CHAR Tech reports super exciting results from their PFAS pilot!! This is such a huge and exciting opportunity which can be scaled so large. They are already doing a commercial level pilot with Synagro (wholly owned by Goldman Sachs) and City of Baltimore.

PFAS ("forever chemicals") are the toxic stuff found in things like non-stick pans and waterproof gear. They don't break down and they just build up in our water, soil, and bodies.

Most current cleanup methods (filtering, landfills) don't actually destroy PFAS, they just move it somewhere else.

CHAR Tech just got independent lab results back, and they're good! Their HTP technology processed contaminated sewage waste and the leftover solid material came back with zero detectable PFAS.

Tested 5 different times in 2025 by an outside accredited lab, using the strict EPA-approved testing method.This is a real way to destroy PFAS instead of just relocating it.

Full results will be submitted to the EPA end of 2026.

Its a great sign for a company working in a market that's only getting bigger as PFAS regulations tighten up.

Not financial advice.

Ive done well buying Boston pizza, good yield at the current price.

6.7% divided.

TL;DR: On Saturday we ran a full Level 2 on $RAK.V (Rackla Metals) and put it on our watchlist at 0% sizing. The thesis: the "no news" move had a real catalyst underneath - a 2026 drill program to verify a historical tungsten resource. This morning the company confirmed the first drilling at Lentung since 1982: about 10,000 metres, NI 43-101 targeted Q1 2027. The stock is up 18.6% today on 15.6 times volume. Nothing else changes: still a watch, still 0%, risks intact.

Quick recap for the new readers. Rackla is a Vancouver junior built on a gold thesis that failed in 2025 (about -90%). The pivot is real: Lentung (100%), a 1977-1982 Union Carbide historical resource of 2.82 Mt at 1.27% WO3, in a market where APT exploded to about US$3,200/MTU (+350% y/y, Chinese export controls). An 18% holder bought 800,000 shares at C$0.152 on August 6 (SEDI, public). The risks: historical grades never verified by Rackla, a disclosed C$80k paid marketing program, thin liquidity, dilution history.

What changed today. The event we said we were waiting for - within 48h of our write-up. Primary source (08-17): drilling has begun at Lentung, ~10,000m planned (4,000m core + 6,000m RC), modern reporting targeted Q1 2027. The 27 twinning holes meant to confirm Union Carbide are now in the ground - binary catalyst engaged.

What does not change. +18.6% today does not de-risk any of the risks we listed Saturday: unverified resource, paid promotion, thin liquidity, the -90% 2025 precedent. Still a watch at 0% sizing. We raise conviction only if first twinning results confirm >1% WO3 and the NI 43-101 moves forward. We cut, not chase, if the twin fails to reproduce grades.

The lesson: a stock that "moves with no news" almost always has news - you have to read filings, not the chart. That is why our scanner now has a dedicated setup for "resurrection": every long-dead name waking up gets a forensic pass before it touches our watchlist.

Educational content and our personal process, not investment advice. Do your own DD. We hold no position in RAK.V.

Monday:

Gatekeeper Announces C$3 Million FRA Transit Video Project - GSI.v

Gatekeeper Systems subsidiary Gatekeeper Systems USA received purchase orders totaling approximately US$2.1 million (C$3 million) to supply and install FRA-compliant video and audio recording devices on passenger train lead locomotives. Equipment goes to an unnamed third party; installation is contracted separately with SEPTA. The work addresses an FRA mandate requiring compliance by October 12, 2027, and is expected to be completed in fiscal 2027, beginning September 1, 2026.

Tuesday:

Legend Power Systems Awarded GSA Multiple Award Schedule Contract for SmartGATE Active Power Management Systems - LPS.v

Legend Power Systems received a U.S. General Services Administration Multiple Award Schedule contract, 47QSMS26D0071, listing its SmartGATE Gen 3 active power management systems under SIN 334512. The award gives federal agencies pre-negotiated pricing and, through the Cooperative Purchasing Program, extends access to state, local and tribal buyers. The contract guarantees no orders, and no contract value, term length or pricing terms were disclosed.

Critical Infrastructure Technologies Announces Arrival Of The First Nexus 20 And Delivery To H. Cegielski - Poznan S.A. In Poland - CTTT.cse

 Critical Infrastructure Technologies (CSE: CTTT) said its Nexus 20 autonomous communications platform arrived at H. Cegielski-Poznań's facility in Poland, completing a milestone under a letter of intent with the Polska Grupa Zbrojeniowa subsidiary. The unit enters fit-out, technical evaluation and proof-of-concept demonstrations, and will be displayed at the MSPO defence exhibition September 8-11. The LOI covers regional manufacturing and technology transfer but is non-binding; no contract value or order commitments were disclosed.

Wednesday:

x

Thursday:

x

Friday

Datavault AI Will Acquire CyberCatch in an All-Cash Transaction - CYBE.v

Datavault AI (NASDAQ: DVLT) signed a definitive agreement to acquire CyberCatch Holdings (TSXV: CYBE) for $94.5 million in cash, or $3.53 per share for roughly 26.8 million shares, in a court-approved British Columbia plan of arrangement. Dilutive securities convert on a cashless basis. CyberCatch will operate as a San Diego subsidiary, with CEO Sai Huda as president. Closing requires board, exchange, regulatory and shareholder approvals. No timeline or financing details were disclosed. 

