Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Matthew Smith  

View Matthew Smith's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • The Obama administration reportedly considers requiring sponsors of the Keystone (TRP) pipeline to reduce the project's environmental risks before it can be approved, which effectively would put off a final decision until after the 2012 election to temporarily avoid antagonizing either the unions that support the pipeline or the environmentalists who oppose it.  [View news story]
    Just wait until the politicians realize the golden goose which American Capitalism and Intuition has miraculously dropped into their laps. Each shale play is worth about $12 billion in economic output, creates tons of jobs, creates building booms and most importantly gets Americans back to doing what led to America's greatness...Americans building America!

    Energy will be a huge job creator in the next decade with numerous pipelines, LNG terminals, and wells drilled not to mention the power plants built and new grids constructed.
    Nov 7, 2011. 05:31 PM | 10 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Rare Earth Element Myths Debunked [View article]
    Once again please read. I did say new technology, see Tesla section. But although REE prices are 'high' relative to where they have been, they still make up a smaller percentage of product cost than they have in the past. It is not the cost worrying manufacturers, it is the supply! They just need more material. That means more mines, not fewer.

    The technology is different, but they did not substitute anything out of a motor to replace the actual rare earths.

    I find it ironic that bears on the industry get down on companies with deposits in the ground and a reasonable chance of getting into production with low CAPEX. Those things are there and actually exist. At the same time they get down on what is real, they proclaim new technology, recycling, new substances and new by-product production will kill prices, and drive everyone out of business.
    Jan 29, 2011. 01:37 AM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Rare Earths May Have Room to Run [View article]
    regarding the tonnage, it is metric tons, per the Molycorp news release:

    "While Molycorp's production capacity is expected to reach 40,000 metric tons of REO equivalent per year with the Phase 2 expansion, the Company will sell its products into the market at a rate commensurate with customer and/or demand growth."

    See the third paragraph.

    Regarding the water filtration system, that is from information we gathered via their prospectus and from various conversations with contacts in the industry.

    Regarding your cerium comments, we know, we covered that in the article:

    "Now both have contracts, and in some cases firm sales prices via floors and ceilings, on forward production but this would be their ‘base case’ bringing production online today at current prices and with only selling the oxides (not further ‘refining’ the product as MCP will do)."

    Looking to 2014, yes cerium should be lower, but as a whole the basket could be higher as only cerium, samarium and gadolinium will be in oversupply (using current growth trends in demand and future production). The rest in these production charts, according to the miners, will be in supply deficits....more demand than supply could mean higher prices.
    Feb 3, 2011. 08:54 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Rare Earth Element Myths Debunked [View article]
    Let's qualify that statement. China tried to buy Unocal for their Asian oil assets as it was reported at the time. Unocal owned Molycorp at the time. So not entirely true. Were the Chinese smart enough at the time to see that? Maybe. But it was a Chinese state oil company attempting a takeover of an American oil company that consequently owned a shuttered REE mine.
    Jan 28, 2011. 03:26 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Rare Earths May Have Room to Run [View article]
    Yes, and who in the western world other than Neo has this expertise? There is GWG and MCP, both with different focuses. In the western world these three are top dog. There are always issues with bringing production online...if we are going to have this arguement, maybe Lynas pulls a UraniumOne at Dominion and leaves it all for MCP, or vice versa. I do not understand why you always like to choose MCP out of the articles and try to argue about it. I do appreciate your evolution to actually going out and reading materials though.

    Molycorp is a miner and a tech stock though. That has been our stance for some time. They will develop products that use their hard to sell production and sell the ones on the open market that are easy to sell. MCP looks like a potential Cameco or Areva for the industry.
    Feb 3, 2011. 08:57 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Rare Earths May Have Room to Run [View article]
    This is not a life of mine valuation. It is production revenues from one year based on today's prices. As we said in the article, we are not fans of in-situ valuations.
    Feb 3, 2011. 08:55 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Quest Rare Minerals: A 'Real' Rare Earth Element Market Player to Watch [View article]
    burnintoo, uranium was peculiar, especially the way it crashed. That was due mainly to hedge funds having large exposure to an illiquid asset, and having to dump it. As we now see the economics of the industry did not change, and the uranium oxide prices should continue to rise as China and other Asian countries begin stockpiling and bringing reactors online. Also it is my belief, as well as Cameco's management (they said as much to a question in a conference call), that Russia will end the supply of uranium via there old warheads. For rare earths, sometime after the first HREE mine opens is probably the time to sell - that is how it played out with uranium, once the first mines opened the industry went down, however like I said that had some peculiar circumstances.

