u/Aggressive_Rush2357

One part of the silver supply story deserves more attention: a lot of silver comes from mines whose main business is producing another metal.

The Silver Institute’s World Silver Survey 2026 reported that lead and zinc mines remained the largest source of silver in 2025. Higher silver output from copper operations in Peru also helped lift global mine production, which rose 3% to 846.6 million ounces.

That makes the supply response more complicated than “silver goes up, miners produce more.”

For a copper or zinc operation, decisions about expansion depend on the economics of the whole mine. Higher silver revenue helps, but so do the prices of the other metals, operating costs and the quality of the remaining ore.

My read is that this can make silver supply slower to respond to its own price. A rally can improve project economics well before it produces additional ounces.

There are other ways the market adjusts, though. Recycling can increase, manufacturers can use less silver, and investors can sell existing holdings. Limited mine growth alone does not guarantee higher prices.

Still, when judging the longer term outlook, I think it matters where the next ounces are supposed to come from and how quickly they can arrive.

Which do you expect to respond first to sustained higher silver prices: recycling, reduced industrial usage or new mine production?

https://silverinstitute.org/elevated-lease-rates-regional-liquidity-tightness-and-robust-investor-interest-resulted-in-record-silver-prices-in-2025/

Silver was up around 1.9% in Reuters’ Monday report as weaker US jobs data reduced expectations of an October Fed hike. The dollar and Treasury yields were still putting pressure on precious metals, though.

That leaves an interesting question: what would convince you this bounce can last?

For me, one green session doesn’t settle much. I’d want to see silver hold its gains through the next round of economic data, especially if the dollar stays firm.

A weaker jobs report can support metals by changing the rate outlook. It also raises questions about economic demand. With silver, both sides matter, which is why I’m cautious about reading every softer data release as automatically bullish.

Curious what people here actually use to judge a move:

• Silver holding a particular price level
• A weaker dollar or lower real yields
• Gold and silver moving higher together
• Stronger physical demand or tighter availability
• Something else entirely

And what would make you change your mind?

Interested in the reasoning as much as the price targets. What separates a bounce you’d fade from one you’d trust?

https://www.reuters.com/world/india/gold-gains-october-fed-rate-hike-prospects-fade-2026-10-05/

Silver is back near $60 after falling almost 5% today.

It is now roughly half the January high, but it is still well above where it traded a year ago.

The long term arguments have not disappeared. The market is still expected to record another annual deficit, mine supply is slow to respond and most silver is produced as a byproduct of other metals.

The short term setup is much less comfortable.

Oil is rising, inflation concerns are back, bond yields are moving higher and markets are pricing the possibility of additional rate hikes. Silver has also repeatedly struggled to hold its rallies since the January peak.

So what are you doing at these prices?

1. Buying physical silver
2. Buying silver miners for more leverage
3. Waiting for a move closer to $50
4. Staying away until the trend improves

I am especially interested in what price or market signal would change your answer.

Silver fell just over 5% today, dropping toward $61 an ounce as gold, mining stocks and the broader market moved lower.

What makes the move interesting is the reason behind it.

Oil rose again after the latest attempt to resolve the conflict with Iran failed to produce an agreement. Higher oil normally sounds supportive for precious metals. It increases inflation risk, adds geopolitical uncertainty and creates more concern about the purchasing power of currencies.

Instead, the market focused on what higher oil could mean for interest rates.

More expensive energy can keep inflation elevated. That increases the likelihood of further rate hikes, pushes bond yields higher and supports the US dollar.

All three can pressure precious metals.

Silver usually feels that pressure more than gold because it sits between several markets. It is a monetary metal, an industrial input and a speculative asset. When investors reduce risk, silver can sell off with equities even when its longer term supply outlook has not changed.

Today’s move does not mean the expected 2026 silver deficit disappeared overnight. Mine supply, recycling and industrial demand did not suddenly change by 5%.

