Raw Transcript
Hello everyone, welcome to VRic Media, your most trusted voice in metals and mining. I'm your host, Daryl Thomas, and today we have the pleasure of interviewing the uranium insider himself, Justin Hune. How you doing today, buddy? >> I'm doing great, Daryl. How are you? >> I'm doing good. I'm doing good. Uh, so I got a question for you. Okay. How do we not waste a bull market? >> That's a really good question. Um, I would say the best way to how not waste a bull market is to well, first of all, have enough confidence and conviction that we're in a bull market because that will dictate how you deal with your positioning. And this was really highlighted last year for us with the way that the sector, the uranium sector, a lot of markets, but the uranium spec sector specifically just really got thrashed in the first four months of the year and a lot of people jumped ship. There was enormous amount of public capitulation. >> Titanic. Like the Titanic, huh? >> Oh yeah. 100% 100%. F this sector. I'm never coming back. This is never going to work. I've been sold all of these promises for years and years and years. I mean, the vitriol was was was at a fever pitch. People bailed out left, right, and center. Then, of course, the sector bottomed, V-shaped recovery, and then it went up another 100% after that. And you have to understand that we have a structural imbalance between supply and demand. That doesn't mean the equities go up in a perfect straight line. it. There's plenty of volatility in the sector, but you have to have conviction that we are in a bull market for the commodity. Even though you can have price stagnation for a long period of time within that bull market, uranium is a very very very long cycle. And it's because the procurement of uranium on behalf of utilities happens years in advance of when they actually need the fuel and the supply is very very slow to respond to price incentives. So those two factors mean that in typical circumstances the cycles are very very long. In fact, if you go back to the previous cycle, the the commodity bottomed in like 2002 or 2003 started to recover. Then we had a massive commodities run across the board 04 to07. Uranium was one of those commodities. You had a mine flood. You had the Chinese buying a lot. peaked out at 134 bucks and it crashed back down basically to like 70 and it started to go up again and that was just sort of the GFCdriven you know blowoff top but it started to recover again in you know late ' 07 into 08 and we had a healthy kind of grind sideways to upward before it got back up and then you had the Fukushima event. So these exogenous events definitely can influence how buller bare markets pan out or in some cases like Fukushima actually trigger a bare market because of the demand destruction. But that was a long cycle. It just got cut short because of that accident. So realistically from the bottom of the commodity until Fukushima you know that was a 7 8year cycle and it would have kept going at the time. Fast forward to today, the setup is arguably leaps and bounds better than it was in the previous cycle. And like I said, we will have volatility. We will have pullbacks in the commodity and the equities. But if you have the conviction in the long-term bull market, that's going to a give you conviction to hang on to your positions when everyone else is being shaken out or even better, b have the conviction to add during weakness. And of course, if you want to trim when things are euphoric, there's nothing wrong with taking profits. You know, nobody ever went broke taking profit. Even if you leave some on the table, everybody will. So, you can't beat yourself up about that. But how to not waste a bull market is just don't get shaken out. And we always try to recommend especially to, you know, retail investors with with less experience in the markets, just avoid margin. Don't buy shortdated options, you know, just you can just be long the co the stock itself and just wait. Close your eyes for 5 years. That's probably going to work. >> So try not to get shaken out. And you have to not waste it by having a grasp of what type of market we're actually in and what type of runway we have here. >> Yeah. Yeah. I think um I've been kind of talking to some kids when I go to the YMCA and play basketball. Uh you know, I asked them, "Hey, did you make the team? Did you make C team?" Varsity varsity JV, you know, and I kind of think of it in that way. >> Um you have your varsity investors, your JV, and your C team. And you know, when I think of like not wasting a bull market, you know, someone like a Rick Rule or like yourself, you know, um, who does the alpha investing, you know, who knows when prices are getting way overheated and, you know, Rick may take some profits. He's like, "Okay, this is way overheated. I think it's going to come back." comes back, he builds a position again or he trades some of that alpha for some beta, you know, and and this is like, you know, senior varsity investment behavior, right? M >> someone who may be on the C team or JV may see the price go up, liquidate position and the price continues going up because you know um that when they see the the price of a stock like increase like they may not even they just see the price they don't see like the longer term like okay this is going to be a structural thing for you know 5 to 10 years >> right >> and