SDV - SciDev Limited

[juiceman]

Further to comments made by Wintermute and myself of late.
What could make this sp move outside of a bomb
1 or 2 announcements, if good about AMMTEC report: Burnie Plant.
BSM processing agreement,(or jv on that issue surprise?
Both ann are overdue, so when are they likely to report.
Consider this:
Staff and Consultant Option Plan. There are 6.6 million options due to expire on 16 July 07 with an exercise price of 0.25 cents, ( so if they wanted those options to close in the money they had better blow their trumpet before the 16th July or risk having some not too happy employee"s or consultants

Last yr in their annaul report it was stated that they were involved in discussions with many company"s re licencing jv"s etc.
Their word"s: discussions so far held may be expected to reach announcable outcomes during 2007 financial yr.

Anyone like to write a put option against INL shares as at Friday"s closing price?
Good luck to all INL holders

 

[Col Lector]

Greetings Juiceman,
noticed you have more than the average enthusiasm re INL.
Obsessive even...?
Certainly no criticism....INL reps my single largest holding at the moment. However, just wanted to caution you .....keep a gambling counsellor close....you/we are now apparently able to borrow against INL shares currently held....collateral rating of around 45-55% available through the new MacBank "Prime" offering*.
The word "exponential" comes to mind!

* me no MacBank stooge

 

[chops_a_must]

Just going to show you that I have some objectivity when it comes to stocks, I am now short term bullish on INL although I disagree on Winter's trend lines. The new higher low looks nice, and the reversal on the candlesticks also look positive. I think it is going to face problems getting through the low 20s as the fibs suggest (given they have some validity here). But above 25c it should do alright. It still wouldn't be one I would be prepared to trade, but hopefully there is some comfort ahead for long suffering holders of this one.

Cheers,
Chops.

 

[Sean K]

Just going to show you that I have some objectivity when it comes to stocks, I am now short term bullish on INL although I disagree on Winter's trend lines. The new higher low looks nice, and the reversal on the candlesticks also look positive. I think it is going to face problems getting through the low 20s as the fibs suggest (given they have some validity here). But above 25c it should do alright. It still wouldn't be one I would be prepared to trade, but hopefully there is some comfort ahead for long suffering holders of this one.
Cheers,
Chops.

Chops, I'm with you on the higher lows. This is potentially starting to turn. Looking for a break through 20 for a re-entry now for a short term trade pending market, etc. Once stochs turn, MACD hitting zero on the up, breaking 20, I'm ready for a high conviction trade on this. Might bomb as well. This has disappointed a few times.

 

[juiceman]

Greetings Juiceman,
noticed you have more than the average enthusiasm re INL.
Obsessive even...?
Certainly no criticism....INL reps my single largest holding at the moment. However, just wanted to caution you .....keep a gambling counsellor close....you/we are now apparently able to borrow against INL shares currently held....collateral rating of around 45-55% available through the new MacBank "Prime" offering*.
The word "exponential" comes to mind!

* me no MacBank stooge

Thanks for your comments, sensible words of wisdom for all.
Being relatively new to the forum I appreciate any return post as it means people actually bother to read them.
Obsessive enthusiasm... just have to agree with you on that one (ask my wife)
Normally I trade most days based on emails I might recieve, market trends or charts I follow on companys I've traded many times before (in and out in one day or before the weekend) not much fun, and high risk.
INL has just got stuck in my craw I guess.
I am overweight in INL by numbers, but certainly not by value no leverage at all. As per an earlier post, I have sold the family's kennel with dog to cash coverters, but they gave me cash for a further purchase on Monday no dept.
To me the forum is a great place to relax and share your own opinion(anonymously) with other like interested people).

PS i don't now much about any other company, I just trade them for the moment

 

[wintermute]

Hey juiceman, I guess we will see whether we keep our heads tomorrow or not My chart has tended to polarize people, as I'm stretching conventional charting somewhat, Chops is most certainly not the first to disagree with my trend lines I think it has a heap more validity than the very dubious first one I posted though, but it is interesting to see how it has pretty much stayed where I picked it right back then, and has been getting more and more (IMO) validity...

I think It will be full steam ahead before too long

Tony.

 

[jman2007]

Evening all,

Thought I'd throw my 2-cents into the now legendary INL debate!

