Reddit Posts
Small Modular Reactor Stocks may be the next tech trend. Check where to invest.
St-Georges Eco-Mining Corp. (CSE: SX) (OTCQB: SXOOF) (FSE: 85G1): Future For The Planet's Betterment
Uranium Stocks trending up: Highlights from the Past Quarter causing this trend. What are some uranium tickers people are watching?
Uranium stocks are trending higher. Here's some insight as to why with news highlights from the Uranium sector this past Quarter... What are some Uranium tickers investors are watching?
Uranium stocks are trending higher. Here's some insight as to why with some news highlights from the Uranium sector this past Quarter
St-Georges Eco-Mining Announces 20,000 tons of Industrial Battery Processing Capacity at the Company's Plant in Thorold, Ontario - Corporate Update (CSE:SX)(OTCQB:SXOOF)(FSE:85G1)
#RYCEY Soon last chance to buy Rolls-Royce under$1.5 (up 46% in 3-mo)
Something a little different, SMRs for industrialized use..Ares Acquisition Corp (X-energy) Warrants - NOT THE CLASS A SHARES
The uranium sector: A lot is changing the last 3 months at the demand side. The supply side isn't ready for this (An update: the actual additional uranium demand each event creates. It's impressive) + NEW: U-turn of Sweden + NEW: Germany extending the operations of 3 reactors
Uranium Stock Thesis - Why they are up Double digits today- Big Oil Coming back to Uranium
NuScale Power (SMR) is going to be a beast in the coming years (imo). Why?
RR.L and CINE.L , Great Britain stocks YOLO
$SMR: Go Long Nuclear Reactors Into Summer Blackouts
Mentions
RDDT, JD, INTC, SMR, aaaaand BYND
SMR, NNE, OKLO - energy demand isn't slowing and Nuclear is the future
Spent about 4 months last year riding 2500 shares of SMR. Holly crap; that was stressful. In the end, my trades totaled about $1m and amounted to $45k profit. Oe well.
WSB can be a good resource. For every 10,000 shit posts there’s 1-2 good pieces of information. Just have to do your own DD on anything you hear. I heard about ASTS, RKLB, and SMR when they were all $2-$4 from shit posting here.
SMR production plants for Nuscale are not expected to be completed until 2030. The top isn’t in, we’re just a little early.
SMR in the past month’s nuking Should’ve bought CEG, or CCJ, or hell even OKLO.
Hi, Long time investor here, I can tell you that even if you research the SHI\* out of a stock , things can go to shit , markets turn , somebody puts a 200% tariff on a part needed for assembly . I agree with the gentleman that pointed out "Your exposure to speculative names is too high" I would have to agree. I don't do airlines either or cruise lines or Banks I try to have a base first , like some etf's of the S&P 500 , VOO, VOOG, etc. I have a good foundation of these , and have my little 5% or 10% speculation money, recently picked up SMCI , already has a 25% return. And for real speculation , IONQ , and SMR , A couple of other more targeted ETF's are MGK , basically the MGK, the [Vanguard Mega Cap Growth ETF](https://investor.vanguard.com/investment-products/etfs/profile/mgk), holds **66 stocks** as of September 30, 2025. Its holdings are concentrated in U.S. megacap growth stocks, with a significant portion in the technology sector, and its top holdings include NVIDIA, Apple, and Microsoft. Or you can do more tech XLK is good for that .... Or the ETF MAGS the magnificent 7 , only those 7 stocks ... QQQ for tech as well , or if you are going to hold for a long time QQQM , lower fee's I also have individual stocks like Amazon, GOOGLE, APPLE, By using targeted ETF's I have been able to beat the S&P500 for the last 7 years or so.... So far this year , I have had returns of 38.27% YTD (mostly stocks) and another account (mostly ETF's) 15.76% YTD . Another one that's 16.51% YTD . The S&P500 as of today YTD 15.29 % Good Luck and Have a good day (:
Yeah I’ll be more specific too - right now OKLO says they have power plants that produce up to 75 MW/hr. In 2023, data centers used approximately 176 TWh of electricity. That was 4.5% of all electricity in the US at the time. OKLO would need to build and install over 2 million 75 MWh units to meet just the data center demand from 2 years ago. But OKLO has not actually turned on a single reactor yet. So the story that they will power all these data centers is pure hype. They literally don’t have any commercial revenue and yet their valuation is $13 billion. I hope they do well and I hope the company grows to $1 trillion market cap, but until the valuation makes more sense I’m not going to invest. Maybe OKLO will win, maybe one of the other 80+ public and private SMR companies will win. Really no way to know right now. It’s all storytelling and hype at the present moment.
