Tribe Technology set to deliver healthy pipeline of orders from Tier-One miners. Watch the video here.
Our agent in Morocco, Younes Maamar, is on the BoD for Chariot O&G Morocco -- https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/11793685/officers
Thanks for the thoughts, Indigo.
ADR registration probably a tad too onerous in terms of regulatory overhead and cost at this point. I agree it is superior to OTC in terms of access and acceptance, of course.
A couple of companies I invest in on AIM are using OTC very successfully to improve liquidity and help improve investor diversity as they pivoted their strategy to be more US-centric (big market, after all, and they tend to value tech companies more in US).
OTC is very low cost and doesn't come with much administrative burden, which is handy. Certainly not as good as an ADR or dual listing, but it tends to do its job well. It's only $14,000-$23,000 pa depending which market you list on. I see
If we're going to be in Utah and Latin America, giving easier access to those investors would make sense, I believe.
Anyway, I popped it along to the team. Whether they have any interest is another matter! And, I'm sure they will want to have some movement on those key projects before it's worth investing in any kind of improved access for US investors.
As I forgot to say it previously: Happy New Year. Here's to hoping 2022 is a good one.
Yes, it can be annoyingly difficult for US investors to buy stocks outside of the country. The way their brokers and regulations work discourage Americans from investing outside of the country, except for ADR registered stocks.
One of the common workarounds is the OTC Markets; they basically provide a bridge that allows US investors to get involved. The problem is that the liquidity is much lower than using the real exchange directly.
If Quadrise want to get better exposure to US investors, they could upgrade to an official OTC listing (e.g. OTCQB). Another company I invest in did this recently quite successfully.
AIUI from the AGM, they believe the Panama project(s) could be relatively simple and perhaps be executed quite quickly given they are self-contained.
We've heard that before, though, so let's see how it goes.
It is good that they've got some trusted associates running that project for them in-country.
A key comment from Jason that could easily be missed.
As mentioned at the AGM, he remarked that OEMs are currently what is blocking progress on beginning the LONOs with bioMSAR and MSAR at MSC.
In this video he mentions that they have some ideas for how they could bypass the OEMS to get things going, and to 'watch this space' .
I hope that's sooner rather than later, because it's really frustrating for a third party OEM to be blocking a transformational project with the biggest shipping company in the world.
I listened to an interesting podcast today about immune system research, one part of which was discussing people's vulnerability to covid-19 via deficiencies in various innate immune functions, including interferon production and auto-antibodies to certain interferons. They concluded that IFN-Beta is a good candidate for supplementation/treatment because auto-antibodies to IFN-B is much less common, and hence is much more likely to trigger a good intracellular innate response (e.g. downregulation of certain cellular functions that viruses hijack).
To listen to the professor describing Prof Casanova's group's research on c19 and IFN, skip to approx: 19m:50s
https://www.science.org/content/podcast/why-trees-are-making-extra-nuts-year-human-genetics-and-viral-infections-and-seminal-book-racism-and-identity
Paper being discussed is: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abj7965
I didn't say we have a sales director, no.
Board decides on MK replacement.
They decided to appoint Laurie Mutch as Interim Chairman until such time that they decide on an appropriate successor.
As we're at a transition period, it probably makes sense to have a different kind of chairman should we close out some of the deals that have been working on.
So, Laurie keeping the seat warm until that point makes sense to me.
I honestly don't think chairman is as important as COO and other operational, sales, and BD roles. And Laurie obviously has a very good reputation and is very knowledgable about the product (as those who have met him can attest). No issues from me.
https://vimeo.com/646943075
So, some exploratory drilling for the smallish downhole/in-situ should happen in the next few weeks.
Actual commercial-scale drilling and production realistically 1H2022 by the sounds of it.
So plausible that an MSAR deal will be signed in the near term, but I doubt any major use of our product will occur on-site until 2022 sometime. I personally wouldn't be surprised if we didn't get any signatures until 2022, and that doesn't worry me particularly. It's good for us that TOM + Valkor see MSAR as useful for both downhole/in-situ and sands opportunities.
As a reminder, they discovered that there is a modest resource that is deeper than the surface shale, but is relatively easily accessible and hence could generate useful revenues in fairly short order. The idea is that MSAR could be used for on-site energy requirements such as heat, steam, CO2 generation for enhanced recovery (EOR), and I guess to generate steam for SAGD in more extreme scenarios.
Oil with waste from biodiesel sounds like it could be bioMSAR (i.e. glycerol is the main waste product from biodiesel industry).
Yes, I posted this on the other forums. She made a wonderfully ambiguous statement of, "I must say, we have tried emulsion fuels before; but, more on that in the future".
Personally, I'm not going to get excited because it could mean many different things and Maersk don't have a great track record with MSAR. But, it's worth paying attention.
BTW, JM confirmed the possibility I speculated about in Quorumzine a few months ago that they believe they can use methanol as an additional feedstock.
As usual, Petroteq were rather burying the lede; there's a debt conversion underneath!
Agreed, Indigo. The ball is rolling on this one. Kudos to the team and our agent Younes for keeping the ball rolling on this key project.
"The Company is also pleased to announce that Mike Kirk, Chairman, and Jason Miles, CEO, will provide a live investor presentation relating to the Business Update via the Investor Meet Company ("IMC") platform on Wednesday 6 October at 14.00 BST."
Mutch ado about nothing, I suspect.
According to various comments of people who were in attendance at the TOM AGM the testing is not yet completed as TOM wanted additional bioMSAR testing conducted. If the reports are accurate, it should be done by end of September. Cannot personally vouch for the veracity of those claims.
According to various comments of people who were in attendance at the TOM AGM the testing is not yet completed as TOM wanted additional bioMSAR testing conducted. If the reports are accurate, it should be done by end of September.
QFI need the funds they have in order to execute the 2+ large projects which are closer to significant revenues than the TomCo and are lower risk, namely MSC and Morocco. As we've already seen, due to covid and other factors there's a risk of schedule slippage, so I do not see that it's wise to shorten the runway.
TomCo seem to have things under control. If they can't sort that out, I don't see how they would plausibly raise ~$110M + for the 5k/10k plant.
Important point of clarification: what you are quoting is not from the official Petroteq account. It's a shareholders group (read the description). Their branding and title is a bit misleading, IMO.
And these are contingent shares, i.e. Valkor gets nothing if the project is not successful. That seems a fair bargain and aligns Valkor and TomCo shareholders very well.
In many ways, I think this share arrangement provides a vehicle for Valkor to get many of the benefits of a publicly listed company without associated hassle.