Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[n3tleylucas] 23/6/2013 13:12

Bogg1e,

Yes, but you don't need much money to de-merge, mainly red-tape. Once de-merged each company can then raise funds to suit their needs.

There is a penny-pinching mentality here that is simply seeing non-core as something to be sold to support iodine, rather than see them as adding long-term shareholder value.

An odd mindset.

[bogg1e] 23/6/2013 12:52

One last thing, it has been mentioned that if iof hit high production targets it would drive down the price of iodine. What i have mentioned before and really should be born, at least in the back of ones mind, is the potential long term health effects caused by radiation poisoning from fukushima. If you look into the alternative press you will see that radiation levels are much higher in the northern hemisphere than is being admitted to in the mainstream news channels. I sincerely hope, in fact I know from various experiments, that people and their dna are more robust than we are lead to believe, however it doesn't take much intelligence to realise that the risk of disease associated with radiation toxicity could rise over the coming years (look at depleted uranium shells and the continuing number of children still born or severely handicapped years after the exposure). I dont actually enjoy writing this, it makes me furious actually, but from an iodine perspective i can see demand rising as a result over the coming 10 years. Sadly.

[bogg1e] 23/6/2013 12:43

BTW thanks for the informative posts, nap, scrut, sg, etc.

[bogg1e] 23/6/2013 12:42

netley, maybe cos of the added opex required to create sub entities, when cash should be spent on the major revenue streams. If we want to avoid a buyout at low prices, spending money on the IO's will force the takeover price to more realistic levels. Next year, perhaps with 6+ plants ion place then maybe the excess funds exist to do as you suggest.

[n3tleylucas] 23/6/2013 12:33

SCRUTABLE,

I spoke of de-merging Water and O&G from the iodine recovery & chemical businesses a while back. Creating three quoted businesses with focused strategies, funding and leaderships.

Why isn't it happening?

I believe divestment is probably the plan, not de-merger.

Why didn't you ask them about it?

[baguette] 23/6/2013 12:00

Ooops so many noughts I got my numbers wrong now I'm barking too Its £7m but point still made

[baguette] 23/6/2013 11:53

Just at the point when many of us must feel a move from where we are to £2.50 -£3 a share would be a fair target this year we now have posts referring to the possibility of £140 a share. For those lucky enough to get in at 20p that would be a 700 bagger and if they had put £10k in that would be £35 m. Barking !!

[mikkydhu] 23/6/2013 11:51

The potential of this company has been well described and is indeed "mind-boggling". However, the market will value the company much more on what has actually been produced and achieved and sold.

I would like to know why there appears to be a stock of unprocessed iodine. If capacity for making iodine derivatives exists, why has it not been used? News about turning that iodine supply into cash would help the share price

The other opportunity for improving the share price (if that is desired) is announcing the increased production from IO2 when the new brines have been added and when normal activity at the site is resumed (ie when the current drilling activities permit). That could be at any time.

[worraps] 23/6/2013 11:43

superg....well if your grapevine is better than IOF's grapevine, that would imply you feel you know more than the BOD.....perhaps it would be good to have a word in their ear in that case. The sooner the better. It would benefit both them, and us!

[skylite] 23/6/2013 11:36

If as Sg says certain companies are well aware of Iofina and have us on their watch list; Sg has been in comms with one where the true potential value will almost certainly have been iterated from research done and made known on here anyway.

As this flies in the face of the "under the radar" board stance and in fact renders that futile then they have a duty to shareholder value to come out all guns blazing in the next RNS.

I'd like to see one regarding enhanced ppms of Io2 perhaps of test results from others.

Well done the Lions - despite the dodgy ref!

[diggulden] 23/6/2013 11:05

Don't know if anyone noticed but IG are down to 4% of overall positions short now, that's the lowest it has been for about 8 weeks I think. Maybe, just maybe, signalling a bottom to the recent drop?

[crazycoops] 23/6/2013 11:00

freshvoice, 30 September at the latest but it could come sooner. Last year it was 17 September.