400-500 acres to produce 100MW and the estimated 10 acres you’re quoting is for the SMR pad alone, reactors require a lot of ancillary buildings, water treatment, brownfield, security parameter. Also solar can be placed on rooftops, etc. Anyhow, I know solar will never be the only energy source, but since it’s the cheapest and quickest to deploy it will be optimized for significantly. If you truly believe in a nuclear future, take a look at SOLS. Anyhow, best of luck.
So your pitch is stop looking at the highly profitable established international companies and start being worried about micro caps with no income Well yeah, there are plenty of years IWM or RSP don’t beat SPY (and those companies are **far better** than the companies you listed here) but we still call it a bull market. And we still say VOO and chill. There’s a reason it isn’t called SMR an chill
I’m officially an SMR bag holder, dang.
2x SMR went from $40 to $4 in a month lmao almost seems like a buy tbh
Most people know close to nothing about the nuclear power industry in the United States and this is far and away mostly hype. I can’t fit an entire analysis of the current state of the nuclear power industry in the U.S. in one comment but here’s my take on what the current climate is and why SMR’s haven’t gotten to be a popular focus. 1.) The U.S. nuclear industry at this point is essentially a life support system centered around operating legacy reactors. We have had 3 new reactors come online in the last 30 years (2 at Vogtle & 1 at Watts Bar). The reasons for this lack of new reactors are plentiful but in my opinion is mostly explained by cheap natural gas coming online in the 2000’s and the nuclear taboo making new nuclear politically unpopular. 1b) By many accounts the new Vogtle reactors were a failure due to their cost overruns and nearly 15 year construction timeline. This is coupled with the objective failure at the Virgil Summer plant where they actually started building two AP1000 reactors and abandoned the project mid-construction. The reasons for these failures are hotly debated but come down to 2 main factors in my opinion: 1) The implementation of a new reactor design (AP1000) comes with major pains for the first builders. Construction began before the plans were finalized, and the old adage about the last 1% of a project takes 50% of the time applied all to well here. 2) Perhaps more relevant for future reactors is that the U.S. does not have a robust professional workforce trained in nuclear construction. This cannot be understated enough. The construction of a new power plant requires highly specialized workers across every industry (electricians, welders, etc). New construction essentially requires a ton of training in addition to cost overruns due to failed inspections of materials. 2) The failure of the AP1000 created an environment that makes SMR’s very attractive from a financing perspective. With a few AP1000’s you might go $15 billion over budget and your whole utility could go bankrupt from one project. SMR’s deliver nuclear power with a fraction of the upfront cost. 2b) I believe the claims of SMR proponents are a little over-optimistic about their future scale. The primary problem in my opinion is that SMR’s (at least the ones that have shown serious technical viability) operate at far lower power outputs but at marginally lower civil footprints. Nuclear energy is already expensive at a large scale and it is even more expensive at a small scale. You have to do a similar civil footprint, environmental reviews, storage requirements, etc and you have less scale to offset these costs. 3.) Will AI change the cost/benefit for SMR’s? I don’t really believe so and most of the claims being made are being extremely generous if not outright misleading. For a deeper dive into this please check out this great summary of OKLO’s actual position vs what they are claiming to investors. https://youtu.be/IvqORMySD6s?si=faBz9Y9HeH8wuDiz
Solar doesn't produce electricity at night and the amount of space solar panels would need to power a single data center would be cost prohibitive. A single data center can use 100MW. That means a single data center would require around 700 acres of land just for the solar panels. A rolls royce SMR requires 10 acres of land.
TPUs are much more optimized for training and inference than GPU. They consume less energy and are faster. That's the main reason many companies are considering TPUs in the first place. Both meta and google know how the underlying computation is done since they own pytorch and Tensorflow respectively. So they know the benchmarks better than anyone else. This is the same reason why Apple built it's own chips for their devices. Google also builds it's own chips to power Android. It's just power efficient and faster. This means less compute and energy demands. That's why TSMC and many SMR stocks are down today. That's my guess.
