Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[che7win] 10/6/2015 16:29

GATE just keeps on rising!

[superg1] 10/6/2015 15:12

Roundup

Careful

Most reserve the right to moan how bad the company is and hold shares.

This isn't a snipe just maths. IOf some think they are better off invested elsewhere then why hang around.

It makes no sense to hang on to recover. I say that on any share.

There are quite a few now where those actually growing have a far lower MC than they do.

When RHPS tipped this and IOF were producing nothing at all it hit 30p because the iodine price went up. What that meant was the chem div had to pay more for iodine supplies. ?


In the chaos in 2011 iodine hit $100 per kg.

Regardless of natural disasters greater risks are now being faced.

One incident and for 200mt you can expect over $10 mill profit at the drop of a hat.

If we did ever get a $100 scenario again then that's $16 mill.

$40/$50 and more, should be nailed on in the coming years just through Chile costs rises. The Peso going on history will do it's cycle once more.

[che7win] 10/6/2015 15:08

Captain,
I like that Lance and Tom coming over early, the AGM next week will be interesting, if the market is pessimistic here, next week might well be a different story.

The share price can do what it wants, each day I stand with my baseball ready to hit a good ball, I think an easy 50% to be made here to get back to a realistic price range.

Very rare that the market serves up an easy home run. You can stand at the pitch for months sometimes...
TPL was one at 3p, easy 300%.
TUNG short another easy one, but would have had to wait 18 months to get around the bases after hitting that ball.
OSB after results, easy 50%.
AFR was another one to short to 3p, some disagreed with me but it happened.
IOF long I reckon is one right now.

Go dyor.

[che7win] 10/6/2015 14:56

Roundup, Agree, we are valued at £30m including full diluted shares (assuming 150m shares).So we need very little profit to justify that valuation, £1.5m profit and 20% growth is sufficient.Forecast growth this year is around 50%, really the market is not giving any credit for the careful cash management and turnaround last year.Any further plants e.g. A couple of mobiles are easily affordable and would continue that growth trend.Superg thinks they might get water in some form, I guess we will hear more at the AGM. I won't be selling, no sireee. We can wait for iodine recovery to come to us now, meanwhile we continue to drop opex costs.

[roundup] 10/6/2015 14:38

I am surprised that those who are now denigrating the company don't sell up and look elsewhere for investment.

[captain_kurt] 10/6/2015 13:42

Both Lance and Tom in London from Monday next week.

I hope they have got Iodine production stable at 42mt+ per month

[woodpeckers] 10/6/2015 13:33

Amazing really the number of people who read and 'comment' here that apparently don't believe the company is capable of being successful. When I feel like that about a company I don't waste my time on their boards.

[superg1] 10/6/2015 12:07

A sure sign that Martelli has been singing

"The prosecutor explained that with this round of questioning Martelli is closed and that his testimony "is being withheld".

Note the last line

'Such steps would aim to detect alleged tax offenses related to SQM case. According to the publication, these proceedings would begin in the coming days.'

Good old SQM, I wonder what tax offences they have found and whether this is a new twist.

[superg1] 10/6/2015 12:02

UP

If I find that the authorities close down SQM's NV mine I'll let you know. If that happens $100 plus a kg should happen within a week or so following such an event :-)

I wish, but it is a very real opportunity. No need to buy just wait for the news. The SQM lot haven't spotted it yet, and won't they are too busy chatting about the latest on the bribery case and the new info re that.

[superg1] 10/6/2015 11:59

Keeping the info update theme going.

Some updates from yesterday re the SQM bribery case. It seems they have found or allege that SQM have made payments (bribes) to 156 people.

In linked news they go on about a guy called Martelli. It seems he has been open in an interview with the authorities, it seems he has probably dropped few in it it judging by their comments

"Mr. Martelli answered everything we asked him. I'm not going to refer to your answer, but I agree, did a great job the Segura tax and did a lot of questions," he said.

Today was struck by the complete secrecy with which the statement was made. Only in the afternoon it was learned that diligence was completed on the premises of the Economic Crimes Brigade of PDI.

Then this news is also linked which tends to confirm the above

Prosecutors ordered new proceedings if SQM following statement Martelli

The Public Prosecutor ordered a series of new measures under the MCS case, after the statements of political operator Giorgio Martelli national prosecutor, finalized last May 29 .

Among the requirements of the Office, according slogan La Tercera , financial analysis and information delivery applications to companies appointed by Martelli during its three-day national prosecutor Sabas statements Chahuán counted.

Such steps would aim to detect alleged tax offenses related to SQM case. According to the publication, these proceedings would begin in the coming days.

[rhwillcoll] 10/6/2015 11:59

I don't think the water is now "priced in".
PS Neither is the iodine.

