ADVFN Logo ADVFN

We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now

Toplists

It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Hot Features

Registration Strip Icon for discussion Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.

TOM Tomco Energy Plc

0.0325
-0.01 (-23.53%)
12 Apr 2024 - Closed
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Tomco Energy Plc LSE:TOM London Ordinary Share IM00BZBXMN96 ORD NPV
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  -0.01 -23.53% 0.0325 45,030,288 15:48:36
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
0.03 0.035 0.0425 0.0325 0.0425
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
Drilling Oil And Gas Wells -690k -0.0002 -1.50 956.22k
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
16:19:30 O 23,500,000 0.04 GBX

Tomco Energy (TOM) Latest News

Tomco Energy (TOM) Discussions and Chat

Tomco Energy (TOM) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type

Tomco Energy (TOM) Top Chat Posts

Top Posts
Posted at 14/4/2024 09:20 by Tomco Energy Daily Update
Tomco Energy Plc is listed in the Drilling Oil And Gas Wells sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker TOM. The last closing price for Tomco Energy was 0.04p.
Tomco Energy currently has 3,187,408,610 shares in issue. The market capitalisation of Tomco Energy is £956,223.
Tomco Energy has a price to earnings ratio (PE ratio) of -1.50.
This morning TOM shares opened at 0.04p
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 28/3/2024 15:10 by the diddymen
One last gasp - accept a material uncertainty on going concern clause in the audit sign off. The bottom line is that if the company do not dilute the living hell out of the share price, going concern is not relevant. Any new capital can now dictate their terms, so sub 0.0001 on the way. Shareholders all had their chance to liquidate some capital prior to this announcement today - too late now.

"The forecast, which includes all commitments at the date of this report and reflects receipt of the net proceeds of the £0.3m equity fundraising announced on 21 February, indicates that the Group will need to secure approximately an additional £0.5m in Q2 2024 to meet its currently envisaged working capital requirements for the twelve months to 30 April 2025, beyond which further funding will be required. Based on historical and recent support from new and existing investors and debt providers, the Board reasonably believes that additional funding can be obtained when required, via further debt or equity issuances, and in the meantime is carefully preserving its existing cash and taking measures to reduce costs and defer expenditure (including director salaries) such that it continues to consider it appropriate to prepare the financial statements on a going concern basis. However, the Board's ability to raise such funds cannot be guaranteed. As a consequence, there is a material uncertainty as to the going concern status of the Group. The financial statements do not include the adjustments that would result if the Group was unable to continue as a going concern."
Posted at 06/3/2024 20:03 by fenners66
It seems to clarify that Jones ....

had a 14.24% stake on the 25th of October.

But as with every other long term gambler (holder) he was diluted when the company issued new shares
which began trading today.

He had 454,033,065 which would have been diluted today down to 11.7% from the 14.24%

So he reacted by buying some to get back to 13.76%

Meaning that even though he did not want to fund them directly he has still bought some

actually MURPHYL its 80m shares not 75m - just correcting you so you are not spreading false information -

He has lost a packet (presumably) already I guess he's trying to preserve the value of his stake ?

The only semblance of a reason I can think of (given TOMS lack of business prospects) is
that somehow (a bit like Musk) he has a loan and is using TOM shares as collateral - if the share price
falls any lower maybe the loan gets called in .

But will that end in tears ?
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 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 19/2/2024 12:10 by the diddymen
Fenners, the lack of robustness to any share price rise tells you that many shareholders just want out. In reality there will be no market unless the Board makes an announcement. Given that there is nothing to announce (except ground zero) there will be no market.

If the Board has nothing further to add to brief shareholders on the development of TOM's strategy, then it should give shareholders a steer on the cash position and the plan B, however unpalatable.
Posted at 17/1/2024 09:42 by 1dutchman
One has to almost envy the delusive contentment which keeps Goulding posting bullish oil price predictions despite there being absolutely no hope of TOM's share price being influenced by the oil markets, at least while pursuing this strategy(?) with this team(?).

Diddy, thanks for the excellent summary of the current position. Re: dilutive funding, at some point won't the brokers have to admit that they can no longer raise funds for the company? In fact, it may have already happened, which would explain Mr Jones stepping in. It is a wonder that both the broker and nomad continue to act for TOM. Strand Hanson has a reputation for being steadfast, but even they must be regretting their association. There are other nomads available further down the pecking order, but even those must surely require a change in management before taking on this dog.
Posted at 04/12/2023 13:02 by fenners66
So the end of November reached and no news
of 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 25/10/2023 00:20 by fenners66
Just to go back to the great white hope - Petroteq and its CORT tech that TOM spent over $1.5m on (and has Nothing to show for it).

There has been no communication on PQE's website of their results since period ended November 2021.
They have withdrawn from the stock exchange listing and not filed accounts.

On their last published balance sheet they had $79m in total assets and a deficit on reserves of $102m

I guess that has all gone now - so effectively they have burned something like $182m

Any of the gamblers want to present any evidence that that is not the case ?

And yet we hear the "reasoning" that if someone is prepared to chuck £100k at overpriced TOM stock they must "know something".

Well since they are £150m or so behind those who clearly knew nothing of PQE and since PQE outsmarted TOM
surely that just shows that putting money into a fantasy does not an investor make ?

Dream on gamblers. Some of you had a chance to make a profit from the PQE fantasy bid that never materialised - it was obvious from the start and we said it so at the time with reasons but instead of selling in the market you were greedy for more .... that is human nature ... that is how the likes of TOM can lose a fortune for nothing.


And despite our misgivings and an all time low share price there will still be gamblers on the other thread looking to lose even more....
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.
Tomco Energy share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock