Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[freshvoicem] 29/1/2014 13:06

Interesting the way the price moved up yesterday afternoon, when States had woken up?, and the RNS today.

Coincidence?

[che7win] 29/1/2014 13:05

Bob,
If I told you the figures, some would say I was ramping, so I will refrain.

If you can recall my December post, I said this:

"16. On optimisation of the plants: I specifically asked about IO2. This is to do with the towers and the build up of residual material. They are looking at ways of stopping it happening, O&G companies deal with it too, they are looking at ways to minimise the need for a deep clean."

That is part of the efficiency to be gained, it's only part of the story.

That residue shouldn't be getting into the towers in the first place, there are ways to prevent this which they should have been working harder on, maybe they dropped the ball.

There is an oil separator, skimmers and filters that require daily maintainence. If these aren't maintained, it ends up in the towers, it can be prevented but they seem to have missed the finer details.

It is all within their grasp, if they can work on this, all will look very bright....

[octopus100] 29/1/2014 12:35

My take on this is that the operational update has been played on the cautious side by the management, not wanting to promise or deliver on what they can't. They have probably covered all downside bases with this update meaning that it is unlikely that there would be any further unforeseen negative news. If they over deliver in anyway that will be revealed in the quarterly production updates they stated in March. So all in all factored into the current price with much upside potential on anything over an above the update coming out. Didn't even mention the waterboard meeting tomorrow which should be an interesting one.

[bobsworth] 29/1/2014 12:23

che7win ref post 15539

quote: "I'm excited because I know there are a lot of operational efficiencies the company can extract from the plant operations. When that happens to IO2, you can wave goodbye to IO2 producing 1MT a day, it will be a lot, lot higher."

Thanks for that insight. Are you able to explain what these operational efficencies Iofina have learnt are that can be applied to all plants?

Also when you say it will be " it will be a lot, lot higher", how much higher 20% or more?

Sorry to ask but I think your point is very relevant and might explain why Lance and co in the early days implied high production with a ping!

[superg1] 29/1/2014 12:18

tsmith

A fairly good response based on the distortion 'fun' some could have had re io3 comments.

It just shows that as plant numbers increase, that the material interest or risk in any individual plant diminishes.

At some point in the future, plants shut downs or disruptions will be par for the course and if we go by previous note guidance they go for 85 to 90% up time.

On those figures, they could shut down plants for a weekend every 2 weeks (85%), to for any tweaking, cleaning etc.

What I do know is that the number of wells in OK completed is rising rapidly, which means so is the produced brine volume and number of SWDs.

Not all brine will be of commercial iodine interest, but if I go on 2007 data. OK had 3.3 million bpd going down SWD wells, that figure will grow quickly.

30k bpd is a smidge under 1% of that.

Last time I looked up Sandridge, some time back they had 116 SWD sites, in play or planned.

The full Miss play stretches into Kansas and elsewhere, to about 17 million acres, I think it's a fair bet other commercial iodine hotspots will appear and by the time this boom develops the amount of brine will multiply.

[tsmith2] 29/1/2014 11:58

Good buying in last hr..

[superg1] 29/1/2014 11:47

Up

For what it's worth, I've seen you post for some years, won't filter you, never have never will. Nothing wrong with sensible debate.

It's not so much about what you know, but investor reaction to things they know little about.

I have learned to give up with sensible debate on other threads with any negative view, as it's like poking a hornets nest.

So now if I stumble across something, either way on any share that the market is oblivious too, then tough on the investors, they need to do their own research.

May lightening strike me down, but some time in the future on that that front, I may learn to cross over to the dark side, and short one day (very very occasionally), as when darkness missed by the masses, is clearly descending upon them, and the price and sentiment means they haven't spotted it coming, then that's not my fault.

That would never involve a post on a relevant thread or anywhere else, or a wish of losses on others, I have posted negatively on a few shares over the years, but would not do that, or short them while doing so.

My view when the dust is swirling, is to stand on the pavement and wait for rush hour to finish, then I can see where sentiment has taken it, and can plan ahead.

[knackers] 29/1/2014 11:40

Given the infrastructure coming online and the proven/unique IP being leveraged these are heavily discounted and extremely attractive prices to accumulate/down-average.