What changed was the price investors were willing to pay while yields and the dollar were moving higher.

That distinction matters, but it does not guarantee an immediate rebound. Silver can remain disconnected from its physical fundamentals for long periods when positioning and macroeconomic conditions dominate trading.

Does the move toward $60 create a better entry point, or does silver need interest rate expectations to stabilize before buyers return?

Source:

https://www.reuters.com/world/india/gold-eases-fresh-us-iran-tensions-lift-oil-prices-rate-hike-bets-2026-09-28/

Gold has pulled back below $4,300, interest rates are rising, and markets are pricing further tightening from the Federal Reserve.

TD Securities still believes gold could move above $5,000 into 2027.

Its argument is that the market may already be pricing a fairly aggressive rate path. If the Federal Reserve delivers fewer hikes than expected, gold could respond quickly.

Positioning also appears less crowded than the price alone might suggest. According to TD, discretionary positioning remains well below previous peaks, while global gold ETFs have accumulated approximately 6.3 million ounces since July.

Central banks remain another part of the thesis. TD estimates that central bank purchases are running near 70 tonnes per month on a three-month moving average, while the People’s Bank of China has reported gold purchases for 22 consecutive months.

The interesting question is whether gold is still primarily an interest rate trade.

Higher real yields should create pressure for a non-yielding asset. But persistent central bank demand, fiscal uncertainty and concerns about currency purchasing power may be giving gold a second source of support that is less sensitive to each Federal Reserve decision.

A move above $5,000 is far from guaranteed. Still, if gold can remain above $4,000 while markets expect several additional rate increases, that would suggest the underlying demand is broader than simple rate-cut speculation.

Article:
https://www.kitco.com/news/article/2026-09-23/golds-bull-run-isnt-over-td-securities-sees-next-leg-above-5000

The long-term uranium price has reportedly reached its highest level in at least 18 years.

That may be more important than a short-lived move in the spot market. Long-term contracts determine much of the revenue earned by producers and the cost utilities pay to secure future fuel.

The latest source of enthusiasm is data-centre electricity demand. Nuclear plants offer dependable output around the clock, while several technology companies are pursuing nuclear power agreements, reactor restarts and advanced reactor projects.

However, an electricity agreement does not create immediate uranium demand.

Restarting an existing reactor can affect fuel requirements sooner. Extending a plant’s operating life also preserves demand that might otherwise disappear. New reactors—especially advanced designs—could take years before they require commercial fuel loads.

The strongest uranium argument may therefore be broader than AI. Utilities already need to replace expiring contracts, new conventional reactors are entering service, and Western countries are rebuilding parts of the nuclear fuel supply chain. Data centres add another reason to keep reactors operating and build more capacity.

Is AI already affecting uranium fundamentals, or is it mainly strengthening a supply story that was developing anyway?

Article: https://www.wsj.com/finance/commodities-futures/data-centers-light-fire-under-uranium-prices-9220990e

Most of Stallion’s recent attention has been directed toward drilling at Coyote, but Stone Island may be the more important development for the wider Moonlite project.

The company completed 519 ground gravity stations at Stone Island and combined the results with approximately 690 line kilometres of VTEM data.

That work produced three priority areas.

Target A has multiple conductor responses overlapping the strongest residual gravity low. Target B extends along the same general conductor trend, while Target C provides a separate target to the southwest.

None of this confirms uranium mineralization. Gravity lows and conductors can reflect several different geological features.

Their value comes from narrowing the search area.

Stallion began with a large regional land position. It is now combining different datasets to identify smaller areas that may justify detailed modelling, additional ground work and eventually drilling.

Coyote remains the main drill target. Stone Island gives the company a second area progressing through the same target development process, rather than leaving the investment case dependent on one system.

Large lithium resources are not particularly rare anymore. The harder question is whether a project can become part of a functioning domestic supply chain.

That is what makes LiFT Power interesting to watch.

