Originally posted by ura_bull
Evidence?!?! Hilarious! clear.png
You say PEN won't be able to take advantage of the U bull market in 2 years time like it's a certainty -
something you cannot possibly know.
In fact the
evidence - supplied by PEN in the form of recent test results - suggests you're more than likely
wrong.
A reasonable person would take these results, even skeptically, more or less at face value... but oh no, not
you, right? You know better. You're smarter than PEN. You're smarter than their engineers and geos. Your prescience is backed up by some
evidence only you know about in your head. You a guy who is afraid to even disclose his position and record with investing. A guy who hides his holding and his record.
You cried about the problems with the process - then when they go about fixing those problems you whinge about that too - without any evidence to back up you bogus assertions of certain failure.
Correct ura, I don't "know" as a 100% certainty. Everything I say, is my opinion; surely this does not have to be explained to you? It's obvious. So when I say "the answer to that is an emphatic no" it is my opinion that PEN will not take advantage of the imminent (
) uranium upswing. For goodness sake, drop the pedantry and focus on the broader message.
I am (very) confident that I'm suitably qualified to make a technical judgement on what PEN has released. By PEN's own admission, the test work done for the alkaline project was woefully inadequate - why is everyone so quiet about this blatant admission? - and it's my educated opinion that the same can be said about the work that has been used to support the acid PFS. I don't care if you don't agree with my assessment, I don't even care if PEN's technical team don't agree - I'm comfortable that my assessment of the information released to date is accurate. It's a difference of opinion, that's all.
"A reasonable person would take these results, even skeptically, more or less at face value" And that's the flaw in the your process. In the previous version, PEN investors no doubt took the results at face value. Look where that got them - a reasonable person would consider anything from PEN with extreme caution. A reasonable person would tell PEN to prove the concept of acid processing through a field leach trial. A reasonable person without this information is a gullible person.
Don't insult my intelligence on this topic with pettiness and condescension. I'm well educated in this field.
I didn't cry about anything. I pointed out the poor performance. Who knows, some of my early commentary in late 2015, early 2016 may have been persuasive enough to make people think about their investment. If they got out then, they've saved themselves some money and time. PEN hasn't fixed anything yet ura. I think their solution on paper is technically feasible, I've said that many times before. Do I think PEN can implement the solution with the cards they have, to the performance criteria they are starting to announce? The odds are not in their favour. In my opinion ura, in my opinion.
Finally, stop twisting my words. Rather put me on ignore.
(20min delay)