so these prices we see today can be significantly higher way later in this cycle. And so, and I consider myself probably like JV, uh, if I'm being honest. And, you know, I think about like, okay, you know, man, I'm in I'm in the green. My positions are up, you know, 100%. You know, 150% or whatnot. And it's so tempting to take that money off the table, right? and take some off the table. But I also know, you know, with my conviction and my research and from all the talks that we've had, we have a long way to go uh as far as this uh bull market and yeah, so that's that's kind of something that that I've been thinking about. You got any perspective there? >> Yeah. No, I think that's that's that's generally good advice. And you know, I think that there's I can mainly only speak to my own experience and what has caused me the most psychological pain with regards to markets is either missing a big move or selling out of an entire position too early. And so I try to not do either of those things as much as possible. And if I'm holding a a winning stock, I have to be extremely confident in the long-term future trajectory of that stock and the underlying commodity or whatever the stock is covering to hold on to a full-size position for a very long time. That is something that's very very difficult for most people to do. And so now if I have a winner that is low conviction and this happens all the time luckily is I have a great network and sometimes people will give me a stock tip and I'll do a cursory amount of research and for the sake of diversification in my portfolio I might have a small position in that. Well, if I get a double on that, that's something that's much more easy for me to cut that in half. >> Mhm. or or to trunch out um to take profits on the way up in small increments that not only will buffer the volatility, but it'll make sure that you're going to get paid, you know, from from your investments. And I think that's very very important. I don't think very many people have the experience or the the intestinal fortitude to hold full positions through very volatile you know bull markets that can have 20 30 40 50% retracements you know like uranium that happens once or twice a year you have a 30 plus% retracement so entering in tanches selling in tanches but most importantly in my opinion is is understanding why you own what you own and having a decent grasp on the longevity of that investment can go a long way towards having conviction and and you know I I like your you know freshman or JV or or or senior varsity type type uh analogy because when I think about varsity investors you know it reminds me of for example and we talked about this maybe six or eight months ago following that that very difficult trough in in Q1 into the early part of Q2 last year for uranium is, you know, communicating with Kevin Bamro and watching some of what he was posting at the time and he was talking a lot about psychology and investing and how once you have enough experience in the markets, you actually end up not even having to force yourself to trade opposite your emotion. You're you're actually aligned with your emotions. So, when the markets get very difficult and you're having 5 to 10% down days in your portfolio and people are crying on Twitter and they're throwing in the hot towel and RSI is is at 20, you don't have to invert the fear that you're feeling into conviction for buying. You actually feel that greed kick in and you actually want to see that weakness and put money to work. And and most people with with limited investing experience hear Kevin Bamro or Rick Rule or people talk like that like they're they want that sale and they think, "Yeah, whatever. That's just lip service. You're just saying that because it's a cute phrase." No, it's not. You actually like I can't tell you, Darl, right now I'm I'm loving to see where the sector is going and I'm loving to see all of the the fantastic performance of the equities so far this year in the uranium space and it's great and the spot price is moving, but I am praying for a retracement. I would love nothing more than for right now something to come in and trigger some fear in the market and to see a 30% drop in these things because I have extreme confidence in what's going to happen for the rest of the year and into multiple years to come. So, I really do want that volatility at times. Of course, it's always nice at times just to see everything go up and to see your actions correct in buying those dips, but >> don't waste the bull market by knowing what you own and having a significant level of confidence in where things could go medium to long-term because in short term you can have volatility from any number of things that are impossible to predict. And you have to be able to understand is this a real threat to my investment or not. And most cases it's if we you are in a bonafide bull market it's probably not and it's probably an opportunity. >> Circa 2020 we pivoted the entire company turned on its head brought in new management. George B our CEO who's built gold mines all over the planet and we focused in on CK copper cake. It was not reliant on drill holes and discoveries. We can go through this process engineering permitting get towards a development stage asset. US Gold Corp. is a near-term lowcost gold producer in Wyoming. To learn more, go to us goldcp.com. >> Yeah. So, I I had um you