Tomco Energy Share Discussion Threads

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 10:23

This is from MCW ENERGY GROUP LIMITED
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
August 31, 2015 and 2014

"On December 29, 2010, the Company acquired a mineral lease (the “MCW Mineral Lease”), covering 1,138 acres in Uintah County, Utah, for the extraction of bituminous or asphaltic sands (tar sands). The MCW Mineral Lease is valid until August 11, 2018 and has rights for extensions based on reasonable production"

It Was valued at $1,976,569

But in 2014

"On the change in the intended use of the mineral lease during the year ended August 31, 2014, the Company reduced the carrying value of the mineral lease to its net recoverable value of $nil by recording an impairment of $1,976,569 in the consolidated statement of (income) loss"

Its hard to define , but it seems change of use was to a Mining and Mineral lease and oil production....

I have to question was this a move away from Tar Sands and into say drilling for oil on the same land ?
If so that bares resemblance to the current plan for Greenfield ....

[ducky fuzz] 01/10/2021 10:14

Yes £2,000 better off. I am feeling very pleased with myself. Until then all my investment decisions have been screw-ups apart from my buying TOMco at 0.5199p of course. Plus all in an ISA so no tax. Although the downside is I can't spend it.

So TOMco has been good to me. So far. Let's hope it continues. DF

[rmart] 01/10/2021 10:04

well done DF. you made a few quid.

There will be more like you as the weeks pass by. Many must have though it would go back to the 50s but it didnt. Now anticipation will kick in again over the next few weeks and many will come back. IMO.

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 10:04

There is some other curious stuff in the MCW energy financial statements.... wonder if anyone on the other thread dare read it ?Err sorry meant to ask if they have time to read it ..

[ducky fuzz] 01/10/2021 09:59

Hi rmart .. The 2 x 1 mill buys are mine and are a result of me selling 2 mill at 0.76p in a panic on Thursday. I quickly read the TOMco rns and saw 6 week delay and was convinced there would be a sell off.

So I'm back to my 4 mill holding.

I was going to wait but the selling has totally dried up and I sense that a further fall is unlikely.

I have read and re-read the rns and proactive article and other than the up to 6 week delay it does sound very positive.

As always with TOMco there are more questions than answers after the rns. DF

[stuart little] 01/10/2021 09:51

I think there's a sponsored stupidity going on over 'there'. 13 posts in an hour saying fundamentally nothing. Finding out Pqe once changed its name, comparing apples with sparrows on leases and not knowing Turboshale and RF and fundamentally the same thing. I could go on but thefirst tee beckons. Beautiful day for it.

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 09:49

Actually its $24,000 an acre, but it does not look cheap compared to the other acreage we have seen.

[wilson2] 01/10/2021 09:47

£25,000 an acre , that's ridiculous, you could buy half of Scotland for £110,000,000

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 09:46

But the not so good news for Petroteq is that their shareholders retained losses were

May 31 2021 ..... ($97,047,409)
all that time and cash spent , when all they had to do , was get Valkor in and have TOM spend $1.5m on the plant.....

[rmart] 01/10/2021 09:45

fenners66 is clearly losing the plot. I dont know if i should feel sorry for him or not.

[rmart] 01/10/2021 09:44

ANYONE LOOKING IN HERE, WELCOME TO THE PATHETIC FREAK SHOW, STARRING, THE DIDDYMEN, FENNERS, LOPODOP AND WILSON2.

Just look at him, post after post after post. This guy is clearly fixated and needs some help. I dont know if he thinks the more he posts the more people listen but he is madly wrong. What a fool.

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 09:42

Don't worry though , apparently nuclear fusion is only 20 years away....

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 09:41

Sorry rmart those are all "Facts" from the Petroteq public record....

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 09:40

"Petroteq Energy Inc.
(Formerly MCW Energy Group Limited)
Consolidated Financial Statements
Years ended August 31, 2017 and 2016"


Oh look its our friends Petroteq !!

And they have been working on the same since at least 2012 ...

