Tomco Energy Share Discussion Threads

[damac] 23/8/2021 17:25

It could also only be $85m (see the detail of the estimate) though I'm content in my research to stick with the middle ground of $110m. Said research involves talking to people who are very knowledgeable on the subject ;o)

[busamitch] 23/8/2021 17:25

Soon? This is doing the rounds on the PQE boards:

[vauch] 23/8/2021 17:11

When will PQE be back in play

[goulding1215] 23/8/2021 16:52

As usual in the states, with any business deal the lawyers win.

[lopodop] 23/8/2021 15:56

Same source as Reform used.

[wilson2] 23/8/2021 15:41

Hi ducky, where do you think the £110.000.000 will come from?

[fenners66] 23/8/2021 14:18

It may need (see the detail of the estimate) about $135m or more.

[damac] 23/8/2021 13:40

Ducky,

Yes, to me, it would be a very strong signal that the $110m has been agreed in principal for the reason that AJJ states in his post. Others will no doubt think different.

Re announcements made together....possibly not as it is a bit of a chicken & egg situation. Say for example, the lenders say....

'We cannot hand over $110m because, as yet, you have not purchased a suitable site that will guarantee longevity to the project and thus satisfy us as lenders that funds will be available to pay back the finance. So here is what we will do. We are prepared to reach an agreement in principle where once you purchase your initial 10% of Tar Sands II (which by doing so gives you the exclusivity to purchase the remaining 90%) we will formalise the release of $110m to Greenfield.'


So, with my scenario above, there would be a period of time between the 10% land purchase and the advance of $110m due to it having to be formalised by the lenders which would mean back and forward between solicitors etc.

[ducky fuzz] 23/8/2021 13:20

You would think that the two announcements could / should be made together.

Ie we have got the 110 million finance agreed and have paid the required 10 per cent
deposit. DF

[ajj2003] 23/8/2021 13:18

Cannot see any scenario in which a competent company would pay the 10% without first nailing down the remaining 90% finance watertight. If they do not then they should not be running a company period

[ducky fuzz] 23/8/2021 12:41

Thanks damac and you think that payment of the 10 per cent signals that the
110 million finance is nailed on.

[damac] 23/8/2021 12:38

I am personally expecting/hoping for......


News on the 10% initial land purchase at Tar Sands II by the 1st September.

News on the oil sample sent to a major refinery for analysis by the AGM.

News on the QFI lab analysis by the AGM.

[ducky fuzz] 23/8/2021 12:31

I just wish we had some idea on what news we are expecting and when we will get that news.

Be good to get the feedback from those attending the AGM.

I'd expect news before the AGM.

[ajj2003] 23/8/2021 12:28

Thanks for the clarifications damac, most appreciated. Should be an interesting few weeks ahead ;)

[ducky fuzz] 23/8/2021 12:27

Thanks damac. Always appreciate your input.

[damac] 23/8/2021 12:25

Ducky,

In addition to the above, that is why I have always said before that there is currently no urgency (from Greenfield) with regards to QFI/MSAR as the MSAR kit needs to be trialed (after positive lab results) on a live plant that is processing Tar Sands II ore. As things currently stand, there will be no live plant processing Tar Sands II ore until the one hoping to be built by Greenfield. So in that regard, QFI/MSAR is largely irrelevant to Greenfield at present and explains why there was no urgency to get the oil samples to them.

[damac] 23/8/2021 12:13

Ducky #21571

I cannot assume how essential it is to Petroteq.

It is however not essential to Greenfield. The Greenfield FEED study has already been completed and should, by now, be being scrutinised by potential lenders of the finance required for the $110m plant. The FEED study will only be based on quality of oil produced to date by processing Tar Sands II ore through POSP. The FEED study cannot make any assumptions on potential improvement to quality of oil produced via the MSAR kit. Therefore, QFI and their potential benefits are not essential to the Greenfield business model. If it can be proven between now and the construction of the Greenfield plant that the MSAR kit can produce higher quality oil then it would be considered as an added bonus to the Greenfield business model.

[ducky fuzz] 23/8/2021 11:53

I think damac said John Potter is currently in Utah. Hardly Vegas.

[lopodop] 23/8/2021 11:02

Goulding1125
Whilst waiting and seeing, if you haven't already done so read up on Groach and Castro and cogitate!

[lopodop] 23/8/2021 10:55

JAYNEALEX
Say you had good news to deliver, would you hold back or publish at the earliest chance.

[goulding1215] 23/8/2021 10:52

Jay, they are on holiday! Stuff shareholder communication.

[jaynealex] 23/8/2021 10:20

TOM should be clarifying what is going on here ...and rapidly !!

Ducky ..as Damac has pointed out quite a few times , greenfield wouldn't pay the 10% deposit on the land lease , if they didn't have the whole finance lined up , and correct , the assumption is they have the funds to pay the 10% already

[ducky fuzz] 23/8/2021 09:36

Is the QFI business model essential to what Greenfield and Petroteq do.

[damac] 23/8/2021 09:34

It what way Ducky?

[ducky fuzz] 23/8/2021 09:31

Are QFI potentially doing business with Petroteq at all.