In short: New pro pick #3 — the speculation, with the loss stated first. "Your listeners need to know that if my exploration thesis is wrong on Talon that they're going to lose 50% of their money. Let me repeat this again." The upside case is a single asset: "the attraction of this is an exploration play, Tamarack, that is mind-boggling, was brought to my attention by Bob Bishop who brought Voisey's Bay to my attention… If this works, you're talking about a deposit that is as profound, perhaps more profound, than Voisey's Bay. Notice that I began that statement with the word if." The governance screen that qualifies it: "20% of the company's owned by the Lundin family… once again, I have adult supervision" (plus the Rio Tinto JV the host raises). Suitability is spelled out rather than implied: "this is for people who are fairly technically sophisticated and people who use money where if they lose that money it doesn't jeopardize their child's college education." He frames all three picks as one construction — "I tried to select three stocks that had varying degrees of risk, varying degrees of reward and would appeal to the different constituencies."
This is the deliberately dangerous one, and Rule leads with the loss rather than the gain: if his exploration thesis is wrong, buyers "are going to lose 50% of their money." He says it twice, unprompted. Talon is not really a mining company yet — it is a bet on what is under the ground at Tamarack in Minnesota, a nickel-copper project it holds in joint venture with Rio Tinto.
The upside case rests on a comparison and a provenance. The deposit could be "as profound, perhaps more profound, than Voisey's Bay" — the Labrador nickel discovery that made fortunes in the 1990s — and the person who put it in front of him is the same person who put Voisey's Bay in front of him decades ago. Rule flags his own conditional immediately: "notice that I began that statement with the word if."
Two things make him willing to take the bet. Rio Tinto's involvement means a major mining company has looked at the geology and stayed. And the Lundin family owns about 20% — what he calls "adult supervision," meaning owners with enough money at stake to stop management doing something foolish. He is explicit about who this is for: people technically sophisticated enough to judge drill results, using money whose total loss would not affect a child's education or what they eat for breakfast. In his framework this is alpha, and he has just spent the previous ten minutes saying most people should skip alpha entirely.
1:05:58— Note, too, that 20% of the company's owned by the Lundin family. — There you go. — So, once again, I have adult supervision. Now, your listeners need to know that if my exploration thesis is wrong on Talon that they're going to lose 50% of their money. Let me repeat this again.
In short: "I think they're decent. I don't think it's as good as Talon's latest promotion, which is spectacular. I haven't changed my ranking because the results I would say have been outstripped by the promotion."
47:18Okay. Let's see. Helen, what's up Helen? How you doing? Okay, follow up on — okay, we hit that one. Talon: latest results. Have you had a chance to look at them? I have. I think they're decent. I don't think it's as good as Talon's latest promotion, which is spectacular. I haven't changed my ranking because the results I would say have been outstripped by the promotion.
Nothing matches this filter.
Verbatim excerpts from the public transcripts (auto-pulled at each mention's timestamp, lightly cleaned). Timestamps link into the video; "source page" opens that commentator's full analysis at this row. Click a mention's header line to expand it (one open at a time). For personal study — not investment advice.