Its Yellowknife Lithium Project contains an inferred resource of 50.4 million tonnes grading 1.00% lithium oxide. Following its combination with Winsome Resources, LiFT also controls the Adina project in Quebec, which contains 61.4 million tonnes in the indicated category and another 16.5 million tonnes inferred.

Those figures establish scale, but scale alone does not build a mine.

LiFT is now working on several parts of the development equation at once. It launched a 38,970 metre drill program at Adina Galinée, began studying lithium carbonate conversion and secured an option connected to the former Renard diamond mine site.

That last piece deserves attention. Existing roads, power, buildings and other infrastructure can potentially affect development timelines and capital requirements just as much as another round of drilling.

LiFT was also included in the prospectus prepared for the Canada Investment Summit this week. That does not amount to project approval or government funding, but it shows how the company is positioning itself within Canada’s broader critical minerals strategy.

The next lithium cycle may reward companies with the largest deposits. It may reward those that can connect resources, infrastructure, processing and financing into one workable plan.

Which matters more at this stage: adding tonnes or building the development system around them?

Ur-Energy (TSX: URE, NYSE American: URG) has officially moved from one operating uranium mine to two.

Lost Creek drummed 140,873 pounds of U₃O₈ during Q2 2026, up 47.4% from the previous quarter. Shirley Basin began initial recovery in April, received final approval for full operations in June and shipped its first uranium-loaded resin to Lost Creek in August.

The setup is interesting because Shirley Basin does not need its own complete processing plant. It captures uranium on resin and sends it to Lost Creek for final processing, drying and packaging. That avoids duplicating a considerable amount of infrastructure.

Together, the two operations have annual licensed production and processing capacity of 4.2 million pounds.

The obvious caution is that Ur-Energy is producing nowhere near that amount today. Licensed capacity is the ceiling, not guidance.

The company expects one million pounds of base deliveries in 2026. It delivered 270,000 pounds during the first half, meaning most of the year’s volume is weighted toward the second half.

Ur-Energy reported a Q2 average sales price of US$66.85 per pound and a cash cost of US$40.20 per pound sold. That cash cost excludes certain noncash expenses, but it shows that produced pounds are generating a margin.

The company also had US$95.3 million in unrestricted cash at the end of June, giving it room to continue developing wellfields and ramping Shirley Basin.

At a market capitalization of roughly C$715 million, the market is clearly assigning value to future production rather than valuing Ur-Energy only on its current sales.

The next few quarters should show whether that is justified. I will be watching pounds captured and drummed at Lost Creek, shipment volumes from Shirley Basin and whether cash costs improve as production grows.

What level of annual production would Ur-Energy need to reach before the current valuation starts looking reasonable?

American Lithium Corp. (TSXV: LI, OTCQX: AMLIF) is usually grouped with lithium developers because of its TLC project in Nevada and Falchani in Peru. Macusani makes the company more interesting to me because it adds a fairly substantial uranium asset that can get overlooked inside the larger portfolio.

Macusani is a near-surface uranium project in the Puno region of Peru. The existing PEA contemplated approximately 70 million pounds of U₃O₈ in the mine plan, with average production above six million pounds per year over a ten-year mine life.

The grade, approximately 289 ppm in the PEA mine plan, is obviously nothing like the grades found in parts of the Athabasca Basin. The potential advantage is the project’s near-surface geometry and the way the mineralization responds to processing.

The uranium is hosted in porous volcanic rock. Early tank-leach testing produced recoveries in the mid-90% range, compared with 88% in the existing PEA. Preconcentration testing also found that roughly 85% of the uranium could be retained in 50% of the original mass.

If those results hold up at a larger scale, Macusani could potentially process less material at a higher effective head grade. That could reduce the size of the required plant and the amount of material being handled. It is promising test work, although it still needs to be incorporated into updated engineering before anyone can assume the savings are real.

The exploration side is also unusually large. American Lithium lists more than 47 additional targets, while approximately 85% of the broader exploration land package remains undrilled.

