Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Tower Resources LSE:TRP London Ordinary Share GB00BZ6D6J81 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.00p +0.00% 1.775p 1,151,448 08:00:00
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
1.75p 1.80p 1.775p 1.775p 1.775p
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Oil & Gas Producers 0.0 -1.6 -1.1 - 6.70

Tower Resources (TRP) Latest News

More Tower Resources News
Tower Resources Takeover Rumours

Tower Resources (TRP) Share Charts

1 Year Tower Resources Chart

1 Year Tower Resources Chart

1 Month Tower Resources Chart

1 Month Tower Resources Chart

Intraday Tower Resources Chart

Intraday Tower Resources Chart

Tower Resources (TRP) Discussions and Chat

Tower Resources Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
14/6/201812:55TOWER RESOURCES24,845
19/4/201722:41Tower Resources To Collapse Sub 5P33
26/8/201414:14Tower Resources - Ugandas Little Gem5

Add a New Thread

Tower Resources (TRP) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Tower Resources trades in real-time

Tower Resources (TRP) Top Chat Posts

Tower Resources Daily Update: Tower Resources is listed in the Oil & Gas Producers sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker TRP. The last closing price for Tower Resources was 1.78p.
Tower Resources has a 4 week average price of 1.55p and a 12 week average price of 1.35p.
The 1 year high share price is 1.88p while the 1 year low share price is currently 0.78p.
There are currently 377,335,427 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 1,634,599 shares. The market capitalisation of Tower Resources is £6,697,703.83.
dodge city: There has been quite a bit of selling this week and the share price has held firm. So who is buying?
alexw80: I haven’t been in TRP since 2104 and haven’t been following it much since but I have however recently reinvested a small amount in anticipation of the next drill. Now I’m assuming everything is still going ahead as planned but this years financials shows TRP have a lot less in the bank than prior to previous drills... can we assume that there will be some sort of big share giveaway to raise funds (whilst diluting the share price further) over the next few months?
imjustdandy: We are witnesiing a re rate in front of us. 10p plus on good 3D and the share price appears to be anticipating such
lw425: This is a really interesting set up here. From a TA perspective the gap at 2.4p from late last year is screaming to be filled and also the 100 MA line on the weekly chart stands out at 2.9p. The expected news flow exepcted shortly and assets do support expectations of a much higher share price so will be great to see how this plays out
dodge city: I don't think you'll see any seismic news until April, but you never know. In any case this is only going one way because the mkt cap is so low and it ain't going bust. If there's oil in Cameroon, and there is, who knows where the share price could go. Get in now while you stil have the chance.
mr_blonde: The MMs will spike the share price up to around 3-4p to get a placing away to raise money for the drill. A spike is inevitable here in the next 3 or 4 months. The smart money is getting on board now.
cube boss: There will be a huge Oil find in, or around TRP's Licence in Namibia, that is for sure! and another thing is for sure, TRP will drill again on their Licence in Namibia, but this time it will be to TRP's desired Depth!. Like somebody said the other day, when a company puts out an RNS like they did on Friday, it's very upsetting! but is a requirement. It usually reads, The Company knows of "NO REASON" for the price movement, But on this occasion the RNS read, The company provided a Comprehensive update to the market on 19th of March 2015 and Confirms that the Directors are not aware of ""ANY OTHER REASONS"" for the continued movement in the share price. So it's Fair to say that what the Company's written in the RNS dated 19th March, does in fact Justify the Price Movement!!. I did Talk to Graeme Thomson on Friday after the RNS came out, and even though it was a requirement to put out the RNS, he didn't want to do it!, he did think TRP was very over sold, and did think the share price would recover! he also confirmed TRP did want to drill deeper than Repsol did, and said they where still optimistic about Namibia, and TRP's other Licence's!! Very happy to hold!!! Anyone thinking of selling/buying should read the RNS dated 19th March 2015 very carefully, it's very Positive and to the point! and for those reasons I can see why the share price has started to recover! and will keep doing so!. As Friday's RNS stated, """We know of No other reason for the Movement""" apart from what's written in the RNS dated 19th March!! Open your eyes guys! ;0))) And Yes Judi, I am for real, and very long on TRP!! .2p is very low and I've taken advantage! :0) What I hold now has cost me £11.5k less than 1 year ago would have cost me £350K!! Buy low!! ;0))
bobobob5: My posts from last year... bobobob5 - 15 Aug 2013 - 11:40:50 - 7956 of 21279 The key factor is the COS on the WW Masstrichtian formation AND the volumetrics thereof. It's all laid out in the CPR. The current international average for frontier wildcats is about 8% success. A lot of wells have been drilled offshore Namibia, confounding the operators and the overall COS level (which clearly was way above 0%!). Low risk frontier wildcats are proving to be high risk, on the average. But a reservoir doesn't "know" what the average is, or what it's "supposed" to be. It is what it is. It's naive to think in terms of simple success or failure: drilling results can often be inconclusive, for example. And technical problems can prevent a well being completed, or can require sidetracking. Which involve re-visits, delays, and costs. Reservoir stimulation may be required. Sustained flow testing is far better than short-duration DSTs. Commercial discoveries require follow-up appraisal