Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[godhavemercyonthisshare] 28/3/2014 08:37

this really could be freefall today

[woodpeckers] 28/3/2014 08:25

I would imagine that they are in a close period so can't.

[grahamhacker] 28/3/2014 08:19

It would help to shore up confidence if there were some director buys!

[woodpeckers] 28/3/2014 07:59

Calmar pointed out yesterday that it is "a touch coincidental that no company producing over 1000mt hasn't been taken over" and that with 6 plants up and running we should be at that level. Bearing in mind we have "overwhelming evidence" that our patented technology is now proven, could the company not sell the rights to the patent in other countries rather than/before simply selling the business? I would presume this would be more lucrative? It strikes me that with 6 plants up and running and a couple of minis on display they have constructed a wonderful "showroom" for their proven technology.

[godhavemercyonthisshare] 28/3/2014 07:51

squeaky bum time today me thinks

[hurricane.] 28/3/2014 07:47

Looks like the overhang cleared with over 4M traded yesterday.
Looking out for a chairman and a nice surprise next week.
Regardless of the current SP, the future is very bright

[che7win] 28/3/2014 06:54

Over 7MT per week from three plants, expected to double within the next month, that would have been a nice positive to include.

[nomorej] 28/3/2014 04:29

RNS was an attempt to steady the ship I think but it still made them look like idiots in lieu of past promises? It's only going to go one way until such time as there really is something positive RNS'd. Obvious risks with holding though is that they screw up the latest plan too - the 'Z' plan (it's changed a lot), lol?

[engelo] 28/3/2014 02:49

frog1 (17694)

'If they had other sources of revenue' Yes on the one hand it was a body blow to IOF and an undeserved gift to the shorters when the water permit was denied at the last ditch in December. On the other hand we do have IOF Chem and apart from being a brilliant balance for IOF's raw iodine inventories it's an essential financial safety net in these troubled times :-)

[engelo] 28/3/2014 02:34

richi rich (17691): Thanks :-) Great stuff. Really appreciated the input from your missus too: that sort of directly comparable experience is invaluable :-)

[engelo] 28/3/2014 01:30

Trav: re RNSs Lance started off with some poor ones but the standard improved to excellent. It's absolutely astonishing that over the last few months they struggle so much with them. Honestly think that at least 50 posters on here could do better even starting with the RNSs as issued, let alone with all the additional info that IOF have.

edit from to-day's RNS:

"Subject to completing minor design modifications, the first two mobile units or mini WET® IOSorb™ technology plants (namely 'IOA' and 'IOB') are planned to be ordered throughout 2014 on a turnkey basis for operational deployment in the fourth quarter."

This is really good news reduced to mishmash by the author. We don't want to hear about 'subject to' especially in para 1 line 1. Not really material, just leave it out. And what on earth does 'throughout 2014' mean??

Alternative suggestion:

"The BoD have decided to proceed with the first two mobile units or mini WET® IOSorb™ technology plants (namely 'IOA' and 'IOB') which with relatively low Capex utilise the advantages of low volume ultra high ppm sites. IOA and B are planned to be ordered in the near future on a turnkey basis for operational deployment in the fourth quarter."

[cool hand kev] 27/3/2014 23:44

I'm a buyer at 30p

[trav5] 27/3/2014 23:31

Rich,

Great post. Why do so many AIM companies produce poor RNS that could have been written in a much more positive and upbeat manner. They do a disservice to both themselves and shareholders!

[magpie99] 27/3/2014 22:45

Yes a balanced post - enough to wind some one with surprise¬!

Hate to think what the paper loses are doing - must feel like a punch from Muhammed Ali - enough force to kill.

[festario] 27/3/2014 22:35

Richi Rich, after reading your post I felt I had been knocked unconscious by a punch in the face, and then brought round by smelling salts.

It was a negative diatribe, garnished with a silver lining at the end.
It has changed my mood tonight, for the better.
Even Froggie sounds more positive.

