Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[superg1] 02/1/2015 10:38

Mad

The mobiles came first the large plants are scaled up versions of minis.

When I say research I mean talking to the CEO at the time and it was an answer given by the CEO way back when the questions were being asked whether plants would work.

Similar plants exist in Chile and the US (with the Japanese). It is the chemical removal process that is the game changer.

[madchick] 02/1/2015 09:12

No amount of research will tell anyone whether these mobiles will work straight off or not. Experience - IOF's experience - seems to indicate that nothing ever works smoothly first time round.

I'd love for it all to work well, but for the sake of sanity, it's maybe best to assume they won't and that's what I believe IOF should also assume. Just my opinion (based on what I know / have experienced).

The plants were based on the original mobiles that never worked properly. The plants have been tweaked and optimised, with many changes (it wouldn't take a year or so otherwise) since. Do those tweaks really translate back into the mobiles? Is the chemical mix really directly proportional? Maybe there is great blockage risk with a more portable design? I don't know. I imagine IOF have thought of much more than I can, but to assume they've thought of everything, I think, would be a mistake.

Anyway, it's true, to an extent this is pointless because IOF will do what they will do, superg's done all the research on the water, so there's nothing to say there, and I'm just champing at the bit and really wanting 2015 to go well. Please!!

[superg1] 02/1/2015 08:40

They started with mobiles, and the same questions arose re would the main plant work.

The main plant idea was proven to work on smaller versions.

The chemical mix to extract the iodine in the main trick, the process up to that point isn't a lot different.

Mobiles don't include the entire process, so if we are looking for opinions but based on research, then the will it, won't it exchange is pointless.


They talked of minor design changes to 2 minis which they called IOA and IOB, so it seems they had two in mind and near model completion, months ago.

In H2 they have been concentrating on getting costs down and the current plants optimised.

[monty panesar] 02/1/2015 08:34

Not that it matters a lot but historically the water permit website often gets updated late on a Friday so we might get confirmation of a hearing date this evening.

[madchick] 02/1/2015 07:45

I agree with sandbag - the mobile plants are different from the plants, by definition, and any change to anything brings with it the risk of mistakes or unforeseen knock-on effects. I would be shocked if IOF just do a roll-out without even checking and tweaking one in the field first.

How long has IO.1 been going - they'd tested that extensively and failed a few times and for most of 2014 they've been - and still are - tweaking the plants. I'm sceptical that by contrast, a mobile plant will work just like that.

This is why I - like others here - would really like to see one being tested in real life as soon as possible, especially since funds aren't an issue. However, I guess we will have to wait if the plants are still being experimented with. It's a bit frustrating, but as long as it's all good in the end...

[naphar] 01/1/2015 21:38

Bogg1e
Your confidence is interesting. I am still wondering how you come to the conclusion they had about $20M cash at bank or equivalents at year end just gone?

[bogg1e] 01/1/2015 21:12

Sandbag, I agree with the more cautious approach. I would love to see IOF order 10 mobiles, but the fact is, with limited suppliers (in my notes i have two Stateside suppliers, there could be more), then I doubt whether more than 3 moviles could be manufactured at the same time, so i imagine more of a continuous roll out, If they order in batches of say 2 at a time, each taking 3 months to manufacture and get into production, then thats three months to tweek the first two to ensure that the next pre-ordered batch is up and running much faster. My concern is not around whether the technology will work, it will, its been proven in the IO plants, Im more concerned about manufacture lead times. Weve seen before that IOFs suppliers do have large order backlogs due to the fracking boom etc. I hope this is not a concern this time around. However Id like to see a rolling order in place so that by the end of 2015 we have 8 or so mobiles in production. I estimate a pay back period of about 6 months per mobile at current iodine prices, which will obviously improve as the price of iodine rises, so the money is there, both in cash + loans + profit from this years operations. I want to to see serious growth based on well chosen mobile sites this year.

[sandbag] 01/1/2015 20:37

Bogg1e,

You say it's only the extraction part of an IO plant. That may or may not be correct, I don't know, and I don't even know if the extraction part of the plant works without any hitches. If the company did tell us that they did work OK then I don't remember it. I do know we were told the that the Titanic was unsinkable, and I do know after a lifetime of work on constructional engineering projects that very few plants actually work when they're announced as complete. They're completed / tweaked etc during the "commissioning" phase which can last quite some time.

The whole point of my post was to keep some balance. It's probably two years ago when discussions on this board about meeting at golf courses in the USA and how we would all be millionaires in months etc appeared and Chris Fay was talking about the shares being £12 in no time. Look where we are now.

I sincerely hope you are correct and all is hunky-dory, meanwhile I still maintain that we should get one unit up and running rather than announcing to the world that we have 10 units and oops sorry but they don't quite work as well as we had hoped.

Best wishes to you and everyone else here for 2015!

[bogg1e] 01/1/2015 19:44

sandbag
31 Dec'14 - 01:01 - 28305 of 28325 2 0

Bogg1e,
"I estimate that a mobile should produce between 0.35 to 1.35 tonnes per day. That means a mobile is a 100 ton per year min plant. 10 would cost $9 mil and add 1000 tonnes per year min to output. Easy to become no 1 in the US next year, provided mobile manufacturing lead times are well managed."

They haven't built and proved, repeat, built and proved, one mobile yet. Keep your feet on the ground FFS!
Your shirts are dazzling you man. Wear shades! ;-)


-- Sandbag, a mobile is only the extraction part of an IO plant. Proven technology. Why wouldn't it be up and running successfully in a short period of time?

Happy New Year :-)

[monty panesar] 31/12/2014 19:16

Let's hope we aren't waiting until 2016 for the first mini!