There's not enough power to run all these data centers that are being built. I can see companies like Meta and Google just outright buying their own SMR's for their own use.
Modern SMRs have a shot although they will have a hard time to take of. Passive safety features could allow less stringent oversight, significantly reducing the costs. However they compete with solar and solar+batteries. SMRs for AI are hype: E.g. The openai+Oracle Stargate project is a 4.5 GW datacenter to be build within the next 2-4 years. A single SMR delivers up to 0.3 GW . So this project alone would need close to 15 SMRs. Not a single one is yet build. It's not that no SMR of this project is build. But no modern SMR is at all build in the US. (two are under construction in the US, one is a military project to test, if they could support military bases). Even in China, only a demonstration project is running. SMRs are not a the technological readiness to deploy en mass. SMRs are just so much an unknown that tech firms can project all their promises onto them and they will not provoke a viceral reaction from the current administration
The opportunity is real but the timeline is longer than headlines suggest. Here’s where the money will actually flow: **Near-term plays (2025-2028):** 1. **Constellation Energy (CEG)** \- owns the plants Big Tech is restarting. They signed Microsoft's 20-year, 837MW TMI-1 deal and Meta's 1,121MW agreement. With 24 reactors up for renewal before 2035, they're the incumbent that actually has operating assets. Stock already up on these deals, but more renewals coming. 2. **Uranium miners** \- Cameco, Kazatomprom. The supply chain is constrained and SMRs need fuel. No new major uranium mines have opened in a decade. If SMRs scale, uranium goes into structural deficit by 2027-2028. This is your commodity leverage without picking an SMR winner. 3. **Regulatory consulting firms** \- The bottleneck isn't technology, it's NRC approval. SMRs need site-specific licenses and Big Tech doesn't know how to navigate this. Firms like **Lightbridge (LTBR)** that specialize in regulatory strategy and nuclear fuel consulting are quietly essential. **Mid-term (2028-2035):** 4. **SMR manufacturers** \- **NuScale (SMR)** is furthest along, first US SMR approved by NRC in 2020. Problem: their first customer (Utah) canceled the project. But now they have Amazon's $500M commitment for Washington state. Still risky - no commercial deployment yet. **Oklo (OKLO)** is Sam Altman-backed and pursuing fast reactors; riskier, but if they land more deals like Meta's, it's a 10x play. 1. **Modular construction/fabrication** \- SMRs are factory-built. Companies that can mass-produce containment vessels and reactor modules will be critical. Look at **Doosan** (Korean, partnered with NuScale) and **BWX Technologies (BWXT)** \- they build naval reactors, similar tech, already scaling. **The actual bottleneck (and opportunity):** 6. **Grid transmission companies** \- SMRs need to be sited near data centers, but the grid in between is maxed out. **NextEra (NEE)** and other utilities building transmission lines to industrial clusters (Virginia, Ohio, Texas) will capture the "last mile" value. **What to avoid:** * **Pure-play SMR startups without signed PPAs.** The Google-Kairos deal is promising, but Kairos hasn't built a reactor yet. Same for TerraPower's Wyoming project (backing from Gates/DOE, but construction just started). Valuations are frothy on *announcements*, not revenue. * **"AI-powered nuclear safety" startups** \- regulatory bodies won't trust black-box AI for nuclear safety. Hype without a pathway to adoption. **Timeline reality check:** The first SMR units will come online around 2030 (Google's Kairos deal). Until then, Big Tech is mainly buying *existing* nuclear output (TMI, Clinton plant). The real SMR boom is a 2030s story, not a 2025 one. Bottom line: **Constellation Energy is your safe bet** (they have the plants, the PPAs, and no execution risk). Uranium miners are your leverage. SMR manufacturers are your moonshots - allocate accordingly.
The bottleneck is not going away, SMR scale will begin in 2-3 years
So was everything at the start. Remember how shit the first steam engine was? Remember how shit the first sailing raft was? SMR are shit because they are new and the funding and financing is going towards fossil fuels.
That's awesome, but Rolls Royce hasn't produced a single SMR and the speculation around it is just a small blip in the overall value of the company and the story of it's post-covid turnaround.