The main issue is getting from an interesting deposit to a financeable project. Peru still needs a clear framework for transporting and exporting uranium products, and the project requires updated economic work, permitting and substantial capital.

American Lithium has previously discussed separating Macusani from its lithium assets. I think that could make the uranium value easier for the market to understand, but I would not price in a transaction until the structure and timing are firm.

Would you buy American Lithium partly for Macusani today, or wait until there is a clearer standalone uranium vehicle?

Sierra Madre Gold and Silver spent the last few years bringing La Guitarra back into production. It is now preparing to see whether that same approach can work at a much larger second asset.

The company trades as SM on the TSXV and SMDRF on the OTCQX.

Sierra Madre closed its acquisition of the Del Toro mine in Zacatecas in June. Del Toro is a past-producing silver, lead and zinc complex previously operated by First Majestic from 2013 to 2019.

The property includes three underground mining centres and an existing flotation plant with roughly 3,000 tonnes per day of capacity. It also has power, water, road access, permits and an experienced workforce nearby.

That does not mean Del Toro can simply be switched back on. Sierra Madre still needs to verify the historical work, update the geological model and determine what a restart would cost under current conditions.

The amount of existing information should give the company a useful head start. Del Toro comes with data from 631 drill holes covering more than 137,000 metres. Known mineralized zones remain open, while several carbonate replacement and skarn targets received limited attention during previous exploration.

Mapping and sampling are now underway, with drilling expected around the middle of 2027.

I think the larger point is that Sierra Madre is no longer entirely dependent on one mine. La Guitarra provides current production and cash flow, while Del Toro offers a second route to much larger scale if management can repeat the restart model.

There is still plenty of work ahead, but buying a permitted past-producing complex with a large mill is a very different proposition from building a new mine from scratch.

Sierra Madre Gold and Silver already has La Guitarra back in production, but its upcoming East District drill program may be the more interesting part of the story.

The company trades as SM on the TSXV and SMDRF on the OTCQX. La Guitarra is an underground silver and gold mine complex in the State of Mexico.

Sierra Madre has approval for 22 drill pads in the East District and plans to test as many as 30 mapped vein systems through a fully budgeted 30,000-metre program. It will be the first modern, systematic drilling campaign across much of that area.

The first seven holes are expected to be sub-horizontal and between 1,000 and 1,500 metres long. Drilling from an area already permitted for mining allows the company to test several projected veins from a smaller surface footprint.

There is already historical work to build from. An exploration target covering only five East District vein systems estimated between 0.77 and 1.54 million tonnes grading 440 to 670 g/t silver and 2.4 to 3.6 g/t gold.

That estimate is conceptual. It is not a mineral resource, and there is no guarantee drilling will reproduce those grades or tonnes. It does show why the area deserves a serious program.

The five vein systems included in that estimate cover a combined strike length of 7.7 kilometres. Sierra Madre’s newer mapping and three-dimensional modelling have identified additional systems beyond those five, including areas with historical underground workings.

What makes this different from a typical junior exploration program is that the drilling sits beside an operating mine and processing plant. A meaningful discovery would not automatically become economic, but nearby infrastructure could make future development much more practical.

Full technical background:

https://sierramadregoldandsilver.com/read/auto-news-1784026892

Most junior silver companies spend years raising money before generating any revenue. Sierra Madre Gold and Silver is already operating La Guitarra in Mexico and is now trying to grow production while the silver price remains strong.

Sierra Madre trades as SM on the TSXV and SMDRF on the OTCQX.

La Guitarra sold 123,483 silver-equivalent ounces during Q2, generating US$8.23 million in net revenue and US$1.58 million in gross profit. The company ended June with US$22.2 million in cash and US$25 million in working capital.

The quarter was not perfect. Costs rose as Sierra Madre completed more underground development, processed lower-grade material from development headings and dealt with power interruptions. The stronger Mexican peso also worked against the company.

