Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[mister big] 04/6/2014 16:43

Super g , I didn't mention the corrupt practices of market markets who are a disgrace !!

[bogg1e] 04/6/2014 16:28

mister big, agreed about the long range attitude, but when a company is perceived as going under and mismanaged and failing targets, its important to show the market decent progress. We should be at 150 tons per month by now, instead we are at 40. So im all up for monthly updates til the BoD say that brine flows are optmised at the current 6 plants + 1 month update to see what 6 plants at full tilt can produce, if there are further plants in production by then, fab. Once the BoD have proven consistency (which has always been the issue rather than the viability of the technology itself) and we have a good idea of a monthly run rate, then the markets trust will have been gained and the BoD can slip quietly beneath the non existent radar again and return to quarterly updates. Thats another point, monthly updates which are consistent and growing, will definitely attract a suitor. I bought about a year ago now and didnt expect to be holding the shares for more than 3 years, i still expect an offer by this time 2016.

[superg1] 04/6/2014 16:16

Oh sausages, just spotted another inquiry to do in my own post.

"Cosayach asked for an extension to March 13 for Soledad and March 20 in the case of Negreiros-Chinquiquiray, and both requests were approved, according to the source"

The two areas under the court case were Negreiros ( EIA app withdrawn Oct 13) and Cala Cala EIA awarded Aug 13.

The other area that Cos produce is Soledad. From that cut and paste it looks like they had no EIA for there either, so I'll see if I can find it.

[superg1] 04/6/2014 16:12

Mr B

On that basis, any idea why aggressive buying and good price rise started in the run up to the rns release showing a really good production month? :-)

[mister big] 04/6/2014 15:38

in general , sorry on iphone so a bit uncordinated!

[the fat controller] 04/6/2014 15:36

Clumsy fingers lead to multiple posts.
sorry!

[the fat controller] 04/6/2014 15:36

mr big,
I got the first comma. My question was did you mean "the Iodine market coming out of China", or the stock market generally?
TFC

[mister big] 04/6/2014 15:34

massive banking issues and property in china.

[mister big] 04/6/2014 15:32

sorry fat controller my bad english - separate the coming out of china, and iofina and two other long term holdings are my only equity holdings! I like IOF

[mister big] 04/6/2014 15:31

ps stop mucking around with iofina and short french bonds! when it all goes it will fold like a cheap suit! ( france and the southern european countries that is)......!!

[the fat controller] 04/6/2014 15:31

mr big,
"major excitements in the market soon coming out of china...."
The iodine market?
Tia, TFC

[mister big] 04/6/2014 15:25

well i disagree - it is better for investors to develop a longer range attitude rather than buying and constantly desiring an update or validation by the latest update. It will be a double edged sword when unfavourable information is released too. a quarterly update is sufficient. I am all in favour of irrational investor behaviour and this site personifies the extremes - one moment the company is a dud the next flying! EMT fans ought to follow this stock!

As for big investors getting better information ( its bullocks) , as warren buffett says with good quality insider information and a lot cash you can go broke in record time.

meanwhile - i think there are going to be major excitments in the market soon coming out of china and iofina , apart from two other long time buy and hold stocks are my only equity holdings!

[superg1] 04/6/2014 15:21

And finally (just as well it was raining I'm losing the will to live going through all the documents)

What has the situation got to do with SQM water rights as mentioned in the case.

Check SQMs form 20-F for 2013.

In that they talk of having gained water rights for 570 litres per second for the Neuve Victoria area/mine.

You guessed it, Neuve Victoria is in The Pozo Almonte area which is what is quoted in the recent case under Cala Cala. Pozo gets a mention in reports.

As detailed before Neuve Victoria is by far SQMs biggest mining operation covering 6000mt of iodine (70% ish of their total output)

SQMs case was clearly that Cosayach had no right to the water they were using and forced well closures are in play.

So no that case wasn't stopping SQM producing, but it now seems SQM have just screwed Cosaych as the EIA for cala cala was approved but they have no water rights.

The other EIA case relevant to the recent news was withdrawn by Cosayach, so they had no gov authority to produce there.


Hopefully all of this rubbish is relevant, and we are about to see a change in the supply situation in the market, forcing prices up.

[bogg1e] 04/6/2014 14:19

SG cheers, are there other routes to find out? For example, the government ministry that governs mining operations in Chile or other regulatory bodies?

[superg1] 04/6/2014 14:09

Cosayach timeline and notes icluding areas affected.

Sept 2011 court action re illegal wells. £3 wells ordered to be closed.

"According to the release, a possible suspension of activities of the mining company will mean the loss of 1,500 direct jobs in the area, "committing 95% of the workforce and 80% Huara of Pozo Almonte."

NOTE Pozo Almonte. ALSO NOTE 'suspension of activities'

"Water rights owned Cosayach have been denounced as illegal by the General Water Directorate (DGA), complaints which have served thereupon foundation SQM to start lawsuits for alleged infringement of waters against its executives commercial competitor, "he says.

Note the SQM comment.


APRIL 2013

The water authorities sought to deal with Cosayach

"Directorate General of Waters (DGA) filed a complaint against Sociedad Legal Minera NX One Card (linked to Francisco Javier Errazuriz), imputing delivery groundwater without proper authorization."