[che7win] 31/12/2014 15:30

I bought here this month at 34.75p, inverse head and shoulders formation to my untrained eye should see mid 40s, probably triggered by this quarters iodine production figures.

As Bocker says, so much potential here and they have scratched the surface.

A takeover on iodine rising would be a risk if we remain at these prices.

[superg1] 31/12/2014 13:59

Nap

That's what the AIM is all about, trying to identify businesses that have genuine ingredients to succeed.

Funds wait for the facts as they are much happier to pay more with less risk.

Research does pay off, v plain old trend and hype. There are quite a few where I would chase a trend or hype, but bail out sharply due to the research.

I just read up on a jam tomorrow share that is hardly followed at all. The odd poster with a bit of detail, but they have missed 80% of what the prospects are.

EG on one angle I can see an outside connection to a hot, current, and future sector. On one of the web one of the Saudi majors has taken a near 30% stake.

It's those sorts of angles bubbling away in the background that most don't get anywhere near to finding.

In fact I hadn't paid attention either but out of curiosity decided to research one seemingly innocuous comment.

[flyingbull] 31/12/2014 13:00

A real challenge for 2015! The January 2015 and the annual oil stock competitions are now on. Deadline for entries is midnight on Sunday 4 January 2015. Good luck!

[neddo] 31/12/2014 12:57

me conceited ? talking cap , stalin.

[napoleon 14th] 31/12/2014 12:08

sandbag 28317 - just the sort of thing I was on about.
Further FACTS include obtaining a water permit FOR REAL,
confirming production rates FOR REAL as well as valid prodictive mobiles &
PBT/ebitda worth talking about.

Much as I appreciate all the hard work & research gone into this,
the market will want HARD FACTS. In its' current mood & with IOF's
history, IMO that's the bottom line as it is today & onwards.

GLA for 2015.

[superg1] 31/12/2014 11:26

CK

Yes in theory as any further letters don't have to be reviewed. Two objections had nothing valid in them anyway so I struggle to see how they could come up with anything extra.

As it stands there is one part of one objection that is deemed valid, but as stated by IOF the nature of it to them is very weak, which I entirely agree with as previously posted.

[captain_kurt] 31/12/2014 11:00

Super, so the sooner we get a hearing date the less chance of another 'valid objection'?

[sandbag] 31/12/2014 10:46

Super,
I take your point about mobiles being smaller scale models of existing plant and should in theory work but I still think it would be prudent to prove one unit before putting out an order for others to be built. We went full out on production of big plant and look where the share price is now. We need to show Mr Market that we can perform - no more excuses.

[bocker01] 31/12/2014 10:45

Che, thanks for the Jonny B reminder! Shows how far things have turned around. Now we have a rock solid base to build from, it all feels a lot better! Lowest cost producer! Cash in the bank! Profitable! Loads of unexploited leases! Protective moat! Prices set to rise! Etc. 2015 should be a pretty good year!

[superg1] 31/12/2014 10:44

nap 14th

I post the info so that the facts stand out.

I fully expect a load of questions here when a date goes in that hearing box.

Questions that have been answered in great detail over and over again. The posting is of no benefit to me, I just share it.

Posting about Starcom was of no benefit either, it's just observations that may be of interest to others.

Posting on various shares is of no benefit to me, but if I spot things I share it as it may be of interest to someone else.

If I think someone is misleading folk that I have got to know on various threads, then I do post my view, if there are facts to support it.

[napoleon 14th] 31/12/2014 10:35

All very interesting but onnly FACTS will really move the share price
I've held loosers for years at different times & even come out with multi-bagers,
so sticking with IOF doesn't look too extravagant, but it's sure taking time.
For the moment, it's promises, promises....!
Here's hoping 2015 finally changes all that.

Thanks for all the research in a very interesting & diverse situation.

[superg1] 31/12/2014 10:14

Water permit timeline.

As stated earlier this month I didn't expect the hearing date box to have an entry until at least now or the first week of January, IF any deficiency letter to the objectors didn't get a reply.

Those predictions were based on the administration process recorded on their website.

The 15 day reply period has now passed and will include the 7 day postmark rule.

With it being new years day tomorrow, the hearing box could be updated today, but I favour Friday or Mon/Tues next week.

The hearing box will get a date in it regardless of whether an actual hearing will go ahead, as that is what their admin process follows. This is the protocol if any point is deemed valid

'• CO will send objection letters with HE assigned & Notice of Hearing date'

CO = Central office. HE= Hearing examiner.

In the rns it said

'at this time, only a portion of one objection is valid. The other invalid objections points may be resubmitted to the DNRC during December for further consideration. 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. If necessary, the Company will vigorously defend the granting of the preliminary permit and feels that this objection has low risk to the Atlantis Water project, and therefore, the Company is continuing to move forward with this project'


So in the next few days I expect a date to appear as that is the administration process.

There are various reasons why it may not go to a hearing and here is one of them

16. Applicant / objectors withdraws the objection as part of a stipulation with conditions-Order Issued to Grant

• HE dismisses hearing and issues Final Order to grant w/ or wo/ stipulated conditions as needed to satisfy the criteria within 30 days of stipulation

receipt (standard template) May include private agreement condition.

• Dept will only review the portions of the stipulation that relate to the criteria

[superg1] 31/12/2014 10:01

info

As pointed out repeatedly with the actual T/O rule posted, it has to be fair value. While the share price doesn't represent the true value, the assets, tangible and intangible do, and that's what any T/O works off.

The brine lease build up as recently and finally mentioned carries a good value.

[infoisrealnot] 31/12/2014 09:28

Totally agree , but it would be very nice to see these facts reflected in the share price, which seems to be suggesting a very different story.

As all the facts are true and share price does not reflect value of the potential and the pre-mentioned facts then a low ball take over offer IOF is very vulnerable. As other management can see the value here.