[freshvoice] 23/6/2013 10:49

Super
Interim report surely is in Sept. that is three months not the two lance mentioned.
Two months from AGM is August?

[superg1] 23/6/2013 10:26

Takeover.

As I say when certain lines are said, I am well 'armed' to understand what has been said.

Many were there. I have long said I expect heavy interest mid this year, because the picture will start to open up.

Lance said they expect to ping the radar in a big way in '2 months'.

SQM are unaware at the moment of the true picture, but someone isn't.

They will slam into radar when they open up on the ppm's and brine they have. I keep saying so and it will happen.

But '2 months' had been bugging me, why 2 months when they quote 3 for the builds.

That's easy, the interim report. That's what they mean. Suddenly a monster margin change will be in play, for all to see, and they will be spelling out just how good plants are, they will surely have no choice.

BUT

I had been doing research and have comms with other iodine producers. With the radar ping comment and 2 months, I have been digging through a list of potentials and clearly came back form the AGM saying I think IOF will be gone near term.

While doing that list, which includes iodine producers and chem divs for iodine and water divs and oil services for the water etc, I had a doh moment.

In that process I dismissed many. However a trait of mine, took me down a path of comms. What I didn't realise was who I was indirectly talking too.

I now know, and I know they said they will be keeping an eye on IOF, it's in my in box. However 'they' are not quite who I thought 'they' were, so yes they do know all about IOF.

I have looked them up, and now think, they would be the likely suitor of IOF. There whole set up is about grabbing companies like IOF. I have read up on them.

Obviously that could be in 2 months, but I think otherwise, these guys don't wait for significant pings. They are in before competitors click.

I have been unwittingly pinging IOF, while trying to find out about other things. I'm still in comms, and sort of kicking myself for not realising who 'they' are.

Now I have it's a very big 'Doh' moment as it's was staring me in the face, but I didn't look.

So as Square1 says chill.
My research has switched to 'takeover', due to knowing what IOF have, the Ping comment, and my comms. Plus looking at who I think will be suitors there is a long list.

The other part I'm looking at is the conventional oil comment, and adjacent to IOF, I think adjacent means exactly. So at least some of IOF leases may be sitting on conventional oil.

When I say 'looking', I mean very deeply, with a very good grapevine, better than IOF's.

[superg1] 23/6/2013 09:58

I will try and keep posts much shorter as you know now i think heavy interest will come over the next month or two and there are good reasons why.

On points

Chem div, plus iodine cake/mud, plus prill.

AGM they said the chem div could go to 800mt currently and an additional market for raw cake at 1600mt, after that prill. So they have a way to go before they out a prilling tower in.

Sometime next year imo.

[the librarian] 23/6/2013 09:54

Square1, thought you had cracked it in your previous post! Best time to buy is when sentiment is low... we will see!

[naphar] 23/6/2013 09:39

Scrutable, re 3062

That post is basically just valuing iodine, with derivatives for as much as you think we can process derivatives if I understood correctly. So from that perspective conservative.

However, without having tried to follow he maths through (too many assumptions not showing for me to do that), my guess is that your £140 a share potential is based on 200 plants, all doing 300mt plus, all with really low opex, and with a stable iodine price.

I just don't think that's realistic. Don't get me wrong, I want to avoid a cheap takeover, but I don't think we would get to £140 on iodine alone.

For a start, once we go to other areas, such as Texas, it was clear that plants will probably do less than 200mt, hence the current OK focus.

That lower output has an impact on OpEX, as we understand from IO1 opex being in the $30 per kg range.

But most importantly, if we could really get to 200 plants, what does that mean in terms of iodine production? Your £14 a share valuation is based on at least 3500mt output, so your £140 a share price bust by virtue be based on at least 35000mt production. The very idea that we can maintain iodine prices in the current range, whilst adding that much output, seems impossible to me.

