Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[superg1] 11/6/2015 09:51

Kev

As they control the market and price I think it's worth keeping an eye on them and watching what they do. Better that than wondering why iodine is $100 per kg overnight if their water rights are suspended (risk as in recent news)

EG

If Russia found a massive resource where they could knock out 1000's of tonnes at $5 per kg, I suggest it's worth following.

Don't panic Russia ppms at best are 35ppm and not commercially viable.

Turkmenistan had been my only concern, but they have talked about increased production for 10 years and have not done it. I assumed they would have low opex. However when they stopped supplying India when it went below $35 per kg, that told me it's not viable for them below that price, with their tech.

What is going on elsewhere is highly relevant re the price. What other commodity can triple in price so quickly, as already proven.

Cash levels is all that holds IOF back, the tech is proven and the sites are there. Had George and co not changed the site plan we would be on higher production, and would have more plants by now, regardless of $30 per kg.

[kevlar131] 11/6/2015 09:32

I thought you were going to say is this a SQM BB - sometimes seems like it

[odvod] 11/6/2015 08:54

Is there a SQM BB?

[superg1] 11/6/2015 08:47

A bit more news is appearing re SQM following on from the bribery case mentioned yesterday


The presentation -comentaron caused relatives to also include the former general manager of the non-metallic mining, Patricio Contesse. The latter is already formalized in this investigation for his alleged role in the incorporation of tax documents "fake" accounting company and this time will impute the same offense. This maneuver allows lowering the tax base of companies and consequently pay less tax than they are.
To date, the prosecution has the accounts SQM Salar subsidiary and AyN and analysis of a number of new facts emerged.

Parallel to this requirement of the National Prosecutor's Office, the watchdog is preparing a complaint for tax offenses to include Salar. Last week completed the steps in this direction and begin to refine the prosecution.

So it seems there are more tax offences to come for SQM, not yet reported on in detail.

[woodpeckers] 11/6/2015 08:37

monts, it was wrong of me to have a go at you personally, I just feel listing negatives is not constructive.

I apologise and will go sit in the naughty corner to contemplate my crime.

[superg1] 11/6/2015 08:37

rh

There is a lot going on behind the scenes after recent events and I hope it translates into news shortly about what next? The general feeling is that an update will come soon.

So if it does come let's see what it says.

[rhwillcoll] 11/6/2015 08:33

superg1: I thought you were saying "it's in the bog" for a moment (sorry Bogg1e!). That seemed a bit drastic :-)
PS I think we need to lighten up on here a bit.

[superg1] 11/6/2015 08:15

It's in Bog.

Good stats though as in the last 5 years they say the industry employment number has gone up by 10.

It would be very nice if IOF are managing with 10 staff at plants but it will be more like 40 to 50 to cover 24/7.

[bogg1e] 11/6/2015 08:06

SG, I note you have the USGS iodine overview 2014 link in the header. This is the one for 2015:

hxxp://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/iodine/mcs-2015-iodin.pdf

The production numbers are iffy cos they copied them straight across from the previous year, although I note that the document mentions that consumption has dropped but they do not specify the amount.

Thanks to some poster who found it. Thought you may like to update the header.

Cheers

[superg1] 11/6/2015 08:01

Fresh

Do you know what current opex is?

Ask at the AGM. They is a scalar depending on production. 50mt and over per month and think under $20.

Move io1 to a high ppm site and imo start thinking 15 and less assuming decent production across the plants.

SQM until this year claimed to be the lowest costs producer worldwide. Now they claim to have the lowest costs in Chile. They show there's to be $22, but for one like process product they shows their profit margins to be much lower so how much of the cost have they slotted across to be able to make the claim.

The iodine production goes through a number of processes. Some like products are produced simply by letting the brine waste evaporate in ponds.

They do add in a sort of disclaimer re where they apply costs.

[bogg1e] 11/6/2015 07:56

1) Monts I don't think SQM are trying to take out everybody because they themselves couldn't cover the shortfall, but RB Energy and Cosayach's output could be covered, more or less, by SQMs available resources.
2) I agree that lance's health is an issue, if he does step down in the future, its not obvious given that one of the agm resolutions this week is to reappoint lance for another year.
3) If we are going to a judicial review on the water, what we really need to know is how long it will take. IOF have til july 4th to lodge an appeal. But then what? Can the DNRC deny or approve the appeal? If the appeal is approved do they have x months to name a hearing date and must the date be within x months of lodging the appeal etc?

[piripiri2] 10/6/2015 23:27

I think a cash call placing is on the cards.

[monkeymagic3] 10/6/2015 22:32

I am literally stunned.

[roundup] 10/6/2015 22:27

Mont12. You have every right to state you views, but please don't complain when others express their view point.

[beeezzz] 10/6/2015 21:49

US has become the worlds largest oil producer overtaking Saudi and Russia

[woodpeckers] 10/6/2015 21:44

A lot of hard work going on here from the 'bears'... wonder why...

