with further positive work in exploration & development.

 

Of my uranium investments, I am hoping I can view 75% of total worth as longer term investments rather than speculative exploration stocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Q's:

 

Some say that only a dozen or so of the Uranium explorers will make it into production,

how do you pick the winners?

 

Do you stay with your picks, or trade in and out?

 

What's the most important difference with other mining sectors?

 

Uranium mining, and the building of nuclear plants, will boost demand for equipments and

services. What related companies should we be looking at?

 

- these are off the top of me head

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone suggest any questions for Dines? Or any questions on the subject of Uranium? I may be interviewing him soon.

 

Hi frizzers,

I subscribe to Dines’ Letter. About 8% of my portfolio replicates his “high risk” basket of 10 uranium stocks, and part of his “longer-term” basket. Yep. the last 6 mths have been brilliant.

 

What is truly incredible (or mad/arrogant, take your pick) is that Dines’ portfolio or ‘baskets’, 5 in all, are with only one exception either pure uranium or precious metal equity plays. He has zero exposure to any other sector or asset class, even his conservative portfolio is basically a pure uranium play.

 

Some questions around this ultra narrow focus would be interesting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

in the most recent version of CW-Radio, Jim Dines says that we have years to go in this Uranium boom.

And when Dominic says there needs to be a correction, he says,

"Why? This is the biggest market opportunity he has ever seen", and before it is done it

"Will be bigger than the internet"

 

I disagree. The parabolic move that we are seeing now, will need some sort of multi-month correction,

before it moves higher. But it need not start tomorrow, the current rally may have some weeks to go,

but correct it will

 

But what do I know?- Dines is the legend. But he is also very heavily invested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in the most recent version of CW-Radio, Jim Dines says that we have years to go in this Uranium boom.

And when Dominic says there needs to be a correction, he says,

"Why? This is the biggest market opportunity he has ever seen", and before it is done it

"Will be bigger than the internet"

 

I disagree. The parabolic move that we are seeing now, will need some sort of multi-month correction,

before it moves higher. But it need not start tomorrow, the current rally may have some weeks to go,

but correct it will

 

But what do I know?- Dines is the legend. But he is also very heavily invested.

“parabolic”??, not really, a lot of Dines’ recomms and those by others, i.e www.Sprott.com and Grandich, have gone sideways for weeks now.

 

On a related note, DrB could you explain why are you in the Faber-Correction camp at this time? I don’t see any genuine liquidity contraction on the horizon, but admittedly I have begun taking some skin out of the game recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "New Uranium" thread on Advfn: http://www.advfn.com/cmn/fbb/thread.php3?id=6450128

 

shows plenty of parabolic looking charts

The uranium jnrs space is all over the map. I can name several quality ones that aint “parabolic” and in fact look like good entries today. Peter Grandichs favourite CXX.v aint parabolic. Sprotts TVC.v aint either. Of Dines’ picks there’s several, e.g. CZQ.v.... Whatever though.... Most are in an uptrend of some sort. I’m selling slightly into that uptrend, mostly cos I have waaaay too much allocated here. What I’m really after are good reasons to get out more/quicker. I like Faber and I like his arguments and style, but why is he banging on about a big correction “within months” as he recently said on bloomberg??? What’s the logic????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

...dines note...

 

INTERIM WARNING BULLETIN

14 March 2007, Vol 2007, #4

 

THIS IS URANIUM'S "PERFECT STORM"

 

Our repeated warnings about "The Coming Real-Estate Crash" are finally

beginning to sink into the Mass Mind, sending the market sharply lower

as the meltdown in sub-prime mortgages erupts into the headlines. The

market has come down so quickly that some kind of rally should soon

arrive in what we call a "dead-bull bounce." From which level? Probably

around the S&P

1375 area, but we do not expect it to get very high. How high is too

soon to tell yet, but we are looking for at least one more subsequent

downthrust as soon as the market's former obliviousness toward "The

Coming Real-Estate Crash" changes to worries about the banks

overcommitted in that area. (On the positive side, any rally from here

should be studied by serious market students for a possible Right

Shoulder of a Head & Shoulder Bottom Formation.)

 

While we predicted a market downturn, made clear in our Annual Forecast

Issue, we did expect the uraniums to outperform the market (along with

the precious metals), so that even if the uraniums came down somewhat

it

would nonetheless outperform the rest of the market on a Relative

Strength basis.

Indeed, we are pleased to report to you, despite price declines in

every

other area of energy (including crude oil, natural gas and coal), the

price of uranium has blasted to a new all-time high at $91/lb! If that

wasn't a lucky guess, we don't know what one is.

