Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[bogg1e] 04/2/2015 10:56

Hurricane, at least we know that they have water JV contracts on the desk, Japanese offtake contracts sat on the desk. Lance has plans laid out, hes just waiting to find out which one he can announce, thats all.

[monts12] 04/2/2015 10:49

Hurricane
I don't think you'll hear anything about the review until the Water decision, imo. Better to assume that than to be dissapointed each day.

[hurricane.] 04/2/2015 10:19

Another day wasted by Iofina.
It's turning out to be an exceptionally long strategic growth review

[che7win] 04/2/2015 09:42

Anyone in AFR, just be careful, a lot of pumping and dumping going on there, I don't know what will happen but I don't have an optimistic view on it.

I've been proved wrong on it in the past week however...

[superg1] 04/2/2015 08:40

Yesterday was the 2nd day of high volume with no news. So that tends to confirm a seller, but equally someone soaking them up, as typically they would not be able to get those volumes away.

A couple of positive tweaks appearing with other factors so hopefully that will continue.

[superg1] 04/2/2015 06:56

Engelo

I understand they have more eager customers than iodine presently.


As for automation, it was about reducing staff, but I'd it's 2 staff per shift at non automated plants, I struggle to see how you could reduce to one when looking at the size and complexity of a plant.

[engelo] 04/2/2015 00:11

super: interesting idea to move I01. However (thanks mainly to yourself) I believe that I02 onwards are a significantly different design. And how well would we trust the removal men with those delicate titanium towers :-)

On the other hand does I01 still have the inelegant trucking delivery system?

[engelo] 04/2/2015 00:07

cyber: have much the same thoughts about IOChem's unique advantage, but can they get new customers to match the extra shift?

On the face of it another plant would be a licence to print money if output via IoChem, but would be a licence to print more money if the POI went up and getting raw iodine customers should be a piece of cake, at least to the level of US imports.

[cyberbub] 03/2/2015 23:13

Spike, I disagree. The company does not have to worry too much about the iodine spot price because it has the amazing advantage of IOChem, which can sell added-value products and make an even bigger margin. It has been stated on here before that the company could add a couple more full-size extraction plants (in high PPM sites) and then simply add an extra shift at IOChem to use their output. So we are sitting pretty compared to every one of our peers. It's only when we have an excess of iodine beyond what IOChem can produce that we need to sell at world prices... and even then we should be making at least 50%!NAI

[hurricane.] 03/2/2015 23:13

Fair comments boggle, but exceptional to me is getting on with strategic growth early 2015 while maximising existing plants. They have done the hard work late 2014 getting the plants upgraded. As super said, getting one plant is the right location drops opex significantly

[bogg1e] 03/2/2015 22:47

Hurricane, exceptional is relative, when we get the plants up to full brine flow late spring, our output will double and revenues even more so as costs drop and prices rise, so easily 100% growth ahead this year with revenues to match or even outperform. That is exceptional. The trouble is we think exceptional is 6 new plants etc per year and 200% growth yoy, cos we still have the high expectations from 2 years ago uppermost in our thoughts!

[superg1] 03/2/2015 22:26

Kaos

They may have one ordered we don't know.

Re permitting they have the brine leases stacked up so no issue there. Permitting was a new word created by George when he didn't get the DEA permit and it caused a delay.

Tackems. Texas for io1, they have another site there should they choose but it will probably be Oklahoma for the medium term.

[kaos3] 03/2/2015 22:01

prices stable to decreasing?


hxxp://www.seair.co.in/crude-iodine-import-data/indian-port-nhava-sheva-sea.aspx

[naphar] 03/2/2015 22:00

Depends on your definition of exceptional and cautious.

[hurricane.] 03/2/2015 21:45

The company being cautious doesn't tie in with the CEO's comments of an exceptional year ?

[kaos3] 03/2/2015 21:38

What is the plant construction lead time? Permitting included. Another few months before main stock is shifted? Timing is crucial.