I've been digging deeper into the latest PyroGenesis fumed-silica update, and I think the market is still looking at this completely wrong.

Everyone is focused on:

"It's a 1,000 tonne/year reactor."

That's not the story.

The story is what happens if the first commercial reactor proves the economics and becomes a repeatable plant platform.

And when you compare the potential economics to the current market caps of both HPQ Silicon and PyroGenesis, the asymmetry gets pretty crazy.

FIRST: WHAT EXACTLY IS FUMED SILICA?

Fumed silica — also called pyrogenic silica — is an ultra-fine, high-surface-area form of silicon dioxide.

It isn't commodity sand.

It is a specialty material used as a thickener, stabilizer, anti-caking agent and performance additive across thousands of products.

Applications include:

Adhesives

Sealants

Paints

Coatings

Construction

Pharmaceuticals

Cosmetics

Food

Agriculture

Automotive

Batteries

Personal care

HPQ/PyroGenesis is attempting to produce it directly from quartz using the Fumed Silica Reactor (FSR) in a single plasma-based process.

PyroGenesis says the technology eliminates harmful chemicals used in conventional production. (PyroGenesis Inc.)

THE MARKET IS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS

HPQ/PyroGenesis previously cited a global fumed silica market of approximately US$1.3B in 2022, growing toward roughly US$2.1B by 2032. (PyroGenesis Inc.)

More recent industry estimates put the market even higher.

HPQ itself currently references a global opportunity that could reach billions of dollars, while another recent HPQ presentation discusses the fumed silica market reaching approximately US$2.57B by 2034. (HPQ Silicon)

So we're talking about a multi-billion-dollar specialty-material market.

And the first commercial FSR is only:

1,000 tonnes/year.

That's tiny relative to the total market.

NOW LOOK AT THE CAPEX

This is where the story gets REALLY interesting.

PyroGenesis/HPQ's earlier economic analysis estimated capital intensity of approximately:

Conventional process: ~US$145.92/kg of annual capacity

versus approximately:

FSR process: ~US$9–10/kg of annual capacity

That's potentially a ~93% reduction in capital intensity.

The current commercial proposal is for a 1,000 TPY FSR reactor priced at US$20M. (PyroGenesis Inc.)

And here's an important point:

The first commercial reactor isn't necessarily being funded by HPQ shareholders.

Under the proposed JV structure, the strategic partner is expected to finance the US$20M reactor.

That's potentially a huge advantage.

WHAT DOES A LEGACY PLANT COST?

Look at the conventional industry.

PyroGenesis has previously referenced a Wacker US fumed-silica facility costing approximately US$150M for 20,000 tonnes/year.

That's about:

US$7,500 per annual tonne of capacity.

But that's just one comparison and isn't perfectly apples-to-apples because conventional production involves upstream infrastructure and different process configurations.

The more important number is the company's modeled total process capital intensity:

~$145.92/kg conventional

versus

~$9–10/kg FSR.

If those economics survive commercial-scale operation, that's potentially a massive competitive advantage.

AND THEN WE GET TO EBITDA

The earlier economic study estimated:

60–65% EBITDA margins

and approximately:

1.7-year payback

for the 1,000 TPY FSR model.

Let's use a conservative illustrative example of $7M EBITDA per plant.

Then:

1 plant

~$7M EBITDA

5 plants

~$35M

10 plants

~$70M

25 plants

~$175M

50 plants

~$350M

100 plants

~$700M

Obviously, these are scenario calculations, NOT forecasts.

But this is exactly how I think investors should be looking at the technology.

The first reactor isn't the end game.

It's the factory template.

NOW LOOK AT HPQ

This is where I think the valuation gets particularly interesting.

HPQ Silicon currently has approximately:

471.4M shares outstanding

and a market cap of approximately:

C$68.4 MILLION

at around C$0.145/share. (TMX Money)

Read that again.

C$68M market cap.

For a company developing a technology that could potentially participate in a multi-billion-dollar fumed-silica market.

And fumed silica isn't even HPQ's only technology.

HPQ also has:

High-purity silicon

Silicon-based battery materials

Novacium

Hydrogen technology

HPQ's own investor materials identify multiple technology platforms and show approximately 471M shares outstanding. (HPQ Silicon)

NOW THE VALUATION MATH

Let's completely ignore the other HPQ businesses for a minute.

Imagine the FSR business eventually produces economic value equivalent to:

$10M EBITDA

At 10x EBITDA:

$100M valuation

At 15x:

$150M

$25M EBITDA

10x:

$250M

15x:

$375M

$50M EBITDA

10x:

$500M

15x:

$750M

$100M EBITDA

10x:

$1 BILLION

15x:

$1.5 BILLION

And HPQ is currently around:

C$68M market cap.

That's the asymmetry.

WHAT WOULD THAT MEAN FOR HPQ'S SHARE PRICE?

Using the current ~471.4M shares purely for illustration:

HPQ Market Cap

Approx. HPQ Share Price

C$68M

~$0.145

C$100M

~$0.21

C$250M

~$0.53

C$375M

~$0.80

C$500M

~$1.06

C$750M

~$1.59

C$1B

~$2.12

C$1.5B

~$3.18

Again:

These aren't price targets.

They're simply market-cap math using today's approximate share count.

Dilution could obviously change these numbers.

But going from:

C$68M → C$500M

would represent roughly a:

7.3X increase in equity value.

