Wikinvest Wire

Wednesday, March 09, 2005

Beware of Fads

I have written a couple of times about the uranium stocks. Most people that have traded them have made money. The appeal is quite simple. Nuclear power is cleaner and something that the US can create and reduce its dependence on OPEC (I realize there are several obstacles along the way but this is the simplest way to state the case). I am aware of two uranium stocks Cameco (CCJ) and USEC (USU). There are probably others.

Both stocks have soared. I would imagine that a big part of the move was from a lack of supply in the group. Whether there are more than two names or not I only hear about two and I think that is true for most people, perception not reality being the driver.

If you have made money in these it would makes sense to have enough introspection to realize the move may have been more about luck than skill. I first mentioned these stocks January 28th. Since then they are up 30% or so. Clearly I should have bought one of them but I didn't. My thinking here was there was money to be made was based on a couple of stock market related things, not my in-depth understanding of uranium. When fads start they can last for a very long time. For all I know CCJ could quintuple over the next couple of years but that the fad element will not go away until it implodes (if that happens).

Another way to play uranium is with Rio Tinto (RTP). RTP has uranium operations in Australia and Namibia. If uranium becomes huge, RTP will benefit and if uranium drops off the radar RTP will not take the hit that CCJ and USU would take.

I'm no expert here. But the stocks have taken off before much of the story has even started to play out. The run in the stocks will likely end before the story plays out.

We could say the same thing about another energy sub-sector; coal. The US is the Saudi Arabia of Coal. Except china produces a lot more than the US. Coal stocks have done very well also. The big difference between coal and uranium is that there have been a lot of coal IPOs. Take that to mean more supply has come to the market. This is a watch out situation. At some point supply will overtake demand. I think the coal story has a long way to go but who knows? Making a huge bet on coal could be costly.

In a diversified portfolio if you have 10% in energy, 4%-5% could be aggressively devoted to either fad. If your stock triples you are adding a lot of performance to the entire portfolio. If the stock cuts in half the damage may be unnoticeable in the context of the overall portfolio.

1 comments:

Anonymous said...

In regards to the idea that a runup in uranium mining stocks is a 'fad' or otherwise, you may want to have a look at the price of U3O8, and what has happened over the last few decades.

The history of U3O8, is one of exploding (pun) demand, glut, 90% mine closure, lack of supply, and now once again... rising demand.

China alone now has 40 new nuclear plants in the works by 2020. India is beginning to find itself in similar circumstances. The US is finally considering new plants, and France is 70% nuclear. Countries the world over are considering new plants, keeping old ones running, and putting existing plants into a
type of 'overdrive' which safely produces more power, at the expense of greater fuel useage. At present prices however, uranium only accounts for 5-10% of the operating costs of a plant. There is no elasticity, as
plants run ONLY on uranium or thorium (India).

The demand side of the equation is not the same issue that it is with gold, silver or platinum, in the sense that private purchases
of those metals rise and fall with sentiment. Nuke plants just keep chomping away at supply, because nobody wants their lights going out, regardless of inflation, deflation, recession, or war.

The difference this time around in the uranium price runup? Demand currently exceeds the amount of uranium being mined by almost 100%, and it takes 5-7 years to get a new mine up and running. And the supply of
downgraded weapons-grade material which USEC is processing, ( which was partly responsible for the U3O8 'glut') is running out.

Hey, much better informed people than myself (Thomas L. Neff and Jeff Combs for example) are coming to pretty radical conclusions about the future of U3O8, and the research is of very high caliber. You can start here:

www.hornbybay.com/WNA-2004-09-Neff.pdf

and

www.world-nuclear.org/sym/2004/pdf/combs.pdf

Good Luck !
Randall Semrau
Vancouver Canada

Proud Member Of