    Check out my website and you can find articles recently done on uranium and ones back at that time...I was a believer long-term and was left scratching my head with that market activity.
    Jan 7, 2011. 01:45 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Playing A Rebound In Energy - Part 1 [View article]
    Hey I've been in the small cap sector before, it is where I got my start, but to say less credit risk I think would be a bit misleading....when credit markets freeze up the bigger fish have better connections and chances of getting money than these little companies. Say what you want about that statement, but I've been there before and it is not pretty. How about liquidity risk for investors trading in foreign stocks b/c the pinks are not always liquid?
    Jun 27, 2012. 01:55 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Rare Element Resources: Bright Prospects for This Mining Play [View article]
    whome123, you seem to be everywhere - with your various aliases- with the same issues, which have been covered many times. However, lets go over it once again. I really do hope you take the time to read it and you are curious to get to the facts, rather than an individual spewing untruths out of spite or trying to work your book.

    #1 Infrastructure- Yes the actual land has little infrastructure on it as it is exploratioin property so no paved roads or anything of that nature. Please see their PEA they issued previously, and you will see the infrastructure we are referring to. Anyone in the mining industry realizes that highways, interstates, and high-voltage power lines nearby separates the projects that do get developed from those that do not. Look at the huge gold deposits in Canada that are sitting there undeveloped because they lack infrastructure. Worth billions if you had the infrastructure nearby to bring the deposits online, but without it those projects have been dormant until recent talk of high voltage power being run through the area. This infrastructure is part of the reason why their PEA was so positive (referring to the low costs when compared to say Avalon for instance)

    #2 The grade is solid, along with the tonnage. If you have high grade ore, less tonnage is required (see Cigar Lake for uranium and possibly GWG's 'Steen' in S. Africa), lower grade more tonnage. Bear Lodge has high grade. If we are discussing grade alone I would encourage you to look around as there ARE projects with much lower grade being "talked" about as far as developing goes. Once again, your "fact" is wrong!

    #3 Not even worth addressing with a serious response.

    #4 Yes permitting is political, however if the USA wants deposits within the country to produce REEs in order to stockpile, provide security of supply going forward, or some other reason this company becomes worth more overnight...all on the whim of some Washington politicos. This seems more likely than Washington passing laws to ban it. As far as this being a Canadian company on US soil, they are our closest ally and a huge trade partner (we import more oil from them than anyone else btw).

    #5 Their share structure is great when you look at resource companies. Lynas has over a billion shares outstanding, many resource companies do. Great Western has somewhere north of 400 million I believe. REE has just over 10% of that! Tight share structure, and it is feasible to think they could get to production with less than 100 million outstanding if they had to issue equity to raise 100% of the cost of their planned project.

    MOST IMPORTANT - You need to understand securities law to understand why they have to issue that little statement at the bottom of their press releases. It was required by the SEC because they were issuing shares in Canada, not the US thus the paperwork was not filed with US securities regulators but rather the Canadian ones! See other Canadian companies who issue stock and that same statement is at the bottom...I know for a fact you will find it on some other rare earth stocks in Canada. Don't hold me to it, however I believe that was filed to be sold prior to their listing in America - I would look it up, but doing this on the fly and no notes around, but good homework for you.

    #6 They sold shares to raise cash to develop the project and they hope to bring it closer to production. They have more cash-on-hand than 99% of the rare earth companies! I said balance sheet, not income statement...there is a difference!

    #7 I never said anything about office space or # of employees, so please don't put words in my mouth! This office space issue raised by some short seller who lost his shirt last year is a dead horse that you guys just keep beating. If you knew anything about the junior resource sector you would know that many of them share management teams, geologists, office space and corporate secretaries. How many full-time office employees should an exploration and development company have? Throughout the industry it is not many - usually it is the President/CEO and a secretary they share with others.

    Molycorp and Lynas are the cream of the crop at this point. The next wave of hopefuls are next in line in the tier we referred to. Just to clarify, based on the above that is why REE is in that group.
    Apr 13, 2011. 08:21 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Rare Earth Element Myths Debunked [View article]
    The bears I was referring to were in regards to the uranium, potash and REE sectors. Please see sentence above that. In fact Soros is/has been bullish potash. None of these guys were bears on any of those resources...housing yes, but not the resources.