 

With a shortage already under way, and serious flooding problems at

Cameco's much-vaunted Cigar Lake mine, Australia's Ranger mine is

having

flooding problems also. Final estimates are being prepared by Energy

Resources (ERA.AX) but there are concerns that the amount of uranium

lost could be around 4% of estimated international production this

year,

a point we will cover in the TDL to be published on 23 Mar 2007. The

impact on the Mass Psychology of those who buy uranium for nuclear

power

plants has to be profound, shaking to their roots any belief that they

could count on production from any single source because supplies are

already stretched so thin that an accident might leave them with the

terrifying possibility that the lights of their customers would go out

-- including critical areas such as hospitals, military installations,

etc. Such buyers are scrambling to buy uranium at any price, and that

is

why its price has been soaring lately. Indeed, wild rumors are cropping

up about the possibility of $200/lb uranium! Personally, we would not

want to see prices going much higher than what we have already

predicted

because these are already wonderfully high enough for our recommended

uranium-mining companies to do very well indeed, and we don't want to

scare the government into converting more of its nuclear weapons into

useable uranium. Even if they did, that would take time, and the

shortage is immediate. No doubt the sharks running hedge funds, sensing

blood in the water, are also in there buying uranium metal with both

fists, so there's no telling how high prices could go on a proverbial

"spike." Therefore, uranium-mining shares in this weak market should be

viewed as a happy buying opportunity, even daring to place buy orders

below the market on the ones that have risen the most lately.

 

In our last TDL we recommended taking profits on Summit because of

Paladin's buyout offer but, after we went to press, Summit declined it

and the stock dropped; instead of the $5.12 (Aus) that we had expected,

our sale officially went off at $3.81 (Aus) ($2.50 US; $2.94 Cdn) for a

nonetheless handsome profit of 706% over our original recommendation.

When we indicate "Sell" we are through with the stock and do not care

what happens afterward because we are satisfied with our profit and

glad

to leave something for the next fellow. All we care about is the profit

between our purchase and sale price. In this unusual case, because of

our publication schedule, those who did not sell may hold out for $5.12

(Aus)

-- it's your decision -- or figure that the potential upside from here

is smaller than reallocating capital to a different uranium

recommendation.

 

The symbol we used for our A-Cap recommendation was its symbol on the

Australian Stock Exchange, but now has a US ticker symbol of APCDF.

 

Furthermore, WMT.AX is Western Metals Ltd, a Perth-based exploration

company in Australia and Tanzania, which should not be mistaken for an

American company also called Western Metals (WTLC). Yet another

American

company has come up with the symbol (Westmount Life Insurance),

confirming Jimmy Durante's dictum that, "Everybody wants to get into

the

act." Please use care when buying our recommendations.

 

Also Standard & Poor's has added two of our favorites to its TSX

Composite Index, and we are proud "parents" to have seen them grow to

maturity, so to speak, and we still favor stock #1 in Supervised List

#1

and stock #5 in Supervised List #2. Another favorite, stock #6 in

Supervised List #2 has made yet another acquisition and is building one

of the great uranium companies in the world so, despite your huge

profit, it is still very highly recommended; it being understood that

those of you who bought it at way lower prices might find it now

overdominating your portfolios sufficiently that some needs to be sold

so as not to have too much money in any one stock.

 

Finally, we hereby add Geovic (GMC.V) (GVCM) to Supervised List #4, but

do not pay more than $2.75 (Cdn); we own it and we will decide whether

or not to add a stop in our next TDL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Beattie backflips on uranium mining

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Friday, 23 March 2007

Rebecca Lawson

 

 

QUEENSLAND Premier Peter Beattie has spectacularly backed down over his staunch opposition of uranium mining ahead of next month's Australian Labor Party national conference, which is widely expected to overturn the "no new mines" policy. The backflip leaves Western Australia as the only state with significant uranium deposits to oppose uranium mining.

 

In a interview with The Australian newspaper, Beattie said he had reluctantly accepted the outcomes of an independent report, which was commissioned by the Queensland Government, that uranium mining would not threaten the state's billion-dollar coal industry.

 

"I've got to be honest, I'm not going to be excited by it because I do have reservations about uranium, but the report is clear," Beattie said.

 

The newspaper said the report revealed that uranium mining and nuclear power was no match for global demand for coal-fired electricity generation, which can be mined for centuries compared to known uranium reserves, which are likely to be exhausted within 50 years.

 

Beattie said he would support the policy change at next month's ALP conference as long as a condition was attached. He had previously been concerned that uranium mining would cost the state millions in coal royalties and thousands of jobs.

 

"I'd want to make certain that with any sale of uranium, the non-proliferation treaty is in place," the premier said.

 

"Now I know we have one with China, but we don't with India and I think it's important that if the conference carries a resolution in relation to increased uranium mining, then we've got to make certain that sale is to countries that have signed the non-proliferation treaty."