[frog1] 27/3/2014 20:16

richi_rich13

Great post and thanks for your input. Very well put. I think with new technology and a new company currently focused on only a single technology like this there are extenuating reasons for what has happened. If they had other sources of revenue (like the water) the issues would never have been as acute. I believe there were hugely over optimistic promises made, probably for good reason in getting the business up and running quickly and this has led to this position. However, the current management have been struggling with impossible targets and have had to reduce expectations as theory becomes practice. There is clearly the old problem of the first 80% of a project taking 20% of the time and the last 20% takes 80% with every site currently. So although they may have lost credibility at the moment, once the company is profitable it will be easy to restore (Steve Jobs was one who demonstrated that). They really need to get a grip on a base line plan though and hopefully the next 6 months will see them achieve that.

[monty panesar] 27/3/2014 19:46

Good sanguine post Richi rich. I always thought the building of the plants was super fast. Imagine all the planning hoops they would have had to have gone through over here. That's why I'm not sure about the uk fracking stories.

Sentiment reminds me of QPP at 8p when everyone was slagging it off a year ago.

[florence10] 27/3/2014 19:45

Good post richi,holders require patience and strong nerves!

[richi_rich13] 27/3/2014 19:28

The problem here is the reputation of the BOD is in tatters.

1) They went on a presentation round a few weeks ago... unless they revealed this to the intuitional investors then they will not be happy. Good luck next time!

2) This is a VERY leaky ship just look at the 5 day graph.

3) Consistently moving the goal posts. As an investor, all I want to know is what the company is doing and plans to do, then I can make a decision. These plans are changing substantially on a quarterly basis at the moment.

4) They appear to be hiding production figures. I don't buy into the under radar rubbish. I don't think the plants are producing as expected. We used to get record production, increasing production or hard numbers. Now.... Nothing.

5) Targets, targets, targets. Its so painful to see them missed again and again. Every time we get an excuse. 6 by year end, sorry towers delayed, Q1 (if they don't get the approval by Tuesday then that is Q2 for IO5)....even if they got the towers on time they would have missed by 2 months.

6) CEO and FEO don't hold any shares. Dr. Fay, L. Baller and S. Eaton have all left the board in the last year. Some understandably but interesting to see why the others have.

6) Result of this, I don't believe a word they say. I don't believe I am the only one and it is an uphill battle from here.

The greatest irony of all this is that over the last year they have actually done a very very good job. If there was not a fluctuating number on a screen that I was looking at every day clouding my emotion just look at what has been achieved. 4 plants built in 8 months giving us an Iodine surplus, low opex and ease of roll out. My misses is a chemical engineer, she was astounded at how quickly they have gone from prototype (IO1) to roll out. Delays are the norm in this industry (one of her projects is currently delayed by 2 years, and growing) and it take months if not years to fine tune the plants, production is variable and problems frequent. Leaving the water aside IF/ When they are producing 700 MT/ year then that is huge.

Finally the review, I am actually fine with this. Chance to get plants working, and hopefully water depot in. I suggest that with the depressed Iodine price along with delays in cash flow the money would not be coming in as quickly as previously envisaged and therefore best to determine the best efficiency. Pods, plants, water, taking over old oil sites 'with no capital costs' (whatever happened to that idea?). It just wasn't express very well (again). 'having successfully completed the first stage of expansion the board find it prudent to assess the current plants, and plan the next stages of growth to optimise shareholder value. During this period, expected to last until Q3, no further plant will be constructed, we will update the market in due course' sounds better.

So overall, a bad day at the office, and a long way back for the BOD. But, the business model is still great, with low opex and struggling competitors. The performance over the year is much better than the share price suggests.

[koolade] 27/3/2014 19:20

Looking for a nice rise back up towards 60p tomorrow. No reason why not

[n3tleylucas] 27/3/2014 19:19

Yes, nice to see SCRUT back.



Some ii's will review pf's early April to assess Q1 performance & MV thresholds.

[monkeymagic3] 27/3/2014 19:17

Good to see Scrutable posting again.

Tell me Scrutable, it may seem a strange question but I think I speak for everyone when I ask, does IOF performance have any parallels with that of ASOS?

Just a random thought.

[rogerbridge] 27/3/2014 19:17

Monty, that is a good point. There must have been some forced sellers and it does not help that it is coming to the end of the tax year when some PI's will be selling for capital gain relief. I will be buying some more for the ISA in April.