Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[heartwell] 06/2/2015 08:22

End of next week reality will kick in. Sub 20p

[heartwell] 06/2/2015 08:17

No new plants, no institutional support. Management have failed.
Water decision is many months away
Only mug punters left

[heartwell] 06/2/2015 08:14

Boom. Sub 30p by the end the week. Heartwell gets it right again

Review 6 months late. Plants in the wrong locations.

quote "1000s of samples" has turned into paralysis by the BOD. There is a reason why they haven't built any plants for nearly 8 months.
All about the water now

[superg1] 06/2/2015 07:55

But the cost per kg has fallen Trav I gave some guidance re that to Cross recently.

What's to say they haven't turned lower producing plants off while the price is low. That action would make sense to me if any plant was operating at over the price. Pure speculation on my part, but logical. They turned io5 off at one point as the old team had it running off an expensive hired generator.

If they have enough iodine and inventory then there is no point adding to the inventory with higher cost plants costs are higher than the going rate.

The key line which prompted my question was this

'The bottom line is IOF is still not making money'

In Oct The CEO said the cash position is increasing month on month and $7.5 mill in cash at that time.

Opex IS comfortably below the current iodine price, as there have been other 'interviews' but they are not available to view on line.

I have no issue with a loss as they are trying to make ground on the mess up in H1, which as it turned out wasn't as bad in cash terms as I thought it would be.

SG and A costs based on what has been said should fall quite a bit in H2.

[naphar] 05/2/2015 23:35

Trav
If a loss for FY 2014 of circa $1m is posted, then they will have made a small profit in H2, proving they are turning things around. I personally believe we could see anywhere from circa $1m loss to circa $1m profit, but it remains to be seen.

I agree with lots of what you have said in last 2 posts, but don't think it is possible to say with the certainty you appear to, that they are still loss making. I believe it is too close to call this year. They have been monitoring and reducing costs, somehow increased cash in Q3, and had 35% revenue growth for the year, having expected the H2 slowdown.

Would a $1m loss be such a travesty? 12 months ago i would have said yes, now, knowing the mess the company were in, I would say it is a miracle and would have been much worse under the previous idiotic management.

[trav5] 05/2/2015 21:52

SG1 expanded;
The facts cash:
From Annual report 25/04/14:
Opening cash $ 5,720,664; raised $ 15,000,000; closing
cash position yr end 2013 $8,268,755:
Loss $3,744,294 (2013¬) (2012 loss $1,131,187).
RNS update on the 29/03/14 stated cash position $2,300,000. A further $5,000,000 was raised in April.
From Interim June 2014
Opening cash $8,268,755; raised $5,000,000 closing cash $6,270,754.
Without raising the additional finance the company would have only had $1,270,000 remaining IMO they did need additional finance as a buffer without even thinking about expansion especially when you consider the prior rates of cash burn. H1 Loss $1,303.081.
The facts Production:
RNS 17/12/13 Issued guidance of between 700-1000mt for 2014.
RNS 23/04/14 Downgrades guidance to 400mt for 2014.
RNS 18/09/14 Downgrades guidance to 325-350mt for 2014.
The facts Operating costs:
From Annual report 25/04/14
“Operating costs below $30” “We expect to see significant improvements in production costs with the addition of higher volume plants comparable to IO#2, which produce at a more favourable cost in the low $20 per kilogram range. The recent addition of IO#4 and IO#5, and the addition of IO#6 in Q2 2014, will significantly increase production over current levels and is expected to decrease average production costs in the year 2014 and onward, growing shareholder value”.
The above statement was made when the guidance was for between 700-1000mt in 2014. The gains in production have never materialised so IMO the fall in production costs probably have not materialised either. Hence based on historical facts IMO a loss in the region $1m will be posted for 2014.

[superg1] 05/2/2015 20:15

I do believe (from comments) that Tom is impressing a few in the same way Lance does, so a good team. The added bonus with Tom as CEO is that he knows iodine inside out and is an expert in that area.

[engelo] 05/2/2015 19:38

Zendo: thanks. Tom comes across very well, relaxed and confident.

[bogg1e] 05/2/2015 18:33

super, there were actually two different interviews, one with fat prophets(??/) and one with some other large city company.

