Tower Resources Research Report 19.11.2007

Tower Resources plc
Year
End 31 Dec
Revenue
(US$000s)
PBT
(US$000s)
FRS3
EPS
(US$)
FRS3
DPS
(US$)
PE
(x)
Yield
(%)
2006a 0.00 (940) (0.01) 0.00 n/a 0
2007e 0.00 (3,500) (0.08) 0.00 n/a 0
2008e 0.00 (5,750) (0.11) 0.00 n/a 0
2009a 0.00 (11,650) (0.22) 0.00 n/a 0
Company Review
Investment Summary: An African Star in the making
Tower Resources is an AIM listed company, with exciting exploration assets in Uganda and
Namibia. In Uganda, the Company holds Block EA5, a wholly-owned onshore block of 6040 sq
kms at the northern end of the Albertine Graben. In Namibia, Tower Resources acquired three
offshore blocks that cover an area of approximately 23,000 sq kms. Tower Resources is likely to
drill a number of wells in Uganda next year and a first well in 2009. Tower Resources is fully
funded and does not need to raise additional funds in the foreseeable future
Uganda
The Company holds a wholly-owned onshore block of 6040 sq kms at the northern end of the
Albertine Graben. The block’s prospective basin is the Rhino Camp, where gravity
interpretation has shown large structural features of 35 sq kms. The Company is currently
shooting 285 kilometres of 2D Seismic with the expectation of drilling two wells next year.
Namibia
In Namibia, Tower Resources acquired three offshore blocks that cover an area of 23,000 sq
kms. Tower Resources has interpreted 10,000 kms of 2D Seismic and has undertaken a
comprehensive geochemical study as well as a surface oil seep survey. The Company has
identified 18 leads, with the resource potential between 40m – 5bn bbls of oil or 10 TCF of
natural gas. Tower holds a 15 % carried interest in the three blocks.
Financials
We expect the Company to report a net loss of US$3.5m in 2007 compared with a net loss of
US$1m the previous year. The losses are likely to increase considerably if the Company
discovers and develops a large hydrocarbon field in either Uganda or Namibia.
Valuation
We can assign a minimum value of £22.5 - 25m for Tower Resources by the implied minimum
expenditure of the farm-outs of its Ugandan and Namibian assets. Our financial model for the
Company’s discounted cash flows on our risked hypothetical resource base gives a value of
£290m compared to the current market value of £14.8m.
November 2007
Price (p) 2.75
Market Cap £m 14.8
Chart
SHARE DETAILS
CODE TRP
LISTING AIM
SECTOR Oils
SHARES IN ISSUE 536.7
PRICE
52 weeks
High 3.88
Low 1.75
BALANCE SHEET
Debt/Equity 2008e (%) 37
NAV (£m) 25-290
(Net borrowings)/Cash
(US$m)
(27)
BUSINESS
Tower Resources is an AIM listed
company, with exciting oil and gas
exploration assets in Uganda and
Namibia. In Uganda it is currently
preparing to shoot 285 kilometres of
seismic with the expectation of drilling
two wells next year. In Namibia, 700
km of 2D Seismic was re-interpreted
and it is planning to shoot 3D Seismic
next year.
GEOGRAPHY (Revenues US$m)
UK UGANDA NAMIBIA OTHERS
0 0 0 0
ANALYST
Brian McBeth +44 (0)20 7920 3390
bmbeth@vsacapital.com
SALES
Paul Backhouse +44 (0)20 7920 3391
pbackhouse@vsacapital.com