drilling, which will always be dilutive though this can potentially be managed. A gas discovery, offshore Namibia, would be a tricky thing to value, especially if there was an LNG dimension. Some operators like AVO - but some don't. Wet sand can sometimes give the same signal as a gas reservoir on AVO, as another oil company in Charterhouse Square found to its very considerable disadvantage. I think TRP are a buy (but only as part of a suitable portfolio) *if* the share price is sufficiently low. You can only establish the solution to that equation imo by starting with the CPR, and studying the Maarstrichtian data, and adding-in your own judgement calls etc. imho DYOR etc ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ bobobob5 - 24 Jul 2013 - 08:29:02 - 7611 of 21279 Wouldn't Tower Resources be better off by appointing Todd Kozel to its board? Mr Kozel has drilled 18 consecutive successful wells on very challenging geology, and now has the lion's share of 19 billion barrels of oil. All of the licences were acquired through Mr Kozel's strong relationship with the host government, combined with financial skills. And in particular, his adherence to the vital requirement to identify and manage risk (a central part of the UK Corporate Governance Code) gave a portfolio with many targets ("running room") which avoided the much-hated "one shot wonder" problem. It seems to me that, if Mr Kozel were interested, TRP shareholders might usefully consider calling for a Special Meeting (EGM) to seek the appointment of Mr Kozel to the board, where his track record and experience could be a real value driver over the months and years ahead. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ bobobob5 - 22 Jul 2013 - 14:17:02 - 7586 of 21279 Acamas: agree 100%. Only Dr Drill and Flo Test can establish what's in the ground. All the ramping, deramping,, guesswork, seismic, speculation, geology - and talking a good game - is all rendered worthless by those two much-feared characters, who dish out disappointment like sweets. Punters - and directors - tend to think that a COS of say 30% = "it will come in". No it does not! The same mentality is seen in every betting shop and every racecourse. If Tower is cheap enough, and the spectre of dilution is held at bay, it must be a BUY at some point. The question is, where's that point? And only then as part of a portfolio of many such punts, to spread risk. Unless, I guess, if one only had, say, a grand to invest in total in the stockmarket, and stuck it on TRP rather as a housewife would stick her half-a-crown on Lester in the Derby. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ bobobob5 - 02 Jun 2013 - 20:26:54 - 7088 of 21279 OK, the following is my *personal opinion* and nothing more. The company website states the risked recoverable resource to be 540 million barrels at the 30% interest level. My view is that if the market believed that this was a true figure, the market capitalisation would be nowhere near the current level of some $40 million. Even at $5 a barrel, the risked figure would be $2700 million, which is a totally ridiculous 68x bagger. The explanation is - in my *purely personal opinion* - that the assessment in the CPR isn't believed. How can one bridge the gap? I personally think it's quite easy, using four factors: (a) funding, (b) the Chance of Success in a frontier basin, (c) reservoir quality, and (d) the liklihood of oil rather than gas. These factors can compound together, and the compounding of multiple risks factors is *again in my purely personal opinion* the reason that so many AIM oilers are value-destructive Penny Dreadfuls. The overall AIM track record is appalling. Taking the above four factors in turn, the 540 million figure is at the 30% interest level. Taking things back to the earlier 15% level, there's a reduction by a factor of 2. Whether Tower can even get back to such a situation is unknown; it depends in part on the HRT situation. I would personally assume a farm-down or equity dilution equivalent factor of 2. We then have the Chance of Success. The TRP acreage has an exceptionally high geological COS for a frontier wildcat; a recent 278 well study by independent consultants has found that (pre-drill) low risk frontier wells are, in reality, very high risk. And "very high risk" wells, having an average pre-drill COS of 11%, had an outturn success rate of just 5%. So the CPR is assuming, and for a frontier basin with a lot of bad drilling results, a COS which is out-of-kilter with international results. How does one interpret that? It's anyone's guess; if one were to take the CPR figure as (say) 30% and then say "well, maybe it's only 10%?" that would give a further dilutive factor of 3. Then we come to reservoir quality. This kind of overlaps with the former, but poor or poor-ish reservoir quality, in a discovery, would represent a further knock-back in terms of commercial value. Who knows how that should be allowed for...suppose it were a factor of 2? That leaves the oil issue. Whether gas would have any significant commercial value is *in my purely personal opinion* a very debatable issue. If LNG trains were required for monetisation, the capital costs and timescales involved could be colossal. Without being overly negative, I'd be inclined to think that a further factor of 2 might be prudent. So we then multiply 2 by 3 by 2 by 2, and get 24. So we then take the 68x bagger figure (above) and divide it by 24, and get 2.8 On this basis, after scaling the CPR assumptions with four compounding negative factors, we at least bring the reduced "risked" value onto the same page as the current market capitalisation, though there are close to three bags on it. One could of course work it out in any number of different ways, so the "3" has no real meaning per se, it's simply showing that an otherwise inexplicable gap can potentially be explained, if one thinks that investors are looking at things in this sort of way. Maybe some of them are, maybe some of them are not, there's no way of ever finding out what determines these share prices. It seems to me *again as a purely personal opinion* that the "risked" value may have some relevance within a multi-investment portfolio, but as a stand-alone it's essentially a pretty worthless metric. It's pretty much a binary bet: the acreage either comes in, or it doesn't. In the latter case, there may be enough evidence to encourage investors to fund further drilling (at the cost of further equity dilution), so shutting up shop is perhaps somewhat unlikely. It's all an unknown. But the way I see it, the potential upside *in the good success case* is huge, and the "risked" value bears no relationship to it. A relatively small number of these Tower shares could potentially make someone a very great deal of money indeed...