know, even last year, you know, you had liberation day, which was dreadful, right? I mean, my my whole portfolio was down significantly, but >> I deployed more capital. Um, and there were times where my portfolio looked really good and then I would see a sharp decline. It was just like huge moves like this over, you know, multiple months. But it was I would argue it was on a trajectory up, you know, but a lot of the trade war talks and such would always like, you know, just and so it it was a challenging year for sure, but I held strong, you know, um throughout that volatility, which which I'm proud of myself for, you know, being able to manage my emotions during that time. But yeah, like I'm looking at, okay, my portfolio, it's like, okay, I'm up significantly. uh if I look over the year or year to date from last year and such, I'm up, you know, but um you know, it definitely was not a uh easy ride. >> Yeah, most certainly not. It's it's not easy. I mean, investing is not easy. It it can be very simple, but it's certainly not easy. Otherwise, everybody would do it and everybody would make money doing it. And that's that's definitely not the case. You know, I'm sure you've experienced plenty of difficult moments in your investing experience. And um as have I, as has everybody. And that's sort of that's just the price you pay really to learn how how to best invest for your own um let's say your own ideals, your own psychology. There's a million ways to skin a cat. I've seen extremely effective and successful technical investors, traders essentially that don't want to know a single thing about what they're what they're buying or selling. All they want to do is have an unbiased view of a chart. And then of course you know most of the extremely wealthy and successful investors have been fundamental investors and and everywhere in between. So um it's important for people to find what works best for them and to learn from their own experiences. And I think anytime you have a big loser or a big winner, it's really important to actually take a moment and and review what you did wrong or what you did right. And um honestly and of course I mean this is such a cliche thing to say but it's the it's the investments where I lost money where I learned the most and have taught me the most about about you know moving forward as an investor. >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So before we get into like the the you know macro of uranium uh I do want to I'm curious in your perspective on when companies go and they do these offerings these these share offerings. So they dilute shareholders or whatnot. Obviously in this market like it's being bought up like it's like it doesn't really matter. And you know, I've been kind of curious about that because um you know, I remember when uh I think Dennis had did that, you know, um then the stock fell down from like two bucks and then you know um then it's been slowly recovering. Then they came out with their news uh recent news and then they they the stock popped again like you know to over $3 which haven't been over $3 in a long time. And so, um, I'm curious as as an investor in this sector, when you see, um, you know, companies raising capital, offering more shares and such, how do you factor that into your investment decisions? Does it does it impact it in any type of way or do you go in buying like, okay, they need the capital to do this? It I guess it depends on what they're using the capital for or whatnot, but just curious your perspective there. >> Sure. Um, I mean it's kind of a reality for for mining companies that have yet to be cash flowing. It's just something that exists in this space and it's somewhat unavoidable. It does affect how how we how we buy and sell and trade in in the sector for sure. Um, if you are interested in investing in an exploring exploration or development stage company in or out of the uranium space, this applies to all mining stocks essentially. It's good to understand their cash balance and their cash burn rate at the time that you buy that position because you might take enter into a position only to have the following week them do a uh a private placement equity financing at a 15% discount to the where the stock is trading the market and then you'll get hit with that. Usually those types of dips are temporary unless the timing is bad or the sizing is too big. oftentimes these financings depending on the pro prospects for the company, the sentiment that's currently in the sector that they're operating in, the equity offerings might also come with warrants or half warrants. And that essentially is a right to buy the stock at a set price in the future. And so those warrants, they do two things. one, they give the company the potential to have future cash flow when those warrants are exercised at a future point in time, ideally if the stock is above the strike price or um or and I should say they do add to the total fully diluted share count. So you are getting diluted by not only the stock offering but the warrants as well as a sharehold shareholder. So, it's important to keep an eye on the cash balance and the cash burn rates of any company, especially if you're going in and wanting to make like a one-time large, you know, investment into the company, you definitely want to check that out. If you're taunching into a company over a period of time, it's probably less