2 TOWER RESOURCES PLC COMPANY REVIEW NOVEMBER 2007 VSA CAPITAL INVESTMENT RESEARCH
Investment Summary: A new African Star
Tower Resources to start
drilling in 2008
Tower Resources is an AIM listed company, with
exciting exploration assets in Uganda and Namibia.
In Uganda, the Company holds Block EA5, a
wholly-owned onshore block of 6040 sq kms at the
northern end of the Albertine Graben. In Namibia,
Tower Resources acquired three offshore blocks that
cover an area of approximately 23,000 sq kms.
Tower Resources is likely to drill a number of wells
in Uganda in 2008 and in Namibia in 2009. Tower
Resources is fully funded and does not need to raise
additional funds in the foreseeable future.
Valuation: significant
exploration upside
The main driver in the oil industry is the oil price,
which is currently above US$90/bbl for WTI crude.
Oil prices have remained at relatively high levels for
the last 24 months, mainly because of strong demand
driven by economic growth, the decline in OPEC
production and political instability in the Middle
East. During this period, Nigerian production has
fallen by 500,000 bopd because of the activities of
insurgents in the country. In addition, Iran and
Venezuela have been unable to meet their OPEC
quotas, Indonesia is in long term decline, and Iraq
continues to be plagued by terrorist attacks. This
has resulted in OPEC crude oil output declining
from around 31.6 m bopd during the fourth quarter
last year to current levels of around 30.7m bopd.
OPEC has agreed to increase production by at least
0.5m bopd but this is insufficient to reverse the
inexorable upward increase in crude oil prices. There
is however a view that if world economic growth
starts to slow down as a result of a general increase
in interest rates that oil prices could weaken in 2008.
We can assign a minimum value of £22.5 - 25m for
Tower Resources by the implied minimum
expenditure of the farm-outs of its Ugandan and
Namibian assets. We have also modelled five
prospective oil and gas prospects detailed below, and
have risked the results for success in the following
manner: an assumed success rate of 25 % for 100m
bbls, 20 % for 150m bbls, 15 % for 200m bbls and 10
% for 250m bbls; and 10 % for the Namibian
prospects. We have also calculated the NPVs using
various discount factors as well as a constant crude
oil price of US$70/bbl and declining crude oil prices
to US$22/bbl in 2017. Although current crude
prices are above US$90/bbl and the futures crude oil
curve to 2015 stands at US$80/bbl we have used
US$70/bbl to maintain our conservative position.
Our matrix gives a conservative risked resource
NPV of £290m.
Sensitivities: four main
challenges
The Company faces three main challenges:
• To find hydrocarbon resources in both Uganda
and Namibia.
• The thermal maturity of the source rocks could
be the main exploration risk.
• To secure a drilling rig in the required time
frame.
• Managing social and environmental issues in
emerging oil provinces.
Financials
At the end of June 2007, Tower Resources had cash
balances of £2.13m, after spending £0.48m in
capital expenditure and a reported loss for the six
months to 30 June 2007 of £0.25m. For the current
year we expect the Company to report a net of loss
of US$3.5m.
We have estimated the Company's Profit & Loss,
Balance Sheet and Cash Flows up to 2009. In our
financial projections, we have used a declining crude
oil price from US$70/bbl in 2007 to US$63.18 in
2009. The hypothetical financial projection shows
that if Tower Resources found a 100m bbls field in
Uganda and assuming it receives world crude oil
prices that it could report negative operating cash
flows of US$12m in 2009. Its balance sheet will
clearly deteriorate as its capital expenditure
increases significantly after 2009 with an estimated
closing net debt of US$48m in 2009.

VSA CAPITAL INVESTMENT RESEARCH TOWER RESOURCES PLC COMPANY REVIEW NOVEMBER 2007 3
The road to the Albertine & Dolphin
Grabens
HISTORY
In August 2005, Tower Resources was admitted to the AIM market. A few months later in January
2006, it acquired Neptune Petroleum, which hold licences in northern Uganda and offshore northern
Namibia. Tower Resources paid for the acquisition by issuing 200 m shares to the Neptune equity
holders Peter Blakey, Peter Taylor and Mark Savage through his Bayview Investments LLC. Through
Neptune, Tower Resources acquired exploration acreage in two of the hottest plays in Africa at the
moment. In Uganda, Tower Resources holds a 100 % stake in Exploration Area (EA) 5 in the
prospective Albertine Graben. Block EA5 is the largest licence so far awarded by the Uganda
Government covering an area of 6040 sq kms. In Namibia, Tower Resources holds a 15 % stake in three
offshore exploration blocks that cover an area of approximately 23,000 sq kms after Arcacia farmed in to
its acreage.
UGANDA - Background
The recent large discoveries made by Tullow Oil, Hardman (now part of Tullow) and Heritage Oil &
Gas have made Uganda one of the hottest areas for hydrocarbon exploration. There is no petroleum
production in Uganda presently, but the recent large discoveries make it clear that the country has the
potential of becoming a big crude oil producer in the near future.
The main prospective area for finding hydrocarbon reserves in Uganda is the Albertine Graben, which
is the northern extension of the western arm of the East African Rift Valley, stretching some 500 kms
from Sudan in the north to Lake Edward in the south. The Albertine Graben is commonly 45 kms wide
and extends in some parts into the Democratic Republic of Congo. To the north of Lake Albert in Sudan
there is large oil production in the Thar Jath, Heglig and Unity fields in the Muglad Basin, which are
producing around 260,000 bopd.
The Albertine Graben is regarded as a particularly prospective area for oil exploration in the East
African Rift Valley. The Albertine Graben can be compared to other large basins in Africa such as the
Muglad basin in Sudan and the Gulf of Suez basin in Egypt. The basins found in the Albertine Graben
are bounded by dip-slip and oblique-slip fault systems that are typically 100 km long dating to the
Miocene. It is thought that boundary faults in the Albertine Graben vary from 600 metres to around
5000 metres in depth in parts. The Graben is in turn sub-divided into smaller basins such as Lake
Albert, Semliki, Lake Edward, Lake George, and Rhino Camp. Good reservoirs with porosities
exceeding 30% are found in the Tertiary sandstones as shown by the 1938 Waki-B1 deep test well that
encountered shows in the Tertiary sands and shales. The presence of good source rocks is inferred from
surface oil seeps that have been known for many years. For example, a sandstone outcrop at Kibiro is
saturated with 14.7 gravity oil with a sulphur content of 0.31%. In addition, two boreholes drilled close
by found heavy asphalt oil of 15.9 gravity.
Exploration History
Exploration for oil and gas in Uganda started in 1913, when W. Brittlebank acquired a licence to
explore for crude oil. Further licences were awarded in 1920-21, but no exploration was undertaken. A
number of reconnaissance field surveys, acquisition of gravity data, the drilling of shallow stratigraphic
tests, and the drilling of two deeper exploratory tests were undertaken between 1920-40. The period
from 1947-90 was dominated by work done by the Uganda Geological Survey, which included a World
Bank funded Petroleum Exploration Promotion Project started in 1983. Since 1991, the Petroleum
Exploration and Production Department of the Ministry of Natural Resources has been active in
geological mapping, gravity and magnetic surveys.
The Albertine Graben, one
of the hottest plays in Africa
The Albertine Graben can
be compared to the Gulf of
Suez basin in Egypt

