Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[nellyb] 29/4/2014 11:32

netley, have you made any gelt this morning.

[n3tleylucas] 29/4/2014 11:32

Diggers,

You think a Banksy-bail-out is good?

It's just the start of the end mate.

[neddo] 29/4/2014 11:24

nice to be kept upto date

[bobsworth] 29/4/2014 11:24

Good to see that Iofina now has the cash to expand again. Thanks Mr Big!

Question with the right planning i.e. targeting rich brine sites, could that $5m generate upwards of 1,000mt a yr?

For example:

At $0.5m a mobile, $3m could buy half a dozen mobiles to be sitted on their very rich ppm sites with a capacity to add upwards of 600mt/yr. That then leaves $2m which together with the new income from the mobiles could then quickly finance plant 7 on a rich ppm site which could add upwards of 400mt/yr.

If so it just shows what Lance could have been achieved with the $15m Stenna Loan!

Can now see why Lance thinks mobiles offer big upside for Iofina while still remaining focused on an IO2 type plant.

[tackems] 29/4/2014 11:10

Hi chaps,
I understand from reading various comments on this BB that the 'minis' get the product to a position where it can be finished off with an IO plant. Is this the case or have I got it wrong? Understanding the method of 'mass transfer' I don't see how a tower with packing and blow-out trays could be miniaturised so easily.

Anyone know please.

Great news and well done Lance!

[n3tleylucas] 29/4/2014 11:10

phoenixs,

I think you are getting a bit carried away mate. I stated my case long before TW did, and dare I say I was one of the few posting bears @250? LOL

Good luck mate, I smell death here. Trade yes, buy no. Surprise me, make money.

[bogg1e] 29/4/2014 11:02

Hi all, just to correct a previous post, i thought the minis cost $250k, i have been informed its closer to $500k/$1mil. Thanks.

[phoenixs] 29/4/2014 10:56

Nutters, the really sad part about it all is that you (and TW) will stop at nothing to try to destroy the share price of this company. There are people who are working their butts off to achieve the potential that this company has and you sit their on your "emperor's" throne deriding everything about this company. Happily, I believe that Iofina will be a truly successful business and investors like me will be vindicated.
So rant on and deramp on if you will....

[sweetnodude] 29/4/2014 10:50

Exactly sg, it's hard to believe that the mobile units are not the safe option just for now and that should be the only direction imo.

[festario] 29/4/2014 10:48

Incidentally, it was not easy to nab 11k shares just now.It took 3 attempts, and broken down into 3 smaller trades.

[n3tleylucas] 29/4/2014 10:46

Graham,

2015 & 2016 profits?

Or is that beneath you?

[superg1] 29/4/2014 10:44

Sweet

That is probably a factor now in deciding plants v mini's.

It will be simply down to bpd available, ppm, time to get in place = best efficiencies to achieve the target amount.

I think mini's were mentioned to be around $500k each. In the right places 2 of those could add 100 to 200mt.

So if waiting for a big plant takes 3 to 6 months, but in a 12 month period it's production capacity and opex fits the desired route then they would favour it.

It will be all down to the best route to cash efficiencies to the bottom line.

1000bpp at 2000ppm is like a 20k plant at 100ppm.

400bpd at 5000ppm................. gives the same result.

Opex would be lower with minis.

If you went for a number of minis on high ppm then the potential disruption factor is far less v a big plant.

[n3tleylucas] 29/4/2014 10:41

phoenixs

What other options?

Name them... theoretically if you're shy.

[phoenixs] 29/4/2014 10:37

nutters,
LB has acted swiftly to put the company back on track. He has arranged for a bond to finance capital expansion which is a far cry from the desperation which you have portrayed, which in itself I find to be disgraceful scaremongering. I wonder whether you and TW get together on occasions and work out ruses to try to cause havoc! It appears to me that AB has looked at Iofina and decided that it is an extremely good investment. I do hear, by the way, that there were other options available to the company. This bond will allow the company to fast track an expansion plan which will deliver the growth.
I do believe, (and this is where I do agree with you) that the previous CEO,CFO and chairman were not up to the job and that they did mislead shareholders. They should have told it as it was and they should never have built IO5 and IO6 without verifying that the brine supply would start on day 1 and that there would be a sufficient supply of brine to make the plant immediately economic.

[sweetnodude] 29/4/2014 10:34

It would be a little disheartening if they went for another plant over the mobile units as the next step. The delays have been like pulling teeth at times and costly for everyone involved. Although with the interests of the IOF top brass now fully aligned with shareholders again at least any future decisions can be trusted. GLA

[superg1] 29/4/2014 10:33

Just to add, the ppm number of plants game is why forecast opex went up, but now with new management will come down as they expand in the future.

It was always likely there were to be some lower ppm sites. Io2 targets a good site, and they are dealing with related brine issues there, all brines have a different chemical mix and some operator oil removal efficiencies are better than others.

I hear midstates have had a firing session too probably related to efficiencies as I worked out that if the skim tech issue covered all their 5 SWDs then they were wasting about $50m per year.

It seems from IOF comments on oil, way back re io2, then mid-states were on about 1% oil in their brine, with an industry rate of 0.03% or less.

In fact offshore they get it lower than 0.00001% as the brine goes into the sea.

Around 100,000 better efficiencies than Midstates, so the tech exists, and with 10's of millions going down swds they will no doubt improve somewhat.

As I recall they didn't really know what they were losing until IOF said 'Do you want your oil back'

[festario] 29/4/2014 10:31

Buying shares at 80% below the highest purchase price I ever made sure does wonders for the average!

[n3tleylucas] 29/4/2014 10:25

phoenixs,

You celebrate this company lying? I am by no means the most bearish poster here... but come on?

[phoenixs] 29/4/2014 10:15

superg, how right you are re plants,ceos etc. If the recent ceo had done half the work LB does, we would not have had the problems which occurred recently. LB has moved fast and the bond is for capital development/expansion not to plug holes. N3tley,you really are talking a load of rubbish now. Go on, take a day off and you might find that you actually enjoy it!

[n3tleylucas] 29/4/2014 10:08

Graham,

I can assure you I have only one share chat avatar.

I called it right. I see the Banksy bail-out as last resort. This company needs proper financing, and it may come down... to you.

[superg1] 29/4/2014 10:05

How many times did we bang on about, it's not the number of plants but bpd and ppm.

Someone didn't get that at IOF and went for number of plants.

As you can see today from news, it's about ppm and relative production levels not the number of plants.

A pod on 1000bpd at 2000ppm could add 80 to 100mt. The associated capex and opex is far less.

In any mineral industry you go for the highest available concentrations first, simple stuff yet ignored by some.

[monkeymagic3] 29/4/2014 10:05

cyberbub 29 Apr'14 - 09:48 - 20425 of 20428 2 0

I can't predict whether Netley will be right or wrong in the long term (neither can he), but one thing I am sure of... Netley will never EVER agree that he got anything wrong. People like him simply can't cope with such an admission, it would mean severe cognitive dissonance.

I think Netley isnt the only one suffering from that particular affliction cyberbub.

[festario] 29/4/2014 09:50

Bogg1e.I think you will find that is exactly what Lance will do, and quickly.Had to move some QFI money here today!