All things STOCKS

#11,776
#11,776
Last Friday I intiated a short of SNOW after it popped $30. Made 200% by Wednesday. I'm doing the same thing today with LULU hoping for a similar result obvi.
 
#11,778
#11,778
13.60 now. If market closes below the lows of yesterday, we go down majorly starting next week instead of the week after imo.
 
#11,779
#11,779
I had a feeling that the early gains wouldn’t hold. An end to a crushing week just before a 3-day weekend. I don’t think that the fear is of missing out just yet.

I’m ready for some strong weeks of advancing.
 
#11,780
#11,780
I backed off finding another put to write just before the close. I like to find something one week out, but I held off. I did pickup URI 220909 P 277.5 yesterday though. I might shop for another put or two on Tuesday morning if the open is lower. I think I heard the CNBC boys just say that the Nasdaq average finished lower for the 6th straight day and that hasn’t happened since the summer of 2019. That was BEFORE COVID. 7 straight down days might be hard for the bears to pull off.
 
#11,784
#11,784
Go aeiou said:
SMR
I don't normally buy companies that are losing money, but this is likely the future for advanced parts of the world
Click to expand...

Not a lot of info available on them on Fidelity's app, but I definitely see your point (and I'm intrigued). Might do some more research on the interweb, and perhaps pick up a handful of shares if it passes muster.
 
#11,785
#11,785
SMR 10Q “risks” are extensive in the SEC filing link below.

https://s29.q4cdn.com/251742275/fil...2/q2/ab5acbca-3736-4f5c-ae21-38b41a8a4b04.pdf

I might be more inclined to buy shares of Fluor. The SMR capital structure is extremely complicated. The publicly traded shares might be more of a tax asset than an actual business. Stock options. Multiple classes of shares. No material sales. Potential competition from China and other cheaters. No worldwide patent.

I don’t understand the entity. I like the concept though. But I think I’d instead get exposure through Fluor and some nuclear and/or uranium ETFs. But it has a market cap of only a half billion and almost a million shares change hands daily, so there is interest.

If anybody can interpret what’s going on with the publicly traded partnership shares, I’m all ears.
 
#11,786
#11,786
Thunder Good-Oil said:
SMR 10Q “risks” are extensive in the SEC filing link below.

https://s29.q4cdn.com/251742275/fil...2/q2/ab5acbca-3736-4f5c-ae21-38b41a8a4b04.pdf

I might be more inclined to buy shares of Fluor. The SMR capital structure is extremely complicated. The publicly traded shares might be more of a tax asset than an actual business. Stock options. Multiple classes of shares. No material sales. Potential competition from China and other cheaters. No worldwide patent.

I don’t understand the entity. I like the concept though. But I think I’d instead get exposure through Fluor and some nuclear and/or uranium ETFs. But it has a market cap of only a half billion and almost a million shares change hands daily, so there is interest.

If anybody can interpret what’s going on with the publicly traded partnership shares, I’m all ears.
Click to expand...
I've never liked Fluor. Hopefully they don't ruin SMR. Small WAG buy for me.
I'll almost certainly sell just before it skyrockets.
 
#11,790
#11,790
I would expect considerable NIMBY pushback on distributed nuclear power. But if they can be put online really quickly there’s certainly a lot of opportunity. I’m talking like weeks, not years. Take them to areas overloaded with stress on their grids. To disaster areas. To undeveloped regions. I’m not real clear on exactly what a small nuclear energy device is and how safe it would be. Is it practical to have them in subdivisions or apartment complexes? Is the footprint similar to what electrical substations already on the grid use? Are they vulnerable and require lots of security? If they fail is the environment at risk?
 
#11,792
#11,792
Thunder Good-Oil said:
I would expect considerable NIMBY pushback on distributed nuclear power. But if they can be put online really quickly there’s certainly a lot of opportunity. I’m talking like weeks, not years. Take them to areas overloaded with stress on their grids. To disaster areas. To undeveloped regions. I’m not real clear on exactly what a small nuclear energy device is and how safe it would be. Is it practical to have them in subdivisions or apartment complexes? Is the footprint similar to what electrical substations already on the grid use? Are they vulnerable and require lots of security? If they fail is the environment at risk?
Click to expand...

The NIMBY factor, as well as the unmatched capacity of elected officials to over-regulate things they don't particularly understand, could be significant hurdles for sure. That said, the quick-deployment applications you mentioned (disaster areas, areas with overloaded grids, etc) could be compelling. One question I have is: what is the footprint on one of those things? Tractor trailer size? Smaller? Deployability and security/failsafes will be big factors in their future success.
 
#11,793
#11,793
tbh said:
The NIMBY factor, as well as the unmatched capacity of elected officials to over-regulate things they don't particularly understand, could be significant hurdles for sure. That said, the quick-deployment applications you mentioned (disaster areas, areas with overloaded grids, etc) could be compelling. One question I have is: what is the footprint on one of those things? Tractor trailer size? Smaller? Deployability and security/failsafes will be big factors in their future success.
Click to expand...

I wonder how different they are from reactors already on navel vessels. Those ships can dock in areas where hurricanes and tidal waves have blown through and off load electricity.
 
#11,795
#11,795
SMR might be more of a company of expertise rather than patents. The big players could swoop in and hire their talent once they’ve got it all figured out. I just can’t imagine a company worth well under a billion being a huge player in a micro-nuclear revolution.
 
#11,798
#11,798
Go aeiou said:
Grew up in OR. You would expect people to be receptive in the area .
Or as Thunder says NIMBY.
Click to expand...

I guess the SMRs are still quite large. Just smaller than the full scale projects that were being mothballed all over in the 1980s and 1990s. Three Mile Island and Chernobyl kind of sped up the demise. Fukushima in 2011 probably derailed a return to nuclear.

Clinch River / Oak Ridge is a good place to reboot the industry. The NIMBY folks there would be an extreme minority. But outsiders will attack it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbh
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top