It is clear that the Albertine Graben is underexplored, with reports of oil seeps dating as far back as
1925 when 52 separate hydrocarbon occurrences were logged around Lake Albert, with nine of these oil
seeps still active today. In the past, several stratigraphic tests were drilled but these were shallow wells.
In 1938, Shell Oil drilled the deepest exploration well to date to a depth of 1,232 metres. For the next
half century very little activity took place until the mid 1990s when the government using aerial,
gravity and magnetic surveys divided the area into five exploration zones. So far, five sedimentary areas
have been identified with sediments in some areas of more than 5 kms thick. The Rhino Camp Basin is
located within Tower Resources' EA5 block with good hydrocarbon resource potential by analogy to
other basins in the Albertine Basin. The main exploration risk is considered to be the thermal maturity
of the source rocks.
The Uganda government so far has awarded five exploration blocks (detailed below), with Tower
Resources holding the largest one.
Table I: Uganda Exploration Acreage
Size km2 Company Basin Activities
Exploration Area 1 4,285 Tullow/ Heritage Pakwach Current seismic + 3
wells in 2008.
Exploration Area 2 4,675 Tullow (Hardman
Petroleum)
Mother Lake Albert Waraga-1 12000 bopd
& 3 wells in Kaiso-
Tonya
Exploration Area 3 4630 Heritage Oil & Gas/
Tullow
Semliki & Southern
Lake Albert
Kingfisher-1 14,000
bopd
Exploration Area 4 2021 Dominion Oil &
Alpha Oil (Uganda)
Lakes Edward-
George
Exploration Area 5 6040 Tower Resources Rhino Camp Seismic to be shot
later this year,
followed by two
exploration wells in
2008
Source: VSA Capital
Exhibit I:Uganda: Explorations Blocks
Rhino Camp basin good
hydrocarbon resource
potential

Source: Tower Resources
Tower Resources' Fiscal Terms
Tower Resources' exploration licence is for six years and is divided into three exploration periods: (1) an
initial exploration period of two years; (2) a first extension period of two years; and (3) a second
extension period of two years. A mandatory relinquishment takes place at the end of each exploration
period. A production licence is awarded for 25 years with a possibility of a five year extension after
approval of a development plan and the fiscal regime includes a sliding scale royalty of 5% - 12.5 % and
a Production Sharing Agreement (PSA).

