The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Hamodeh, I put chances of an RNS this week below 5%. Yesterday's RNS said it is "finalising a shortlist", meaning it didn't have that final shortlist as of yesterday morning.
With yesterday and today both being dedicated to the site visit, I expect tomorrow they will reviewing the candidates and early next week I should expect an update saying that they have closed off that shortlist. From there, I would hope for a quick showdown to get ink on paper within a few weeks.
Positive,
> "full funding from one of the 14 to quick production."
> " two separate interviews confirmed the deal will have no dilution."
Can you point to where those are specifically claimed?
I've been watching this quite closely, but I've neither seen or heard nothing as definitive as "full funding" or "no dilution". The closest I've heard is LC saying something about getting the best deal for shareholders, but not anything as specific as what you just said.
Terrier,
IF TOM decide to go the placing route for raising funds, it can't be too far away.
The reason is purely down to TOM's own statement that the upgrades can't take place until the funds are available.
Even if they have cash to survive to the end of the year, they still needs funds to do the upgrade.
On the other hand, if they are able to source some funding from US banks or other sources, then the placing may not come.
Honestly, I hope for the latter but I won't hold my breath. The BOD doesn't exactly have a great reputation for protecting shareholder interests.
Kai.
Perhaps the market won't care. It seems to have been more-or-less indifferent to the previous few RNSs I've seen, maybe a missed deadline might slip by unnoticed.
With any luck, we'll have a pre-open RNS tomorrow with a good update. It would be very nice to hear that they're down to a shortlist of a few partners, the nature of those options, and that they'll pick a preferred partner to progress with within the next two weeks. That, or anything better, would be fantastic.
I should have my username changed to WishfulThinking.
And just to be clear, Kissimee, I have sympathy for your losses. Just like a lot of other long suffering investors in TOM, I too am in a loss here. I hope that all of us are able to recover something from it sooner or later.
Where I have no sympathy is trying to pass blame on your own poor decisions on to other people.
Stoater -
Brutal? Perhaps.
True? Absolutely.
Personal responsibility in all things, even investing. Unless someone is holding a gun to your head, every decision you make is your own responsibility.
If KISSIMEE bought in based on reading a message board, and failed to conduct his own due diligence and then make a risk-weighted investment, he's most certainly not alone, but the failure and responsibility for it are 100% his to own, just like it is for the rest of us.
Blaming anyone else for that is at least as moronic, if not more so, as his failure to invest responsibly to begin with.
If I were a warrant holder, I wouldn't convert.
Look at it this way - If I opened a short at 2.25p thinking I'll convert my warrants at 1.5p, I'd bank 50% profit. Well, why would I convert my warrants at 1.5p when I can buy the shares on the open market for 0.9p instead?
If I did that, I'd bank 1.4p per warrant in profit, or 155%, and still have the warrants in hand to do it all again the next time it hits 2p+
Dilution at a discount is always a kick in the nuts for existing holders, and I will admit there is a lot of turd-polishing in the RNS. However... the key phrase is as follows:
"With long term working capital now secure, the Company can immediately navigate from a position of strength..."
That tells me that we shouldn't have any more placings soon, and it means that KAT has a slightly stronger negotiating position with the funding partners for the Blyvoor project.
It's a small hit, but right now, the share price is holding rather well. I topped up just last week at 1.7 and (so far) it's held above that.
Thanks Purp. I see that Joe's response (and my subsequent reply) have been removed, but clearly he found a way to take umbrage to my comments. Nonetheless, as I said, we're all on the same side, so I do hope that his optimistic projections prove more accurate than my own.
Here are the relevant sections from the RNS that support my argument.
Friday RNS:
Further, the Company will no longer be required to provide funding to Greenfield of up to US$1.5 million, as was previously envisaged, until such time as TomCo has such funds available. Accordingly, Valkor and TomCo will review and seek to agree, inter alia, the budget for the proposed upgrades to the POSP and phasing of the associated tests pursuant to the JV Agreement, before TomCo commits to any material expenditure. The Company will provide further updates to shareholders in this regard, as appropriate. All other material terms of the JV Agreement remain the same.
Wednesday RNS:
Under the terms of the JV Agreement, the Company will provide funding to Greenfield, subject to being satisfied as to the use of such funds, of up to US$1.5 million, to enable Greenfield to be able to complete, inter alia, the required upgrades to the POSP and to undertake the proposed test programme as detailed below, together with funding TomCo's contribution to the FEED. Valkor will provide the engineering knowhow pertaining to the Oil Sands Technology required to complete the changes and will undertake the work detailed in the Work Order. Valkor will provide the services for the completion of the pre-FEED and the FEED up to a value of US$375,000, along with their management and operating experience and any other information and other valuable resources owned by ?and/or controlled by Valkor. In addition, Valkor has granted to Greenfield a licence to the Quadrise MSAR® technology, for the processing of heavy sweet crude into heavy fuel oil for which it has a right to an exclusive licence, for the use on all future plants that are majority owned and operated by Greenfield in Utah.
