Tomco Energy Share Discussion Threads

[ducky fuzz] 12/1/2023 16:28

RNS tomorrow or next week?

[vauch] 12/1/2023 15:35

And this was to be reported back once first well was up and running

[vauch] 12/1/2023 14:36

Their was a questioning regarding the pitiable seepage through the capping layer above extraction.

[theuniversal] 12/1/2023 14:05

Is it possible that the delay is actually the drilling obligation made by the valkor engineers from the late oct2022 utah oil and gas commission meeting on youtube. When the engineers said that part of the obligations of concern was only possible when 1 month into drilling and certain results may/should meet these obligations. Couldn’t remember from video if the commission exempt these obligations based on the engineers certainty that the results would be met to speed up the permission to drill based on previous drillings from other locations that matched commission criteria…imho

Just food for thought…

[the diddymen] 12/1/2023 09:08

Last weeks recovery was frothed up by the possibility of an early day RNS.

No great surprises but that one was not going to come, although as has been pointed out by the other thread there should be news on the licences before too long. Again you can have as many licences as you want but the significant development risks are the show stopper for TOM, and if they cannot develop it themselves, then it has little to no value.

In reality it is now a holding game. All the pieces are in position and it either happens or it does not. This thread is emphatically saying no, and there is now a timeline at the end of February. If the Board are unable to extract any value for the long suffering by the Feb deadline, it is difficult to see how this narrative can continue.

A new narrative and a consolidation maybe?

[lopodop] 12/1/2023 08:31

MC
Why not ask DAMAC who seems to have in-depth knowledge. View his recent contributions.

[mikecoster] 12/1/2023 06:21

Do you think Tina could get hold of John Potter, and put us out of our misery?

[ducky fuzz] 11/1/2023 16:50

Don't know if anyone else noticed but there have been two UT TRADES today.

A UT trade is a matched BUY and SELL.

At 2pm there was a 4,148,915 trade at 0.33p (price 0.32p and 0.33p)
At closing time 4.35pm there was a 3,667,825 trade at 0.34p (price 0.32p and 0.33p).

So over the offer price of 0.33p. Must be confident or daft.

[ducky fuzz] 11/1/2023 14:50

LOL

Trust me I want them to rush. DF

[rmart] 11/1/2023 14:44

They never have.

[ducky fuzz] 11/1/2023 14:37

Hi rmart .. 6 weeks till the extension runs out. No permits issued yet. They
probably don't see the need to rush. DF

[vauch] 11/1/2023 13:27

Has anyone seen this.
Shame they cant follow their own advise.

[lukeisbackontrack] 10/1/2023 15:35

I dont know about you guys but I would hate to be out this weekend.
Choo choo

[lopodop] 10/1/2023 08:43

RMART
Is an end in sight?

[ajj2003] 09/1/2023 12:34

Might explain the odd nibble or two so worth keeping an eye out for
Thanks to Talais ;)

Talais31 Dec '22 - 08:26 - 29233 of 29329
0 0 0
If no one disapproves we should get news after the 8th January,

8. Notice re: Right to Seek Judicial Review by the Utah Supreme Court or to Request Board Reconsideration: As required by Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-208(1)(e) through (g), the Board hereby notifies all parties in interest that they have the right to seek judicial review of this final Board Order in this formal adjudication by filing a timely appeal with the Utah Supreme Court within 30 days after the date that this Order is issued. Utah Code Ann. §§ 63G-4-401 and 403. As an alternative to seeking immediate judicial review, and not as a prerequisite to seeking judicial review, the Board also hereby notifies each party that it may elect to request that the Board reconsider this Order, which constitutes a final agency action of the Board. Utah Code Ann. § 63G- 4-302, entitled, “Agency Review - Reconsideration,R21; states:
(1)(a) Within 20 days after the date that an order is issued for which review by the agency or by a superior agency under Section 63G-4- 301 is unavailable, and if the order would otherwise constitute final agency action, any party may file a written request for reconsideration with the agency, stating the specific grounds upon which relief is requested.
4880-3426-7711
- 10 -

