London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
You will only have one login account. Registering with multiple accounts is not allowed. Any user found to have more than one account on this site will have all, and any future accounts suspended permanently.
Your email and password must only be used by you. If a post is made under your account, it will be considered that it was posted by yourself.
Your account nickname must not be the same, or contain, listed company names or board members' names.
While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate; rudeness, swearing, insulting posts, personal attacks, or posts which are invasive of another's privacy.
You will not;
discuss illegal or criminal activities.
post any confidential or price sensitive information or that is not public knowledge.
post misleading or false statements regarding the share price and performance. Such posts are deemed as market abuse, and may be reported to the appropriate authorities.
post any private communication, or part thereof, from any other person, including from a member of the board of directors of a listed company. Such posts cannot be verified as true and could be deemed to be misleading.
post any personal details (e.g. email address or phone number).
post live price or level 2 updates.
publish content that is not your original work, or infringes the copyright or other rights of any third party.
post non-constructive, meaningless, one word (or short) non-sense posts.
post links to, or otherwise publish any content containing any form of advertising, promotion for goods and services, spam, or other unsolicited communication.
post any affiliate or referral links, or post anything asking for a referral.
post or otherwise publish any content unrelated to the board or the board's topic.
re-post premium share chat posts on regular share chat.
restrict or inhibit any other user from using the boards.
impersonate any person or entity, including any of our employees or representatives.
post or transmit any content that contains software viruses, files or code designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of this website or any computer software or equipment.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium and Verified Members
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
"Valkor had the licence agreement and then it was transferred to Greenfield." That statement is true, but the inference that Valkor does not have a current license is incorrect. The clarification is in the following news release:
But something not picked up on. Valkor had the licence agreement and then it was transferred to Greenfield. So if Valkor plan to go it alone will it now cost them a lot more for each licence and a heavier royalty.
Good morning, you'll have to elaborate on what you see as 'clear' evidence within the interim results and where it indicates the use of their funds in a different manner. What brings you to the conclusion that is was not used for the specific intentions? The £1.86m spent on Greenfields up to the end of March appears to tie in with what they had planned. Thanks
We're all aware of the lack of information on Valkor's fundamentals. Not as much of a concern now that the JV has come to an end. Just so long as they continue to provide support to Tom.
Use of Proceeds In order to facilitate the Company's future plans for Greenfield, which assumes successful POSP trials and the completion of the FEED study, the net proceeds of the Placing of approximately £3.2 million will be specifically utilised as follows:
· US$0.5 million (approximately £0.4 million) will be loaned by the Company to Greenfield (the "Loan"), which together with the US$1.5 million already provided by the Company to Greenfield to upgrade the POSP, which as set out above, secures the new Petroteq Licence. Under the terms of the Petroteq Licence, the US$0.5 million will be invested by Greenfield into the POSP in order to satisfy the full consideration for the Petroteq Licence. The Loan will be unsecured and has an interest rate of 6% per annum payable at the same time as the principal of the Loan is repaid. The Loan is repayable on the second anniversary of the date of advance or earlier with the consent of both Valkor and TomCo or immediately on an insolvency event of Greenfield;
· Approximately £1.3 million will be utilised for the Group's general working capital purposes over the next 12 months and beyond and, if required, providing further funding to Greenfield; and
· Approximately £1.5 million will be retained by the Company with the intention that it is used, inter alia, to facilitate the securing of a site by Greenfield for the first proposed commercial 10,000 bopd plant using Petroteq's Oil Sands Technology pursuant to the Petroteq Licence. Once a suitable site has been identified, the Company intends on providing a loan to Greenfield, which will be on the same terms as the Loan, which will be used to secure the site.
Notice they used the term "specifically utilised.." So from the interim results RNS it's clear that the funds were no used as they said they would be. This just adds more weight to my concerns about Valkor having little or no cash to put into this venture as it all appears to come from Tomco only. I suspect this is the main reason why Tomco have taken full control of Greenfield but it has come at a heavy price with Valkor getting 29% of shares on the cheap. I really hope they can raise the necessary funding by way of debt.
Hi Minimil, I see that the interim results up to 31st March show a total of £1.86m invested into the JV. I presume that includes the $1.5m Petroteq license and $0.5m loan? Regardless of the exact exchange rate, It doesn't leave much left that has been invested. Maybe the difference is an increased loan to Greenfields to the sum of £761k? I'm certainly no expert and might be reading things incorrectly. What figures have you focused on to arrive at your conclusion?
@Craggs - apologies for the late reply - YES I am stating exactly that and it is inferred in the TOM RNS for its latest results RNS. Unfortunately this BB has been infiltrated with Petroteq share holders the former of which can't get its accounts organised. Just go through the TOM RNS's over the past year. It's easy to follow the money trail. You can then make your own opinion of it all. As for trying to find out about Valkor, Sherlock Holmes would struggle.
TomCo did not have to "redirect" funds anywhere due to Valkor. That's just misinformation, and I have a hard time understanding why anyone would try to make such a glaringly false statement, especially in print. I am not sure why some would want to paint the relationship as adversarial, when it is anything but.
Tully. August 31, 2021 9:00am EDT SHERMAN OAKS, CA / ACCESSWIRE / August 31, 2021 / Petroteq Energy Inc. ("Petroteq" or the "Company") ??(TSXV:PQE; ?OTC PINK:PQEFF; FSE:PQCF), an oil ?company focused on the development and implementation of its proprietary oil-?extraction and remediation technologies, announced today that the Company has received proof of funds from the undisclosed bidder who was previously disclosed as being a client of Uppgard Konsult AB. The confirmation was provided by the bidder indirectly through their Canadian legal counsel, Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP.
The confirmation consisted of a swift message from The Royal Bank of Scotland, containing a swift confirmation in the amount of €120.000.000. The Company had requested confirmation of proof of funds as a condition to negotiating and executing a non-disclosure agreement with the bidder so the bidders identity could be disclosed to the Company and the parties could discuss a potential transaction.
Neither Uppgard Konsult AB nor the offerer has made any filings in relation to the offer under the ?Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or under applicable Canadian securities legislation.?
Shareholders are encouraged to do their own due diligence prior to taking any action.?
There can be no assurance that any transaction with the bidder will be completed as proposed or at all. Completion of any transaction will be ?subject to applicable director, shareholder and regulatory approvals.?
TOM set aside £1.3m for working capital and to support Greenfields on the POSP. They anticipated this would keep them afloat until June 2022. Are you suggesting they have spent all of this on Greendfields and then broken into the £1.5m fund allocated to the 10% purchase of the land?
@Pluginbaby - Valkor will have to live with any placing dilution along with everyone else. Cash wise Valkor have provided zilch to this project which is why Tomco had to redirect previous placing funds which were meant for the 10% deposit on the tar sand land purchase. My personal preference is for 100% debt to secure all the land and build the plant.
Plugin, I don't think we will see a placing at this time. But the price is being held back by MMs that i'm sure, but once the land deal is done then it hopefully will be let go and find the next level.
Placing/equity raise for the $1.7m or not. Surely they would have done a placing by now if they were going to do it. I think someone going to take 50% of Greenfield and then provide substantial funding and take oil produced. That way avoiding immediate dilution of Valkor's shareholding in TOM. Pure speculation on my part of course
Have seen a few times the UT trade last minute or just after hours if closed on blue, then it is a good sign for the next morning to open bullishly higher … probability is good but not 100%Guaranteed as you know M. M. Shenanigans and all that..