Tomco Energy Share Discussion Threads

[stuart little] 18/5/2021 09:37

Never fall in love with a share! This is that dirty cow girlfriend who keeps cheating on you but you stick with her because you think one day she'll make a really good Sunday dinner. Shareholder group to force change in attitude is a good idea - hard work for whoever takes it on and probably liable to fail.

[rmart] 18/5/2021 09:12

To be fair thay cant really say anything else.

[damac] 18/5/2021 09:10

Petroteq/Greenfield clearly believe that the permit they had been working under granted approval for trucked in ore from Tar Sands ii to be used.


"Greenfield strongly refutes the basis for the issuance of the CO and believes that it has been conducting operations in line with the site's existing permit held by Petroteq and the approved operational plan."

[ducky fuzz] 18/5/2021 09:10

Maybe Petroteq's check bounced.

[damac] 18/5/2021 09:09

double post

[rmart] 18/5/2021 09:07

thanks Damac, surely then this suspension does not matter that much? They have been running for 4 months so surely they should know by now if it is working correctly or not.

I hope this is just not a ruse to get out of oil sands and quietly back to Turboshale.

Nothing wuld surprise me with this BOD.

Maybe we will be in Trinidad and Tobago soon testing Turboshale?

This BOD are, and will continue to be a total shambles until someone pulls them in and sorts it out.

Of course, it could all be a jobsworth from DOGMA pumping his chest out and it could all be sorted by Friday?

[damac] 18/5/2021 09:00

rmart #18960


From the link I posted, which was the letter to DOGMA on 25th February ....




Petroteq clearly state that they have been using trucked in ore from Tar Sands II since the 11th January.






Petroteq have subsequently applied for an extension to run from 1st March continuing what they have been doing since 11th January, it appears that DOGMA have not told them they couldn't......until now.

[beetroot juice] 18/5/2021 08:48

Would Hate to be holding this when it gets suspended. Probably never come out of Suspension, will be a total Wipe out for TOMCOs Mug Punter brigade.

[the diddymen] 18/5/2021 08:41

WII fools and money are easily parted.

[fishyneck] 18/5/2021 08:33

Indeed. I'll be looking for a clear and concise forward looking RNS when and if this CO is lifted. I have my doubts about our nomad and their willingness to help to improve things here. Get over this hurdle, which will have been a shocked to all concerned, and we'll need someone within Tomco to stand up for its shareholders.

[rmart] 18/5/2021 08:28

so they wont be able to test the ore from the potential new lease? Unless of course they had already ran some through, enough to supply for the msar samples?

Who knows? Certainly TOM wont tell anything positive, always the negative.

[ducky fuzz] 18/5/2021 08:27

Another keeper damac.

[damac] 18/5/2021 08:24

I think it is definitely a shock/surprise to Petroteq/Greenfield for the reason that I posted. The assumption has obviously been that DOGMA had approved of the condition to bring in ore from Tar Sands II.

If that assumption is wrong then it will hopefully be considered as a genuine misunderstanding by Petroteq/Greenfield and the cessation order will be lifted but on the condition that any ore currently on site from Tar Sands II is taken back to Tar Sands II along with any waste products from previously processed Tar Sands II ore.

[wilson2] 18/5/2021 08:20

Why are people buying?

[ducky fuzz] 18/5/2021 08:16

Great post damac .. you always make me feel better.

[fishyneck] 18/5/2021 08:12

Thanks lotus. I'll be speaking with other holders through the day. Just to be clear I wasn't suggesting the removal of anyone. Like I said, clear heads, dust settle and answers are required about how we got in this position. Which for the record I believe will be temporary. Maybe if we do reverse the CO will be the time to get things sorted with the BOD's.

[damac] 18/5/2021 08:10

On the 25th February 2021, Petroteq submitted to DOGMA, their Notice of Intention for permit M/047/0089 in relation to extending the permit from 1st March 2021 until July 2021 in order to complete the pilot plant upgrade and carry out an extended demonstration of the process.

A requested condition of the extension by Petroteq was that ore would be brought in from the Tar Sands II site to complete the demonstration phase. DOGMA granted the permit extension.


Petroteq (and Greenfield) have obviously assumed that as the permit has been extended by DOGMA, they have approved of the conditions requested by Petroteq.

If DOGMA would not approve of bringing in the ore from the Tar Sands II site to complete the demonstration phase then why didn’t they make it clear at the time that this aspect would not be approved? Or did they?

[the diddymen] 18/5/2021 08:10

Pretty basic error but an error is only an error when it becomes known to the relevant authorities.

[rmart] 18/5/2021 08:06

No Vauch, I am not in right now

[loftus16] 18/5/2021 08:06

It can be done. It takes time and effort. A group of us called a GM at one small company calling for the CEO's resignation. We succeeded after some struggle. The GM never took place.

[jaynealex] 18/5/2021 08:03

Whatever happened to the " no surprises " mantra

How can the authorities just issue a notice and the company talk of ..meeting to sort things out

These conversations should occur before the notice is issued ... If everything in Utah is as switched on as we're led to believe

What happened to the friendly phone call from the authorities , we've got a few issues to talk through with you