Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[che7win] 09/5/2015 11:10

Yes, but will anyone pick up the assets from admin?

[rogerbridge] 09/5/2015 10:54

Nice to see they have finally gone.

[superg1] 09/5/2015 08:25

Finally they announce it in news.




The Court order also provided for the termination of the Company's three officers as at May 8, 2015. Richard P. Clark, the sole remaining director of RB Energy, resigned effective on the same date.

[naphar] 08/5/2015 22:13

Just weighing in after a few hectic days away on business.
I agree there is value to trying to forecast results. I gave up doing it with spreadsheets a while ago, because of all the change and moving parts.
Gut feeling and logic work for me currently, and I would guess at $1m loss to $2m max profit. I add my own caveat regarding IO1 potential write off costs. Depending in what will happen to it, it may indeed be written off - the auditors will decide. If a write off is in order, they may deem it to be a significant post balance sheet event, and insist on the impact hitting 2014. I am not sure if the rules here though, a little bit of knowledge can be dangerous etc).

That said, I will be more focussed on cash flow figures to judge 2014 performance, especially H2.


Bogg1e
All 2014 invoices should be included in the p&l account. It is only cash flow and balance sheet that would be impacted by payment not being til 2015. But then the same delay will have existed from 2023 to 2014, so the impact will be limited to the growth aspects of the last month or two.

[che7win] 08/5/2015 20:23

TPL,
Quick update. Sinohan deal didn't come through, even though management were sure it would.
Been in contact many times with the company, they worked hard on it.

I suspected problems, but as I said, this was a unique situation, either way I thought this was an unbelievable opportunity.
So I've been buying many times over last few weeks, even with the above deal not coming.

Nice to see 100% rise from the bottom, looks too cheap to me, but they need to pay back Sinohan some money and sort out funding going forward. I hope that comes through Georgia sale, maybe farm down of Tajikistan.

Up 25% today, currently up 40% in Canada.

Results next Friday, I suspect they will look much better compared to last year, might even get near cash flow positive.

Company is possibly up for sale for the right price.

High risk, high reward! DYOR.

[arlington chetwynd talbot] 08/5/2015 18:48

Hey Banksy lad, £1m to lose 1 seat and a leader? Tell me what yer next bet is sunshine.

[beeezzz] 08/5/2015 15:41

Might be stop loss set at 10p MM just drop the price to pick those up cheap...lovely

SG....I just hope you are right...30-40p ranch is not goooooooood for me, and that the company are on the road to recovery, profitable more like.

[roundup] 08/5/2015 15:08

Somebody has got a bad price.

[superg1] 08/5/2015 14:37

While you were busy watching the election here is part of the monitor report for RB energy.

A surprise for me as I thought the Chile mine had $40 mill of debt. It does, but seems to have another $84 mill of debt on top of that. Then add the $11 mill owed to Tewoo.

"She's dead Jim".


26. On May 7, 2015, the Petitioners served the CCAA Termination Motion returnable on May 8, 2015 (the “CCAA Termination Date”), seeking an order (the “CCAA Termination Order”), amongst other things:

a. Terminating the CCAA Proceedings;

b. Terminating all employees of RBE;


STATUS OF THE PETITIONERS’ CHILEAN ASSETS

29. As at March 31, 2015, AMC had approximately US$39.2 million of third party debt, including US$34.3 million of bank and finance loans. In addition, AMC has approximately US$84.0 million of unsecured related party debt owed to Chempro Finance Ltd.

(“Chempro̶1;), a direct subsidiary of Sirocco.

30. As discussed in the Monitor’s Fifth Report, according to the Initial Order, the Interim Lender has a priority charge over all of the Property of the Petitioners, including Sirocco. However, it appears that the Interim Lender does not enjoy priority over the shares of Boron Chemical Holdings Ltd. (“Boron Holdings”), the wholly-owned subsidiary of Sirocco and the indirect parent of Atacama Minerals Chile S.C.M. (“AMC”), the owner of the Chilean Operations.
Tianjin Products and Energy Resources Development Co., Ltd. (“Tewoo”) is owed
approximately US$11 million by QLI. Sirocco guaranteed QLI’s debt and granted Tewoo security in the form of a mortgage over the shares of Boron Holdings (the “Tewoo Security”). In the Receivership Motion, the Interim Lender stated that it does not assert priority over the Tewoo Security.


31. Therefore, any sale proceeds resulting from the sale of the shares of AMC that are passed by way of dividend up through the corporate chain to Boron Holdings would be payable to Tewoo up to the amount of the QLI debt to Tewoo, but the related party debt to Chempro would remain. However, any sale of the assets of AMC could result in the repayment of the related party debt to Chempro and would appear to bypass the Tewoo Security.


MONITOR’S OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
41. The Monitor concurs that, considering that the SISP did not result in any binding offers being submitted for either the Lithium Project or the Chilean Operations, the appointment of a receiver is a reasonable option for dealing with the Petitioners’ assets. Accordingly, the Monitor supports the appointment of a receiver. If a receiver is appointed, the CCAA Proceedings do not need to continue.

[beeezzz] 08/5/2015 14:04

Unusual trade @10p

[roboben] 08/5/2015 09:43

Probably consoling his mate Nigel!

