Iofina Share Discussion Threads

[cyberbub] 25/4/2014 07:26

This all seems very positive... 2014 will be a lean year as we know, but Lance is saying that (apart from the water project) there is no need to raise further cash....Obviously a substantial loss has been declared due to the large capex on the plant construction (which has gone onto the balance sheet).Inventory stable from H1 to full year, so we still have all that to sell!All looks good to me.NAIAll looks OK to me.

[cyberbub] 25/4/2014 07:14

Knigel you beat me to it - no need to raise finance!

[knigel] 25/4/2014 07:09

THE KEY POINT - GOING CONCERN
In May 2013, the Group raised $15.0 million of funding through a convertible note to complete construction of iodine extraction plants. At its current stage of development, the Directors consider that the Group does NOT need to raise additional funds in order to realise its core business plan. For this reason, the Directors consider it appropriate to continue to adopt the going concern basis in preparing the financial statements.

[slimchops] 25/4/2014 07:05

KEY FINANCIAL POINTS:

-- Revenue of $18,931,230 (2012: $18,643,308);
-- EBITDA loss of $1,594,886 (2012: positive $182,791);
-- Loss before tax of $3,804,293 (2012: $1,182,805) ;
-- Successful issuance of $15mil Convertible Bond to fund plant rollout;

[festario] 25/4/2014 01:13

BrileyLoucan,
I don't think they are Insti holders.
Most of those are just holding shares as nominees for PI's like me.
NatWest etc, Barclays and Hargreaves.

[n3tleylucas] 24/4/2014 23:17

beeezzz,

They had to raise funds just to survive, the cash-flow impact of the outsourcing>in-house was dramatic... the roll-out was a separate issue.

[n3tleylucas] 24/4/2014 23:02

No, the question was asked by festar. I merely offered an explanation.

[phsycho] 24/4/2014 22:46

jamonit, Briley is throwing the question back to Nutley, if you have
him on filter the post is confusing.

[leecoyote] 24/4/2014 22:42

Looks like Zak Mir at Spreadbet Mag has waded in here with an update on IOF -

[n3tleylucas] 24/4/2014 22:26

Digger,

The original £10m was to speed-up the roll-out. I had my doubts about that, it was clear that the real reason was to prevent a cash-flow crisis as the business model changed from outsourcing to in-house.
The problem you now have is the cash-flow is not rising fast enough to meet your targets. So my guess is a repeat £10m funding is needed.
You cannot run out of money or you will be suspended, so you must act fast, and going for a s/t fund is always a disaster because the market will take you down ahead of the next fund. So do it now, and do it properly.

[diggulden] 24/4/2014 22:16

On what basis do you think they need £10m asap Netley?

Seems well over the top to me.

Re Masurenguy, I agree completely, the change of fonts are not clever, stand out from the crowd (assuming that is your aim) because of the content of your posts, not the type of font you use. Plus it completely messes up formatting of the page on a mobile device as Fest pointed out.

[n3tleylucas] 24/4/2014 22:06

Festar,

I pointed out a while back that some ii's will only hold stocks that have a MV supra-£100m. There may be some smaller co funds who will still hold, and they could be sub-3% so you'd have to trawl through all the funds that are available to see if any hold. But it's not a science, more a labour.

[n3tleylucas] 24/4/2014 22:01

Festar,

Cheers mate, I knew I wasn't alone! lol gl & atvb

[n3tleylucas] 24/4/2014 21:54

Bad Robot is correct. You probably need another funding of £10m asap. At around 25p that's 40m new shares.

127 + 40 = 167

The fully diluted effect is therefor around 25%. If the market buys it you have a chance, if not Stena is the last resort. Bear in mind the terms of the existing Stena debt are almost certainly going to be revised against you.

[phoenixs] 24/4/2014 21:52

alfie. the idiot is filtered.

[alfie4048] 24/4/2014 21:36

Sad Robot,

Feel free to show some figures that support your views.






thought not.........

[cyberbub] 24/4/2014 21:34

I would agree if IO1 and IO2 were not generating cash, and at least some output from the others. But they are... and so is IOchem... and we have someone tough back in charge...

[ramsey11] 24/4/2014 21:33

Still here bolok breath...

[bad robot] 24/4/2014 21:29

Cyber

you really think 10% dilution?

Who goes to the market to bet only 2m?

This will not be enough to pay for tea and coffee.


You will be looking at 60% dilution.

[jonnybig] 24/4/2014 21:01

I wonder where the thread starters are nowadays, eh?:

"Andy (Sky) and Rich (24ric)"

Sound like a comedy duo, don't yer think? A bit like "Ant & Dec". Hey, maybe "Ant & Dec" could host the next Cheltenham meeting, with a great big poster of the IOF chart for the past 12 months in the background, LOL!!! (even tho' superramp will probably insist that the chart be shown "upside down", LOL!).

Tell yer what, I'd certainly invite my "family & friends" along to such an event, but I wouldn't recommend they buy IOF shares though! Now that would be REALLY daft, LOL!!

Yours
"Now where are those results?"
JonnyB:)