Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[hurricane.] 19/9/2014 07:57

Correct, Nothing has changed except others like Mr Big have a lot more shares.

[roboben] 19/9/2014 07:48

OK C, now let's have the proof. ( Tee Hee!)

[ammons] 19/9/2014 07:41

IO#5 Production Plant

IO#5 was connected to the power grid on July 30th and is back in production. The plant is running very well, taking all available brine at the site.

The above is what was said in the July update issued on 14 August. What happened between then and now?

[crosseyed] 19/9/2014 07:36

"I have discovered a truly marvellous proof of this, which this margin is too narrow to contain."

[after Pierre de Fermat]

[superg1] 19/9/2014 07:32

A key line in the rns which sums up some answers

'These factors had a short-term negative effect on production, with production beginning to normalize in this last week.'

Che 1.7 is said to be a conservative number not the max rate.

Obviously for the best numbers we'll have to wait for the glitches to be sorted.

[captain_kurt] 19/9/2014 07:29

From the RNS...... "These factors had a short-term negative effect on production, with production beginning to normalize in this last week."

This also includes IO2.

[superg1] 19/9/2014 07:26

Mr B

It's a choice of saying nothing or something. As I say the grapevine is extensive. When such events occur major shareholders always contact the company to fill in the gaps.

At times I get to learn of the answers, but may not in the future if I was to splatter them all over this BB.

Major shareholders were left head scratching first thing, but by late afternoon the fog had cleared with very good explanations.

The other point of cryptic posts, is to let dozens of folk invested, that know me personally, will be aware I'm happy with responses. My confusion about the 40mt forecast has evaporated.

But on one point

1MM your line

'I wonder what the unanticipated design changes at IO 5&6 were all about'

As I'm aware of that from a few.

They are not design changes from the original plan, it's just some pillock (can't think who, pre this team) made changes which have since been found, both plants will now be put back to the original setting they were meant to be.

[che7win] 19/9/2014 07:13

My contact with the company suggests they are very much committed to getting above 1.7mt per day from these plants.

The plants 5 and 6 had unknown issues that were made at design stage, unfortunately everything is having to be checked.

Don't ask me any questions, I believe they are as frustrated as us and new plants going forward will not have such issues.

[1madmarky] 19/9/2014 06:15

I wonder what the unanticipated design changes at IO 5&6 were all about? I'm assuming that this was not to do with the SWD plant itself but that they were talking about our kit. Perhaps they have had to add additional storage capacity on the feed into the plant. It just got me curious.
GLA

Unless They have found a design improvement and decided to get it in now instead of waiting for some future date.

[mrbeavers] 18/9/2014 23:19

Yes sg for someone who offers up such precise research on many fronts to the masses, to offer such cryptic hearsay doesn't do anyone any favours.

[micknickbanny] 18/9/2014 22:45

superg1,
I would be interested to know what answers you are aware of which can explain this poor rns

[crosseyed] 18/9/2014 21:16

Monty P,

Given that in 2013 probably their entire revenues of $18.931 million came from IOChem's derivative products during which my estimate of raw iodine used was ~300 mT, that's why I suggested that some of the revenues of ~$19 million indicated to September will have been sourced from non-iodine product sales and probably a little from raw iodine sales.

I agree entirely that it is unlikely that IOF have bought any iodine in the open market (I thought that was what I said).

superg1,

Very cryptic !!

c

[superg1] 18/9/2014 20:44

There are some very solid answers appearing in the background to explain certain aspects of the rns. Similar answers from various directions. All of which are very plausible and causes me to retract my comments about 'daft to forecast 40mt'.


With the answers I'm aware of, then yes Mr B is probably happy having been sat by the pool all day having added to his pot of shares.

[monty panesar] 18/9/2014 20:12

C,

I thought to get to $19m revenues they were expected to use something like 300-350m? I might be wrong. IMO I think marginal whether they have had to buy iodine in market.

Feeling a bit sorry for the IOC guys as they have had a brilliant year which has been completely hidden buy the production issues.


Monty

[crosseyed] 18/9/2014 20:02

Monty P,

I was a little surprised at ~$19 million revenues if that is just from iodine-based derivative products. However, it might well also include non-iodine products which past posts have suggested might be back in play this year. In fact, my own model forecasts end-of-September revenues from both sources at $18.957 million! Probably just luck.

There may also have been sales of raw idoine as hinted at in earlier RNS's.

I doubt that IOF would have bought any iodine on the open market. To September (assuming the 27.2mT target for September), the IOSorb production will reach 215.2 mT. At single-shift capacity of 30 mT/mth, that would require 270 mT leaving 54.8 mT to make up. I'm still working on the basis that IOF Chem are processing an average 5 mT/mth or 45 mT by September. At the end of 2013, my estimate of raw iodine inventory was 87.8 mT. They also had the processing equivalent of 45.7 mT work-in-progress and 33.8 mT in finished products. Thus, even without recycled iodine they would have had sufficient raw iodine to meet production requirements and also to sell a limited amount of raw iodine in direct sales.

c

[monty panesar] 18/9/2014 19:56

Fresh,

IO1 produces 1t a week. IO2 has always been quoted to be a mega plant with big ppm and has been producing 20t per month until it was decided to take off line and increase the vols going through it. Hopefully short term pain for medium term gain but let's wait and see but they had to try to increase the iodine production at IO2 from around 60% throughput to full vol at some stage.

Anyway let's wait and see what they say with results in next 10days.

Monty

[rovi67] 18/9/2014 19:47

ROGER MELLY
18 Sep'14 - 18:31 - 24659 of 24664 7 0


Another stock market guru crawls out to espouse his superior knowledge after we've had a knock. The time to short would have been before the drop you nob.



LOL LOL LOL Many thanks

[monty panesar] 18/9/2014 19:31

Sg or others,

If they have sales of $19m so far this year I wonder what the average selling price is per tonne and how much they have used. I think around 325-350t were to be used in IOC this year. Do you think they have had to buy relatively expensive product in the market to supply IOC?

TIA

Ps seernb doesn't know Mr Big!

[deadend] 18/9/2014 19:27

Does anybody know if Lance is ok?
No mention of him,and missing stated target is unlike him.

[monty panesar] 18/9/2014 18:59

They seem to put the production shortfall down to IO5&6 when in reality we know IO2 produces 20t per month when running at less than 2/3rds capacity. Get that sorted as it appears to be happening over last week then production goes above 40mt per month very quickly.
$19m of revenues in the first 9 months I think is what analysts had pencilled in for year. They typically make 20% margin so should be around $4m of gross profit in iodine chemicals if I remember correctly.

[roger melly] 18/9/2014 18:31

Another stock market guru crawls out to espouse his superior knowledge after we've had a knock. The time to short would have been before the drop you nob.
Good luck with your short, hope your not too far from your potty ....potentially unlimited losses and all that.