Recent Discoveries
In 2006, five wells were drilled in the Albert Basin, all of which were discoveries. In Block EA2, the
Waraga-1 well tested 12050 bopd and in November 2006 in Block EA3 a shallower zone was tested on
the Kingfisher prospect that yielded 4120 bopd of 30 API, with a low gas-oil ratio. Earlier this year,
Heritage drilled a deeper well on its Kingfisher discovery which tested 13,893 bopd across four potential
pay zones with a net pay of 37 metres. It is estimated that the Kingfisher prospect could hold more than
500m bbls of upside potential, and this estimate does not take into account the primary deep target
because the well did not reach it owing to problems with the drilling rig. The well did however intersect
three hydrocarbon zones, thereby derisking the deeper primary target that will be drilled in 2008. The
Kingfisher reservoirs are sandstones of Tertiary age and the prospect could extend over 70 sq kms.
Tullow also drilled the Nzizi-2 and Mputa-3 wells on its Kaiso-Tonya appraisal programme in Block
EA2, with both wells encountering hydrocarbons. The Mputa-3 well intersected three oil-bearing
zones, with a total net pay of 19.5 metres, the best result to date in the appraisal programme. Well data
indicates that all three zones in Mputa-3 could flow at a combined rate of more than 4,000 bopd of oil,
and the well was suspended as a future producer The Mputa-4 appraisal well, drilled 1 km east of the
Mputa-1 discovery, was to test an adjacent fault block, with the well reaching just over 1000 metres in
depth and encountering three oil-bearing zones with a total net pay of 15.4 metres. Downhole pressure
testing and sampling of Mputa-4 has shown moveable light, sweet crude with very good permeability,
as seen in the other Mputa wells.
The data compiled from the drilling programme has confirmed the extent of the reservoir sands.
Heritage estimates its risked reserve base in the country at 643m bbls in Block EA1 and 330m bbls in
block Block EA3, while Tullow estimates its risked reserve base in Uganda at 100-250m bbls.
Early Production
It is possible that commercial oil production in Uganda could start as early as 2009 with Heritage Oil
and Tullow Oil supplying light, sweet crude from their exciting discoveries to be used locally to
produce kerosene and other fuels, as well as supplying feedstock to a small power plant. This is part of
the government's Early Oil Production scheme that involves building a mini-refinery to produce diesel,
kerosene and heavy oil, and, in addition, building a heavy fuel oil-based power plant to generate cheap
electricity. According to President Yoweri Kaguta Musewi in a speech given in October 2006, Uganda
will be able to ‘produce oil-based electricity that is almost comparable to hydro-electricity at a cost of
about six American cents per unit. This is a far cry from the present 24 American cents per unit of
electricity using imported diesel without subsidies’. In 2006, Uganda imported the equivalent of just
over 10,000 bopd at a cost of US$443.3m. The increase in domestic crude oil production will have a
favourable impact on the country’s balance of payments. In addition, both companies are currently
trying to determine whether to start laying a US$2 bn, 1,300 km export pipeline to Mombassa, the
Kenyan port which serves land-locked Uganda.
Recent large discoveries:
Waraga-1 12,050 bopd &
Kingfisher-1 13,893 bopd
Risked reserve base 100 -
973m bbls

Block EA5
Tower Resources holds a 100 % interest in Block EA5, the largest block awarded so far in the country
covering an area of 6040 sq. kms at the northern end of the Albertine Graben. The Rhino Camp basin
located on the block is an unexplored basin with good potential by analogy to the recent discoveries
detailed above made by Heritage and Tullow.
It is anticipated that there is a high probability of finding large structures with good reservoirs in the
Rhino-Camp basin. According to Tower Resources, geochemical studies indicate that source rocks could
be mature below 2000 metres, while gravity modelling shows large structures. In addition, anecdotal
evidence suggests that extensive local oil seepages have occurred on the acreage and that some recent
water wells have been contaminated with crude oil. Moreover, the region has a number of hot springs
indicating locally high subsurface temperatures. Furthermore, gravity interpretation shows large
structural features of 35 sq kms. If the current porgramme of 285 kms of 2D seismic lines together with
the drilling of its two commitment wells next year confirms such an interpretation, then it is likely that
Tower Resources will find some very large structures when its exploration drilling campaign is
completed in 2008.
There are no major ecological problems and because the block is not over Lake Albert or Lake Edward
it will be easier to conduct seismic surveys and drill wells. This means that Tower Resources will be
able to catch up with the existing companies operating in the country. In addition, there is a moratorium
on the allocation of new licences even though 30 companies since 2005 have applied for them. This will
allow the current licensees to drive the initial stage of development.
Tower Resources has set up offices in Kampala, the country’s capital, as well as a regional operational
centre at Arua. Tower Resources is also embarking on a programme of community social investment
focused on higher education, health and infrastructure improvements.
Rhino Camp basin: good
potential by analogy
Local anecdotal evidence of
extensive local seepages
No ecological problems