[superg1] 05/2/2015 17:34

Zendo

Thanks

I wondered what was going on as I was sure the person interviewing via phone was a bloke with a beard, yet a blonde woman is the one I found and linked.

[brucie5] 05/2/2015 17:29

Thanks for the links. Watching atm!

[zendo102] 05/2/2015 17:23

And another from 15th January this year:

Iofina boss Becker targeting ‘strategic growth’

[superg1] 05/2/2015 16:46

Cross

Well said.

I'm glad you same to your own conclusion on that. The collective 'whoever' have been doing the same across many shares for years.

[cyberbub] 05/2/2015 16:31

I said a couple of days ago that the loans were not a problem in any way shape or form, assuming that the company does indeed start to gain real traction in the next 6-12 months.

[crosseyed] 05/2/2015 16:27

Why would IOF need to re-finance at all during 2015 or 2016?

The first loan of $15 million made by Stena in May 2013 was revised in March 2014 with a maturity date of 15/05/2017 at a lower rate of interest (with an option for repayment in shares at £1 or $1.67/share).

The second loan of $5 million made by Panacea in April 2014 has a maturity date of 15/05/2017 (with an option for repayment in shares at 40p/share).

Whoever suggested 2015 as a critical year for re-financing is either trouble-making or ignorant - the original terms of the Stena loan did indeed specify a maturity date of April 2015, but the RNS of 7/03/2014 reported the revised terms.

c

[superg1] 05/2/2015 16:16

2 interviews with different points in them so listen to both. 7.5 mill comment is in the first.

www.directorstalk.com/video-tom-becker-new-chief-executive-iofina-loniof/

[superg1] 05/2/2015 16:13

Naph they had a good Q3 and at the time of the late September presentations it was said $7.5 mill in the bank but could go up to about $9m shortly. Then on Oct 3rd the $7.5m was stated by Tom Becker.

As Q4 went well I'm guessing at between $8m and $10m in the bank.

Unless of course they have spent money building SWDs for oil companies as stated by a certain person. I have been wondering why IOF would do such a favour and build such things, some sort of gratuity system perhaps.

I must look into the bottom of the author's wine glass to see where he got that one from.

IOF of course don't build SWDs. Good idea though if there weren't hundreds already 'built' at the expense of others. Many of which are waiting to be exploited for iodine extraction

Rear end and elbow springs to mind.

[bobbyshilling] 05/2/2015 15:37

If we get the water permit, even at 40000bpd at just $1 is massive towards a safety net cash flow for the company, and any debt worries will disappear. Our first depots should be up and running by year end if permit is awarded. Add a couple of hot water depots and cash flow will increase significantly on top.

[naphar] 05/2/2015 15:30

Brucie
No probs, but it is just my view. That poster could also be correct, in that they may have trouble refinancing in 2016 or 2016 if things are not going their way. Then again, they seemed to change the Stena terms easily enough last time, and raise additional funds. Its not a simple thing, lots more to it than having to succeed in 2015 or else. Although success in 2015, thus ensuring no issues further down the line, would be rather pleasing.

[brucie5] 05/2/2015 15:16

Thanks Naphar.

[kaos3] 05/2/2015 15:13

The most effective thing to improve the cash right now is a permit and the product price. Both in others hands

[brucie5] 05/2/2015 15:08

Great stuff, SG.

'I see one interview with some good points in has been viewed 65 times.'

Which one? I'm trying to educate myself, perhaps you could furnish the link.

Thx.

[naphar] 05/2/2015 15:07

Bogg1e, yes it did.

[naphar] 05/2/2015 15:06

Yes sg,lots points to the companies cash position increasing from that $7.5m position in October, on the assumption that we have not purchased any large new capital items.

I made the point about your $9-10m comment, just to be balanced, having pointed out the other poster cannot post facts and figures about cash declining as there are none out there.

Brucie, I would not have uses the term knife edge. Most of the debt is not repayable until 2017. As long as they can keep improvements going in 2015, they have all of 2016 and some of 2017 to collect the cash to repay the debt, or improve the business enough that the conversion option is chosen. And that ignores the fact that subject to water permit approval, we may well sign a water JV that could wipe out a lot of if not all of that debt. Exciting times, but with no guarantees yet.