We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
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:
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 Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. 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:
https://ir.petroteq.com/news-presentations/press-releases/detail/351/petroteq-announces-management-and-operations-at-asphalt
In particular: "Valkor remains party to a non-exclusive technology licensing agreement with Petroteq dated July 2, 2019, as amended, in respect of the POSP."
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.
Craggs - From 16 November 2020 placing RNS
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.
Joeyangtze . Unfortunately Every b board has one ……. Onwards and upwards,,,,
Unfortunately this BB is habitée like minimal, making false statements that Tomco have no money in the pot to pay thec10% deposit. He cannot prove it and it is a lie. Just ignore.
Be a lot happier when the seller finishes,,, come on Tomco give us poor shareholders something to cheer about….
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?
@Paul - Can you explain why there is no money left in the pot to make the 10% deposit for the land?
We would all like to hear your take on this...
OTY....
@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.
I am well aware that the information given in AJ post is mostly out there Vauch, but " prove of funds " " too be signed " " price too be confirmed " , is what i was referring to.
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.?
Petroteq Receives Confirmation of Proof of Funds From Bidder
I doubt that is real AJ, look at the spelling and grammar used.
Petroteq Energy Inc.
August 31st, 2021 - Confirmation of Prove of Funds from Bidder.
Next step NDA too be signed by Both Party’s.
Price too be confirmed for Controlling Interest or Complete Takeover.
$pqeff #pqeff $oilsands #pqe #pqcf
NO doubt 100% debt finance, given a 3 year payback (inc the construction period) would be the shareholders choice, however most lenders wont go for that.
From the most informative recent director's video presentation, it is clear they seek different sorts of finance probably from different sources.
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..
One day it will.
It would be nice to think of it as being a strange jump, that could be an indication of leaked news for tomorrow and Tomco are going to get a re-rate.
It didn't jump, glitch on the last UT trade - hopefully it will soon..............