> Nuclear is back, and this time it’s funded by AI profits. FTFY: Nuclear is back, and this time it’s funded by AI ~~profits~~ smokescreen machine. People who need the power to run data centers currently do not make a "profit" off of AI. The only entities making money off AI right now are NVidia, the foundries making their chips, the HBM memory makers, and the physical construction workers building the data centers. Here's some fantastic articles about the absolutely NUTS investment going on; nuts not because it is large, but because it is not even remotely commensurate with the actual ROI's involved here. https://pracap.com/global-crossing-reborn/ https://pracap.com/an-ai-addendum/ All the AI people NOT making the hardware HOPE to make money on it. Hopefully a shit ton to justify the levels of capital spending currently being spent and the absolutely INSANE and utterly bananas numbers being quoted by the AI Prophets; Altman said 1.4 trillion by what 2030? This company does not make a DIME in profit. So why the nuclear power? Well, I believe Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, Google, etc. want us to think the plan is to buy nuclear power to keep up with AI center demand **because the REAL plan sounds bad.** The real plan is to buy power from utilities and increase the average cost the consumer sees dramatically to pay for the infrastructure necessary to provide it AND hopefully drive down consumer and other industrial demand so there is enough. I couldn't find a good term for this... it's like astroturfing meets causewashing meets greenwashing meets a smokescreen. This "plan" to buy nuclear by investing in it is a deception campaign to hide and divert attention away from the real LIKELY outcome; which is they use power currently being used by OTHER people by paying more for it, and increasing EVERYONE'S bills to fund the infrastructure required. Look, I am a nuclear evangelical. I want it to be back, I want to to make nuke plants, MORE than anything. I'm a chemical engineer, I do large plants for a living, literally... and I think nuclear is THE proven answer to a long term lower carbon baseload and slow ramp issue. There's a major SMR company down the road from me, I want to quick my job and work for them so badly it hurts because I think this one of the ONLY ways we're going to salvage the climate. But this whole data centers are going to use nuclear power schtick is a joke. 100% it's misdirection to hide the actual LIKELY outcome, because YOU, the consumer, might stop them if you thought about the likely outcome. Think about how long, even with literal perfect execution and planning it takes to make 10 billion dollar projects, let alone nuke plants. IF you had $10 billion, RIGHT NOW, all $10 billion of it, a finished design, a site to build it on, approvals from everyone who needed to approve, the infrastructure in place to move power to where it can be used, a customer, the fuel, and 10,000 construction workers ready to go, you are STILL 4-5 years out from "I stuck a shovel in the ground" to "I delivered my first kWh." Now how many years are you out if you have NONE of that. 10? 12? 15? Even in the WILDEST best projections, we're 10 years out from our FIRST commercial kWh. When the inevitable happens, MAMA can go, "Aww schucks... nuclear power mired down in red tape (rabble rabble at whomever is in power), but good news, regional utility says we have enough if we all just pinch! Sorry about the 40% increase in your bill, yeah that infrastructure hit is a bitch. Those greedy utility companies, gotta pay all those executives! Hey anyways, look at this meme about this situation ChatGPT-8 made!" If this alleged rocket ship to the moon is to even partially true, the power demand starts next year. There will be precisely ZERO SMR's up and running, or new nuclear plants of ANY kind next year. Which makes me sad, because I think nuclear needs to be built anyways in the united states, and globally. It needs to be THE baseload, and not coal, and it turns out we need the watersheds ruined by poor dam planning if we want to eat fish. Like I said, I'm a chemical engineer, I design (or help design) multi billion dollar fabs. There is a SMR company local to me, I could commute to it. I want to work for them SO BAD. But, chemical is a hard sell. Not impossible, just hard. I should have studied mechanical engineering and gone into the industry, but I'd literally need to go back in time.
Thanks chatGPT, now realize that ChatGPT will always give you what you ask for. You asked for advantages, it gave you a list of theoretical advantages. However, most are not realistic. Mark my words, SMR's will never become commonplace. In no world does it make any sense to dump a ton of money into an unproven technology that has only the potential to add very marginal and rare context specific advantages over conventional reactors. Especially when solar today is already multiples more efficient than the most lofty SMR LCOE, can be rolled out in a tenth of the time, is proven, has less overhead, has more flexibility, is 100% safe and environmentally friendly. Simply makes 0 sense. Anyways, you go ahead and invest in some unprofitable SMR companies because you think the tech is cool. I'll invest in real tangible energy production.