Exhibit II:Situation of Block EA5

Exhibit III:Block EA5 - Prospective Kitchen
How will Tower Resources fund its drilling commitments?
Orca Exploration Inc. earlier this year farmed-in to Tower Resources' block. Under the terms, Tower
Resources will recover 83.3 % of its past costs, equivalent to US$0.7m, with Orca funding 83.3 % of the
costs of the current seismic programme capped at $5m. Orca also has an option agreement to participate
in the 2-well commitment programme by paying 83.3 % of the costs of the wells for a 50 % equity share.
Orca’s spending is capped at $10m for drilling and US$5m for testing. Orca will assume the
management of the drilling programme under the supervision of Neptune as licence holder. Orca is an
experienced operator in southern Africa. It operates the Songo Songo field in Tanzania and has an
operational base in Dar-es-Salem.
Uganda Pipeline
At the moment Uganda imports all its petroleum products with approximately 85% of the country’s
petroleum products coming through Kenya with the rest through Tanzania. The costs of transportation
from Mombasa in Kenya and Dar es Salaam in Tanzania are high. As a result, the Uganda government
wants to extend the existing Mombasa-Eldoret oil pipeline to Kampala. In 1995 a Memorandum of
Understanding was signed to establish a Joint Coordinating Commission (JCC) to supervise the project.
The idea is for the pipeline to bring white products into Uganda. The pipeline would be 8-inch diameter

and extend from Eldoret to Kampala, some 320 kms. The ownership of the pipeline would be a
combination of private and public funds, with Kenya and Uganda owning 24.5 % each and the rest held
in private hands. In 2004 the JCC invited companies to express an interest and 12 firms submitted
detailed proposals. The possibility of building a 1,450 km pipeline through Tanzania to Uganda is also
being examined.
It is likely that with the large crude oil discoveries made, and the possibility of building a small crude oil
refinery possibly close to Kampala, that an export pipeline will be built in parallel with the product
pipeline.
Reserve base in Uganda
We give below a hypothetical matrix of what to expect if one prospect is successful in Uganda. We have
risked the possibility of finding these resources from 25 % to 10 % and have also assumed that Tower
Resources’ equity stake in Uganda is 50 %. Our risks factors are clearly conservative compared with the
current success rates of almost 100 % achieved by Tullow and Heritage. We can see that on a severe
risked basis Tower Resources could hold resources of between 12.5 m - 15 m bbbls of crude oil.
Table I: Tower Resources - Matrix of estimated risked hypothetical resources (m bbls)
Prospects
Hypothetical
Resource size (m
bbls/ BCF)
Risk Success
factor (%)
Risked Proven &
Probable Gross
Oil Equivalent
Resources (m
boe)
Tower Resources
Net Equity
Interest (%)
Tower Resources
Risked Net
Resources (m
boe)
Uganda
100 25 25 50 12.5
150 20 30 50 15
200 15 30 50 15
250 10 25 50 12.5
Source: VSA Capital
Hypothetical Uganda Net Crude Production
We give below a hypothetical net crude oil production curve for a 100m bbls discovery in Uganda. It
should be noted that this is only shown to give investors a flavour of what could come out of Uganda if
a small discovery of 100m bbls is found.
Our hypothetical crude oil production curve starts in 2012 and quickly reaches peak production of
around 18,750 bopd in 2014. Please note that there is a major constraint in getting the oil out of the
country that is being addressed by all operators in Uganda at the moment. The possibility of upgrading
the railway line to Kenya in order to export future oil production is currently under discussion.
Risked hypothetical
resource base of 12.5 - 15m
bbls of crude oil
Hypothetical production of
18.750 bopd in 2014

Exhibit IV: Tower Resources: Net Daily Crude Oil Production from a Hypothetical
100m bbls Discovery (000s bopd)
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
20000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Years
bopd
bopd
Source: VSA Capital

NAMIBIA
Namibia is another southern African country that is underexplored with only seven onshore wells and
11 offshore wells drilled. Offshore exploration started in 1968 and so far the only significant discovery
has been the Kudu gasfield with 3 TCF of reserves discovered by Chevron in 1973. For political reasons
no further exploration and appraisal work took place until 1987-88 when a number of wells were drilled
by the forerunner of the National Petroleum Corporation of Namibia (NAMCOR), the country’s
national oil company. Further exploration did not start until after Independence on March 21, 1990.
The geological interpretation of the area indicates considerable oil and gas potential that is linked to the
opening of the Atlantic Ocean which was accompanied by heavy volcanism. The most common
interpretation of the basin's formation is that preceding the separation of the tectonic plate of Africa
from South America a thermal subsistence and shift in plate location took place. This volcanism lead to
the formation of continental flood basalts such as the Etendeka and Paraná flood basalt provinces in
Africa and South America respectively. A large number of 60 - 100 km wide seaward dipping seismic
reflection patterns, commonly known as ‘seaward dipping reflector sequences’ (SDRS) are found in
water depths of between 200 metres and 4500 metres at approximately 70 % of the continental margins
of the Atlantic. The discovery of the Kudu gas field at the edge of an SDRS put the passive volcanic
margins on the petroleum industry’s agenda.
Recent Discoveries
In May 2004 Tullow, through its take-over of Energy Africa, acquired Production Licence 005 that
contains the large Kudu gasfield with estimated 9 TCF of gas reserves in situ, with proven reserves of
1.5 TCF of gas reserves. In April this year, Tullow sold a 20% interest in the licence to the Itochu
Corporation of Japan, which will pay 40% of the cost of two appraisal wells in 2008 to earn a 20 %
equity stake. In May, the two-well appraisal programme started when the Pride South Seas semi-
submersible rig started drilling Kudu-8 to establish commercially productive flow rates from the
extensive Kudu East reservoir originally tested by the Kudu-5 well. In early September, the well
penetrated the primary objective section and was found to be gas bearing. The well reached its target
depth of 4500m in October. In addition to pursuing development of the field as a single gas-to-power
project supplying electricity to Namibia and South Africa, the partners expect to export the remaining
natural gas directly to South Africa
Underexplored region
Considerable oil & gas
potential
Kudu gasfield with GIIP
estimated at 9 TCF