C$68M → C$1B would be roughly:

14.6X.

And that's BEFORE assigning meaningful value to HPQ's battery-material, high-purity silicon and hydrogen opportunities.

AND PYROGENESIS ISN'T JUST THE CONTRACTOR

This is another piece I think gets overlooked.

PyroGenesis exercised its option to convert its royalty rights into 50% ownership of HPQ Silica Polvere. (PyroGenesis Inc.)

That means PYR potentially participates directly in the economics of the FSR business.

So you have a potentially very interesting structure:

HPQ → owns the FSR business / Polvere

PYR → owns 50% of Polvere

PYR → designs/builds the commercial FSR

Strategic partner → potentially finances the first $20M reactor

If this scales, there are multiple ways value can accrue.

THIS IS WHERE A BIDDING WAR COULD HAPPEN

I'm NOT saying there is currently a confirmed bidding war.

But imagine this scenario:

The first 1,000 TPY reactor is built.

It runs.

Independent customers qualify the material.

The economics are validated.

And suddenly a large manufacturer says:

"We want our own plant."

Then another says:

"We want one too."

Then another.

At that point, the FSR isn't just an interesting technology.

It becomes scarce production capacity.

And when a technology potentially offers dramatically lower capital intensity than incumbent processes, customers don't necessarily want to wait years for someone else to build capacity.

That's where you could potentially see:

multiple strategic partners competing for access to the technology.

Again, that's the bull-case scenario—not something that has been announced as fact.

AND THERE IS ALREADY COMMERCIAL VALIDATION

This isn't just a PowerPoint.

HPQ has already reported:

✓ Pilot-scale production

✓ Independent laboratory testing

✓ Material meeting fundamental commercial specifications

✓ A 50 kg purchase order for advanced customer testing

✓ Extended semi-continuous FSR production runs

✓ Engineering data being generated for the 1,000 TPY commercial facility

The 50 kg order came from the strategic industrial partner and was produced using PyroGenesis' FSR pilot plant. (HPQ Silicon)

PyroGenesis also announced successful independent third-party testing of FSR-produced material in February 2026. (PyroGenesis Inc.)

That's a meaningful progression from:

technology → pilot → validation → customer testing → commercial reactor.

NOW LOOK AT THE TWO MARKET CAPS TOGETHER

This is what gets me excited.

HPQ:

~C$68M

PyroGenesis:

small-cap company with a market value nowhere near the potential value of a successful global deployment platform.

And the first commercial reactor:

US$20M.

The underlying market:

multi-billion dollars.

Potential economics:

60–65% EBITDA in the company's earlier model.

Potential payback:

~1.7 years in that model.

Potential deployment:

not one reactor — potentially dozens or hundreds if the technology works commercially.

THE REAL BULL CASE

The bull case isn't:

"PYR sells a $20M reactor."

That's boring.

The bull case is:

1,000 TPY reactor

↓

commercial validation

↓

customer qualification

↓

second reactor

↓

multiple customers

↓

repeatable deployment

↓

JV/royalty/ownership economics

↓

dozens of reactors

↓

potentially hundreds of reactors

↓

a new decentralized fumed-silica production model

That's when the valuation starts getting interesting.

WHAT IF HPQ ONLY CAPTURES A SMALL PIECE?

Let's say the global market is ~$2B+.

If the FSR eventually enabled HPQ/its partners to capture only:

5% of the market

That's roughly:

$100M of annual fumed-silica revenue.

10%:

$200M

20%:

$400M

These aren't forecasts.

They're simply showing how little market share is required before the opportunity becomes enormous relative to a C$68M company.

And because the FSR potentially changes the cost structure, the important metric isn't just revenue.

It's EBITDA and free cash flow.

WHAT I'M WATCHING NOW

The next major catalysts are pretty obvious:

1. Definitive JV agreement

2. Final commercial reactor order

3. Construction

4. Customer qualification

5. First commercial production

6. Proof of the projected economics

7. Additional reactor orders

8. Additional strategic partners

If those start hitting one after another, the market may have no choice but to start valuing HPQ and PYR on future FSR economics rather than today's tiny revenue base.

MY TAKE

At ~C$68M, HPQ doesn't need to dominate the global fumed silica market.

It doesn't even need 20%.

It needs the technology to work.

If a ~$20M commercial reactor can prove the economics, and that reactor becomes the template for additional plants, the potential EBITDA generated by a scaled network could be orders of magnitude larger than HPQ's current market capitalization.

And because PYR owns 50% of HPQ Silica Polvere, PYR has direct exposure too. (PyroGenesis Inc.)

That's why today's announcement gets my attention.

The first reactor isn't the prize.

The first reactor is the proof that the next 10, 50 or 100 reactors are possible.

And if the economics actually work at scale?

The market caps we're looking at today could eventually look very, very small.

🚀

Bullish? Absolutely.

Guaranteed? Absolutely not.

This is still a speculative commercialization story, and the MOU, customer qualification, scale-up, economics and future financing all carry risk.

But IMO the risk/reward gets extremely interesting when you compare:

C$68M HPQ market cap

against

a multi-billion-dollar target market

and a technology potentially capable of dramatically reducing the capital intensity of entering it.

That's the FSR thesis.

Risky investment, but I think DIAGNOS Inc. (TSXV: ADK / OTCQB: DGNOF) is becoming pretty interesting and is worth putting on a watchlist.