..
In addition, Valkor has entered into a new lease, effective from 1 July 2020 and for a term of 12 months, with the landlord of the POSP site, which will allow Valkor access to the land to be able to operate the POSP to undertake the necessary upgrades and tests as well as to mine for feedstock for the POSP. Pursuant to the lease, in addition to a monthly rent, the landlord will be entitled to certain royalty payments in respect of any commercial produce from the POSP and/or associated operations. Valkor has also granted Greenfield the right to occupy the site to complete the upgrade works and operations of the POSP proposed under the Work Order.
Joe, find fault in my argument as much as you like, and I will respectfully spar with you; I do believe a good debate sharpens the mind and I'm open to reinterpretation. But if you feel the need to resort to personal insults, you have already lost. Be better than that.
With that out of the way, of course that statement you quoted from the RNS is relevant. The difference is how we interpret that statement and the implications for the business. You, clearly, take an optimistic approach. On the other hand, I take a more cautious approach. Make no mistake, we're both on the same side here; we both want TOM to win and if your interpretation is more accurate than my own, I'll be over the moon.
Now, I've gone back to re-read the both RNS's. I'll paste the relevant sections into a separate comment because I run out of characters if I include them here.
Friday's RNS requires context from Wednesday's RNS, especially because it states "all other material terms of the JV agreement remain the same".
So, Friday tells us:
1) TOM will only provide the $1.5m to Greenfield when it has the money available.
2) TOM and Valkor will review the budgets before committing to spending any money
3) Everything else remains the same as Wednesday's RNS
So then, what does Wednesday tell us? Let's see:
1) TOM's $1.5m will go towards the upgrades to POSP, the test programme, and the FEED.
2) Valkor's contribution to the JV is their knowledge, experience, IP, and licenses. They are also contributing $375k worth of work specifically to complete the pre-feed and feed.
3) Valkor's lease begins on 1 July 2020, and rent becomes from that date.
4) Both TOM and Valkor have a vested interest in seeing the upgrades done as soon as possible.
There's a chasm of uncertainty between the two RNS's with regard to who will pay for the upgrade works. One can make assumptions that Valkor will, but to assert it as fact is disingenuous and a disservice to reality.
Officially, TOM has agreed that it will fund the upgrades. But it has also agreed that it won't provide any funds to Greenfield until it has the funds available, and that it will not commit to spending anything until the budget has been reviewed. Valkor has only agreed to fund $375k worth of pre-FEED and FEED work, not the upgrades.
So where does that leave us?
Well, my interpretation is as follows: any of the following three outcomes are possible:
- Valkor takes it on the chin and starts the upgrade work, hoping that TOM will act in good faith and pay up later;
- They review the budgets and TOM commits to those costs, with payments due when it has the money;
- They review the budgets, redistribute the cost between them so that Valkor is funding more of the upfront cost and TOM pays a larger share of the pre-FEED and FEED costs.
- They figure out the budgets, TOM commits to the spending for the upgrades, and Valkor waits until TOM has the money to put into Greenfield before beginning any wor
First off, no, I'm not a shorter, I'm long to the tune of about a million shares. Not that it's relevant at all. Because...
Point 2 is not pointless, it's about providing some balance. You are implying that Valkor will be doing the work without being paid for it until after it's complete. While I would certainly be delighted if that turns out to be the case, it is, with the facts we know today, an utterly baseless claim. There is absolutely nothing to support that claim, so it can only be presented as a theory, not as fact in the way you presented it.
In the interest of responsible investing and trading, one must look at the facts and present them clearly, untainted by personal interpretation or opinion.
Joe
1) "Just a week to go for Valkor to upgrade the Petroteq system."
2) "Valkor have agreed to be paid as and when TOM have the cash"
On point 1: Where's that week timeline come from???? Last RNS from TOM was that they would spend time reviewing the budgets with Valkor and then commit to spending. That was Friday morning.
Point 2: Misleading. Yes, they have agreed to be paid when TOM has the money. They have not agreed to do the work at risk ahead of being paid.
Vauch - yes they could. If TPI hold the warrants, they could have exercised them on Friday or any time since and use those to replace the revoked shares from the placing. That would be the equivalent of them buying shares on the open market at 1.5p; i.e. they would sacrifice the ability to open a short at 2.25 for example and then cover it with the warrants.