I was trawling thru some previous INL announcements and I came across a rather interesting statement made my Jervois Mining Limited (2nd April) re the failed JV with INL, which read as follows (quote):

"...INL's metal recovery technology is unable to economically recover precious metal from the Hellyer tailings and is only able to recover zinc metal. INL's merger proposal would only have been worthy of consideration if the precious metals were capable of being recovered.." (end quote)

INL immediately launched a strong rebuke to reassure their shareholders.

Would someone be able to shed some light on this? Are Jervois aware of some inherent failings in the INL technology, or was it an unjustified and inaccurate statement to make? Perhaps someone with more techinical expertise than myself can clear this up for me, I am not all that familiar with Intec.

Apologies is this issue was dealt with in an earlier post.

Cheers
Jman2007

 

[Enumerate]

Evening all,
Would someone be able to shed some light on this? Are Jervois aware of some inherent failings in the INL technology, or was it an unjustified and inaccurate statement to make? Perhaps someone with more techinical expertise than myself can clear this up for me, I am not all that familiar with Intec.
Jman2007

The Jervois statement is completely wrong, in all of it's phases.

Not only has the Intec process proven high yeilds, in terms of metals extracted, but the process itself has proven highly efficient (Worley Parsons BFS - bankable feasibility study) in terms of energy and environmental residue. This means that as a closed system the Intec process simply produces inert, solid waste and not highly toxic liquid waste as with conventional leaching. It actually generates some of the reagents it uses as process by products - hence the efficiency!

(The BFS has been received by the company who are pleased, apparently, with the prognosis. It has not been released publicly but, apparently, a public "summary" is being contemplated.)

Intec have proven the process on Cu, Au, Zn ore bodies. It is important to understand that the process is not a fixed an rigid thing. Depending on the chemistry of the ore body and the metal targets - the process can be changed and tweaked. I'd speculate that the thermodynamics of the process are more important than the "mass equations".

It is important to understand that Intec did not offer "the process" to Jervois. Rather, they offered the skills, expertise and access to the Burnie scale plant to work out the best approach for the Ni laterite ore body. The fact that Jervois directors did not seem to fully understand what was on offer is more a testament to the ego centric nature of Jervois board decision making than the technical merits of the Intec process.

BTW - you will see the hydromet part of the Intec process working at Hellyer as part of the IHRP (Intec Hellyer Residues Project) - processing Zeehan slag, EAFD and BSM ore.

 

[wintermute]

my guess is that JRV picked up on some of the stuff in the announcements from last year about how the gold circuit in the Burnie Demo plant had not performed to design specifications. This is something I have meant to follow up on but haven't, as there was never any (that I found) clear indication from Intec as to what happened here or what the implications were... I suspect that they decided that the zinc lead and silver were the most important going forward (for the hellyer tailings) and did not continue to optimize the gold and copper circuits as getting stuff moving was more important (as they were already more than six months behind when they finally announced steady state)...

I've been speculating for a while that part of the reason for the "semi comercial" operation of the Burnie Demo plant, may in fact be to tweak the gold and copper circuits whilst also producing zn and pb. Thus as has been posted the demo plant will be cost neutral (ie roughly running at break even) This would allow for R&D to be done effectively at no cost.

Tony.

 

[juiceman]

mute re our heads, you did say you would go first didn't YOU?
Ps dog's not happy either.

 

[youngneil]

juice you'll get your dog back.

my charts as tony would know says next week is the week nad this week is the start.

they thing with charts is patience. what we know is most indicators are bullish.

i dont really trade candlesticks, so i tend to stay away from the day to day stuff. from my experience candlesticks are only best suited to very high volume stocks (at the least) and forex, where the prices are not as easily manipulated.

regards

youngneil

 

[Sean K]

they thing with charts is patience. what we know is most indicators are bullish.
i dont really trade candlesticks, so i tend to stay away from the day to day stuff. from my experience candlesticks are only best suited to very high volume stocks (at the least) and forex, where the prices are not as easily manipulated.

regards

youngneil

Not sure what you're on about here Neil. Are you looking at the same stock I am?

Nothing bullish about this at the moment, except it's made a higher low. Might have found a bottom at 15 (I anticipated 16 to be the bottom) MACD neutral, Stochastics bearish, sp under 200d ma. Still looks vulnerable to fail under 20 cents to me. Needs a positive day ot two to gain momentum, and for those indicators to turn more bullish.