*if* there was a good commercial success offshore Namibia. For example, if (say) one billion attributable recoverable barrels of black oil were found, worth perhaps $5 a barrel in-ground undeveloped in an M&A context, Tower would prima facie be "worth" $5 billion, or a 125x bagger from the current price. That equates to about £2 a share, so an investment of just eight grand (500k shares) might make one a million pounds. But...the odds of that would *appear* (according to Mrs Market's assessment, and the compounded risks that I have tentatively suggested above) to be small. It is my personal experience that many investors in wildcats are like people in the betting shop gambling on a horse: they *think* it will win. Even though the odds may be ten, fifty, a hundred or even a thousand to one against, they *think* it's going to come in. In my *purely personal* opinion, the upside here in the success case may be enormous *but* the risks may perhaps be much greater than many investors imagine. I think this is why the shares are currently very cheap. If my multi-millionairess Aunt Georgina in Devon were to give me a couple of hundred thousand shares in Tower for my birthday, would I sell them and out the money into Gulf Keystone or Circle Oil? No, because despite the compelling attractions (to me) of those two companies, TRP is an interesting punt. Maybe it's worth risking a *bit* of money on it. But to think it's going to come in...hmmm...well, that would seem, to my personal way of seeing things, a sort of betting shop mentality. It's certainly interesting. but imho DYOR etc as always ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ THE NEW GKP / Drilling for Super Giants (moderated) - GKP doughty - 22 May 2013 - 10:27:08 - 281074 of 359495 He certainly nows the mover and the shakers !...this from TRP thread...... bobobob5 22 May'13 - 09:42 - 6997 of 6999 0 0 An international 'elephant hunter' whom I have known for a dozen years (he's a well-regarded geologist) said by chance yesterday evening to a colleague "offshore Namibia is not working out...there's nothing there...these E&Ps are chasing the same things, like a pack". Well, we shall see. In my personal opinion this is very high risk stuff because it is an *unproven* commercial oil basin. I personally see one of the key risks as reservoir development i.e. whether the carbonates and sands formed in such a way as to act as a good capture mechanism for the migrating oil...which was certainly created during geological ya feel lucky? We do ya, punk? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ bobobob5 - 20 May 2013 - 15:13:36 - 6923 of 21279 bel: the flaw in your argument is that there is no guarantee whatsoever that anyone would want to take a small 10% slice of the asset, and leave Tower with 20% together with a free carry! It's possible that terms wouold be substantially *worse* than those of the original deal, because of subsequent poor wildcat results. If HRT find gas, and not black oil, and nobody else finds black oil, there's no guarantee that enthusiasm for this frontier play will continue. Aminex and Solo have a decent enough onshore gas discovery, East Africa...and are people interested in it? Well, look at their hammered share prices today, and there's your answer. There is also a flaw in Tower's logic that they 'were "incredibly unlucky" in Uganda given other discoveries in close proximity to TRP'. Because, on that line of logic, the discoveries themselves were no more than luck! In which case, the entire sector is pure gambling. Which is kind of true in one sense...*but* a prime responsibility of a board is to *assess and manage risk* (June 2010 UK Corporate Governance Code). I don't personally think that Tower have done that, by reversing the farm-down. In my personal opinion, they have identified risk *and increased it*. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ bobobob5 - 01 Apr 2013 - 20:19:36 - 6472 of 21279 Reversing the farm-down was a very high-risk move...if the HRT well finds oil, TRP goes up and they can raise money. If it's a's a problem imo. Would I have done it? Absolutely not, but I'm a risk-averse speculator lol
luminoso: Tight holes might be alright for a major like Repsol where this well is not the be all and end all, but for a minnow like TRP, this well can mean movements in share price of several multiples - ie no chance of a tight hole, where so much potential profit and loss is concerned. Repsol will be forced to allow an announcement if the TRP share price is going crazy. Its a pipe dream, this tight hole ! :-)
belisce6: the Delta prospect, if successful might then be mimmicked by the other 3 prospects in the relevant licences... so the potential 10bill barrels of (recoverable) oil becomes something larger my a multiple of 3 or 4... so if this aint a duster, but is a commercial oil strike instead, then these crazy figures in the pounds sterling for trp share price will be justified...
Tower Resources share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
add chat code
Your Recent History
Gulf Keyst..
FTSE 100
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:40 V: D:20180618 03:34:41