    I imagine from your responses that you are not too involved with Canadian or junior resource companies. Managements working with a group of companies is not uncommon, not in Canada, not in Australia, not in South America, not even in Europe. They do this to keep costs down for shareholders and for doing 12 months of exploration/field work. All of these companies have few employees, they usually hire consultants instead, its cheaper and you can get a specialist.
    Jan 29, 2011. 01:19 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Rare Earth Element Myths Debunked [View article]
    A Clemson Grad! That's great! Won't hold it against you, but cannot root for you guys anymore until Dabo is gone.

    Back to REEs. It is safe to say that the generalization made holds. For the great majority of projects out there they are difficult to separate. Eudialyte hosted deposits have never economically been mined, and only recently lab work shows it is even possible to separate them "economically" in a testing situation - now we must wait on someone to have enough conviction to build a test plant. Notice you pointed out two exceptions to the rule, not the rule, therefore what was stated was in no way a myth.

    Further, I am not sure that you are describing the Bear Lodge Project but rather Bokan Mountain which is a Ucore project. If you look at the drilling results and read the historical papers on the Bear Lodge project, the "dikes" they refer to are not small but rather large. Also, off the top of my head I think that the project is 4% REO, don't hold me to that exact number, but it is close if I recall.

    But make no mistake, these are very difficult to separate. The Australians have had a heck of a time dealing with silicates I believe. Some have spent 20 yrs cracking the 'codes' to these deposits.
    Jan 28, 2011. 12:57 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Quest Rare Minerals: A 'Real' Rare Earth Element Market Player to Watch [View article]
    Bellbell 63, uuraf is a company I was interested in early on. Their deposits are thin in nature, yet highly rich. The company's CEO has said it is economic to mine the ore (that being the ground) and shipping it elsewhere to be processed. This means that they would not actually get the prices for their HREEs that you see priced in the news as they will do none of the refining or value added activities. They have not responded to any of my requests for information which is quite peculiar, especially as I offered interviews via my website. I do have some investors playing simply as a way to exposure to US HREEs stockpile exposure, however I believe that there are better plays out there.
    Jan 7, 2011. 01:40 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Today's Market: Why The Time Warner Will Be Purchased By Twenty-First Century Fox [View article]
    I think you might be a bit biased in your analysis...hard to trust any of the cable news networks these days as they all employ opinionated talking heads and try to appeal to certain demographics or political parties. CNN will be sold, so that is nothing to worry about as far as a deal kicker. Not sure where you were going with the stock tanking talk, but I could see a scenario where some big name Hollywood names might pass on working with FOX, but those cases would be few and far between; certainly not the norm. HBO and Warner are such great means for distribution, and at the end of the day that outweighs some owner's politics or other media property (FOX News).
    Jul 18, 2014. 09:05 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Coal: Almost At The Bottom [View article]
    Look I really don't want the back and forth again. But once again you fail to see the big picture. There were quite a few words such as or in that statement which would mean not everyone of them would necessarily apply yet you pick out one to argue about. Looks like we are getting more production curtailments - see ACI after the close, but I'm sure that is somehow wrong b/c you said somewhere that the production cuts were already over and already exceeded what was needed a while ago. And links in articles, is that what makes a good article? Bottom line Mark is that you have been wrong since I've seen you posting here on other people's articles on SA, and your thesis about no demand destruction from low natural gas prices was totally off base along with your thesis that met coal was not going lower because of economic slowing. Really? Yea you had nice links to back all of this up, but analyzed it incorrectly and not understanding the meaning.

    I honestly do not read your articles. I just read the comments you have with other posters on articles by other people. And off on precise timings huh? I'd say from some of the posts I've read that that would be an understatement of epic proportions.

    I appreciate as much as anyone an opposing view as there are times when you can find an opportunity, but you are extremely biased when it comes to coal that it clouds your judgement/analysis and makes it quite difficult to take you seriously. And your record on investing in it is historically poor.
    Jun 21, 2012. 07:29 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Playing The Rare Earths Summit [View article]
    When the initial recommendations are at $1-3/share there is a low cost basis. So yes, some readers are seeing their unrealized gains increase dramatically once again. All about the entry point.
    Feb 1, 2012. 07:49 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment