Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[the librarian] 19/11/2013 19:17

I actually knew a doughnut jam injector, the only time it was 'off-line' was when he had a day off... was an old fashioned bakery though, they gave him a bucket of jam and a syringe.. how times have changed :-).

We must be in the time-frame for an update, or the about bloody time-frame.

[johncsimpson] 19/11/2013 19:06

Bag post 11227 - your right re what was actually said but I would have assumed 'on line' meant producing. When I worked at Tip Top Bakeries when I was a student, the doughnut machine was always going 'off-line' when the jam injectors got bunged up. Once this was sorted, they were back on line and producing.

I see someone voted your post down though . . .

edit - notwithstanding the post immediately above if correct!

[micknickbanny] 19/11/2013 19:05

BAG..
the quote attributed to George Lantz is slightly different depending upon which site you read. the key words "on line and producing iodine" is contained within the rns detailed on the iofina.com site but for some reason the words "producing iodine" is omitted on other sites

[noli] 19/11/2013 18:51

It only takes 60 days to build a plant, as far as i am aware iof have not said io#6 will not be built. It may look that way from where we are, however all the infrastructure is already in place at the IO#2 site so no electric etc or waiting time like the other locations.

[baguette] 19/11/2013 18:48

Meadow2 your post 11215 where you charge me to read RNS's carefully followed by a sort of admonishment in post 11223 - is actually wrong and it is you who have misquoted the RNS. It does NOT say on line and producing iodine it says "on line" whatever that means but earler states clearly that production is subject to well operator approval - a totally different statement.

try reading carefully yourself please

[meadow2] 19/11/2013 18:46

Jamonit - "Markets have been promised deadlines for 4,5 and 6 that look increasingly unlikely." We know that IO#6 could be late for good reasons, but 4 and 5 could well be bang on time as far as we can tell.

[noli] 19/11/2013 18:43

Jam, iof have given ppm and bpd in the past and it cost them. They have now changed that to estimates, i.e 700 to 1000mt. IOF are telling us what they have in a different way, if they miss that target then have a go at them.

Its thought iof could do 700 to 1000mt in 3 plants rather than 6, iof imho will be ahead of expectations so it matters not only 4, 5 plants are online as long as they hit the target number. (end of year run rate)

[johncsimpson] 19/11/2013 18:43

Meadow2 aka St Francis

[meadow2] 19/11/2013 18:39

Reading announcements carefully will help calm the nerves! As well as inform the reader, of course.

[johncsimpson] 19/11/2013 18:38

Thanks jamonit - edit that's your earlier post

Bag - half of that reply 11209 doesn't apply to anything I've ever said and you seem to have missed my main FACTUAL observation re November 19 and not December 19, unless that sort of accuracy is unimportant.

As an aside, someone is voting a number of very sensible posts down probably in an effort to bring about discord - check out St Francis of Assisi also M.T. 1979.

[superg1] 19/11/2013 18:31

Bag

All you do is from time to time appear, with no helpful research, other than have a go at others that simply share what is said in the background or what they dig out for themselves.

Yes you were right IOF have slipped in their timings, but clearly it is a fluid business plan, going after the most profitable production sites early on as and when they appear. Next week, IOF could identify a better SWD than where they plan to put io7 or 8 so the plan will change, just like it has in recent months.

We have the full report that Weil completed on their well, we aren't supposed to have it, it was just luck, but it would have never appeared without some digging.

Two weeks back some important information was obtained, but has not been mentioned here. Will that translate to what we expect, short term, I don't know.

All we can do is make a judgement on the information given, and try to cross check the validity of the information.

IOF say the they have the rights of way sorted for the water depot. Well 'we' know exactly what route they are taking, who the land owners are and that it is all signed off.

There is no need to mention that as IOF said they have all the rights of way, and no-one here doubts it.

If someone doesn't want to hear all the rumours, then they can just use filter.

We heard one about hawk and posted about an oil discovery near their land, and even identified the well. Then out came an rns of oil near their land, and they are drilling as close they can to the well mentioned. Then up came WF production, showing a sudden increase in oil. Next came Chad talking about 6 trucks of Oil form one well, in the geographic area.

So was/is the hawk rumour a pile of tosh. Yes it depends on whether they actually hit oil for a result, all one can do is research to try and get ahead.

[noli] 19/11/2013 18:29

Bag, meadow has posted the info for you, online and producing, how clear do you need the information to believe it. Its not about who knows what, its about how much you can find on the web, and to me you dont find that much, so you dont know as much as others who spend the time and effort looking for information.

Some are happy to share what they find while others just moan.

[noli] 19/11/2013 18:21

Well spotted Meadow, it says it all really.

[superg1] 19/11/2013 18:16

Jam

I you have followed threads for long enough on various shares you will find PIs can find info a company has not announced, such is the nature of the internet and other forms of communication.
'
E.G. if I could ID who 'Chad' in Colorado, and get contact details, then production from 1 well would be known. There is the infamous case of Tom win (think it was him) ringing the ground crew while directors were on a flight re 'how did the drilling go'. it was a duster, no rns and the share price crashed before they could issue the bad news.

Many times critical information has been obtained but those putting the work in.

If I lived in OK, and was an IOF investor I could simply drive to the io3 site just to see if the plant is running. It wouldn't take too long to find all the other sites too, to see how at what stage the builds are at.