impactful. But I would say over the past five, six years, the companies that we've been watching in the space, you know, some have done very intelligent raises that were sized correctly and done at the right time in the market and some have not. And the timing and the sizing of raises is actually something that um very solid companies can do well. >> And that's and and of course having the ability to sell the story, having the connections in the financing world, etc., etc., All these things matter, but it's it's an unfortunate reality for the mining world. Um, anytime a company is not cash flowing and they need to raise somehow, Dennis's last raise was done through a convert, so that was less dilutive. There were no warrants involved and they actually have the ability to pay that um that debt back um and save on the interest. So, that's that's usually a better way to go if that if that is being offered. But oftent times you have these very small companies sometimes operating in shady jurisdictions and it's more difficult for them to get debt packages as opposed to equity offerings and and if the company is in a tight spot a lot of times those those financings will will take a pound of flesh. So they'll get not only will they get a 10 15 20% discount to where the market pricing they'll get a full warrant for three years that's only you know 30 40 50% out of the money. Um, so it's just it's just how it is. It's something that you have to keep an eye on, but it's just a part of investing in the mining world. >> Yeah. Yeah. There's so many layers to this to this game, man. So many layers, man. Uh, you just taught me to step back uh side step, fade away three-pointer right there. Like that's that's a whole another level, right? >> Yeah. >> Uh, okay. So, let's let's touch on uranium um the macro. Like so obviously we're still in the supply and uh supply deficit. I saw recent there was some recent news with uh Meta and uh I think it's Meta and Ollo and and such and doing a deal for nuclear power and such and so I'm curious uh what what are you seeing like are the most compelling stories for uranium and nuclear at this time? >> Sure. Yeah, that's a that's another significant deal. And this one is kind of to the next level of the previous deals that we've seen with tech companies and development projects in that they actually have some purchase commitments and some some financial commitments that they're going to be making to both Terrap Power and Ollo, which were the two um nuclear builders, SMR builders to power data center electricity demand for Meta. The other part of that deal is they have a power purchase agreement and I think it was a 10-year offtake um possibly it was 20 I apologize for getting off the top of my head with Vistra which is a a electric utility that has a number of nuclear power plants and part of that deal is Meta is going to be putting up some cash for Vistra to expand the capacity of those existing plants by power upgrades and and certain refurbishments at the plants. So that's one side of it, securing power from existing utility, existing plants. The other side is actually committing to investing in the in the buildout of multiple terap power natri reactors and Oaklo reactors as well. So they had they put out an RFP gosh 13 14 months ago that was due last February and that was a request for for nuclear proposals. They they were basically saying we're interested in nuclear power to power future data center demand. um what do you got? And so and we didn't hear anything after that RFP, those proposals were due last February. We heard nothing until this was announced just a you know a week and a half ago. So they did a lot of due diligence and ended up choosing terror power in Oakland. And that's quite interesting because we're talking multiple gigawatts of power that they're going to want to be nuclear to be supplying but they didn't go with a large reactor which the obvious choice would be the Westinghouse AP. So they went with Terap Power and Oaklo and I believe that's because they believe that these will be able to be built faster. Even though these are both reac advanced reactor designs that will need advanced reactor fuel halo fuel that we are barely producing at this point still that choice I think has some weight and meta I don't know how closely you're following the AI story but they have been outspending everyone. So, you know, Microsoft and Amazon and Google and everybody else are just pouring billions and billions and billions of dollars and Meta is out there stealing talent from everybody and and investing um to a much larger degree in terms of total capital spend than than all of these other companies. So, for them to choose power to use their AI products either, I've yet I I don't think I've ever used Meta's AI uh products. Maybe I've used it in in some ways, but I mean, if they're spending that that amount of money, like I've yet to use their products. I don't have you. >> Yeah. No, I I don't I think nobody really knows exactly what they're going to be doing on the AI front besides the obvious right now, which is the Meta um glasses, whatever they're called. >> So, that obviously is involving AI, and that could in the future be an extremely popular product that might justify all of this capex in and of itself. But I'm not really sure exactly what he's up to, but he's up to something. >> Yeah. Yeah, for sure. Okay. So, so