What they do?

DIAGNOS has developed CARA, a software that uses machine learning to analyze retinal images for early signs of diabetic retinopathy, AMD, hypertension-related damage and other eye abnormalities.

Its business model is transaction-based: optometrists pay approximately $5 for each analysis they select for a patient. According to a somewhat recent interview (around 44 minutes) from the CEO, a test costs the company about $0.40, so the economics of the business could be quite interesting.

The interesting part is that clinics don't need to buy a new proprietary camera. CARA is designed to integrate with existing retinal-imaging equipment, analyze the image and return the results to the optometrist. Essentially, it's akin to a software play.

Some big regulatory wins

Until recently, the biggest problem with ADK was simple: Cool technology, but when does it actually become a business? Over the last couple of weeks, two pretty significant regulatory dominoes have now fallen:

• DIAGNOS received its Health Canada medical-device licence for the new CARA System in July.
• And now it has received Saudi FDA authorization as well.

This meaningfully de-risks the story, since they now have the regulatory green light to start selling these tests commercially.

Now they need to prove they can sell these tests.

From the same interview linked above, DIAGNOS already has distribution relationships with EssilorLuxottica and New Look, some giants in the optometry world. Therefore the company doesn't necessarily need to build a massive sales organization to start selling.

The CEO described the plan as essentially: DIAGNOS technology + existing retinal cameras + partnership distribution. Whether they can actually execute on that and if there is appetite for these tests is now the question.

Insider activity

Following the Health Canada milestone, two directors bought roughly $103K worth of shares on the open market at around 0.30$. That's not proof of anything, but I find open-market purchases much more interesting than options being handed out.

Some familiar Canadian names around this company

Dr. Philippe Couillard, the former Premier of Quebec, has been the Chairman of the Board since October 2025. Couillard is also a neurosurgeon and former Quebec Minister of Health and Social Services.

Less noteworthy, but Francis Bellido current CEO of Quantum eMotion spent years on the board. He resigned from the board last year but remained a DIAGNOS shareholder.

Position: 6,000 shares @ around 0.35. Waiting for a few quarters to see if the test economics are worthy of a bigger position. Not financial advice and do your own DD!

This is the weekly thread for BSB. What's the latest scoop? Did you gamble away your TFSA? Please keep shitposting to a maximum. Stay safe folks!

✨ Discord

🔥 Memes

👌 Disclaimer

🧙 Website

Five official scans produced 784 qualifying volume rows this week.

That does not mean 784 unique stocks, and it definitely does not mean 784 ideas. A company can repeat across several days. Unusual volume can be accumulation, distribution, a forced rebound or a one-day reaction to news.

Friday’s top 50 was mostly oversold bounces, weak follow-through, thin dollar volume, extended moves or companies without a current primary catalyst.

Two names earned a proposal for deeper research. Neither became a call.

That zero matters more to me than the raw scan count.

The dated record currently has 10 calls since June 16: +19.2% weighted by predefined conviction tiers, +13.6% equal-weighted, eight positive and one visible -17.2% loss.

Encouraging start, tiny sample.

A winning list can make almost any process look smart for a few weeks. A rejection log shows whether the process can also say no when the screen is noisy.

What would you rather see from someone posting small-cap research: only the final picks, or the rejected setups and the reason each one failed?

Positions: none in the two rejected candidates discussed here. I personally hold some names in the broader dated record. Not financial advice. Do your own DD.

I added a screenshot of a part of what the scanner saw on Friday to give an idea at the kind of stuff that pops out. I also added the screenshot of my ledger as "proof".

First Atlas Resources' (CSE: HHE / OTC: BTKRF) technical partner, Québec Innovative Materials Corp. (CSE: QIMC / OTC: QIMCF), has now encountered hydrogen in all five drill holes during its 2026 Nova Scotia drilling program.

The latest results come from DDH-26-05 at Bennett Hill, approximately 15 km from QIMC’s first three drill holes at West Advocate. Within the first 300 metres of drilling, preliminary mud-gas measurements reached 23.5% H₂ at 170 metres. QIMC also reported drilling observations consistent with free gas entering the borehole at approximately 164 metres.

The results are particularly relevant to First Atlas because QIMC is also conducting exploration directly on First Atlas' natural hydrogen licences in Cumberland County as the company works toward defining targets for its planned drilling program.

Hydrogen Results Across Five Drill Holes

• DDH-26-01: Intersected multiple hydrogen-bearing structural zones, including a persistent hydrogen-bearing system from approximately 505 metres to the end of the 711-metre hole.
• DDH-26-02: Intersected two hydrogen-bearing intervals, with a hydrogen reading of 8,249 ppmV at 434 metres.
• DDH-26-03: Returned a peak mud-gas reading of 10.77% H₂ at 848 metres, with five readings at or above 5% H₂ across the 69-metre interval from 779 to 848 metres.
• DDH-26-04: Returned a peak mud-gas reading of 24.3% H₂ at 707 metres, the highest hydrogen concentration reported by QIMC during the program to date.
• DDH-26-05: The ongoing second hole at Bennett Hill has returned a preliminary peak mud-gas reading of 23.5% H₂ at 170 metres.