[uppompeii] 10/6/2015 11:47

It's true I lurk SG, but I'm still not seeing a reason to buy. Everytime I consider it, it falls another 20-30%. I suppose that's ok when not holding but nothing has come to pass yet that has helped the share price which ultimately for me, is what it is all about.

[odvod] 10/6/2015 11:36

as I am slow please can one explain it to me:

LOI is not enough to get the new water permit. One needs a firm contract to get a water permission.

Due to "IOF case" decision - all the old and the new licences will be looked up in this new light.

BUT the old existing ones will have firm commitments (existing ones) and the new ones will hardly have ones. So the existing ones will be awarded licences and no new licences will be granted. All will be fair and in the spirit of the rules.

TIA

[freshvoicem] 10/6/2015 10:59

I read somewhere they get results from each rig daily to their office, so just add up a column of numbers shouldn't take long.

[freshvoicem] 10/6/2015 10:57

You will know how good the results are by the delay.
Announced within a few days good.
Delayed means not so good.
Over a week late b awful.

[captain_kurt] 10/6/2015 10:22

Oh dear...lets hope they managed to do atleast 42mt per month this quarter!!

[roundup] 10/6/2015 10:20

So what has changed as far as Iof is concerned. Productivity increased, chemical plans doing exceptionally well. Oh yes, we has been denied the water permit (non-core), but I believe it has only been delayed. The price of iodine has fallen, but that is not permanent. IOF has been able to carry on with the iodine price a fraction of what it was a couple of years ago and is now in a good position to reap the benefits of a higher price to come.Short time set back, but long term the prospects are excellent.

[monkeymagic3] 10/6/2015 10:14

Che - unfortunately you have proved my point better than I could.

GLA

[uppompeii] 10/6/2015 10:00

Seriously che7win? This has halved since Feb and you are still happy?

[che7win] 10/6/2015 09:44

Yes, acute shortsightedness which is the norm these days.

I'm as happy as larry today (he's very happy).

[monkeymagic3] 10/6/2015 08:45

Monts- to be fair, the collective myopia that was once rife on this thread is far less prevalent now than it once was (maybe down to a handful?).

[superg1] 10/6/2015 07:03

SQM year end news.

In that they mentioned extra demand from Asia.

I note on the export site that SQM in 2014 had virtually no exports to China and India.

I suggest that is the custom they let go and clearly RB took that on, probably offering discounted rates.

In the year end news SQ said they were seeing a rise in demand from Asia re plastics. That demand rise would have been pre RB going bust.

So once the RB inventory is cleared there is a 1500mt gap left over from last year in Asia.

I estimate RB had 400mt left at the time they went bust. That assumes they didn't have a bit of a fire sale in the weeks running up to the inevitable.

[superg1] 10/6/2015 06:45

Someone asked re the options on who decides. IE Are there options other than a judicial review.

Three state entities play a role in administering Montana water rights:
• Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC),
• Montana Water Court, and
• Environmental Quality Council.

EG

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COUNCIL
The Environmental Quality Council contributes policy oversight to the administration of state
water rights. Among its roles, the council:
• advises and updates the legislature on water rights developments;
• oversees policies of the DNRC and other institutions who deal with
state water; and
• communicates with the public on matters of water policy (MCA § 85-
2-105).

You also have water commissioners

Chief Commissioner. When a court appoints two or more water commissioners on a
watercourse, one may be designated chief commissioner. A chief commissioner supervises the other commissioner(s) in distributing water rights (MCA § 85-5-102).


Then there are water mediators and so on.

[superg1] 10/6/2015 06:25

We had that discussion at the AGM post that event. Most of the change was because it went into trust funds.

Bobby

re

He acted within the law maybe, but he could still have acted within the law in our favour, but did not.

He couldn't have as he was sticking to the law/rules. He recognised that he was making a decision at odds with all the previous permits.

It isn't a US law it's a Montana law/rule. As posted the legislative lot identified that there will be a need for changes as and when different demands pop up.

They did exactly that in 2010.

Here are the rules he applied as quoted in the final order.

Montana law imposes additional criteria upon applicants who apply for a water marketing permit as found in § 85-2-310(9)(a)(v), MCA:
(v) except as provided in subsection (10), if the water applied for is to be
appropriated above that which will be used solely by the applicant or if it will be marketed by the applicant to other users, information detailing:

(A) each person who will use the water and the amount of water each person will
use;

(B) the proposed place of use of all water by each person;

(C) the nature of the relationship between the applicant and each person using the
water; and

(D) each firm contractual agreement for the specified amount of water for each
person using the water; …

he has said all the above must be in place which is impossible. No relevant permit awarded has that detail, so has he just determined they are all illegally awarded.

Note the line

'except as provided in subsection (10)'

So they do make amendments when things don't fit, and did so in 2010