Tower Resources' Namibian Interests
Tower Resources holds three offshore blocks (1910a, 1911, 2011a), which extend approximately to
23,000 sq kms at water depths between 200 metres to 3000 metres in the Dolphin Graben. In the 1990s,
Norsk Hydro drilled two wells, 1911/15-1 and 1911/10-1, on block 1911. Both wells were drilled to the
Lower Cretaceous Volcanics but no test was undertaken of the deeper Cretaceous and Jurassic. The data
from the wells confirmed extensive basins along the coast with good traps and source rocks.
Tower Resources acquired 10,000 kms of 2D Seismic from TGS-Nopec that covers most of the licence.
As a result of the seismic interpretation, Tower Resources has identified 18 leads with an upside
hydrocarbon potential of between 40m to 5.4bn bbls of crude oil or 10 TCF of gas. It has also
conducted a geochemical study of the region as well as a sea surface oil seep survey by satellite imaging.
The results were extremely encouraging with the Company reinterpreting and reprocessing a number
of seismic lines using the technique of Amplitude Variations Offset (AVO). This technique uses the
contrast in the physical properties of rocks, allowing information to be established on the different
lithology and fluids found in the various geological horizons. AVO works by using the property
associated with ‘energy partitioning’. When seismic waves hit a boundary, part of the energy is reflected
while the rest is transmitted. The AVO on Block 1911 indicated the presence of natural gas in two
adjacent, very large structural features in the northern part of the block, to the west of the Norsk Hydro
wells. It also confirmed the lack of hydrocarbon indications at the two dry holes. As a result, Tower
Resources shot just under 800 kms of 2D Seismic earlier this year to confirm this interpretation and
now intends to shoot 1000 kms 3D seismic at the end of 2008 to determine a suitable well location.
Tower Resources' Fiscal Regime
Tower Resources' fiscal regime is comparatively benign given the country's underexplored nature and
includes a 5 % royalty and a Petroleum Income Tax (PIT) of 35 % of taxable income. Both exploration
and operating expenditure can be written off immediately and in full and development expenditure is
depreciated over three years.
Farm-Out Agreement with Arcadia Petroleum
Earlier this year, Tower Resources farmed-out to Arcadia Petroleum Ltd., which will assume
operatorship with Tower Resources retaining a 15 % carry over the 2D and 3D Seismic shoot as well as
over the drilling of two exploration wells in 2008, which will probably cost between US$100m -
US$150m. This is a very favourable development for Tower Resources because Arcadia, which is a large
oil trader with turnover last year of US$17bn, is a subsidiary of the very large Farahead Holding Ltd.
that specialises in the construction of offshore floating production platforms, as well as transporting
LNG. It also has expertise in drilling wells, and in developing and marketing any hydrocarbon
resources discovered. The significance of Arcadia taking such a large interest in Tower Resources'
acreage is that the Farahead Group has the resources to develop any gasfields found in the country,
which would be developed as LNG trains and through Golar trade the LNG cargoes. It is estimated
that worldwide LNG trading will grow from 145 m tonnes in 2006 to 370 m tonnes in 2015 and
demand is expected to eclipse supplies by 20 m tonnes per annum between 2008 and 2015.
Resource base in Namibia
We give below a hypothetical matrix of what to expect if one prospect is successful in Namibia. We
have risked the possibility of finding these resources to 10 % and have also assumed that Tower
Resources’ carry in Namibia is 15 %. We can see that on a severe risked basis, Tower Resources could
hold reserves of between 7.5 m barrels of crude oil to 11.7m bbls of crude oil equivalent.
Table II: Tower Resources: Estimated Risked Hypothetical Resources in Namibia
Prospects
Hypothetical
Resource size
(m bbls/ BCF)
Risk Success
factor (%)
Risked Proven &
Probable Gross
Oil Equivalent
Resources (m boe)
Tower Resources
Net Equity
Interest (%)
Tower Resources
Risked Net
Resources (m
boe)
Namibia
Dolphin Graben
Amplitude Variations Offset
Farm-out to Arcadia
Petroleum Ltd.
Hypothetical risked
resources of 7.5m bbls of
crude oil or 11.7m boe gas
reserves