[arlington chetwynd talbot] 03/2/2015 21:34

Next stop here is 26.5p;


free stock charts from uk.advfn.com

[tackems] 03/2/2015 21:27

Clarification please, IO1 is in Texas while the others are in OK. Is that right?

[naphar] 03/2/2015 20:56

Spike
I appreciate your point, but also agree with Hurricanes thought, the opex of the next plant should be below $20/kg, giving a good margin for further reduced prices, whilst also reducing overall cost per kg and increasing output available for IOC. It would also allow them a bit of flexibility to strategically close one or more of the more expensive current plants if iodine prices reduce much further.

I am in two minds, and at the end of the day have to either trust management decision making and their current strategy, or sell up. I am staying put for now, however frustrating the lack of information currently is.

[superg1] 03/2/2015 20:54

aja5

No is what I hear, and logically it wouldn't make sense.

Spike, like Hurricane I think they will go for some high ppm sites to increase production and enhance opex.

Io1 was said to be a 1 mt per week unit, then it will be the highest opex.

On pure figures and not strategy, pick it up and stick it at a 200 site, the gain is 150.

500 @ $25 per becomes 650 at $19.23.

$12.5 mill $2.5 mill profit v $19.5 mill with a $7 mill profit.

I think they said the cost to move a plant would be about $1.5 mill. Using the above figures the pay back is under 3 months.

My first move would be to put a big plant in on a high ppm site.

The logic depends on the cost for a new plant, as there would be no point moving io1 if a fully fitted new plant costs could be cut to $1.5 mill.

The one thing I am thinking is costs will come down as the oil industry is on slow down, so the wage and supply battle shouldn't be so fierce right now.

I note US small caps have done well recently, as the sentiment is the US based small companies will do well. IOF are looking at a 4,500 mt US import market that they can fill over time. If they have the lowest opex, which seems likely, it should be easy to take custom away from Chile.

Plants are nowhere near at the production levels that they desire due to disruption, but overall the opex is lower than most of the Chile producers.

[spike_1] 03/2/2015 20:51

Hi Hurricane,
We anticipate opex under $20/mt if we build new plant. Yes that is a reasonable expectation on the 'information' we have. We don't know if the high ppm's are in areas susceptible to current market forces or for that matter dilution with lower ppm's.

For whatever reason, IOF are being - in our view - conservative regarding expansion.

Until IOF tells us otherwise, I would rather let them decide.

I am many thousands of £ underwater with IOF and I am not happy, but we are where we are.

Best wishes - Mike

[hurricane.] 03/2/2015 20:23

Spike that makes no sense. Any new plant would have opex under $20/MT. That's 50% margin minimum. No existing producers can come close to matching that. Iofina should move forward with growth regardless of water.

[spike_1] 03/2/2015 19:29

Until we know more or less for certain that the raw iodine price has started a genuine mid to long term rise, why would IOF risk spending capital on building more plants.

If SQM are determined to take the iodine price low enough to take out the competition, we have to be sure we are not part of the competition they intend to remove.

Yes, current impending legislation and upcoming / ongoing court cases strongly suggest that much of the competition is about to suffer a terminal blow, but it hasn't happened yet!

If legislation is seen to be destroying mining in Chile, who is to say it may not be watered down, who is to say that the current/impending court cases will result in production being lost rather than transferred to a new entity with adequate cash resources.

In short - IOF is currently successful. If water works out (with a sizeable upfront) then they have the cushion to risk expanding now and hope that the iodine market will provide the conditions that allow that expansion to be a success.

The odds are in IOF's favour, but expanding too much too soon seems to be a risk they have not been prepared to take. Not forgetting that the fracking industry is also in a state of flux.

Best wishes - Mike

[neddo] 03/2/2015 18:45

come on guys don't let fartwell goad you into replying to him , just laugh at act/fartwell for what they are, one clown. same idiot