Yes, small modular reactors (SMRs) offer several potential advantages over large nuclear power plants, primarily related to **cost, construction time, siting flexibility, and safety features**. Cost and Construction * **Lower Initial Capital Investment:** SMRs require a smaller upfront capital investment compared to large, multi-billion-dollar projects, making them more financially manageable for a broader range of investors and utilities. * **Factory-Fabricated Modules:** Key components can be mass-manufactured in a factory setting and shipped to the site for assembly, which improves quality control, reduces construction time, and avoids the costly delays and overruns typical of large, custom-built reactors. * **Shorter Timelines:** The ability to pre-fabricate and the reduced complexity of SMR designs lead to shorter construction and commissioning cycles (potentially as little as three years), allowing for a faster return on investment. Flexibility and Deployment * **Siting Flexibility:** SMRs have a smaller physical footprint and require less cooling water, allowing them to be sited in locations not suitable for larger plants, including isolated areas or existing industrial sites (e.g., retired coal plants). * **Scalability:** Power capacity can be added incrementally by installing additional modules as energy demand grows, which helps utilities better match power generation with market needs and manage financial risk. * **Integration with Renewables:** SMRs can complement variable renewable energy sources like wind and solar by providing stable, 24/7 baseload power or by "load-following" to adjust output and ensure grid stability. Safety and Operations * **Enhanced Safety Features:** Many SMR designs rely on passive safety systems (using natural circulation, convection, and gravity) that do not require human intervention, external power, or force to shut down systems in an emergency, increasing safety margins. * **Simpler Design:** The simpler designs of SMRs mean fewer moving parts and components, which lowers the likelihood of failures. * **Reduced Refueling Needs:** Some SMRs are designed to operate for several years (3 to 7, or even up to 30 years in some microreactor designs) without refueling, minimizing the transportation and handling of nuclear material. So yea totally there's no upside to SMR's over larger plants lol
That would make them useless. The whole point of the SMR is power wherever you need power. If itsa going to plug into the grid we can build traditional units.
A SMR that can be built in one place and installed anywhere with a road would actually be revolutionary
If Trump mentions SMR during the Gemini mission then it’s game over
The cost of SMR's keeps going up. I don't think its going to be the easy way.
The technology has changed a lot over 50 years. Those SMR's were basically miniature versions of large plants, they had inverse economies of scale. Today's SMR's do not use pumps, or even have any water, do not require manual shutdowns, have flexible fuel requirements, are more flexible where they can be placed, etc. It's like comparing a small car from 1975 to a Tesla.
when? the first were small SMR sizes but that was 50 years ago. The industry found then uneconomic so they built bigger plants hopping the additional power revenue would solve ether problem. It didn't Now were are going to solve all of the problems found 50 years ago with SMR again?
The deal is only good if the company get aprroval of its SMR design. Then gets approval to build a plant in a particular location. And for that they need local approval. Then when they get through all of that they have to build it without giving over budget. And Only then can they start to geterate power. Historically nuclear power plant have taken a lotting to plan and build than planned. And these delays often show up as cost overruns and power that cost more than original expectations. So historically these orders often get canceled long before construction starts.
If you have the time I would like for you to explain to me why you favor this energy stocks if things don't stabilize. I can understand the rationale behind OKLO or SMR but why pick the other stocks?
What did you buy puts in? Valuations being insane depends on what you are looking at. Something like Google is not insane. However, stuff like PLTR, SMR/OKLA, and like the quantum names are way different story.
You can just google things man. Like you can look up CSCO PE for example during the height of the dot com bubble: [https://www.icis.com/chemicals-and-the-economy/2024/06/stock-market-bubbles-follow-the-same-pattern-as-nvidia-and-cisco-confirm/](https://www.icis.com/chemicals-and-the-economy/2024/06/stock-market-bubbles-follow-the-same-pattern-as-nvidia-and-cisco-confirm/) >*“The problem was the share price. It was, simply, too damn high. At the March 2000 peak, Cisco’s price-to-earnings ratio stood at 201 times, its enterprise value to sales at 31 times and its price-to-free cash flow at 176 times.* There were a ton of companies famously like pets dot com that all where taking in a ton of investor money and had no path to profitability. A lot of the companies investing Capex right now have money to do it. There are things that are more in a bubble in my opinion, like people who are investing in SMR nuclear plays and quantum computing.
