Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[arlington chetwynd talbot] 12/12/2014 17:12

Well there's a bitter price-war atm and although we've seen rev's we have not been told margins. The market rightly views this with deep suspicion.

[johnsdale] 12/12/2014 17:09

That's the trouble the strategy review was delayed presumably due to the pending water news, monthly updates were stopped, could really do with some positive news to give Investors a reason to buy back in at this level.

[woodpeckers] 12/12/2014 16:51

Thanks SG, you really are worth your weight in iodine!

Another rubbish week share price wise but being 'connected' to the oil industry that is not surprising, despite being ridiculous.

The story hasn't changed and neither have my feelings regarding my perhaps stupidly large holding. Like many here, I have averaged down so many times I've lost count, so on paper it looks terrible, but I'm still confident that come next year I'll be glad I invested!

The bottom line remains that the world needs iodine and regardless of all 'asides', this is an iodine company with proven patented technology which is able to produce iodine more cheaply than anyone else.

[superg1] 12/12/2014 16:02

The key word is facts.

Mr Culbertson depot has double listed one permit, some that have no water and the odd one that are nothing to do with fracking.

Assumptions re Hal, and plain old deliberate misrepresentation on other points.

Nice to know what it's all about, nothing more than an annoying gnat.

If some had stayed awake and read the posts, they would know that. :-)

[alphacharlie] 12/12/2014 15:33

I did a lot of reading up on Culbertson some months ago after an exchange with maca next door. I managed to download an on-line document (which you're not supposed to be able to do - as I remember I used OCR software to get it) and have to say I was unimpressed either with what maca had said or with Culbertson; particularly with some of their plant and the building(s).

I also learnt that water rights are an absolute minefield re regulations which vary from state to state and even county to county.

I will dig them out when I'm home later and upload them as best I can.

Thanks to SG and obbig60* for the contributions so far this afternoon.

* so now we have:

mrbig
johnnybig
and obbig60

Curiouser and curiouser said Alice . . .

[superg1] 12/12/2014 15:22

Lol

Culbertson

If he goes to a hearing and says some of the things he has recorded he'll probably have his permit revoked at the next annual review. Doh.

So at best it looks like a pensioner v Halliburton and Iof. A pensioner who has put some porkies and own goals in his objection.

All to be revealed over the weekend as I have a busy night tonight made much letter by reading those.

It's easy for me on a quick read as I have been through just about everything mentioned in fine detail on those objections.

But just one point.

He says wells only need 40k barrels to frack them the. But on his permit to get his water he says 50k to 70k which is about right going on that recent report.

He says no way is a 50 mile radius justifiable, yet one of the Ames depots he mentions has a letter saying they will truck it 300 miles.

[bal1man] 12/12/2014 15:16

dont want to tempt fate on the basis of these objection as super as described the award of the permit looks like a formality.

[cyberbub] 12/12/2014 14:43

Will be interested to see people's interpretatio of these objections over the weekend...... remember that we are undervalued on the iodine business alone though!NAI

[obbig60] 12/12/2014 14:42

For convenience, here are the links to the 3 objections provided by "aimtitan" on lse;

hxxp://www.filedropper.com/ob1
hxxp://www.filedropper.com/ob2
hxxp://www.filedropper.com/ob3

[superg1] 12/12/2014 14:41

Thanks Mad I've just read the post.

Re news there won't be any on that topic just yet as just one point deemed not valid starts the 15 day response deficiency letter. Plus 7 days to cover the post mark rule. If they reply that gets reviewed too. But going on the various guidance 22 days after deficiency letters are sent is the first time they will know for sure what may or may not be valid.

Obviously points are not deemed valid as the hearing box gets updated if everything is complete. It's the first action post review of any objections.

'Am I bovered'

Not in the slightest as I stayed awake when I read all the rules and other permits.

Others can not have a say until the objection period. There must be at least one depot complaining if 3 is as Iof would crush their business.

We'll get the permit and the reasons why have been explained in great detail.

I expect an rns to explain what is going on very late in December of 1st week of Jan. Iof may decide to update us but until those periods I mention have passed nothing is certain.

If it is 3 and that wildlife one does appear it always seems to end up as invalid.

If there wasn't the demand IOF wouldn't be pursuing that business. They are linked up with Hal and the corner shop depots that currently exist can not support supermarket style shopping.

They spent as much on depots as our friend does on Carlsberg export from Pavans.
No, he probably spends more.

[johnsdale] 12/12/2014 14:39

So Culbertson makes up two of the objections and the fisheries the third, after all the speculation it's interesting to actually read them

[arlington chetwynd talbot] 12/12/2014 14:37

Graham's usually on top of all these objections, where is he? Playing golf?

[monts12] 12/12/2014 14:26

Cyber
Could the news of three objections to the water permit and a possible further hearing be construed as bad news?
You'd have thought this was all in the price now?

[cyberbub] 12/12/2014 14:20

I'm going to stick my neck out and say we've reached bottom at 30p-odd, in the absence of any bad news....No advice intended of course.

[johnsdale] 12/12/2014 14:15

Might be seeing a slight rally late in the day, I've topped up a bit and brought my average down considerably, still have faith in iof long term

[festario] 12/12/2014 14:09

Well, we arrive at Friday again, and usually each week I find myself a little poorer on my AIM stocks. (Primarily due to IOF and QFI)
This week however, I find myself quite a bit poorer due to both of those stocks.
AIM, don't you just love it!

[arlington chetwynd talbot] 12/12/2014 13:57

In fact I count maybe 4 long-term bears of this stock? And I'm pretty sure there are at least 3 differing MO's? Of course there are some bulls turned bears too, but I'm not including them.

I certainly know there are more than that many MA's from the long side.

Do we have confirmation of more objections yet? Graham?

[arlington chetwynd talbot] 12/12/2014 13:49

Well the multi-avatar game is played by all sides of the trade mate. So unless you root out your own side's MA's then that argument is somewhat weak.

Personally I'd advocate that everyone pays to post. Of course this wouldn't prevent MA's from both sides, but it would reduce the prevalence you'd think?

fwiw I am of the opinion the long-side operate more MA's than the shorts - by quite some margin.

[madchick] 12/12/2014 13:38

aimtitan on LSE is claiming that three objections were received.

[alphacharlie] 12/12/2014 13:34

ACT - Thanks for thre reply. Are those the same reproductive-laws that enable some posters to have doppelgangers?

I guess bio-science has come on tons since I was at school . . .

[arlington chetwynd talbot] 12/12/2014 13:09

Well mate, of course folk laugh. Then when I'm right they get angry, it's kind of a pattern that keeps repeating... marvellous fun though.

As for your question? I don't think so, unless the scientific laws of reproduction related to ages somehow reversed for a period.

[alphacharlie] 12/12/2014 12:59

You know ACT, people may laugh at you but you have an infuriating habit of being right.

While you're around, if you'd be so kind, are you able to clear up a little question that's been troubling me. Is johnnybig (frequently seen on the 'holdings' thread) Aarons boy?

[alphacharlie] 12/12/2014 12:53

engelo - Looks like any news on water is going to drag on, maybe even into January.

You as a loyal and long shareholder here sound a tadge hacked off. But just to clarify and for the records - January 2015 or 2016?