However, to make it a bit more palatable, it would take 14 plants at end 2014, and out in 12 a year thereafter, those 200 plants would not be in place until 2030. The iodine marks could grow by 90% or more in that time. That would out us supplying roughly half the market. But I still think iodine prices would reduce.

Could we get to £140 a share on iodine alone? Maybe but I don't believe hat as strongly as you obviously do. And I believe it would take a considerable number of years, maybe indeed until 2030, in which case I need to discount that £140 to a figure of maximum £61 now assuming a discount rate of just 5%. At a 10% discount rate that £140 a share now is worth £28, assuming we don't see £140 until 2030.

I accept in that I make no assumption for iodine prices or opex rising wih inflationary costs, I choose to ignore it given I don't believe the stable prices I think are inherent in your calculations.


Now, nobody I am sure wants a cheap takeover. But IMO talking about a £140 share price being achievable, wih all the uncertainty the future holds, is several steps too far for me. I know it is your aim, but i dont think you will change the fact that lots of people like me will be happy for the proverbial "bird in the hand" so long as we think its a valuable enough bird.

Where I totally agree, is that the boD need to out sufficient info out there, in the event of a takeover approach if not before, to help us all decide if that bird being offered is valuable enough.

[peterz] 23/6/2013 09:39

Ansana - I think the point you make below is very important. We do have a link with BOD, via Sg1. And I guess they are appreciative of the huge work he and others have done which has benefitted shareholders and company. I would have thought that the company know more about the development needs of the business than shareholders. But the BOD agenda may now have changed and may perhaps be different than many shareholders. The BOD have done brilliantly getting the company to where it is today.

"The PI relationship with the board is very important and just as they may be underplaying their hand we should be careful we don't overplay ours".

[ansana] 23/6/2013 09:22

Post 3074 is this the start of viral? Iodine kingdom, bit flowery! Events dear boy events. If the Bod would like to take me to lunch I am happy to give them my full support.

[gadolinium] 23/6/2013 09:22

Naphar,
Post 3073: Thanks for that clarification from Lance.

[orslega] 23/6/2013 09:21

funds/II have clearly set mandates on taking profits, particularly at quarterly, six monthly and annual dates....IOF BOD will not be able to change that...however, a clear and unambiguous update might tick a few more boxes though for further consideration at their review dates, providing better clarity etc on the potential ahead...

...and then you get a change in manager, probably at L&G who has other ideas (but banks his investors a large profit..). saw that in blinkx and some big money lost there for one or two investor funds.....many other examples around of fund managers taking a different view...that'll never change...hoping L&G pretty much done now, looks like it...which II/fund has replaced them?....nice holdings RNS would steady the share price ..

[ansana] 23/6/2013 09:11

I am concerned that the falling share price makes them vulnerable to a cheap t/o. This was the reason I suggested Comms with the board for those who wished to express their concern, Comms to request that we correct the negativity of the poorly worded rns last week. This idea got little support and that is perfectly ok. I ask in this case as some are still worried about our weakened position going into tomorrow how do we convey our concerns to the board, if collectively is out do we email separately with dozens of slightly different messages. Do we shout at them with Capital letter? Do we we go Viral as Scrutable suggests. Does going viral mean we start putting the information out in every domain which forces the companies hand so they must come out and confirm or deny. The PI relationship with the board is very important and just as they may be underplaying their hand we should be careful we don't overplay ours.

[jointer13] 23/6/2013 09:08

good post scutes.

whoever controls iofina will control the iodine world (in time).
if a bid comes in it wont be alone!!

[square1] 23/6/2013 09:08

All this hand-wringing and continual posting about very little is just attracting the shorters-and I'm long. Moaning about the wording in an RNS is pointless, it's done and is not about to be changed. Let the Company deliver on it's business plan. Share prices don't travel in straight lines. What was a good BB is now sounding like a bunch of nutters who will only countenance a rising price. If you like your investment hold, if you're worried, sell. Simple. I'm staying long but suspect I'll be ignoring this board for a while!!!