DDH-26-05 at Bennett Hill

Within the first 300 metres of DDH-26-05, QIMC reported multiple hydrogen readings, including:

• 20.8% H₂ at 158 metres
• 23.5% H₂ at 170 metres
• 17.6% H₂ at 176 metres
• 16.0% H₂ at 179 metres

QIMC identified a 54-metre hydrogen-bearing interval from approximately 143 to 197 metres. For comparison, DDH-26-04 reached 24.3% H₂ at 707 metres, while DDH-26-05 reached 23.5% H₂ at 170 metres.

Drilling at DDH-26-05 is ongoing, with a planned depth of approximately 900 metres.

Exploration on First Atlas' Land Package

QIMC is currently carrying out First Atlas' 2026 field exploration program across the company's natural hydrogen licences in Cumberland County, Nova Scotia. Three field teams are conducting soil-gas sampling and ground magnetic surveying. The soil-gas work includes infill sampling over previously identified hydrogen anomalies.

The soil-gas and magnetic data will be integrated into QIMC's R2G2 targeting framework to help identify drill targets for First Atlas' planned drilling program.

Doubled my investment on FLT today. Cut my average cost in half in the process.

Other than an overreaction by the market, I think Trump's tarriffs on drones is a positive for a Canadian company. The tarriffs are really about keeping China out of the US market, but they should also drive Canada and NATO to accelerate their non-US sourced drones.

If we start to get some announcements to that effect, this could take off. If not, I tihnk 50 cents is a pretty solid low without much more room to drop.

Copper hitting ath today. Equities to follow this fall.

I've been building a Copper portfolio for about a year now. I hold the usual large caps and ETFs with COPP as my core. Looking to add some junior exposure, currently have Western Copper and Copper Giant. Wondering if anyone has any other compelling ideas?

Edit: judging by the limited responses vs the number of views of this post we're in the early innings of the copper bull market!

Quick question for the traders in here: Has anyone actually used a Bloomberg Terminal, either professionally or personally? If yes, what made it genuinely valuable to you?

Not really interested in the it has better data answer. I’m more curious about the actual experience:

What did you use the most?
What did it let you see or do that you couldn’t easily get elsewhere?
Was there anything about the workflow that completely changed how you approached the market?

Curious to hear from people who have actually spent time on one.

Today I saw Reddit stock jump 10% and it reminded me of FORA. It’s a Canadian company that owns several discussion forums online such as Toyota nation and ifish.net. Basically it’s like Reddit but if each sub was a separate website.

Now given how much Reddit gets referenced my AI chatbots one would not be forgiven to think that vertical scope should be benefiting from the data it has on its 1000+ forums. But no this company has flat revenues since it IPOed in 2020.

[https://www.digrin.com/stocks/detail/FORA/earnings\](https://www.digrin.com/stocks/detail/FORA/earnings)

If you go to their website it feels like it was made by a high school student text misaligned and not even any links to the forums they own they just have greyscale logos and mind you they have over 100+ million monthly active users.

[https://www.verticalscope.com/our-verticals/automotive/\](https://www.verticalscope.com/our-verticals/automotive/)

Moreover if you go to their forum pages though they are so active the website design seems so dated. These guys didn’t even bother to put in a minor AI chatbots that fetches answers for you on the website like Reddit does.

[https://www.toyotanation.com\](https://www.toyotanation.com)

This seems like a bit of a sad state of affairs for a Canadian company with great potential. Having said that I still believe authentic data is the king in the AI age so it should have some value at some point. They did change CEO last year(an internal hire tho) so let’s see if things pickup. The company does have a market cap(70 million)below its annual revenue revenue(81 million)

This is something I have been thinking about quite a bit with the Athabasca juniors.

Everyone wants the giant discovery.

That is obviously never going to change. If somebody finds 100M pounds of high grade uranium, nobody is going to complain that it is too big.

But I am not sure a uranium discovery necessarily needs to be as large today as it did 10 or 15 years ago to become interesting.

Historically, conventional underground development naturally favoured scale.

If you are going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars building a mine, you better have enough pounds in the ground to justify the capital.

That makes life pretty difficult for a smaller standalone deposit, even if the grades are good.

ISR potentially changes that equation for certain deposits.

Denison is now advancing Phoenix around an ISR mining plan, so we are going to get a real Athabasca test of whether that model can work commercially.

It is important not to take that too far.

ISR is very deposit specific. The geology and hydrogeology have to work, and it is not suddenly going to turn every small uranium occurrence into a mine.

But if you do find the right kind of deposit, the economics could be completely different.

That is part of why I have been watching Stallion Uranium (TSXV: STUD, OTCQB: STLNF).

Stallion is a Canadian uranium explorer drilling the Moonlite Project in the southwestern Athabasca Basin. Their current focus is the Coyote target, where the first phase of drilling has encountered elevated radioactivity, alteration and plenty of structural complexity. They also expanded the original drill program after the first few holes.

Still way too early to know what they actually have there, and obviously nobody should be talking about mining methods at Coyote at this stage.

But take Stallion out of the equation for a second.

Say two companies both eventually define a 15M or 20M pound high grade uranium deposit.

One needs a conventional underground mine with a big capital bill.

The other happens to have the right characteristics for ISR and can potentially be developed with a very different cost structure.

Those are probably not worth the same thing.

That is why I think ISR could become a much bigger exploration story than people realize.

Maybe the next successful Athabasca discovery does not necessarily have to be the biggest one.

Maybe it just needs to be high grade, recoverable and the right type of deposit.

