Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[che7win] 22/12/2014 16:07

Suoerg,
My view is restricted too, but you can see the comment if you do this search (top item):

[superg1] 22/12/2014 16:00

Che

Post 28170 re the legal rights comment.

That info doesn't show on the indmin site due to restricted access. Were you able to view extra information?

[ansana] 22/12/2014 11:29

Culbertson Guy may withdraw if it's pointed out he has much to lose if he continues and his own operation comes under scrutiny. He may also think twice if he incurs costs.

[superg1] 22/12/2014 11:10

re this line

'The objection deemed valid may result in a contested case hearing before a DNRC Hearing Examiner whereby the objector must prove that the permit was preliminary granted in error.'

There are options that go on before a hearing where the applicant and objector can communicate with the objection being withdrawn or agreed conditions.

I can't see the Culbertson guy being willing to withdraw, but he will probably know it's a complete waste of time so may do so.

At any hearing his points are not only weak they are false to some extent, a matter which is easily proved.

If IOF are in talks re a JV, then as in the rns, the objection process has not interfered with that.

[woodpeckers] 22/12/2014 10:47

Good luck che. :)

[woodpeckers] 22/12/2014 10:31

Shame you didn't take the plunge che, not too late!

[1madmarky] 22/12/2014 09:33

SG entirely probable. Also mining concessions were previously granted to friends and family etc so perhaps some of those decisions are being re-appraised. It's going to get interesting and there is no guarantee that SQM are squeaky clean either. ;-)

[superg1] 22/12/2014 09:26

1MM

I'm wondering if the legal line by Indmin may be something to do with Cosayach, we can only guess, but they did set up false companies to sell iodine through to avoid tax and gain rebates.

They were making it look like they were selling at $20 per kg, but by the time it came out the other end using the false companies it was $52 per kg.

Perhaps the IRS have found something else in those raids they did.

[superg1] 22/12/2014 09:21

15 days plus around 7 days to allow for slow post as anything postmarked pre the cut off date can be considered.

For one at least I'd say the 15 days passed last week and we are in the postmark period. For another I suggest it has just about hit 15 days, so that's why I point to the end of December or early Jan when the final outcome will be know on valid points.

It seems for the rns content that nothing has been returned yet in response to rejected objections.

[1madmarky] 22/12/2014 09:19

Yes SQM have read the market well but it is still a case of fighting for survival for SQM. If the aquifer that they are drawing from is in decline (I think it is) then it's only a matter of time before they will not have any water (or at least significantly less than now). So they need cosyach's pipeline therefore they need cosyach dead in the water. The question is how long will it take? AIMHO of course
GLA

[ansana] 22/12/2014 09:15

I look forward to rising iodine prices too, one reason being that the plants are performing, we are on target, they are hitting their stated company target and they also state that the brines will continue flowing in 2015. It's all coming together.One question for SG what is the cut off date for Mr Objector having to prove their case?

[che7win] 22/12/2014 09:13

Kicking myself over AFR, was close to buying at 35p, I see they have a takeover approach, hope that doesn't happen here!

[che7win] 22/12/2014 09:05

I agree superg,
RB set themselves up for a fall, to actually stop selling iodine for such a long time was crazy.

Then when they are distressed, they dump the lot at firesales prices.

SQM played the market the right way, they have to be given credit.
IOF too did the right thing this year, Lance knew what he was doing cutting costs, I dare say he remains in close communication with SQM as they previously supplied us with our iodine.

Ridicule, we are cheap by about 20p IMHO, I don't really care as I let the market do its own thing. I bought more on the fall.

The big reason why IOF has been falling the past month or so is simply down to the chart. Shares overswing, just look at AFREN (AFR), rebounds happen quickly for mispriced stocks.

[superg1] 22/12/2014 08:53

Che

It's been all about killing off RB and Cosayach. SQM knew they had an inventory build up and a whole load of issues stacking up for both.

RB choosing not to sell iodine in H2 2013 and build up an inventory has cost them a lot of money, probably about $10m to $15m.

Cosayach double that as they rapidly built up an inventory on illegal water extraction.

SQM took some short term pain by driving the price down, clearly with the intent of stifling cash flow of others to put them in serious trouble.

[ridicule] 22/12/2014 08:50

che7win Re your post 28181. IOF is currently insulated to a large degree from low iodine prices because nearly all their production goes to their iodine by-products division where the value add reduces the effect of raw prices. Hence I am disappointed in the muted IOF share price and low volume this morning. Lets hope it picks up as the day progresses.

[superg1] 22/12/2014 08:43

Che

The words 'in the country' have me wondering who that could be.

"their legal rights to continue extracting iodine in the country."

That seems to infer it is an encompassing legal issue not just relative to where their current mine is.

I may be reading too much into it, or the good old Indmin haven't got their facts right once more.

Cosayach have the IRS issue and lack of water rights, but they do have a pipeline and other areas.

SQM have a lease issue with Corfo but that is to do with nitrates.

The newbies are Algorta Norte so maybe they have hit a legal problem, it could be Bullmine as I know little about them. I'll have a dig.

[che7win] 22/12/2014 08:40

The interesting thing is that supply has dialled right back this year but inventory from iodine producers kept the pressure off iodine prices.

Next year, supply restricted + no surplus inventory available means iodine has to rise, by how much we don't know.

IOF geared play on iodine, any rises in iodine fall straight through to our bottom line so next year should be the opposite of this year share price rise 😄

[che7win] 22/12/2014 08:31

Superg,
I was hoping someone would pick up on that. It does seem new, although judging by the quality of Indmin articles, it may just be legal water rights restrictions rather than iodine extraction for Cosayach?
If it is iodine legal rights, that's a new bullish indicator for iodine supply.

Either way, iodine prices to me are the key driver for IOF as much as anything else.

Looks like iodine is artificially low as you say because of a couple of distressed players.
This ties in with SQMs recent conference call and their head scratching on one of the questions referring to Indmin article and prices which they weren't seeing.

I'm quite looking forward to iodine rising as those companies holding off on replenishing inventories will jump in as soon as they see a bottom in. Demand will be higher than expected when that happens.

[captain_kurt] 22/12/2014 08:31

All setup for Iodine prices to increase in 2015

[superg1] 22/12/2014 08:24

Che

Interesting post which may have been missed with the news out

"Iodine price decline rumblings not reflected by wider market

Market insiders in Chile said that total iodine output has declined, with one source saying that some companies are “in a real mess” regarding their legal rights to continue extracting iodine in the country."

Also

'large contract discounts offered by individual companies are not reflective of the market as a whole.'

That part was what we suspected, Cosayach and RB having to slash their price to get sales as SQM drove the price down.

“in a real mess” regarding their legal rights to continue extracting iodine in the country."


That point is interesting too, so I'm wondering what that may be about. It doesn't seem to fit anything already raised so perhaps there is another problem.

[rogerbridge] 22/12/2014 08:12

This rns de-risks the operation for those who were unsure about how the reduction in oil price would affect iodine production and that IOF will meet year end forecasts.
Water permit is nailed on by the look of it.
Excellent news.