I agree and disagree. The long term is SMR but they cannot meet short term demand, the time-to-operation is just too long for AI companies to wait. The Economist just released an article/podcast about what type of tech companies are likely to fill that niche.
Imo its always like that. Either you sell or buy at wrong time and feel bad. Atm I have like -30k on stocks like SLDP, SMR, NBIS, LAES. You can never hit everything and win
Submarine nuclear reactors are small and somewhat modular. Their design can't and won't be used for the terrestrial SMRs being proposed. The proposed terrestrial SMRs will be a new design suitable for their purpose. That will require substantial regulatory review to be approval. That is a slow, tedious, and expensive process. There is no such thing as a safe nuclear reactor, only some safer than others. Every one is a potential Chernobyl or Fukashima. Do we really want hundreds to thousands of these scattered around the country? The government can mandate it, but expect huge public resistance. There will be huge pressure on congress not to allow it. All of this makes investing in SMR a very risky speculative investment. It ain't no sure thing. Source: I was a submarine nuclear power plant operator. I know what I am talking about.
>Microsoft, Google, and Amazon have all signed 20-year deals to buy power directly from new Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) Any news link/source for this? While SMR has been making progress, it's still relatively new and unproven tech that doesn't have regulartory aprpovals yet.
SMR cost is more than standard reactors No one is gonna pay that cost when they can buy a proven, proliferated design that produces far more power and costs less
I'm currently working on some SMR stuff in the states, and it is VERY close. When it hits, it's going to hit hard and heavy because the demand is there.
Rolls Royce just broke ground on a SMR in the UK. It is happening, though I do agree SMRs are overhyped and if will be a much slower process than investors seem to expect.
So basically we just looking at new regulations right. SMR for everyone!
\>>Most people think Big Tech going nuclear is hype. I do too. It takes a 10+ years to bring a nuclear reactor online - safely. \*No one\* is currently selling SMRs that can be used outside of a submarine. There are SMR designs, but no one currently has the trained manpower capacity to built them in volume, and then there's the trial period before roll out as it's a new nuclear design. This is just more blue sky thinking from a bunch of TechBros in the valley. It's a nice thought, but 'move fast and break stuff' isn't going to happen with nuclear reactors, SMR or otherwise. This is one example of where more haste ans less speed is a good thing. We don't want another 3 mile island.
Wouldn't a submarine be classed as SMR?
Ownership of TMC, SMR, UAMY, UUUU, or NB is required for clitoral minerals bag holders anonymous. Join us this week to see if the 12 steps dig you out of a hole or it’s just another free ticket to the back alley tug try outs.
None yet but I'm eyeing BE, SMR, and CEG.
all i know about these certain companies is there play in future technologies. IMSR and SMR have a part in the development thorium reactors GOOGL since they have a part in the development of fusion energy IONQ and MSFT due to their play in quantum computing BTC for a crypto investment and solana because i want to invest in the meme coin market but I don't want the huge risk that comes with it. CVX to invest in hydrogen becoming a potential fuel source. GXO due to their play in logistics and I felt like investing in a logistics company with tariffs going on could be a wise choice. PLTR and NVDA due to their play in AI im investing for the long term and i feel like investing in these companies working towards future technologies would be a wise decision, and honestly i would love to speak to a professional about this to get their insight so i could improve.
Rolls Royce and BWX Technologies are much better SMR nuclear stocks. For one, they have revenue. Two, they’re even ***profitable.***
Yes, especially OKLO. The nuclear/SMR sector has been beaten down lately, wouldn’t be surprised if we start to see a strong rebound.