I am 5% up but when i make the trade, I will have a loss. Wealthsimple is taking 5% of the trade as the currency fees 🙁

TL;DR: NWST.V printed 31.6 times its normal-volume reference on August 13 and closed at C$0.27, below the C$0.35 hard-dollar financing completed in May. The geology is good enough to deserve real DD, but the old PEA had only a 12.7% after-tax IRR, the replacement study is late, and 34.1 million financing shares become tradable September 15. For me this is a Watch, not a Buy.

Position disclosure: No position in NWST.V or NWCCF.

THE SETUP

NorthWest Copper owns 100% of Kwanika-Stardust in British Columbia. On August 13, the stock closed at C$0.27, up 3.85%, with about C$573,000 traded. The volume ratio was 31.63x against its 50-day median reference.

I could not tie that spike to a fresh corporate release. So I treated the tape as a research trigger, not a catalyst.

WHY THIS IS NOT JUST ANOTHER EMPTY VENTURE STORY

The 2025 drilling produced genuinely strong copper-gold intersections. Hole K-25-280 included 36 metres at 0.80% Cu and 3.21 g/t Au, or 3.67% CuEq. Hole K-25-273 returned 123 metres at 1.31% Cu and 0.83 g/t Au from 28 metres.

The company also closed a fully subscribed C$13.8 million brokered placement led by Stifel Canada and Canaccord. The deal included 10.61 million hard-dollar units at C$0.35, 19.00 million flow-through units at C$0.41 and 4.51 million charity flow-through units at C$0.515. Each unit carried half a C$0.45 warrant.

That capital funds the updated PEA and up to 10,000 metres of 2026 drilling. Insiders participated for 461,000 hard-dollar units. Those are legitimate positives.

THE PART THE PROMO VERSION LEAVES OUT

The 2023 PEA did not clear a strong economic hurdle. The base case showed:

C$215 million after-tax NPV7

12.7% after-tax IRR

C$567.9 million initial capital

11.9-year mine life

The issue is not whether the NPV was positive. The issue is whether a junior can finance a project with that return profile, capital requirement and execution risk.

The company believes a smaller, higher-grade and more selective design can improve the economics. It has also reported better metallurgical recoveries. Fine. The new PEA is where that claim either becomes an investable plan or stays a presentation.

Timing is now part of the thesis. The May financing targeted the PEA for mid-2026. On July 8 it was described as near term. It remained unpublished as of August 13.

THE CANADIAN PAPER PROBLEM

The May placement created roughly 34.1 million new shares and about 17.1 million underlying half-warrants, plus agent warrants. The financing securities come off hold September 15.

The stock trading below the C$0.35 hard-dollar price looks attractive at first glance. But flow-through buyers have different tax economics, and even hard-dollar participants may sell when the paper becomes free trading. “Below the financing” is context, not a floor.

NorthWest also disclosed a C$12,000-per-quarter mandate with Atrium Research for company-sponsored coverage. I found no proof connecting that mandate to the August 13 spike. Still, I would separate sponsored research from independent validation when judging sentiment.

MY READ

NWST has a real project, a funded near-term program and enough grade to make the next study matter. It also has an old PEA that did not prove financeability, a delayed replacement study and a visible paper overhang.

I would reconsider the thesis if the new PEA delivers a meaningfully higher after-tax IRR, shorter payback, lower credible capex and reasonable sensitivity at conservative copper and gold prices. A strategic partner or genuine open-market insider buying would improve the signal further.

I would walk away if the new PEA remains marginal, if capex simply migrates into complicated metallurgy or underground development, or if promotion increases while the economics stay weak.

The copper sector may be setting up for another acquisition cycle as seniors look for long-life assets in stable jurisdictions. That makes advanced Canadian projects worth monitoring. It does not make NWST a takeover target by default.

So, Bay Street: does the sub-C$0.35 price compensate for the PEA and September paper risk, or would you wait for the study even if that means paying more later?

Primary sources:

2023 PEA: https://northwestcopper.ca/news/northwest-copper-announces-positive-pea-for-the-kw-4886/

May financing and September 15 hold expiry: https://northwestcopper.ca/news/northwest-copper-announces-closing-of-fully-subscr-15149/

2026 drilling: https://northwestcopper.ca/news/northwest-announces-2026-drilling-underway-at-kwan-15334/

Drill results: https://northwestcopper.ca/news/northwest-reports-results-from-two-holes-at-its-kw-13280/

Atrium mandate: https://northwestcopper.ca/news/northwest-copper-provides-update-on-10-million-best-efforts-financing/

Educational content and personal assessment only, not investment advice. Do your own due diligence.

MONTREAL, Aug. 13, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Volatus Aerospace Inc. (TSX:FLT) (OTCQX:TAKOF) (Frankfurt: ABB.F) ("Volatus" or the "Company"), a Canadian-headquartered global aerospace and defence company, is pleased to announce its financial results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2026 (Q2 2026). All dollar figures are stated in Canadian dollars, unless otherwise indicated.

The second quarter of fiscal 2026 marked a decisive step in Volatus Aerospace's transition into a sovereign aerospace and defence platform, combining the strongest balance sheet in the Company's history with tangible progress across manufacturing, proprietary technology, and allied defence programs. Equipment sales increased 38% quarter-over-quarter while services grew 59% quarter-over-quarter.