 

[wintermute]

yeah juiceman I'll go first, I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong, but you we need to wait till Friday for me to admit it, as my chart is weekly, and it could go to 12c during the week but if it closes at 20c or higher then my trend line still stands and if it were to go to 22c then I'd say we have a very bullish trend reversal signal

Hi Kennas, it is the weekly chart you should be looking at for bullish indicators the daily turned bearish towards the end of last week. A program I have been playing with (it analyzes the indicators to give bullish bearish calls) says that on the weekly chart for INL only MACD is bearish, it has 14 other indicators it thinks are bullish... I haven't used it long enough to know whether to believe it however for the daily it now thinks four are bullish and 12 bearish with a 63 percent probability of further declines.

BTW Youngneils chart is a MUCH longer timeframe, and is using (I think) pattern analysis more than traditional T/A methods

Tony.

 

[youngneil]

Not sure what you're on about here Neil. Are you looking at the same stock I am?

Nothing bullish about this at the moment, except it's made a higher low. Might have found a bottom at 15 (I anticipated 16 to be the bottom) MACD neutral, Stochastics bearish, sp under 200d ma. Still looks vulnerable to fail under 20 cents to me. Needs a positive day ot two to gain momentum, and for those indicators to turn more bullish.

hi kennas

i am looking at weekly charts MACD is tending to almost perfect there.

also bolinger band is tightening (however this only indicates spike, doenst tell you which direction)

regards

youngneil

 

[Sean K]

hi kennas

i am looking at weekly charts MACD is tending to almost perfect there.

also bolinger band is tightening (however this only indicates spike, doenst tell you which direction)

regards

youngneil

Cheers Neil. You should start posting your charts up! Things would look different on a weekly perhaps. Post it up!

 

[youngneil]

Cheers Neil. You should start posting your charts up! Things would look different on a weekly perhaps. Post it up!

here goes kennas
the next chart will explain the blue and yellow lines

i dont know all teh technicals of TA. i just know how to use the indicators etc. so i cant get into a duel about definitions etc

regards

youngneil

 

[youngneil]

another one to explain teh support lines

WME and ENG once showed the same characteristics

again kennas, i'm not as knowledgeable abt charts as you guys are. i just want to make quick money. i have been inand out of INL for a quick buck. but i always believe int he story, its just that i dont believe i can make money if i just hope i'm right.

i use other indicators too. but this is just to illustrate the time frame of my charts.

i personally thought next week will be turning point for INL. but it may not be.

regards

youngneil

 

[Sean K]

here goes kennas
the next chart will explain the blue and yellow lines

i dont know all teh technicals of TA. i just know how to use the indicators etc. so i cant get into a duel about definitions etc

regards

youngneil

Thanks Neil. Interesting that on the weekly it's clearly bounced off 15.5/16. MACD and BB is converging, but change isn't imminent IMO. Needs a few more positive days to confirm any up trend. Getting in now would be fraught with danger for short/medium term trading IMO. Long term fundamentals are up for argument - as is the case.

 

[youngneil]

Thanks Neil. Interesting that on the weekly it's clearly bounced off 15.5/16. MACD and BB is converging, but change isn't imminent IMO. Needs a few more positive days to confirm any up trend. Getting in now would be fraught with danger for short/medium term trading IMO. Long term fundamentals are up for argument - as is the case.

i strongly agree. as you can see jun06 to sep06 it traded sideways for a long time.

charts fail sometimes. nothing is 100% fool proof.

i think if you follow the market action (as i have for the last month, on annual leave! but back to work next week), in the last few days a few "traders" have tried to anticipate this big rise and have had to bail out (t+1, 2, 3 imo). i ahve always bought INL with what I am willing to hold. since i got in sub10c and sold 27, 24, 22 on support failures, i've made the point that my stop loss is half the profit i made intially.

regards

youngneil


regards

youngneil

 

[jman2007]

Cheers to Enumerate and Wintermute for their explanation re the INL metals recovery process.

I certainly detected some "sour grapes" undertones from the Jervois Directors, they clearly didn't seem to appreciate the fundamentals of what they were being offered by INL.

Good luck to the long-suffering masses who own this one, all the fundamentals seem to be there (top notch management, tech expertise etc..) but this bad-boy refuses to budge from the 15-16 c range!

I'll be following developments closely....