They already require a crazy amount of electricity that isn't available. You would need a few nuclear reactors, which is why SMR and OKLO are pumping so hard, but these cost tens of billions a pop. So the deal is, billions to buy chips that require tens of billions of electrical utilities, to.... mine bitcoin?
it's doubtful there's going to be a huge market if people are willing to pay 4x the price for electricity maybe some data centres that are in a huge rush and will make anything crazy for extra power, but not the voters of any western nation it's questionable if rolls can keep the manufacturing costs down especially when there will be safety upgrades, and that's always killed the enthusiasm for regular nuclear and it's no different with SMR SMR was considered dead and buried about 1975 based on the economics I think it's still the case
Dont know shit about the company but based on the chart for SMR you quite possibly sold at the worst possible time lmao, seems like a decent setup for a temporary bounce. Basically back to where it started the year at, and a strong support from the April lows.
I feel like APLD, OKLO, SMR, SOFI, and CRWV have the ability to rip your puts to pieces for no logical reason
Lol, OKTA...sorry. Meant OKLO, which is SMR. Got in at $22 in April during tariff plunge. Sold $75 in September...just to see it go to $175 in October. OKLO in $50 would be ambitious, but reentry. G'luck with OKTA
OKLO and SMR still getting demolished.
You might want to do some actual research before buying a stock. OKLO and SMR are complete frauds, they have crazy high valuations purely based on fairy tales.
SMR is approved by Nuclear commission for their design and just signed a contract to build that design with TVA near the Clinch River in TN
SMR had 11 red days out of last 13 days. And 9 of them are more than 5% red.
SMR is at 55, 3 weeks back and there were so many articles about how govt gonna take stake in nuclear companies. Now its at 18.
this is my first time investing with very little background knowledge i just put $10 into 10 different symbols, will add $10 every week GXO GOOGL MSFT IONQ BTC SOL IMSR SMR PLTR CVX +$5 worth of NVDA that robinhood gifted me for signing up i think this is a pretty solid in regards to the grower of future technologies but and the end of the day i probably know barely anything
I am almost ready to grab some SMR
Any SMR bagholders out there? what a monthly candle
SMR, NNE,FLR added to that
Again please look into any positive economic news. The fact that we are building the first SMR in the country wasn't even on the BBC homepage. We're now the number 1 country Europe for private investment in startups. We've finally committed to building 9 new reservoirs. I think Hinckley Point C (but it might be the other standard nuclear reactor we have planned) is fully privately funded. SSE announced 33 Billion of capex on modernising the bits of the grid they control in the next 5 years. There are a dozen billion dollar projects underway too like the equinox data centre [4 Billion] (that's not an AI centre just a standard Internet one). They've done about as good a job on the economy as possible considering the mess they were handed. Their messaging is dogshit, and they've not handled welfare particularly well. They've reformed a lot of immigration policy too which should help reduce number of illegal immigrants if you care about that.
For tomorrow's open: - If NVDA tanks its earnings report, then ATM puts on: - AFRM SMR RGTI CVNA PLTR APP OKTA ZS SOFI Tomorrow will be interesting *"may you live in interesting times"* --ancient chinese curse
My possible earnings related play for tomorrow's open: - If NVDA tanks its earnings report, then ATM puts on: - AFRM SMR RGTI CVNA PLTR APP OKTA ZS SOFI Tomorrow will be interesting *"may you live in interesting times" --ancient chinese curse
Google AI and nuclear and go look at that sector for stocks - CCJ, OKLO, SMR and so on. It's not magic, power plants have been bought with plans to power big AI data center already
This just happened with SMR for me😭
An indirect supplement of energy. OKLO and SMR will do fine considering the amount of contracts they have now. It’s just so forward looking that investors and everyone alike are saying “aight bro? Where is the product???”
I was so close to getting SMR at 20 per share. Guess I’m just be happy with my 25 per share position.
Of course the panic will hit everyone's price for a time, but if you have an actual business and not a hype machine you'll probably weather the correction. The question in my mind is: which category does nuclear (SMR/OKLO) fall in to? Data centers themselves will continue and intermittent power still has limitations. Are these meme stocks or the actual future of energy?
I bought a few hype stocks on the initial drop at the beginning of the month, but they still have good stories so I’m staying optimistic SMR NKLR GSIT
OK! for all you .....RETARDS..... or have a short interest welcome to 2025 it does not take 20 years to build a Uranium Nuclear Reactor....What? welcome to 2025......ok!! how about modular reactors OKLO and SMR... shipping containers and mobile ship reactors already in service or US submarines????......HELLO Marty McFly we need energy NOW!!! cause of your sex toys recharging cable and AI data centers for porn...☢️⚡️☢️
What? welcome to 2025......ok!! how about modular reactors OKLO and SMR... shipping containers and mobile ship reactors already in service
PWR is my holding for this issue. Other power/energy related positions I hold include: CEG, NEE, GEV, AES, with CCJ and BWXT instead of the speculative SMR companies.