Oil 500 10 50 15 7.5
Gas 5000 10 78.13 15 11.72
Source: VSA Capital
Hypothetical Namibia Net Crude Production
We give below a hypothetical net crude oil production curve for a 500m bbls discovery in Namibia and
an alternative 5 TCF gas discovery in the country. It should be noted that this is only shown to give
investors a flavour of the potential of the prospective resource base detailed above. Our hypothetical
crude oil production curve starts in 2015 and reaches peak production of around 30,000 bopd in 2017.
Exhibit V: Hypothetical Net Namibian Crude Oil Production (500m bbls)
0.00
5000.00
10000.00
15000.00
20000.00
25000.00
30000.00
35000.00
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
bopd
Source: VSA Capital
A hypothetical natural gas production curve scenario also starts in 2015 and reaches peak production of
120 bcf per annum in 2017.
Exhibit VI: Hypothetical Net Natural Gas Annual Production for a 5 TCF Discovery
(BCF)
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
140.00
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
bcf
Hypothetical peak
production of 30,000 bopd

Source: VSA Capital
Total net hypothetical crude oil and gas resources
Our hypothetical resource base with the various risk factors is given below for both Uganda and
Namibia. As we can see, our risked hypothetical resource base is between 12.5m - 27m boe.
Table III: Hypothetical Crude Oil & Natural Gas Resources
Prospects
Hypothetical
Resource size
(m bbls)
Risk Success
factor (%)
Risked Proven &
Probable Gross
Oil Equivalent
Resources (m boe)
Tower Resources
Net Equity
Interest (%)
Tower Resources
Risked Net
Resources (m
boe)
Uganda
100 25 25 50 12.5
150 20 30 50 15
200 15 30 50 15
250 10 25 50 12.5
Namibia
Oil 500 10 50 15 7.5
Gas 5000 10 78.13 15 11.72
Source: VSA Capital
FUTURE
Tower Resources is working towards acquiring more assets of similar quality and size in southern
Africa.
Risked hypothetical
resources of between 12.5m
- 27m boe.

Directors & Senior Management
Peter Kingston, Executive Chairman, graduated from Oxford University with a degree in
Mathematics, and is a Petroleum Engineer with almost 40 years of experience in technical, executive
and advisory roles. He has been directly engaged, as a director, in the strategic development of oil
companies for over 20 years and has served as executive and non-executive director of UK-based oil and
gas companies, including LSE-listed, AIM-listed and private companies. He was Joint-Managing
Director of Enterprise Oil Plc from 1984 to 1992. He is currently Deputy Chairman and Senior
Independent Director of Soco International Plc. He became Chairman of Tower Resources on 1st
February 2006.
Peter Taylor, Non-Executive Director, trained as a chemical engineer, and is Joint Chairman of TM
Services Ltd, an international oil and gas consulting company. In 1991, he was a founding member and
director of TM Oil Production Ltd, which is now Dana Petroleum Plc, an oil and gas company listed on
the Official List and one of the UK’s leading independents. Mr Taylor was a director of Dana until 2001.
He was also a founding member and director of Consort Resources Ltd, which became a significant
North Sea gas production company, and of Planet Oil Limited, which was merged with Hardman
Resources Limited in 1998. Mr Taylor was a founding member and director of Star Petroleum PLC,
which was incorporated into Global Petroleum Ltd, which is dual ASX and AIM listed and which has
significant interests in Kenya and the Falkland Islands. Mr Taylor is a founding member and director of
Neptune.
Peter Blakey Non-Executive Director, trained as a chemical engineer, and is Joint Chairman of TM
Services Ltd, an international oil and gas consulting company. In 1991, he was a founding member and
director of TM Oil Production Ltd, which is now Dana Petroleum Plc, an oil and gas company listed on
the Official List and one of the UK’s leading independents. He was also a founding member and director
of Consort Resources Ltd, which became a significant North Sea gas production company, and of Planet
Oil Limited, which was merged with Hardman Resources Limited in 1998. Mr Blakey was a founder
member and director of Star Petroleum PLC, which was incorporated into Global Petroleum Ltd, which
is dual ASX and AIM listed and which has significant interests in Kenya and the Falkland Islands. Mr
Blakey is a founding member and director of Neptune.
Mark Savage, Non-Executive Director, holds a business degree from the University of Colorado and
was senior executive for a number of US banks before he joined an Australian based merchant bank. Mr
Savage has experience in debt and equity markets as well as in the corporate advisory area. He has held
directorships with a number of public companies. Mr Savage is also a director of Global Petroleum Ltd.
Jeremy Asher, Non-Executive Director, is a graduate of the London School of Economics and the
Harvard Business School. He is Chairman of Agile Energy Limited, a privately held energy investment
company; and a director of several non-energy-related companies. Following several years consulting
with Mercer Management Consulting, Jeremy ran the global oil products trading business at Glencore
AG, and then acquired, developed and sold the 275,000 b/d Beta oil refinery at Wilhelmshaven in
Germany. As CEO of PA Consulting Group, he oversaw PA’s globalisation and growth from 2,500 to
nearly 4,000 staff.
Jim Webb, Exploration Manager, graduated from London University with a degree in Geology, and
has more than 35 years of experience in the international oil and gas exploration and production
business. He is a former Director of Exploration for Kerr-McGee, and Hunt Oil Company, he currently
advises on exploration for Tower, Global Petroleum and several other junior oil companies. Jim also
advised Falklands Oil and Gas.
SENSITIVITIES: four main challenges
The Company faces four main challenges:
• To find hydrocarbon resources in both Uganda and Namibia.
• The thermal maturity of the source rocks could be the main exploration risk.
• To secure a drilling rig in the required time frame and at a reasonable cost.
• Managing social and environmental issues in an emerging oil province.