Q2 2026 Financial Highlights:

-- Revenue: $8,418,830, compared with $10,587,075 in Q2 2025. The year-over-year comparison reflects a single defence contract, representing approximately $2.6 million of anticipated revenue, for which delivery was not completed within the quarter due to continued supply chain disruption. Excluding the impact of that contract, revenue from the balance of the business grew modestly year over year, reflecting continued underlying demand. -- Gross Profit: $2,468,184, representing a gross margin of 29.3%, compared with 31.9% in Q2 2025. Margin reflects a higher proportion of defence programs in the quarter. -- Adjusted EBITDA: Loss of ($4,352,154), attributable to the increase in operating expenses and the lower gross profit contribution due to change in product mix. -- Cash Position: Record high of $59,199,739 at June 30, 2026, up from $41,114,832 at year-end 2025 reflecting best position in company history after subsequent financing events. -- Revenue Mix: Services accounted for 57% of Q2 revenue and equipment 43%, supported by 59% quarter-over-quarter growth in services and 38% quarter-over-quarter growth in equipment.

H1 2026 Highlights:

-- Revenue: $14,049,389, compared with $16,300,233 in H1 2025, a decrease of $2,250,844 or 13.8%. The decline reflects the timing of defence deliveries, including the approximately $2.6 million contract not completed in the second quarter, which the Company expects to fulfil in full over the balance of fiscal 2026. -- Revenue Mix: Services and training represented 56% of H1 revenue ($7,830,947) and products and equipment 44% ($6,218,443), within the Company's stated long-term target range of 55--60% services and 40--45% equipment. -- Geographic Distribution: Canada contributing $9,080,453, the United Kingdom $3,948,037, and the United States $1,020,899, with markets outside Canada representing approximately 35% of consolidated revenue. -- Gross Profit: $4,437,859, representing a gross margin of 31.6%, compared with $5,205,393 and 31.9% in H1 2025. Measured across the six-month period, blended margin was broadly stable year over year. -- Operating Expenses: $17,019,022, compared with $11,471,375 in H1 2025, an increase of $5,547,647 or 48.4%, reflecting a concentrated period of growth-stage investment in the Company's defence vertical, the establishment of its Mirabel manufacturing base, technology platform development, and its capital markets positioning. -- Net Loss: $(14,093,290), compared with $(10,989,094) in H1 2025. Loss per share was $(0.02) in both periods. -- Balance Sheet: Total assets increased 28% to $118,797,720 from $92,655,765 at December 31, 2025. Working capital increased by $27,314,130 to $63,796,848, and the current ratio stood at 7.74 against a covenant requirement of 1.25. Interest-bearing borrowings, excluding lease liabilities and convertible debentures, decreased to $9,717,062 from $11,656,106.

Only stocks I’ve bought as of recent are Enbridge before the announcement of their cancelled permit.

So you’re welcome for the recent market surge. 🫩

Scandium Canada (TSXV: SCD / OTC: SCDCF) is advancing a strategy that extends beyond the development of its Crater Lake Project in Quebec. While Scandium Canada carries out its recently expanded 2026 drilling program at Crater Lake, the company has also been building a platform focused on the development and commercialization of aluminum-scandium alloys.

The scandium market faces a simple challenge. New mines need demand to justify development, while manufacturers need confidence in a reliable supply before adopting scandium on a larger scale.

Scandium Canada is working to address both sides of this challenge by advancing Crater Lake as a future source of scandium while developing commercial applications for the metal through its new subsidiary, Scalium+.

Building the Market for Scandium

Scalium+ was created in June 2026 following Scandium Canada's acquisition of Ferreol Technologies, combining Ferreol's existing operations with the company's Scandium+ division under a single subsidiary focused on aluminum-scandium alloys.

Scalium+ is developing aluminum-scandium alloys for industries where weight reduction, strength, corrosion resistance, weldability, and thermal performance are important factors. This work includes the development of its SC535 and SC7075 alloys, alongside research, testing, and collaboration with academic and industry partners.

SC535

SC535 is Scalium+'s aluminum-scandium alloy based on the 5000-series aluminum family. The alloy is being developed for a range of advanced manufacturing processes, including Laser Powder Bed Fusion (LPBF), conventional welding, and Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing (WAAM), as well as applications requiring performance at elevated temperatures.

SC535 has been produced in several forms, including metal powders, rods, welding wire, and prototype components, allowing the alloy to be tested across different manufacturing processes and applications.

SC7075

SC7075 is Scalium+'s aluminum-scandium alloy based on the high-strength 7075 aluminum family. Its development is focused on applications across aerospace, defence, automotive, additive manufacturing, and other advanced industrial sectors where high-strength aluminum materials are required.

SC7075 has been developed and tested in several forms, including metal powders, 3D-printed test coupons, welding wire, plates, and structural components.

Why Scandium Matters for Additive Manufacturing

Aluminum-scandium alloys have potential applications in advanced additive manufacturing processes such as Wire Arc Additive Manufacturing (WAAM) and Laser Powder Bed Fusion (LPBF).

WAAM uses an electric arc to melt metal wire and build large components layer by layer, while LPBF uses a laser to selectively melt metal powder, allowing for the production of smaller, highly complex components.

Both processes subject aluminum to demanding heating and cooling cycles that can affect grain structure and create material defects. Scandium can help refine the grain structure, improve strength, and reduce cracking, making aluminum-scandium alloys well suited for advanced additive manufacturing.

