Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[angel of the north] 13/12/2013 18:08

Of course I'm 'pi$$ed off' with the S.P. today but at least the air has been cleared somewhat and the scare mongers will struggle from here on.
This is no way a reflection on SG's research or great commentaries and I'm shocked at the attacks herein.
For me todays actions don't matter a jot! I have a large holding here and that's the way it will stay.
Of course anyone leveraged will have a different point of view I guess and on that point it has taught me a valuable lesson on where NOT to dip my toes as were my contemplations.
We have more members of the 'One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest' club I see......what a sad waste of time. No financial interests one way or the other....just nothing else to do I guess?

[monts12] 13/12/2013 17:59

Another great article on Share Knowledge:

[noujay] 13/12/2013 17:51

Netley to be quite honest I find most of your posting on this particular board pretty unhelpful. But..fair is fair, that Nick Cage clip is great value. I'm a holder here and a firm believer in this company and its forward potential, but after a frustrating day during which lowering my average with a moderate top up was the only positive, watching that cracked me up!

[the librarian] 13/12/2013 17:51

Well done to the shorters and naysayers it appears the consistent de-ramping has had an impact, although I do find the name calling all around disappointing that appears to be the nature of bb's. However, responsibility for people making money or losing money works both ways, I hope not too many have bailed out with the recent scare tactics that have been applied.

Fortunately that is it for now, despite extreme statements in a weak market the stall has lost strength. There are positives now for long term holders in that this is probably as bad as it can get and some have been able to build on their holding at prices they did not expect to see again.

Another positive (I hope) is that it will reinforce the need for the BOD to keep the market better informed (as other companies do) and react to media inaccuracies. I suspect that the company will be thinking about their strategy in this respect and hopefully will outline the future prospects.

It is a good growth company and probably has a lot of interest from possible suitors, the next 12 months will prove very interesting.

[n3tleylucas] 13/12/2013 17:46

It's the drip-drip-drip of disappointing news, each on its own not disastrous, but cumulatively it corrodes confidence.

The hopes of many hundreds of posters have been raised, but each moribund RNS simply hits the share price further down. You may think this is the low, the company behaviour pattern says otherwise.

Brokers haven't helped either, despite slashing this year's and next year's profits, they still keep a very high 1 year share price target.

The next disappointing RNS, highlighting further delays, will take this to 75p.

[monts12] 13/12/2013 17:46

Changed your opinion on charts readthismessagen0w? Just the expert aren't you, lol!


readthismessagen0w
9 Sep'13 - 10:03 - 3356 of 3940 0 0


The above is all facts and got nothing to do with charts, charts have no hold or show no direction and is a waste of space.

[che7win] 13/12/2013 17:45

Yes GDL chart looking poor.

[readthismessagen0w] 13/12/2013 17:35

Chart is looking very bearish atm.

[hitsha3] 13/12/2013 17:07

Criteria for Issuance of a Permit
Section 85-2-311(1), MCA
The applicant for a water use permit to appropriate less than 4,000 acre-feet a year
and 5.5 cfs has the initial burden to prove by a
PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE
that
the criteria for issuance of a permit
are met. These include the following:
1. Water is physically available at
the proposed point of diversion in the
amount that the applicant seeks to appropriate.
2. Water can reasonably be consider
ed legally available during the period
in which the applicant seeks to appropr
iate, in the amount requested.
3. The water rights of a prior appropriator under an existing water right, a
certificate, a permit, or a state
WATER RESERVATION
will not be adversely
affected. Adverse effect is based on
a consideration of
the applicant's
plan to exercise the water right so that prior water rights will be satisfied.
4. The proposed means of diversion,
construction, and operation of the
appropriation works are adequate.
5. The proposed use of wa
ter is a beneficial use.
6. The applicant has a possessory intere
st, or the written consent of the
person with the possessory interest, in the property where the water is to
be put to beneficial use.
An applicant is required to prove one of the followi
ng criteria if a valid objection is filed:
1. The
DISCHARGE PERMIT
holder has the ability to satisfy
EFFLUENT
limitations of a permit issued in accord
ance with Title 75, chapter 5, part
4, MCA.
2. The proposed use will be substantially in accordance with the
classification of water set for the source of supply pursuant to section 75-
5-301(l), MCA.
3. The water quality of a prior appropriator will not be adversely affected