tell walk me through um Okay, so they they're looking at these SMRs are smaller that that could be built faster and such that take this uh Halo uh type of fuel that we're not really producing as much. Um, and I'm I'm curious uh like what happens if they can't really get the supply, right? you know, and so I'm just kind of wondering about that, okay, if they're investing this money for this future product. And then is is Oaklo and and Terap Power, are they close to like permits for building out these uh SMRs and such, or is this like a 10-year type thing? I'm just curious like where are they at in their chain with I mean because the stocks have run up significantly and they have good ideas but it's like okay when when do we actually see the product you know and so just curious where they're at in their kind of uh chain of things. >> Sure. Yeah. No, that's a good question. Um Terrap Power is is in the early stages of construction of their first Nature and Reactor in Wyoming right now. They don't quite yet have NRC approval for the reactor design, but they are expecting that within the next year. They're doing the early um non-nuclear site construction currently. So, you know, pouring concrete and building the building the the facilities that don't have anything to do with the actual reactor core design. And and so that part comes next and they are expecting that they will get that relatively soon. Oaklo has not yet built anything. to my understanding, they are relatively far along in the process with the NRC compared to other advanced reactor designers that have also not built anything yet. Um, so they're far enough along supposedly that Meta would have confidence in making a deal with them. And it's really interesting, Darl, because they're talking about having potentially north of a gigawatt of power from the Oakley reactors. And the Oakley reactors are 15 megawatts. And I think they can be scaled up to around 50, but still even at a 50 megawatt, you're talking about 20 reactors, 20 of these Oaklo reactors. So, um, it it's very curious. It does seem like they're trying to do what's fastest, not necessarily what makes the most sense at an economy of scale, which would be a single large reactor that's going to operate for 80 to 100 years or two large reactors, right? But in their thinking, I'm assuming they believe that they will be able to build an HM reactor or one of the Oaklo reactors faster and then from there be able to scale them faster than than what it would take to build one or two very large reactors. That's what it seems to me both companies are are moving towards being able to build and of course Terrap Power is actually building. They just aren't building the nuclear aspect yet because they don't have their license from the NRC yet. But they'll get it. They'll get it. Okay. So, is this a risky bet? Like I mean I mean Terra Power I mean they're actually you know at least building it and in the process and then Oaklo is further along in the process. But I'm thinking of like okay they have these designs. I mean sometimes you know you you design something and you build it out and you got to figure it out like it mishaps happen and and things of that nature. So I'm like, have these things already been built and tested and to where they are like efficient where they're like, "Okay, we know how to build this. We've tested these and and uh you're guaranteed to get this power output or do they still have or is Meta like the the guinea pig or the um you know where they're testing this out on like how how does that how does that play into the equation?" >> Sure. I mean, I guess there's risk with anything, but I think that the environment here is is so supportive and the need is so great for the electricity that it's something that they're willing to take that risk on to to potentially build first of a kind or second of a kind in the case of the Natri reactor. Um, both of these companies, both Terrap Power and Oaklo, are very serious businesses. They're they're doing they're doing what they're what they're aiming to do. They have all their ducks in a row. They're engaging with the NRC. Um, in Terap Power's case, they're actually building the the reactor. So, they aren't building the reactor itself yet, but like I said, the pre the pre-reactor elements of construction are happening currently. U, you also have an NRC that's had considerable considerable reform under the Trump admin. >> So, there's much much less of a concern and a risk right now that these novel designs that have been decades in the works in some cases. You know, it's not like these companies just popped up out of nowhere. Um the the co-founders of Oaklo have been working on these reactor designs for 15 years. Um Terrap Power is decade plus. So there's less of a risk and less of a concern that the NRC is going to outright reject these things or take 10 years to review them and approve them. Um there's absolute fasttracking happening at the NRC. And you actually even see the like the NRC's Twitter X account kind of taking victory laps on how fast they're getting getting approvals going through the NRC. >> So there's to a total sea change of of of sentiment and incentives at the NRC right now. It's not all about um taking as long as possible to make sure that absolutely every little possible safety element is is covered. um six ways from Sunday with actual anti-uclear people at