We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tomco Energy Plc | TOM | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 0.0385 | 08:00:22 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.0385 | 0.0385 | 0.0385 | 0.0385 | 0.0385 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| OIL & GAS PRODUCERS |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 18/4/2024 14:42 by the diddymen Fenners, another company which some members of the other thread were involved with was CICC. Not the bona fide Chinese CICC. The company was delisted some years back. Most of the assets appear to have disappeared or never existed. It is not even clear that CICC have a shareholder register. Shareholders have been left in limbo and I suspect are unable to crystalise CGT losses.The difference with TOM is that the most likely scenario is insolvency within the next couple of months, and that will at least generate CGT losses. The highly unlikely alternative option is a placing which will obliterate existing shareholders. TOM is only marginally better than CICC. |
Posted at 12/4/2024 22:40 by 1dutchman Amazing. Over the last 7+ years that Mr Groat has been Chairman of Tom, shareholders have seen the company's value drop 98%. Groat has been Chair of Harland & Wolff for 5+ years, during which time that company is down 85%. There seems to be a pattern here. Will the H&W shareholders give him another two years to match his record at Tom? |
Posted at 29/3/2024 12:12 by the diddymen In 2023 TOM allowed the shares to be suspended in the knowledge that they were on the cusp of another fund raise.In 2024 TOM have had to accept a qualification of the accounts - presumably because they do not have the ingredients of a bail out package in place. If they had any substantive financing package for TSHII close to completion they would be in a position to go to the markets for temporary financing of working capital. The Chairman writes: "As I write, we believe we are edging closer to securing the requisite funding after many months of effort and patient negotiation." 'Believe' is a very difficult word to challenge in the courts. On this thread we 'believe' that TOM has been a narrative company for many years. On outcomes we have been proven right time and time again. The Chairman refers to months - they have been negotiating for years and it is appropriate at some point to say 'this one will never get over the line'. That should have happened years back, but this is AIM and in this set of results the Directors received £381k (2022 - £362k) in remuneration. For avoidance of doubt the current value of shares owned by Directors is £15. That speaks volumes for the confidence of the Directors in the narrative. |
Posted at 27/2/2024 21:57 by fenners66 goulding121527 Feb '24 - 21:41 - 31270 of 31270 "The TOM machine produces" No shame , just bare faced lies. TOM has no machine , it does not own a machine and never did - it was the commercially failed CORT machine that PQE (how are they not in liquidation having not released accounts etc?) always owned, TOM just genourously donated money to it. |
Posted at 27/2/2024 21:41 by goulding1215 A little bit deserted over here. So, while everybody is unhappy with proceedings so far, myself included but I do see some hope for the future. Of course it will all depend on the bond maturing for want of a better word, and cash in the bank. We all regard TOM as an oil company. Well it isn’t, it is a sand company, because the sand is worth more than the oil. Why? Because there is a world wide shortage of sand particularly silica for glass. The TOM machine produces 1.5 barrels of quality sand for every barrel of oil. Currently oil is selling at 77$ pho. Sand is selling at about 85$ per barrel.Tom will be unique in its revenue for one machine, maybe 2? We know that TOM Owns a lot of oil. Who knows what the sand is worth? The sand is not going away, been there a few millions of years, and with a world-wide shortage. There is no oil shortage even with Russia sanctions. So, I see the sand being dominant in the company’s future. The BOD actually said at the AGM 2 years ago “we are a sand company where the byproduct is oil. If we can get this funding sorted, I am hopeful that TOM has a bright future. |
Posted at 22/2/2024 11:04 by 1dutchman To dig a bit further into the seeming success of AIM narrative companies, is it better to have one consistent story with multiple failures to deliver? TOM would imply it is. Are shareholders are more likely to stay loyal despite the same repeated lies because they think they understand the plot? TOM is a good example of this, continuing to be propped up for 4-5 years on the same story, despite an abject failure to deliver. Logic would say this company should have disappeared long ago. But it isn't logical. Taken over an even longer period, CORT was really just an extension of the RF and other novel extraction methods that has kept this company meagerly funded for so long. Would it have worked as well if TOM had instead, say, ditched Utah after RF and turned to offshore Falklands, subsequently ditched that and instead tried their hand at the North Sea? I doubt it. Sorry, I'm rambling, but it really is an interesting phenomenon that has drained a lot of pockets. Quack doctors and snake oil were eventually (mostly) finished by regulation. Where's the AIM Regulation to protect investors from quack companies? |