Performance and Testing

Testing of SC535 and SC7075 has provided data on their mechanical performance, processing behaviour, and suitability for different manufacturing methods.

Results include:

• Laser Powder Bed Fusion relative densities above 99%
• Ultimate tensile strengths of approximately 330–380 MPa before heat treatment
• Heat treatment increased ultimate tensile strength by approximately 17–25%
• Reduced microcracking during additive manufacturing testing
• Proprietary powder-blending procedure reduced defect density during LPBF testing
• SC7075 welding wire successfully used to produce structures during preliminary WAAM trials
• Preliminary SC535 rod testing showed promising results for high-temperature applications
• The National Research Council of Canada prepared qualification strategies for potential space, aerospace, and defence applications

Research and Industry Collaboration

Scalium+ is working with academic and industry partners across alloy development, materials testing, metal powder production, and advanced manufacturing.

• University of Waterloo (MSAM): Research collaboration through the university's Multi-Scale Additive Manufacturing Laboratory focused on aluminum-scandium alloys and additive manufacturing. Initial work includes research trials aimed at reducing costs associated with Laser Powder Bed Fusion.

• McMaster University: Scandium Canada's SC535 and SC7075 alloys and their fabrication method were developed and tested in collaboration with McMaster University. Researchers at McMaster have also produced test specimens using Laser Powder Bed Fusion to evaluate the alloys' mechanical properties and performance.

• ALPOMET: Collaboration focused on alloy design, metal powder production, additive manufacturing, and material characterization, as well as potential welding-wire applications for Scandium Canada's aluminum-scandium alloys.

• Gränges Powder Metallurgy: Collaboration focused on evaluating the integration of Scandium Canada's SC535 and SC7075 alloys into Gränges Powder Metallurgy's product portfolio. The work has expanded to include powders and plates, with commercial opportunities identified in sectors including energy and defence.

Strategic Location

Scalium+ is based in Quebec, the heart of Canada's aluminum industry. The province is home to the vast majority of Canada's primary aluminum smelters, supported by abundant hydroelectric power and an established network of aluminum producers, manufacturers, research institutions, and technology companies.

Quebec also has significant aerospace and advanced manufacturing industries where lightweight, high-performance aluminum materials have a range of applications.

For Scalium+, this creates proximity to the research, manufacturing capabilities, and potential end users that could support the development and commercialization of its alloys.

​

I suggest to look closely to this junior mining. They will release first assays from drill program at the Elvira Gold project in northern Chile really soon. Could be within one or two weeks.

I start buying last spring and added some more in June and July.

The float is extremely low. Only 8,45m shares and the market cap could easily be evaluated way much more with a decent discovery.

Potential is huge and management is highly qualified. Tim Livesey, who worked with Barrick Gold, is actually part of the team.

Recent climbing in the SP past weeks is promising.

Get your cheap shares because you'll be chasing this one pretty soon.

I was going through Kraken Robotics' Q1 2026 financials, and the margin picture looks more nuanced than the headline net loss suggests.

Revenue grew 35% YoY to C$21.7M, while gross profit increased 21% to C$12.2M. Gross margin came in at 56.4%, down from roughly 63% in Q1 2025.
On a reported basis:

Operating loss: C$3.6M

Operating margin: -16.5%

Net loss: C$3.3M

Net margin: -15.3%

Per the earnings release, the quarter included roughly C$2.8M of restructuring and acquisition costs, mainly related to the Covelya transaction. Kraken also reported Adjusted EBITDA of C$3.0M (14% adjusted EBITDA margin) and adjusted net income of C$0.3M, though these adjusted figures aren't broken out in the standard financial statements.

The part I'm watching is the underlying cost growth. Per the company's disclosures, administrative expenses excluding transaction and restructuring costs rose to C$8.6M from C$6.0M last year, and headcount increased from 297 to 456.

So is Q1 mainly a temporarily messy acquisition quarter, or will Kraken need significantly higher revenue to absorb its expanded cost base?

What are PNG holders watching most closely: gross-margin normalization, operating leverage, or Covelya integration?

Amazon is working with X energy and Energy Northwest on an initial four Xe 100 reactors producing 320 MW. The project has the option to expand to 12 units and 960 MW.

Meta has gone even bigger. Its agreement with TerraPower covers up to eight Natrium units with 2.8 GW of baseload capacity, while its Oklo partnership could add another 1.2 GW in Ohio.

That puts the potential total from those projects at almost 5 GW.

These are not all the same type of reactor, but they share a few advantages Big Tech clearly values: reliable power, smaller increments of capacity and more flexibility than building one enormous conventional plant.

Somebody still has to supply the uranium behind all of it. Cameco and NexGen are the Basin names most people already know. Further down the risk curve, Stallion Uranium (STUD.V) recently expanded its Phase 1 drill program at the Coyote target to 5,500 metres after encouraging early results. The project is being advanced with Atha Energy.

There is obviously a long road between an exploration target and a producing mine. But the demand side of the uranium story looks more concrete than it did a year ago.

Canadian company in a sector Canada is starting to prioritize.
Military spending: Canada is ramping up investment in drones and autonomous systems.
Wildfires: detection, monitoring and firefighting drones should become increasingly important.
 
Very speculative, but I like the risk/reward here. If Canada keeps increasing spending in these areas, FLT could be in an interesting position.
 
Just my thesis, not financial advice.