the helm of the NRC that's in the rearview mirror. So we actually have an NRC that's supportive. So that risk is is much much derisked compared to just you know a couple of years ago. >> And then of course the power need is just so great you know like the gas turbine makers are sold out for the next three four five years you know Genova and others are are largely sold out of gas turbines. So that's not necessarily a quick fix. The other options are are solar and battery backups and they're doing that too. Um you know that of course is the fastest and on an LCE basis the cheapest but the batteries will run out in 20 or 30 years and solar panels you'll have to replace five times over the life of a single reactor. So they're kind of doing the gas thing and the solar and backup thing now as much as they can to get it done now. And they're also investing in nuclear because they know they're going to be operating things for multiple decades. This is not a trend that's about to go away. This is the future and they're investing in that. So the tech companies are going to take more risk than utilities. And you know, >> you can just go back and look at like Amazon in the early days of Amazon trying to work with FedEx and UPS and all of that and they're just like, "You guys are too slow. We're going to buy our own planes and and build our own trucks and we're going to have our own shipping fleet." And they did that. And so for the utilities to be hemming and hawing about building new capacity just because the tech companies are saying, "Hey, we want to buy more electricity from you. You guys go build this." The utilities like, "Nah, we're not going to do that." So the tech companies, "All right, we'll just build it ourselves." And there's pressure also coming from the Trump admin. It's like they don't want to see electricity demand from the tech companies impacting what citizens are paying for electricity. So they're saying, "Yeah, >> you want to build these data centers, you're going to have to provide the power for them as well." Yeah, it's been a big issue that's been coming to the forefront. Um, I mean, I don't know how many communities are impacted in that way or whatnot. I just saw a few headlines here and there, but um, yeah. Is that like how significant is that? Like the the uh data centers moving into certain neighborhoods and skyrocketing electricity costs like is like how real is that narrative? You know, just curious in your perspective. It's very real and and the tech companies understand this and they're doing what they can to not have that type of impact by just buying, you know, um in front of the meter, you know, grid powered electricity and for and driving the price up, which is why they're they're making these power purchase agreements. Constellation did one with Microsoft, right, for for um the restart of Three Mile Island. Now Meta just did with the Vistra. So the power purchase agreements are happening all over the place with existing utilities and existing reactors and and some of these deals are are involved with like like I said the restart of 3M island but also life extensions of reactors that were previously planned to be shut down in the next 3 4 5 6 7 years that are getting 20-year life extensions. And part of those life extensions and the work that the utility is going to have to put in in order to meet the NRC's demands to life extend that reactor is power purchase agreements and offtakes >> with with the tech companies. But electricity availability is the limiting factor in the growth of AI. >> And that is why they're pushing so hard on on every front. Not only the the administration, but the tech companies themselves. They're all pushing really, really hard to build as much capacity as they can of any sort because the quote unquote adversary across the pond, China is just they're expanding electricity um you know 20 times what we are. It's it's absolutely >> theart the chart is the chart is freaking crazy when you look at China's capacity compared to the US. Yeah. It's it's uh it's it's pretty astonishing when I when I see that. Okay. So, so how does this eventually obviously it has to come back to the the miners and the producers right at some point um I mean the producers have already started to uh you know have already you know went up significantly in share prices and such. Uh, so I'm just curious, uh, I mean, they have to get this uranium out of the ground to fuel these reactors and such. And so, um, where do you think we're at in that particular cycle? >> Sure. Well, I mean, for the miners, really what what is driving the miners currently and what's going to drive them for years to come is just u an uplift in the price of uranium. Um, demand is outstripping supply very simply and that's positive for anybody that is selling or will be selling the commodity. Um, with that said, how the tech company story and the growth of nuclear loops into this is, well, it's obviously a tailwind, any new nuclear that's built is going to add meaningful demand for uranium. Now, the timelines can be argued, but in my opinion, any reactor that's going to actually have a shovel hit the ground to start construction, like Terapower, for example, they were they were already out there um sourcing the necessary fuel for that first core load. Um GE Vernova that's building the four B uh BWRx300s um OPG is going to be the operator in Ontario. They