Francisco is the Cosayach boss.

The court ruling

Mining can extract water without rights. In other words the water authority failed and it opened up a door for Cosayach, but the court did say.

"The Supreme Court issued a ruling determining that the holder of a mining concession could build a well for extracting or "light" water in groundwater located in the area of the concession without paying for it, allowing it out indiscriminately , arguing that they are "exploiting" the minerals that are in the natural resource."

"High court decision would open the door to indiscriminate extraction and depletion of aquifers."

2014 rumours around that Cosaych were up to their old tricks.

Last week a Cosayach boss was sent to prison for 61 days for 'theft of water'.

The court ordered the closure of 38 wells and there is a mention of a suspension of proceeding which the Cos bosses agreed to.

That's what makes it seem current and relevant

"The owner of the company, Francisco Javier Errazuriz Ovalle, and two managers accepted the conditional suspension of proceedings, given by the prosecution. In exchange, the closing of 38 wells in the areas of Cala Cala and Negreiros"

The various translations get confusing but it sounds like the punishment is the closure of 38 wells.

SQM had claimed the extraction affected rights they held, AND the authorities dealt with them for environmental damage in the same case.

More in another post just spotted something

[j4ckster] 04/6/2014 14:08

Bogg1e, You get better results by searching google.cl and entering "Cosayach".

[bogg1e] 04/6/2014 14:01

J4ckster cheers. I assume the production shut down is imminent if not not already enforced, in which case, there should be some news somewhere and soon that states Cosayach to close mines or laying off staff etc.

perhaps i am putting in the wrong search criteria, "Cosayach", "Water well closures", "court ruling", "mine closures" translated into spanish and searched for doc published within the last month. I kept on finding articles going back to 2011 trial involving SQM. Perhaps I shoud try a differennt tack, search under the names mentioned above for artciles which indicate when closures may be enforced, because then all we need do is add 3 months for inventories to run low to the closure date and we should be able to fortell when iodine prices should start to rise.

[j4ckster] 04/6/2014 13:28

This ones translation is more readable ..



"The owner of the mining company, Francisco Errazuriz Ovalle, accepted the conditional suspension of the procedure in Exchange for the closure of 38 wells.

Thursday 29 of may of 2014-A 61-day prison penalty was sentenced Carlos Contreras Quispe, Manager of the mining company Contractual society of nitrate and iodine Cala Cala (Cosayach). The penalty was met by the Court's guarantee of Pozo Almonte for the repeated crime of usurpation of waters.

The owner of the company, Francisco Javier Errazuriz Ovalle, and two managers accepted the conditional suspension of the procedure, proposed by the Prosecutor's office. Instead, it ordered the closure of 38 wells in the areas of Cala Cala and Negreiros. These were used since 2003 to remove water, for mining use, without rights of exploitation or legitimate title.

According to the prosecution, the situation affected underground rights of Soquimich and also the Tamarugal basin. At the hearing yesterday, Contreras accepted the facts, while Errázuriz and Waldo González Bravo and Alejandro Puelles Ocaranza executives approved the conditional suspension. The Prosecutor's office will be who check compliance with the measure.

The Prosecutor in the case, Juan Zepeda, explained that if well the prosecution accused all executives, "in the case of Contreras Quispe, his responsibility is greater, for being who was in office longer, which is also operating in task and activity in the wells".

[j4ckster] 04/6/2014 13:08

Bogg1e...

Article dated last Thurs and refers to the Wed court case



2nd para mentions the 61 day imprisonment.

last but 1 para refers to decommisioning of the wells.

Last para mentions that SQM were in attendance.

Jack.

EDIT.
Here's another....

[superg1] 04/6/2014 13:08

Cyber

Just to explain the Cosayach importance. I asked outright a few weeks back who is the main 'offender' on the cheap iodine.

The info that came back was that Cosayach were struggling for cash and were churning out iodine as fast as they could, a move from post 2011 troubles of 1800mt to a thought 3,750mt now.

That 1800 drop was from a prior 6000mt plus. It was the hidden event in the market, the Japan earthquake was explained as the main reason.

The spot price of iodine hit $100kg

The reason they were able to start suddenly upping their production was down to the Cosayach 'free water' court ruling last April. So Cosayach then pressed the accelerator and went for it. However they had let down customers in the production chaos so have been under cutting prices to pick up the loose custom available.

The 2011 capitulation related to the closure of 33 illegal wells.

A week ago it seems SQM won a supreme court case forcing the closure of 38 wells. Closures the court want supervised. They called it 'Theft of water'.

As SQM claimed it was affecting their water rights, I assume Cosaysch had no rights so it was the 'free water' from the April 12 decision it seems.

On top of that the case included authority action in relation to environmental damage.

So for now it seems the 'free water' Cosayach got last May which allowed them to ramp up production has just been shot down. Two areas seem to get a mention.

If we go on well numbers alone it's more than 2011 and like for like on well numbers seems to account for their entire current production.

The relevance is that no one has the capacity or ability to suddenly churn out the iodine to cover them, if Cos are hit badly.

If Cos are to see significant production drops out it could mean the demand is higher than the supply rate once the wheel turns in full.