Comments on: The Curious Case Of The REE Companies That Aren’t

By: R T

R T — Sat, 29 Jan 2011 18:45:27 +0000

After reading all of this, I’m left with two conclusions, 1) All we truly need is one portal of information that is beyond reproach, which we have in TMR. I suppose it is incumbant on us to spread that fact, and, 2) We tell people to do “due diligence” on any investment decision for a reason. They have more resources to accomplish this manditory investment principle than ever in the history of human-kind. If it is to much of an energy drain to preform that task, these individuals need an actively managed investment account for their capital, or some type of investment that is not quite so labor intensive. We just can’t hold all of those hands. I do believe crooks and criminals assets should be ceased and they should promptly be escorted to the hootscow, but more-over, I was always taught that a fool and his money are soon parted. Thanks for the honest, diligent research that your group does, not to mention that you share it for free. There are many of us who are grateful for that.

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:28:17 +0000

The confusion arises with the adoption by the media and policy-makers of the term “rare earths” for all of what Jack calls “technology metals” and I refer to as “critical and strategic minerals.” Check the front-page article in Sunday (16 Jan 2011) Denver Post. We’re getting some publicity for the issue and will have to work around the confusion created to geologists, geochemists and chemists.

By: Chris Alexander

Chris Alexander — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 00:37:03 +0000

I had the idea 4 years ago that Rare earth minerals would be a good investment. With my dabbling in small Cap. Australian mining companies, I noticed 12 months ago that any Co. would only have to install the REE acronym in a drilling report, and that would effect their share price for the better. Now we all have to be aware. Good article Gareth.
Chris Alexander

By: Gareth Hatch

Gareth Hatch — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 22:17:52 +0000

@Kyle: I did try to notify CNBC on Friday via the producer who worked on a lot of the rare-earth segments shown that day; he passed a message along to the studio but apparently it made no difference – the two Chinese companies continued to be displayed under the rare-earths banner for the rest of the day…

By: Kyle

Kyle — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:54:42 +0000

I was going to ask if you had informed the offending parties, but I suppose some poeple just don’t like being proved wrong!

By: Gareth Hatch

Gareth Hatch — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:13:44 +0000

Interesting… I posted a version of the above article to Seeking Alpha over the weekend, and it has now mysteriously disappeared….

By: Gareth Hatch

Gareth Hatch — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 16:21:46 +0000

@Kyle: thanks for the note. Perhaps I’m getting too cynical in my old age :-)

By: Kyle

Kyle — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 15:48:31 +0000

HI Gareth,

Thanks for another great article, I had wondered why General Moly had been discussed elsewhere.

In reference to Rare Earth Minerals (LON:REM), I bought stock in this just before it changed it’s name. I live in England and there has been a lot of talk about this company on the boards. People are interested due to the two people involved- Lenigas (although he is involved with lots of companies) and Bruce Rowan, who bought 11.19% of the company in October. And also because there are no rare earth element companies listed on LSE, except Thor Mining (dual-listed on ASX), which I believe has some exposure (sorry it’s Sunday, too lazy to check).

As The Telegraph article says, it appears they plan to invest in REE companies around the world, or possibly directly stockpile like Dacha do, but there has been no confirmation as yet. And although I have shares, I have to say that there cash position of £630,000 does not strike me as being particularly large in the world of REEs.

Anyway, I suppose my point was that maybe Rare Earth Minerals shouldn’t, just yet, be tarnished with the same brush as the 4 listed above?

Thanks

By: Gareth Hatch

Gareth Hatch — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 08:39:27 +0000

I see this problem isn’t confined to the left side of The Pond…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/8232346/Rare-Earth-Minerals-333pc-rise-after-name-change-puts-Aim-under-fresh-scrutiny.html

By: Gareth Hatch

Gareth Hatch — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 05:55:54 +0000

@Brian: a number of rare-earth projects certainly have a ways to go and some hurdles to overcome. If their owners have a defined rare-earth mineral resource and are actively making progress on their development work, I’d still call them rare-earth companies though :-)