Still not managed actually doing 500bpd?

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 09:38

Gone on 3 guesses ....

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 09:38

BUT who are this outfit MCWO ?

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 09:37

"MCW ENERGY GROUP LIMITED
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
August 31, 2016 and 2015"

"MCWO is engaged in a tar sands mining and oil processing operation, using a closed-loop solvent based extraction system that recovers bitumen from surface mining, and has recently completed the construction of the first phase of an oil processing plant in the Asphalt Ridge area of Uintah, Utah. The Company is currently completing an expansion of the oil processing facility which will increase the production capacity to 500 barrels per day"

Wow 500 bpd who would have thought it ?

Since 2015 ?
But same tech since 2012 (at least)

Wow if ONLY Tom had known about this all along , maybe they could have invested £20m in that instead...

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 09:35

I guess when your business is in Utah after tar sands / shale etc. you may be aware of the neighbours....

perhaps ..

"Financial Statements
August 31, 2012"

"MCW Oil Sands Recovery, LLC (“MCWO”) is a tar sands mining and oil processing operation using a closed-loop solvent based extraction system that recovers bitumen from surface mining. The company is based in Uintah, Utah. MCWO holds a working interest in mineral rights within the Asphalt Ridge area, acquired from its 49% shareholder, Amerisands, LLC. MCWO is in the process of developing an oil processing plant on the property in Uintah, Utah"


Sounds familiar ?

That is the earliest set of accounts available to me online.....

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 09:32

Just out of interest , HOW did Tom get involved with the CORT process again ?

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 09:29

"stuart little
1 Oct '21 - 09:25 - 23000 of 23000

Yes not long until the land deal, which will prove excellent value for money, is concluded. The anticipated reserves, first class location, all the necessary infrastructure in place, permits secured and now interest from our neighbours. I’m sure all will agree it’s going to be a shrewd bit of business by John."


LOL !

At least that proves you have a sense of humour.

rmart on the contrary I have never advised / suggested anyone buys/sells/holds here, everyone makes their own decisions.

If however You view the facts as presented from the RNS's as negative, take that up with the directors involved......

[shaunx] 01/10/2021 09:27

Anyone interested in Dancing around a piece of broccoli this weekend join here.

[stuart little] 01/10/2021 09:25

Yes not long until the land deal, which will prove excellent value for money, is concluded. The anticipated reserves, first class location, all the necessary infrastructure in place, permits secured and now interest from our neighbours. I'm sure all will agree it's going to be a shrewd bit of business by John.

[rmart] 01/10/2021 09:19

2 x 1m buys and a few other buys on AQSE gone through.

[rmart] 01/10/2021 09:18

ANYONE LOOKING IN HERE, WELCOME TO THE PATHETIC FREAK SHOW, STARRING, THE DIDDYMEN, FENNERS, LOPODOP AND WILSON2.

Another constant repeat from fenners, who holds no shares by the way, but posts on a VERY regular basis on why you should not buy TOM.

[fenners66] 01/10/2021 09:12

No where else have I seen the question asked , why is this land going to cost

$24,000 an acre ?

Shareholders why are you not demanding answers - with FACTS

Why is there not a table of land cost per acre comparisons ?

We easily found the price Valkor are paying HCD. EASILY

So why not have TOM highlighted their price vs all other local claims and Show why $24,000 an acre is a bargain ?

This is the most MASSIVE investment this company has ever planned to make - with no explanation.
Just taken as read that the shareholders (sheep?) will just accept any proposition without scrutiny.

WHY buy the option in the first place - an option some never believed could be kept to - 4 months to buy. If BB posters this far away from the coal face came to that conclusion why did the board not say ? We have 4 months to pay but we might need 5 or 6 or 6.5 or....

When much bigger quoted , profitable companies on the market make MUCH smaller % investments , they come to the market and explain in detail with comparison NPV or PE or other analysis.

This seems (with little to go on ) like a massive overpayment - for something they as of now cannot do anything with......

Shareholders Own the company they should be asking for facts.