[phoenixs] 08/5/2015 09:33

I wonder where Mr Big is this morning??

[superg1] 08/5/2015 08:09

Is anyone watching the New world oil situation play out?

It's worthwhile to make sure some don't get caught in the future.

In short NEW had massive dilution with a set date and it seems those that took part then sold theirs in advance of it all being agreed. BUT they have sold shares that don't exist and the dilution was many times the shares that are in circulation.

If the share issue isn't supported, and may well not be. Those that forward sold will have to buy back the shares but in the market from the much smaller existing share issue.

TW was going on about shafting those involved then did a big U-turn suggesting it was ordinary investors who would be affected.

I don't recall his compassion for PIs, I thought we were all morons. I suspect some of his mates were in, and forward sold, hence the U-turn to try and save them.

[rogerbridge] 07/5/2015 22:20

This is riveting reading , I will be happy with a near break even, but what I really want to know is the current state of IOF and projections for the future.
Carry on please.

[crosseyed] 07/5/2015 19:49

Well said, Briley.
The purpose of doing one's own forecast is to have a yardstick on which to base the actual figures when they are presented. Sharing that forecast provides the opportunity for others to comment and thereby make adjustments (as Briley did today in my case) to improve or better understand specific items. There are quite a few here who do that.

Isn't that why investors study brokers' forecasts, the more detailed the better, and why the share price reacts accordingly?

I would anticipate some informed debate when the annual report is published. And many thanks to those who have made contributions, not least our esteemed host :}

c

[superg1] 07/5/2015 17:41

Yes Briley.

Perhaps I was a bit too brief there. Forecasts based on figures from the past and indications for the future, with some added comment thrown in re savings they mention.

I'm all for trying to work out what the position should be if there are enough details to work with, as if there is a significant disparity either way, then it suggests something is amiss or has been over-looked.

On the savings front it was said the new management found a load of dead wood middle management had been take on, and that has been trimmed out.

Io5 had been using a generator at $150k per month so that was stopped and at some point it was connected to the main grid.

We know io5 and 6 needed some tweaks (additional spend needed), but was that done in late 2014, or this year etc.

[superg1] 07/5/2015 16:27

AOTN

I'm guessing it's a bit of fun trying to forecast things blind to see how they fair.

[angel of the north] 07/5/2015 16:24

Really can't understand all this conjecture with the results proper just two working days away?

[crosseyed] 07/5/2015 16:13

Briley,

Thanks for that. I would therefor agree with your finance cost estimate which brings my estimate for FY net loss to about $1 million with no tax.

c

[brileyloucan] 07/5/2015 16:02

crosseyed,

Interest cost in p+l should be accrual accounted so you can just look at 6 months of interest, comes out about the same. 15m*6.5% *2/12 + 15m *6% *4/12 = $463k on Stena loan. 5m * 6% * 2/12 = $50K on Panacea. Total H1 interest= $513K. But H1 says $656K so where is the missing $143K?

One explanation is that when they converted the terms of the Stena loan there could have been a fee payable (pay to play) - shall we say 1% of face value (oh look $150K). We know the Panacea loan had "No origination fees or placing fees were paid on this transaction" but this language was not present in the Stena change so reasonable to assume there were.

The other possibility is that there is movement in this line due to the change in option value in the embedded derivative in the convertible. I am not completely on top of the accounting for convertible instruments though.

Also see final accounts "The interest expense on the liability component is calculated by applying the prevailing market interest rate for similar nonconvertible debt to the instrument. The difference between this amount and the interest paid is added to the carrying value of the convertible loan note." So this would mean that they are charging an interest rate for accounting purposes of nearer 8%.

Overall not especially material but I stand by my estimate of $1.3m for the full year.

[superg1] 07/5/2015 15:29

Cross

Got to dash, but they were paying for the io2 site in stages, I forget how much and when.

[crosseyed] 07/5/2015 15:26

Briley,

On the financing costs, I take these to be the interest costs as follows:
- Stena loan of $15 million in May 2013 at 6.5%pa interest paid quarterly in arrears but re-negotiated from March 2014 at 6%pa interest also with an extended repayment date to May 2017 (or share swap), interest payable quarterly in arrears. I calculate those payments in H1 2014 to be $244,000 in Feb and $225,000 in May;
- Panacea loan of $5 million in April 2014 at 6%pa interest paid quarterly in arrears, repayable also in May 2017 (or share swap). I would therefore expect the first interest payment of $75,000 to have started in July.

Those figures suggest total H1 interest payments of $469,000 and H2 interest payments of $600,000, or $1,069,000 for the full year 2014. However, the interims for H1 2014 showed finance costs of $656,000, nearly $200,000 more.

Have I missed something?

c

[bogg1e] 07/5/2015 15:07

As Briley states, theres a lot of moving parts and we only have general numbers to work with.

[che7win] 07/5/2015 15:04

Boggle,
I presume they will move it, makes sense.
Good point on writing off IO1 in last years accounts, but if it was only breaking even last year then they still might write it down last year (I hope they would and have a clean slate this year).

Outstanding debtors, outstanding creditors, hard one to weigh up.

Back to lurking.