No more promises of jam tomorrow it's all about delivery now. The market and mgt know this very well. I expect the share price to reflect that more open/communicative relationship between mgt and shareholders. By Easter the share price will be in a VERY different place.

Fund-raising with production and sales ramping up will not be an issue. I, for one, would be VERY happy to participate should that happen.

The more open tone in today's Ops update was very welcome indeed. STRONG BUY [IMHO]

[frog1] 29/1/2014 11:30

naphar

Perhaps as good as the Numis note, which goes for £6 million profit (1 above N3L). That still causes concern about a fund raising and until that recedes I don't see any large buyers emerging (unless they get private briefings from the company or get favourable terms from someone wanting to get out).

Anyway, why not just re-iterate 700-1000mt for 2014 if that is The Plan. It would be just as quick as On plan and would be more transparent. So one of my points is that the company's management suffer from a perception of lack of transparency and so questions like "What are they hiding" arise. This is actually easy to solve by just using hard production and revenue figures when they produce RNS's. So who knows what IO2 is producing? What about IO3? So with statements as we have in the RNS, has the production of IO3 reduced from 100mt per annum to 50mt or from 20mt to 15mt? All we know is that it has been hit.

The analogy here would be a small oil company drilling a well and not giving any flow rates but just talking relative flow rates. The market immediately fear the worst and that is happening here. This gives the impression the technology is not as efficient as many thought it would be and they don't want to publicise that.

[superg1] 29/1/2014 11:15

Bob

Investor sentiment weakens mainly due to lack of knowledge of what they are invested in.

Sells can be purely down to knowing everyone will sell on the back of other people panic selling. That is the same on every share and has been going on for years, it will never change.

Dig

io2 Midstates definitely and IO3 strongly believed to be Chesapeake.

The disruption centres around disruption of old wells, and use of produced water for fracking, it may differ across the various operators.

In other words my guess is that Chesa are busy drilling wells near io3 and sometimes use frack water from other complete wells, to complete the next one, so it causes disruption to the supply to the SWD. In that case it would be short term and more wells going in means more brine overall.

Take io2, 18.7k bpd, then it went down in the next month or two as drilling nearby went ahead, then when the dust settled/wells completed they reported 50k bpd plus going to the site.

Chesa are in efficiency drive mode as demonstrated in their strategic plans, so they imo will utilise SWDs to their max capacity, some of which are well over 50k bpd.

[scrutable] 29/1/2014 11:15

sg
I appreciate your forensic report on GDL. I failed to pick up that 15% discrepancy myself, but accept most of your criticisms about the company. However the past is not always a reliable guide to the future. GDL have the ability to get their act together and scale up to meet the very substantial increase in the order book. This year is likely to be transformational.

The share price is no reliable guide to PI belief in the company's future as long as there remains part of the 31m share sale outstanding. There may still be a fortnight's supply to dispose of before the share can begin to reflect its bright future.

[naphar] 29/1/2014 11:13

frog, we know the plan is for 2014 production in the range 700-1000mt. They have given us those numbers in 2 RNS last year. If we are on track for at least 700mt crude iodine output, that's practically as good as the Numis note. If they are able to reduce costs and increase revenues per kg (conjecture until they tell us) compared to the Numis then all the better.

Having said that, I too would like solid numbers, and I suspect that's what we will get with the quarterly production updates they have now promised, for output at least.

[superg1] 29/1/2014 11:05

Yes chesty I have some hawk

[bobsworth] 29/1/2014 10:55

uppompeii
29 Jan'14
Bobsworth - genuine question. Why is it "derampers" give misinformation when everyone elses "information" is not far short of guesswork either? As clearly demonstrated by the current sp?

Genuine Answer: Everyone elses "information" is based on the solid hard working research carried out by the likes of Superg1 and many others invested in Iofina backed with detailed links that take you to that research. The derampers never back any of their "information" with factual links for us investors to follow up and check out. The only thing the derampers are good at is swamping the bb with false repetitive information that weakens investor sentiment and the shareprice made worse by incorrect numis reports and lack of production data from Iofina. That said the "information" shared by the likes of superg1 and other will when Iofina and Numis get their act together on reporting will in my honest opinion be proved right and this bear raided and shorted shareprice will recover on facts alone. That said I welcome negative information if its backed with quotes and links. Anyway keep watching uppompeii and lets see which "information" proves right. Oh and sorry for not answering your genuine question earlier as I have you on filter based on past postings and only saw your question in superg1 post!