I don't fancy paying for flights and accommodation, time out etc, to do that. If I wanted to I could and I'd be well ahead of this BB on what's going on.

On a final point, it's not about what we think they should tell us, but what the nomad thinks if newsworthy. A company may want to issue news, but a nomad may say no and not release it.

I have been on my soapbox on that point in the past. I'm not going there again but yes, I am absolutely sure that nomads sometimes block news that a company think needs releasing, but the nomad doesn't. I get rather cynical on that point, so won't comment.

[baguette] 19/11/2013 18:08

Noli and SG its always "look deeper" and hint hint we know something you dont.

SG despite your reasoning regarding io2 output I maintain mine is just as sound and until we know this could be argued any way you like. You "hear that io3 brine is flowing" well I wish we could hear that too and until I do excuse me for being doubtful.

My whole point is all the "nudge" stuff leaves me cold - the majority ask for facts

[meadow2] 19/11/2013 18:04

Well, do they mean this comment in 31st October RNS?

"Commenting on today's news, newly appointed CEO George Lantz, said: "We are very pleased to have IO#3 on line and producing iodine." ON LINE AND PRODUCING IODINE.

[superg1] 19/11/2013 17:58

Bag

I know you are a bit of a straight talker so re this-:

The RNS included comments regarding delay in io6 and mentioned excess brines for io2 - that could be taken as very good news but not unless we know how well io2 is performing. It could be that it is under expectations so another plant is now needed alongside to "help" it out. We just dont know.

So we don't know how io2 is performing - if it is requiring further investment to arrive at original expectations -


The it could be under expectations in reference to io2, is complete junk.

If io2 was a bad site, why would they take a plant from a better site, and put it at a poor site? That defies all logic.

The actual rns said-:

'Large, productive brine flows which exceed current IO#2 capacity may warrant diversion of the equipment staged for the IO#6 plant to a location adjacent to IO#2 which the Board believe may have both short and long term financial benefits.'


Large PRODUCTIVE brine flows. That suggests the brine has good yields.

Short and long term financial benefits. In other words the io2 site ppm is good.

So there are no grounds at all or evidence to suggest io2 is a poor site in need of a leg up. The opposite seems to be the case from the news.

As for we don't know how io2 is doing. No we don't know what rate it is at, but the last figures we had, were io1 at 1mt per week, and a combined figure of .8 to .9 mt per day from io1 and 2, when io2 was on 18.7k bpd.

As 1mt per week is around .15mt per day. Those figures gave a .7mt average for io2. So in theory on 30k bpd io2 will be on over 1mt per day. They mention over 50k bpd at the site.

So it's looking like a near 2mt per day site if all the brine is processed. Give an 85% uptime as in guidance and it's a 600mt plus site.

Yes we have to wait for an update, but we know the guys actually working at the plant took iodine samples of 300ppm in the locality, when they were on a college project with Arysta.

The production data so far suggests levels in that range, the college record of ppms supports it, and IOF clearly think it is financially beneficial to process all of the brine at the site.

We'll just have to wait and see what they say, if they choose to release a production update.

As for under the radar, well I've explained that one enough times, and it's a very valid point if anyone takes the time to understand it.

I know you follow Hawk, right now they are trying to stay under the radar due to leases that need to be renewed and they don't want prices taking off, or competitors with deep pockets moving in and pushing them off leases they may wish to renew. (I you go back through old data leases were up for renewal in Sept, just when WF hit oil). Marben posted about wanting to go low key recently.


The IOF reason is more complicated, but do we want to IOF to identify lucrative iodine brine sites, hand the data to a competitor, who then simply outbids IOF to stop IOF ever producing brine from a particular location. Identifying where the best brine is comes first, then brine leases follow.

It seems OTT, but it's certainly not tosh. Frustrating YES, hugely frustrating at times, I wish they would spell it out too, but their reasons for not doing so, are genuine.

Rumours are not much use, but the suggestion is the io2 brine is slightly better suggested, I also hear that io3 brine is flowing. That towers arrived in the US a few weeks back and so on.

I also hear other stuff which isn't from IOF, and even they may not know about it.

Best we hear it from IOF, but rather than sit around guessing I do my own research.

5th 6th Nov was a key date for me, but it's not in the chart, news, or anywhere else, that anyone here knows where to look.

I'm just waiting to see what is said, if anything, about things one or two people track.

[noli] 19/11/2013 17:54

With regards IO#3 and it producing iodine, you have to look in the right places. The information is out there, you just have to find it. If anyone is of the opinion IO#3 is not producing iodine, then you need to look deeper.

[the librarian] 19/11/2013 17:48

Can't disagree with your first post BAG, great last paragraph as well, can sense the frustration in your second one though, just a waiting game now.

[baguette] 19/11/2013 17:32

Johncs

Anyone who posts anything calling for realism and accuracy of information is either called pessimistic or negative but those who earlier this year were shouting
- eye watering numbers of output per plant
- 2000-3000 tons of production
- Huge income from water
- Oil
- Helium
- Asos - asos - asos
- £5 - £7- £10 - £12 - £20 share

seem to be feted.

We all hope news soon but you dont know what or when any more than I do

[johncsimpson] 19/11/2013 17:12

November Bag - line 3

added - just edit it

further added - a bit pessimistic mate. News soon . . .