Monts:
"Sorry if this post doesn't please those of a blind faith disposition. Surely existing holders/potential buyers should consider the above and try to come up with their own answers?"

Otherwise translated as "If I can convince you that everyone invested here hasn't two braincells to rub together perhaps you will sell so that I can buy in cheaper because there is actually a great opportunity for someone who can look further than next week."

[rhwillcoll] 10/6/2015 21:40

水满017;溢 shuǐ mǎn zé yì - Water surges only to overflow. This proverb points out that: things turn into their opposites when they reach their extremes.

[freshvoicem] 10/6/2015 21:25

S1
Should we be in league with the rogues you paint them to be?
I think the biggest worry in the two posts from ACT (who i have unfiltered and who has been far more accurate in his forecasts than the board) and monts is the future health of Lance, remembering how the price dropped when he had to resign before.

However give the boards record

-nip in the road
-lowest cost producer
-largest producer
-mobiles
oh and also how many plants were we going to have by now
and how much were they going to produce.

Indeed it is hard to find one thing they have succeeded in the last two years

[superg1] 10/6/2015 21:09

Monts save that one for coffee time at the AGM and you'll find out why.

"IOF have good relations with SQM" line, why should they?

[madchick] 10/6/2015 21:09

monts, you raise good points. FWIW, my thoughts are:
1. I wouldn't be surprised if SQM also hoped to bring down IOF. I suspect this is why IOF is playing safe regarding expansion (or lack of).
2. I agree the lack of use of the loan is a bit frustrating, but I suppose at the time when the markets were worrying that IOF would go bust, it served a purpose to reassure. I would like them to spend a little on a mobile or relocating IO.1 as you say, while still retaining some cash. If either or both go to an existing site, they can presumably save on labour costs.
3. Agree, we don't know about OPEX for sure.
4. Agree, the huge loss was a shock and I still don't really understand it. I originally thought simplistically that a lot was covered by IO.1 decommissioning and then depreciation on 6 plants rather than 2 plants, but reading other posts I believe I was wrong (not surprising). I did notice that raft of new rules and wonder if that had something to do with it. I hope some light may be shed at the AGM. I hope people will report back as I can't make it.
5. Yes, I'd been thinking the next thing to go wrong would be Lance stepping down. I would hope he would be more sensitive than that, although I have no idea how his health is. Fingers crossed on that one on many counts!
6. I'm sick of hearing about water now. I'm forgetting it until next year. No point speculating - maybe Halliburton will cough up some of the judicial costs, maybe IOF will talk and get it all sorted without a judicial review, maybe IOF will completely stuff it up and lose it by taking the wrong approach. Anything could happen.

I do wonder if che is just acting the wind-up merchant now... :-)

[arlington chetwynd talbot] 10/6/2015 20:50

Monty, are you the 4th man who thumbs Graham down? I have worked out who the other 3 are by a process of elimination. I will make 5 before I log-off.

Good posting by the way, similar thoughts to myself although you couldn't possibly have read my post and in 10 mins cobbled that lot together as my composition took probably as long and was much shorter. Maybe I'm not quite as bearish as I thought?

[monts12] 10/6/2015 20:23

Has anyone considered :
- SQM's tactic of keeping the iodine price low is to take out ALL competitors/producers including IOF? I don't buy the "IOF have good relations with SQM" line, why should they? How do we know this as fact? To support this theory, have a look at IOF's latest results. I'm sure SQM have shed no tears.
- What will be the cost involved in relocating IO1 and is this what they're finally going to use the Panacea loan for??
- Why has IOF paid interest on a $5m loan for a year without using it? It was hardly money well spent.
- Nobody really knows what IOF's opex really is, numbers like low $20s have been bandied about here but who/what is the source of this? "Commercial sensitivity" has been used as an excuse for too long.
-The latest results show that low $20s opex is a myth...why else such a huge loss? We even had an extra 20% mark up through IOC and still managed a thumping loss. I don't buy the staff costs line.
- Lance Baller will not continue in his position long term (he stated this at the last AGM) due to health issues.
- What will happen to sentiment and share price when his departure from the company is announced
- What will be the cost of litigation for Judicial Review re Water application, how long will it drag on and what is the contingency for losing yet again? Everyone thought this was a sure thing until now and it wasn't, why should it be now if IOF go to JR?
-How does this scenario fit in with repaying $20m of loans within the next 2 years?

Sorry if this post doesn't please those of a blind faith disposition. Surely existing holders/potential buyers should consider the above and try to come up with their own answers?

[arlington chetwynd talbot] 10/6/2015 20:13

With the finals and water news well digested it's time to make a few early estimates and predictions.

1) There will be boardroom changes this year.
2) There will be additional funding greater than last year's.
3) The debt re-financing terms released in 2016 will be genuinly onerous.
4) The loss in 2015 will be greater than 2014's.
5) The MV will fall to below £15m this year.
6) The water appeal will fail yet again.