The more interesting part is what has happened since the quarter ended.

Daily mill throughput reached as high as 672 tonnes per day in August, up 34 percent from the previous 500-tonne level. Phase I is targeting 750 to 800 tonnes per day before the end of September, followed by a larger expansion to 1,200 to 1,500 tonnes per day in 2027.

Backup generators have been installed at the plant, new underground equipment is being introduced and production is ramping up from Coloso and Nazareno. Sierra Madre has also repaid the entire US$5 million loan it used to restart La Guitarra.

The next few quarters should show whether those investments translate into higher production and lower costs. If they do, Sierra Madre could start being valued as a growing producer rather than a speculative restart.

Stallion Uranium is trading around $0.15, near the bottom of its 52 week range of roughly $0.13 to $0.53.

That chart looks rough. The underlying company has continued spending money on exploration and expanding its main drill program.

At March 31, Stallion reported C$16.3 million in cash and another C$3.0 million in short term investments. Total liabilities were approximately C$1.7 million.

The company spent C$2.6 million on exploration during the first quarter. That is a meaningful amount for a company with a market value around C$22 million, and it shows where the treasury is going.

Stallion originally planned 4,000 metres at Coyote. The program increased to 5,500 metres after the early holes encountered alteration, complex structures and elevated radioactivity.

It has now been expanded again to approximately 6,750 metres.

The latest hole returned the strongest radioactivity in the program, with a peak of 1,416 counts per second inside a 2.3 metre interval averaging 595 counts per second.

Gamma readings cannot be converted directly into uranium grades, so Stallion still needs assays and a proper mineralized intersection. The company is continuing because the geological information has given the team more specific areas to test.

The capital structure needs to be considered as well. Stallion had approximately 148.4 million shares outstanding at the end of March and about 83.3 million warrants with a weighted average exercise price near $0.27.

Those warrants represent future dilution if exercised, but they could also provide additional funding if the share price trades above the exercise prices.

A falling share price tells you where sentiment sits. It does not automatically tell you whether a junior is running out of money or whether its exploration program is deteriorating.

STUD remains funded, the program has been expanded and the strongest radioactivity came from the latest round of drilling. The next few holes should tell us whether the market became impatient too early.

Canada supplied 32 percent of all uranium delivered to United States nuclear operators in 2025, making it their largest individual source.

Kazakhstan supplied 28 percent, followed by Australia at 15 percent. Uranium produced inside the United States accounted for only 7 percent.

That level of import dependence matters because American utilities still have a large amount of future demand left to contract.

The latest EIA report shows 186 million pounds of unfilled uranium requirements through 2035. Existing contracts cover maximum deliveries of approximately 174 million pounds over the next decade, against total anticipated requirements of 360 million pounds.

Utilities have inventories and do not need to contract every missing pound immediately. They also cannot wait until a reactor is nearly out of fuel. Uranium must be mined, converted, enriched and fabricated into fuel assemblies before it can be used.

Canada is already positioned to supply that market.

Saskatchewan’s Athabasca Basin hosts some of the highest grade uranium deposits in the world. The province also has the infrastructure, skilled workers and regulatory experience needed to move large uranium projects forward.

Finding the next generation of deposits is the challenge.

Stallion Uranium has exposure to roughly 1,700 square kilometres in the Athabasca Basin, including its joint venture ground with Atha Energy. Its flagship Coyote target is being tested through an expanded drill program expected to reach approximately 6,750 metres.

The latest hole produced Stallion’s strongest radioactivity so far. Gravity work has also identified five target areas across the Coyote corridor, giving the team several areas to test as the program continues.

Stone Island provides another target beyond Coyote and is currently being advanced through additional geophysical work.

The United States has other possible suppliers, but Canada is already its largest source and one of the most established Western uranium jurisdictions. If American utilities become more aggressive about securing future supply, successful Athabasca producers, developers and explorers should be in a strong position.