[diggulden] 29/1/2014 10:41

N3tleyLucas

"However incoming brine volumes have been affected recently due to the Operator's significant fracking and drilling activity in the area, which is affecting overall iodine production levels".

Important to note that comment is in relation to IO3, not IO2. IO3 is a new start up plant having been online for less than a month, so I would expect it to go through the same initial problems in terms of brine flow from the operator as IO2 had.

One thing that is important to note, the time taken to get to optimal brine levels is taking longer than I first expected, down to several factors including co-operation from the brine operators, which will sort itself out in time.

I do believe IO2 is sited with a different operator to IO3, can someone confirm?

[chesty1] 29/1/2014 10:32

superg1 are you still in HAWK, they are looking set to bounce strongly ??????

[phoenixs] 29/1/2014 10:31

At last, an update which at least keeps investors informed about progress etc.

Whilst there are brine issues, company is working on it with supplier.

IO4 and IO5 to begin producing Feb/Mar and IMO will result in positive cash flows for IOF going forward. So maybe the doomsters will have to reassess their position after all.

It will take time to re-establish investor confidence, but it all comes down to being open about progress and/or problems when they occur as well as profitability.

[superg1] 29/1/2014 10:30

Up

Exactly, that's why with the water meeting approaching, I sought to help investors understand what water laws an rules say, by posting the relevant sections.

There is clearly was a huge lack of understanding of the process. Hence rather than watch 'you are all going to die' posts, from those that work on fear alone, not evidence, I sought to get the facts out there ready for the 'debate'

I know some didn't understand that water can be appropriated to sell to others. I know some frown on the term 'letters of intent', but that's about the maximum declaration/proof that is allowable under water laws. So IOF on that front have 100% evidence of the demand in LOI form.

The posts are there not as opinion but showing the exact rules and laws involved.

Comparing the rules, with the information stated in releases, I see no reason why the permit won't be awarded.

Guesses relate to what the engineering query is. The list is in the rules, I see nothing onerous in them. It could be bigger pipes needed, it could be they want better tech to secure against water loss leakage during pipeline transfer etc.

Beneficial use. I believe some had contact with IOF and the suggestion was there is speculation that water may go into ND. Those with coms will know if that is true or not.

However the rules as posted on here, show that taking water into another state is not an issue, but it must be an end use that is allowable in Montana. The state would want a higher burden of proof for the use in the other state.
However IOF have never stated it's for use in ND. Speculation I suspect by the bureau, as the depot would be 20 miles from the border with a main road going straight to it, I can see why. But that's where the Missouri is, and in good proximity to the eastern Montana oil boom.

So my guess based on reading, the laws, rules, IOF news, other applications contested cases and so on, is that the permit will be awarded, timescale unknown, but there are set deliberation periods.

So if those with a different view can explain why it won't be awarded, then fire away.

I fully accept that if the LOIs are fraudulent documents, or that there are plans to ship the water to California,to keep private swimming pools topped up, then IOF won't get the permit.

It's hard to see, based on the research, why it would fail, but S happens. So on a gamble, betting on the final outcome, a bet against it, looks high risk to me.



uppompeii
29 Jan'14


Bobsworth - genuine question. Why is it "derampers" give misinformation when everyone elses "information" is not far short of guesswork either? As clearly demonstrated by the current sp?

[longsight] 29/1/2014 10:28

che7

OK but then shd be stated plainly in RNS & I still don't know why I shd trust their numbers. Not suggesting deceit but just more a Q of do they really know themselves?

[che7win] 29/1/2014 10:20

Longsight,
Simple, by talking to the company direct.

[beercapafn] 29/1/2014 10:17

Here we go again. Upzes Downzes

[microcline] 29/1/2014 10:16

Maybe the production is affected positively?

[jointer13] 29/1/2014 10:14

"Management continues to expect iodine production during 2014 to be on plan."