were out there buying uranium 2 years ago and that reactor is not going to be operational for another three or four years. M >> so once construction starts even if it takes 5 6 7 8 9 10 years it will equal demand and there's going to be new nuclear builds in this country and in the west in general that start over the next 5 years that will equal uranium demand during this cycle. With all of that said, I personally believe that we're going to see more and more tech company involvement in all things nuclear and potentially even the fuel cycle. So, this and this isn't really new news. You know, it was almost a year ago where we had already heard that there were tech company reps kind of outkicking the tires and asking about where they can buy UF6, etc., etc. So we know that the tech companies if they're going to in some cases maybe sidestep utilities and build new nuclear just because it's faster and they want to be you know controlling their own domain there's no reason why they might get directly invol why they might not get directly involved in the fuel cycle itself. So I would not be surprised at all, Darl, to see certain tech companies actually engage with uranium development projects and or uranium producers for production offtakes in the same way that utilities are securing uh power offtakes for their for their book. I think that we'll see some d-risking of future supply for these companies by actually making investments into the into the mining sector. I would not be surprised to see that over the next few years. And whether or not we see exactly that, we're going to see further and even more engagement and investment in nuclear by the tech companies. So, and the great part about it is we don't need this for this investment to work. Like this is this is all right tail. This is all a tailwind. >> Mhm. >> The existing operating reactors, the reactors under construction right now hitting the grid. That's the demand that we're calculating in our models that show that supply is insufficient to meet. So, we expect further price pressure and we're finally starting to see utilities get engaged in in the in the uranium market, which is a very very good sign. >> Okay. All right. So, President Trump has three more years. Okay. And um you know, I've been kind of thinking about this like cuz a lot of uh the initiatives are focused on long-term growth and so it's it's um you know, five 10 years or whatever. Um and you know, I think that's hard with the United States because we we do have these um you know, changes can have these significant swings and regime changes and like over uh what you know, four every four years or whatnot. And so I just been kind of curious about that. Um do you think at that point in the next 3 years we like we would have made so much progress and created so much value that even if we were to have like um a president who as a um you know a Democrat or whatnot you know they may just want to keep things going and and make that you know a long-term goal for them you know or some I mean obviously it's kind of we're speculating here. But, you know, I just been kind of curious about that cuz I know under certain, uh, presidents, under certain governors and such, uh, when the political party shift, like, you know, the sentiment, uh, would change on like some of these initiatives. And so, um, and some people may not just like the may not like the initiative just cuz Trump did it, even if it provides value, even if it's great. And so, just curious if, uh, if I mean, it's hard to kind of plan around that. It's seems like >> Yeah. >> You know. >> Yeah. No, I think I think it's a a valid question. Um I mean the good news that is that in this country and in most places now nuclear has become a bipartisan issue. Um you actually have bipartisan support in the United States even though you know Democrats and Republicans can agree on essentially nothing. They're both supportive of nuclear. Um which is fantastic. Um you know some of the initiatives that Trump is introducing in the executive orders for example he wants to have 10 large reactors under construction by 2030. So I think well he'll be out 2029, right? >> But that's part of the executive order is to have shovels hit the ground for 10 large reactors by 2030 and ideally that would happen sooner. Um so any of these development projects that actually get started under Trump, I don't see why they would end under Biden because they're not super subsidy heavy. Although the $80 billion investment into the Westinghouse AP-1000s is for those to actually be federally owned reactors, but everything that the private sector is doing, the private sector is going to do. The incentives might change and shift, but you know, going back to the Biden admin, there was no they were not shy about about funding um whatever they wanted to fund either. and part of the, you know, inflation reduction act um initiative that had investment, clean energy investment and clean energy production tax credits that were in the multi-billions of dollars that was hugely de-risking to the nuclear fleet at a time that was, you know, just a couple of years before the real big, you know, data center demand started to hit and that, you know, electricity demand curve just started to go up like a hockey stick. >> Mhm. So, you know, these these are probably long issues that are going to be, you know, dealt with, not only by individual states that are both Democrat Democrat and Republican le, but electricity demand is growing up and and no matter who's in power, there's going to have to be um you know, they're going to have to deal with it somehow. So, we don't worry about that too much. And I I would definitely be nervous about any particular investment that was um super reliant on it being, you know, one side of the political aisle or the other. And luckily, this is not one of those. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And I I do think you know uh credit to Trump's administration like they are coming in and like you know uh speeding up you know regulatory processes and reducing regulations and such which I think that's been like a an issue for for much of this this sector and so um you know I do tip my hat off to them if I had a hat you know but um >> yeah and I think that you know that's important you know. >> Yeah. No, I I agree with you there. And I think one of the best things that Trump did was selecting Christopher Wright as the Secretary of Energy. I mean, everybody loves this guy on both sides of the aisle for the most part. He's he's very much an advocate of expanding energy as quickly as possible for the benefit of benefit of everyone in the country. And he's he's very very sharp. Um he's very measured and I think he's the best secretary of energy we've ever had. And for him to be unabashedly supportive of nuclear is is a very very positive thing. So part of what the administration, in my opinion, has done well is is put him and other people in key roles in place that are that are doing a lot of the the heavy lifting in terms of getting these um these administrative initiatives going and and and actually getting the getting the work done. >> Let's just say that. So hopefully that that momentum continues over the next few years and beyond and we'll actually see some reactors get built. But again, we don't need it. We are modeling for zero new reactor capacity in the United States in our models. So any anything that gets built is total right tail. It's all gravy. >> Yeah. Yeah. For sure. Well, Justin, appreciate this uh very thoughtful and conversation that just get into the weeds of some of these things that are happening behind the headlines and such. So, I appreciate you doing your due diligence there. Uh what's going on with the newsletter? Uh what can people expect if uh they were to sign up for the newsletter? Uh sign up at uraniumsider.com. What could people expect? >> Sure. Um, they can expect daily coverage of the uranium sector. We have got a a small dedicated team and we, you know, we live, eat and breathe this stuff. So, we put a lot of focus into the physical market. That's really where we put most of our attention and that is something that has paid off very well for us. Especially like we were talking earlier about the the crazy volatility the sector can have. If you know what's happened in the physical market, that can not only help you in your conviction to hold or to buy, but it also can tell you whether or not a sell-off or a ramp is justified based on what's happening in the physical market. So, right now we're seeing the stocks up, you know, 30 40%, you know, pretty significantly over the past few weeks. Very, very large move in the sector. Um, but the spot price is moving and there's reasons for that. And so we get into the detail on all of that with our membership. And um I mean in my opinion, if you have money on the line in the sector, you have to own it. That's that's just my honest opinion. You have to know what's going on in the physical market. And so we have >> relationships with multiple price reporters and we have relationships across the industry. And so that helps us to gauge where exactly we're at in the cycle, what's happening in the physical market, and how that dictates into how we want to trade or not in our model portfolios. And we have a portfolio now, Darl, that we launched last year, last February, called the dynamic model that's more of a trading portfolio. We'll tunch in and out of of a small basket of liquid positions. And that portfolio is up over 100% since last February. So, it's it's been a very very solid performer for us. And we, you know, a lot of that goes to our work in the physical market, understanding what's happening there. So, you just have to know that. And most of the time the the praise that we hear from our membership is uh is that we help people hang in when times are tough. So that's something that that obviously paid off very well for our members last year when a lot of people that didn't have the conviction bailed out. And uh you know I'm not taking a victory lap there at all. But >> you know you you have to understand what's happening. You have to have that conviction because the volatility can be incredibly incredibly great. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, you got a team of psychologists and counselors over there, too, right? >> Pretty much. >> That's good. That's good. All right. Well, you all uh heard it from Justin. Be sure to check out uraniumsider.com. Also, click the link that's pinned in the comments. That's to the Vancouver Resource Investment Conference. Love to see you there in person. And hit the subscribe button if you have not subscribed yet. So, thank you, Justin, for coming on the show. >> Always good to see you, Darl. It's my pleasure.