[n3tleylucas] 13/12/2013 17:04

"Looks like SuperG(lue) has come unstuck"

[shonny] 13/12/2013 16:42

Looks like SuperG(lue) has come unstuck today and run away to hide under a stone. Hopefully he'll stay there and give up enticing mug punters to throw money at this sorry share.

[hitsha3] 13/12/2013 16:28

(17) "Criteria addendum" means that additional portion of an application on which
substantial credible information must address the criteria listed in
85-2-311

[frog1] 13/12/2013 16:22

hitsha

I suspect there was always an issue here. I worked for an IT company that was focused on high margin work. Someone had a villa in Sicilly and got an offer to import a pile of oranges that would give us an immediate no risk profit for no work. We discussed it but it would have lowered our % margins and confused our business model and so we had to turn down effectively free money. For the same reason we never sold hardware with our services.

[rovi67] 13/12/2013 16:22

the 7 month drop !!!!!!!! ???????????????

[frog1] 13/12/2013 16:17

hitsha3

Their heading in the interim results for this was Water Project – Non-core.

I can't be sure as I am fairly recent on this, but they seem to have been very aware investors may place a high price on this and possibly assume it's somehow related to their core iodine business or success in that core business is dependent on it as opposed to a non-core opportunity that would give a nice revenue stream if they got it, but wouldn't affect their core Iodine/Chemical business if they didn't.

[captain_kurt] 13/12/2013 16:16

All will be forgotten is they bring IO4/IO5 online early Q1

[readthismessagen0w] 13/12/2013 16:13

hitsha3

Correct. It's called being setup for a fall.

[spike_1] 13/12/2013 16:13

Perfectly correct to remind people it is non-core. Don't forget financial journalists don't necessarily see the whole picture. They will have seen the drop and may chose to comment on it - best we remind them. Slightly less chance then of them getting it all wrong.
Best wishes - Mike

[hitsha3] 13/12/2013 16:09

Why did they mention on the last sentence, that the water is non core business for them, we all know this, is it because they are trying to cover them self if in case we don't get the permit. Not to sure what they mean, but it was not clear RNS. Again very bad public relation.

[bogg1e] 13/12/2013 16:07

I doubt it. IOF have a chance to address the issues, so no harm done. There's no need for time and money wasting litigation.

[meadow2] 13/12/2013 16:02

"The determination states that the application did not meet certain criteria set out in state code 85-2-311"

I wonder how the specialist consultants missed the certain criteria? Would the American courts award damages for such a failure?

[readthismessagen0w] 13/12/2013 16:02

crosseyed

It's superG's baby, of-course he would make it all sound to good to be true.

Q: How do you think so many got trapped in here at over £2?

Why do you think he makes so many threads? and now moderates this one? it' so he can keep it all going and ban anyone who questions his logic or poses a threat to his superiority complex.

He's the reason so many here are trapped because they all bow down to his arrogant ramblings and in the end just say...Oh super G is right! BUT!! he's not, he just waffles on for hours with diatribe that wears people down so they come to the conclusion that he's clued up and they can't argue or it's a ban.

The reality is, this is AIM, the chart looks nasty and superG and his army of rampers have been caught out! Just a shame so many paid over £2 to inflate the rampers coffers.

[2vdm] 13/12/2013 15:57

frog1 thank you very much for your views.

[roundup] 13/12/2013 15:54

To me the phrase, "beneficial use of the water," might be the most difficult issue to overcome. I would welcome others to comment regarding this issue if it might cause us a problem.

[frog1] 13/12/2013 15:53

crazycoops,

I agree no need for monthly updates. I advocated comprehensive 6 monthly updates detailing the new position and hopefully progress would be best.