Posted at 20/2/2024 18:02 by 1dutchman The facts are quite simple. TOM's CEO has no industry experience. Nil, none, zero. He trained in catering and the last value he created was pouring a beer at Wembley. He spent the last three years being led by the nose by Valkor's Steve Byle, who had his own agenda that certainly was not consistent with that of TOM's shareholders. To be fair, after picking TOM's pockets in order to keep food on the table during COVID, Byle subsequently tried to help Potter out by giving him a contract to engage with Utah officials re: leases and permits. Strange, then, that Potter never showed up in any of those videos of the Utah Board reviewing those permits. But Byle is no idiot - he knew all along that CORT wasn't commercial and he eventually had to dispense with the relationship with Greenfield and TOM. And now he has new relationships with Ecoteq and Triad and has left poor JP on his tod. |
Posted at 10/1/2024 06:43 by the diddymen 1d, going back to the link up between Valkor and TOM, we said at the time that the only contribution of TOM to the party was that they had the capacity to raise money because of their listing. From the latest raises, £100k and £50k you can see why Valkor moved on.While CORT is dead, third party drilling in proximity to TOM's site might be the equivalent of a defibrillator to TOM's narrative, and why Mr Jones has kept the corpse alive for a few more months. |
Posted at 04/12/2023 13:02 by fenners66 So the end of November reached and no newsof course not , there was never going to be. Now according to the AGM reports they will have to come up with another story. As I said I looked at their AGM notes and they laid out so many red flags but (maybe not surprisingly) the gamblers did not pick up on them. So (I have been asking myself if I can be bothered) if we look at them (always assuming their notes were accurate). Their notes - "Not been using Petroteq process for a couple of years. Nothing wrong with it but we're now using a better solvent and have made technical changes to the materials used in the process. There is no IP impact with Petroteq." Now this is the CORT process that used next to Zero solvent as a consumable It was going to give oil and clean sand. It's what TOM spent $1.5m on and as said on here it was NEVER proven as commercial. This was supposed to be a game changer ... but its been abandoned without an RNS to explain why they spent all that cash and moreover since it was obvious from the start that a CORT plant would never happen and Valkor would never get 29% of TOM ..... again their AGM notes " "Qn: With new 'go it ourselves' funding route, will Valkor still be entitled to 29% of Tomco? JP: That was based on where Tomco were 2 years ago. With this latest reserves based funding, it WILL be 100% that Tomco retains." obvious no CORT no 29%. But do the gamblers question? No./ You burned millions $'s and no questions asked. Dumped Petroteq and no RNS - despite some on here trumpeting PQE were going to sell more CORT licenses including to that ....err really credible - Netoil - ha ha no movement on that either. TOM's cash has dried up now PQE delisting and refusing to file accounts , CEO resigned All flagged from the start on here. PQE takeover at 200% premium - fantasy never happened..... none of it. But they swallowed everything TOM said - now they just accept that TOM has moved on to an unknown alternative. Dream on gamblers. Where have we been wrong ? |
Posted at 09/9/2023 11:54 by the diddymen Lopo,I have taken a look at the Active Investors now. First observation, a small observation, is that TOM is reduced to using a Laptop camera (or was it a phone?) That aside the whole body language, the feel, is about another placing of some form. How they are going to do it I don't know. Over the last few years I have had a sneaking admiration for John Potter's ability to keep the corpse going by filling the biscuit tin. Financing this project is a completely different kettle of fish. I re-iterate the stance that we have taken on this BB. Even if the project were sound and proven the values are too great for TOM (alias John Potter). Going from a B/S that has the contents of the biscuit tin to $250m plus is just not feasible. TOM have no technical expertise. TOM have no legal expertise. TOM are operating out of jurisdiction. TOM have no market expertise. TOM have no operational expertise. For a funder this equates to Corporate Governance risk, Financial Risk, Operational risk, Technical risk, Legal risk, Sales/Marketing risk. No risk based return on capital is ever going to work. Every alarm bell will be ringing. In my view TOM are planning to get another placing away. It may involve some potential 'opportunity' for existing investors, but in reality the company will be transferred to a new group of shareholders if JP can 'do it again'. The offer on the placing will be that they have potential funders, and then as usual 'nothing can be guaranteed'. No doubt the placing will involve a massive consolidation as predicted by thesageofsaint. Lopo. Not long now. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