QSI, EXOZ, HOVR, SMR, NNE, FEIM, SAIH, and LWLG are the ones I've either bought more of or put on my buy list recently.
Fellow tards: NVDA, AMD, MU etc are still close to ATH so the bricks part of AI is OK but the shovel part - IREN, NBIS, OKLO, SMR, BE are taking a beating. Who's going to power and build the physical data centers so that ORCL CDS don't blow out? That is much slower than just have TSMC spray out wafers.
sounds like a solid foundation. loading up on SMR
I swear to god SMR if you tickle my taint again and just fall off the side of a cliff before I can finish I’m gonna be reaaaalll upset
I knew SMR was way over sold
I'm not that dude you are replying to but I am going to take a guess as to why they listed energy and metals. Energy: The heavy hitters are shoving AI down our throats. In order for that to be a thing they need massive power intensive data centers. Microsoft went in on a plan to renovate and reopen three mile island. A couple of them (off the top of my head I think GOIG and Nvidia are looking at small.modular reactors (SMR). The DoD/DARPA are also interested in SMR for forward operating bases. Being able to drop a conex box into a war zone to power your FOB would be huge. Nuclear power is the option most of the AI tech companies are pushing for. They are throwing money around to get things fast tracked which will persuade the government to *"streamline"* the regulation process. He'll, they are already using their own AI to help design nuke facilities to power the data centers. You see OKLO and how it has pumped this past year. Nuscale Power has been making noise in the space as well as a handful of others. Metals: Rare earth metals are in everything, most critically to nations ... military toys. It has always been that way. The SR71 Blackbird was build out of titanium that the U.S. bought from the Soviet Union through Shell companies. The S.U. would never sell the U.S. titanium in any significant quantities knowing the U.S. would use it against the S.U. Same principle applies today. China controls the vast majority of rare earth metal production. We already saw a run up of mining companies this year. The trade war between the U.S. and China exposed the U.S. as being in a very bad spot relying on Cjina for the metals the U.S. required to make their war toys. Combine that with the AI push from the MAG7, which their data centers/chips/GPUs all require these metals, and you'll see the U.S. continue to ramp up sourcing and funding mining operations to supply their metals needs. Even if the U.S. and China start to play nice with each other, the U.S. knows it can't allow both national security *and* the wider commercial economy to be reliant on China's willingness to sell rare earth metals to the U.S. With quantum computing transitioning from R&D to adoption, that is one more tangible space that requires metals.
Have they proven they can do the thing? SMR's have failed badly on execution in the past.
I'm done trying to guess which nuclear stock to pick (OKLO, SMR, etc.) - pivoting to the turbines that can be ran on GAS/Nuclear - $GEV going to the moon and beyond.
SMR feels like a good pick, good luck homie I've been green on it all year and only this week switched to red... decided to buy a little bit more
Lmao when SMR was at 55 a month back, there are so many news articles about the need of nuclear energy for AI and govt may take stake in those companies. Now its at 20.
Market turns in April, by Summer just keeps going up every day ---> people FOMO even harder into all the speculative hot stocks, buy on margin, pour money into options and leveraged ETFs -----> skepticism of AI starts to become tough to shake, people start taking profits, down days actually occur "wait, these quantum and SMR names that won't have revenue until 2028 don't only go up?" ----> profit taking turns to dumping, margin calls and turns into a broader puke of growth themes beyond just the most speculative.
How tf is SMR 50% off ATH already lmao
$BBAI, $CCCX, $NBIS, $HIMS, $ELF, $ACHR, $SMR **+** BTC, ETH, SOL Some good deals now for ➡️ EOY 2025 and early 2026 run **^(Catalysts)** * ^(Fed stops QT by end of this month) * ^(Federal employee paychecks start re-hydrating the liquidity) * ^(Santa rally) * ^(Rate cut in Dec or Jan)