 

Meanwhile, the Association of Mining and Exploration Companies spokesperson Ian Loftus has welcomed Beattie's backflip, commenting that additional exports of Australian uranium will deliver benefits to the Europe, North Asia and North American economies that are currently the world's greatest greenhouse gas emitters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beattie backflips on uranium mining

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Friday, 23 March 2007

Rebecca Lawson

QUEENSLAND Premier Peter Beattie has spectacularly backed down over his staunch opposition of uranium mining ahead of next month's Australian Labor Party national conference, which is widely expected to overturn the "no new mines" policy. The backflip leaves Western Australia as the only state with significant uranium deposits to oppose uranium mining.

 

In a interview with The Australian newspaper, Beattie said he had reluctantly accepted the outcomes of an independent report, which was commissioned by the Queensland Government, that uranium mining would not threaten the state's billion-dollar coal industry.

 

"I've got to be honest, I'm not going to be excited by it because I do have reservations about uranium, but the report is clear," Beattie said.

 

The newspaper said the report revealed that uranium mining and nuclear power was no match for global demand for coal-fired electricity generation, which can be mined for centuries compared to known uranium reserves, which are likely to be exhausted within 50 years.

 

Beattie said he would support the policy change at next month's ALP conference as long as a condition was attached. He had previously been concerned that uranium mining would cost the state millions in coal royalties and thousands of jobs.

 

"I'd want to make certain that with any sale of uranium, the non-proliferation treaty is in place," the premier said.

 

"Now I know we have one with China, but we don't with India and I think it's important that if the conference carries a resolution in relation to increased uranium mining, then we've got to make certain that sale is to countries that have signed the non-proliferation treaty."

 

Meanwhile, the Association of Mining and Exploration Companies spokesperson Ian Loftus has welcomed Beattie's backflip, commenting that additional exports of Australian uranium will deliver benefits to the Europe, North Asia and North American economies that are currently the world's greatest greenhouse gas emitters.

 

thx for the updates Dr B. Despite the 'Sword of Damocles' hanging over the markets, I added to my MGA, PNP and FRG positions yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I added to my MGA, PNP and FRG positions yesterday.

 

can you tell us more about those positions - i am not familiar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can you tell us more about those positions - i am not familiar

 

Sure, no worries. Right now I'm basically out of the very speculative end of the U miners, limiting my self to the likes of Mega Uranium (MGA) and PNP (Pinetree) plus positions in 6 others. At >20% uraniums still dominates this, my main trading portfolio, MGA alone is currently 7.3%. At one point last year uraniums were more like 50%. (baring in mind that I have 2 trading accts, the 'main' one Im discussed here being ~65% of the grand total, and besides tiny indirect exposure through mining mutual funds, the smaller acct has no U exposure)

 

Due to pure luck and a gut feeling about the US mkts, I started taking skin out of the game early Feb 07, and sold into the post-Feb 26 rallies, and sometimes into the dips. I sold off most of my very speculative stuff like Crosshair (CXX) and Pele (GEM) and recycled that into short-term Cdn bonds/cash or the U's that look certain to actually be producers (or are, like Denison)

 

I'm waiting for the "real" US mkt correction a la Faber et al before getting back into the jnrs and/or adding to my 'top tier' like DML etc. Although as stated before, I added to some the other day, resulting in the returning to a somewhat heavy %, though nothing like late 2006. On a fundamental and technical basis, or at least based on my flimsy technical skills!!, MGA looks to be the best of the lot at the mo, Id buy more but it already is my largest single holding of anything anywhere!!! I'm upgrading my (novice) technical analysis skills so as to identify more candidates and entry points.

 

cheers and good trading,

wttw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

just received a note from a friend who invests heavily in U-stocks:

 

"Pinetree just bought big chunks of CUE, RGT & DEV and Dines just recommended the latter two"

 

he also like LAM on a pullback, which may come as the stock goes freetrading

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you say they bought big chunks of Cue, you mean stock rather than actually acquiring their assets?

 

pinetree are a venture capital fund.

 

Dines really has a moral dilemma here doesnt he? IMHO its plain as day that his comments can move these jnr U stocks (as can Doug Casey-- another story)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dines really has a moral dilemma here doesnt he? IMHO its plain as day that his comments can move these jnr U stocks (as can Doug Casey-- another story)

 

i wonder if he sees it as a dilemma or an opportunity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i wonder if he sees it as a dilemma or an opportunity?

 

Lets hope he doesnt screw over his readers....

 

Dr. B, may i ask since you brought it up elsewhere, what % of your profits do you systematically recycle into portfolio insurance. On a mthly, annual basis, and how often to you re-balance this? What sort of puts do you buy, or do use some other instruments (spreadbets)? my question does relate to Uranium, as my U stocks are generating massive profits and uncomfortable volatility, and theres only so much profit I want to take (taxes) at the mo. cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dr. B, may i ask since you brought it up elsewhere, what % of your profits do you systematically recycle into portfolio insurance. On a mthly, annual basis, and how often to you re-balance this?

 

i will answer on another thread, and come back and give you a link.

 

link: http://www.greenenergyinvestors.com/index.php?showtopic=1930

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...