(b) Unless otherwise provided by statute, the filing of the request is not a prerequisite for seeking judicial review of the order.
(2) The request for reconsideration shall be filed with the agency and one copy shall be sent by mail to each party by the person making the request.
(3)(a) The agency head, or a person designated for that purpose, shall issue a written order granting the request or denying the request.
(b) If the agency head or the person designated for that purpose does not issue an order within 20 days after the filing of the request, the request for reconsideration shall be considered to be denied.
Id. The Board also hereby notifies the parties that Utah Admin. Code Rule R641-110-100, which is part of a group of Board rules entitled, “Rehearing and Modification of Existing Orders,” states:
Any person affected by a final order or decision of the Board may file a petition for rehearing. Unless otherwise provided, a petition for rehearing must be filed no later than the 10th day of the month following the date of signing of the final order or decision for which the rehearing is sought. A copy of such petition will be served on each other party to the proceeding no later than the 15th day of the month.
Id. See Utah Admin. Code R641-110-200 for the required contents of a petition for Rehearing. If there is any conflict between the deadline in Utah Code Ann. § 63G-4-302(1)(a) and the deadline in Utah Admin. Code R641-110-100 for moving to rehear this matter, the Board hereby rules that the later of the two deadlines shall be available to any party moving to rehear this matter. If the Board later denies a timely petition for rehearing, the party may still seek judicial review of the Order by perfecting a timely appeal with the Utah Supreme Court within 30 days thereafter
Talais31 Dec '22 - 08:28 - 29234 of 29329
0 1 0
hxxps://fs.ogm.utah.gov/bbooks/2022/10_Oct/Docket/2022-024_471-02_HSOandACOil/2022-024_20221208.1_FindingsOfFactConclusionsOfLawAndOrder.pdf

[ducky fuzz] 09/1/2023 10:15

Bit of a Zzzzz fest at the moment.
Still share price up so that's a plus.
Soon be back to the placing price.

[ducky fuzz] 09/1/2023 09:37

Is that 4 mill buy rmart topping up / buying back? DF

[fenners66] 09/1/2023 09:18

So the cease to trade order placed on Petroteq for failing to file its accounts is in place. Their shares are suspended.

They were of course touted for the past several years on the gamblers board as

1, a source of massive "investment " profits that were to be re-invested in TOM , through their fantasy share offer that never happened.

2, They are the source of the CORT tech , which since Greenfield are involved with (remember TOM were originally not involved at all , it was Valkor , whom TOM joined in with ) is going to change the world and make TOM's fortune.... BUT now 2 years later PQE tells its shareholders it is seeking $18m to try and make the Tech commercial.

3, If the funding required for a cort plant to be built is arranged for Greenfield then Valkor get 29% of TOM for their giveaway of Greenfield....

We have been sceptical all along

Said the fantasy bid was never going to happen - it did not.
Said the CORT tech was never proven as commercial - by PQE's own RNS it is not
Said the funds $200m + for a CORT plant were never going to get raised - 18m later not a sniff - will never happen.
Actually posted that PQE had ceased quarterly filing and questioned why some time ago - well no filing accounts at all says ..... something is wrong.....

Valkor did nothing with CORT for over a year , until it got TOM to fund it, then abandoned the JV as soon as it looked like they may have to place capital at risk, far better to work at arms length with TOM

PQE is a basket case despite spending over $100m

But TOM was taken in and burned another £1.5m - will any banker seriously put a large sum at risk , given the situation here..?

Don't worry gamblers , its time for a change of narrative.....

[lopodop] 09/1/2023 08:52

RMART
During this period of news blackout, TOM WILL BE PAYING its 4 directors. What precisely do you think each has / is doing for their emoluments. Isn’t there a case for restricting their emoluments until news breaks? What exactly is JP up to - he cannot be negotiating every day of each week. Is he in fact doing anything apart from sitting in his office, waiting for something to happen?
If TOM does pull off some amazing arrangement, then fine but even you and others including Vauch are not confident and end up having supported 4 people financially for how long. This is called realistic thinking and unless somebody can make an authoritive statement this week what is your take?

[rmart] 08/1/2023 18:54

I will answer that at the end of this coming week.