The remote possibility of crude oil prices weakening is always a fundamental point of concern as it is the
main driver in the sector, but this is one area where we do not expect any weakness for some years to
come.
VALUATION
The main driver in the oil industry is the oil price, which is currently above US$90/bbl for WTI crude.
Oil prices have remained at relatively high levels for the last 24 months, mainly because of strong
demand driven by economic growth, the decline in OPEC production and political instability in the
Middle East. During this period, Nigerian production has fallen by 500,000 bopd because of the
activities of insurgents in the country. In addition, Iran and Venezuela have been unable to meet their
OPEC quotas, Indonesia is in long term decline, and Iraq continues to be plagued by terrorist attacks.
This has resulted in OPEC crude oil output declining from around 31.6 m bopd during the fourth
quarter last year to current levels of around 30.7m bopd. OPEC has agreed to increase production by at
least 0.5m bopd but this is insufficient to reverse the inexorable upward increase in crude oil. There is,
however, a view that if world economic growth starts to slow down as a result of a general increase in
interest rates that oil prices could weaken in 2008.
We can assign a minimum value of US$45 - 50m to Tower Resources by the implied minimum
expenditure to be undertaken by the farm-outs of its Ugandan and Namibian assets. In arriving at this
figure we have used US$20m that Orca is committed to spend following its farm-in to Tower Resources'
Ugandan acreage, and US$25 - 30m for the value of Arcadia's farm-in for 85 % of the Namibian acreage.
We have modelled a number of hypothetical oil and gas prospects in both Uganda and Namibia, and
have risked the results for success in the following manner: an assumed a success rate of 25 % for 100m
bbls, 20 % for 150m bbls, 15 % for 200m bbls and 10 % for 250 m bbls; and 10 % for the Namibian
prospects. We have also calculated the NPVs using various discount factors as well as a constant crude
oil price of US$70/bbl and declining crude oil prices to US$22/bbl in 2017. Although current crude
prices are above US$90/bbl and the futures crude oil curve to 2015 stands at US$80/bbl we have used
US$70/bbl to maintain our conservative position. Our matrix gives a conservative risked resource NPV
of between US$-199m - US$1360m, an average of US$580.5m.
Table IV: Net Present Value of Hypothetical Resource Development (US$m)
Constant Oil Price US70$/bbl
Declining Oil Price US$70/bbl to
US$22/bbl
Discount
Factor
10 15 20 25 10 15 20 25
Uganda
100 m bbls
prospect
279.23 155.70 81.45 36.30 -1.81 -34.24 -49.76 -56.02
150 m bbls
prospect
667.12 329.76 251.74 149.39 -47.71 -90.40 -108.24 -112.80
200 m bbls
prospect
1095.63 668.92 405.84 240.92 -164.78 -198.52 -205.20 -198.59
250 m bbls
prospect
1360.27 845.22 526.41 325.40 -107.71 -166.50 -187.26 -188.57
Namibia
500m bbls
oil prospect
967.95 681.41 484.91 347.23 -273.96 -243.43 -210.89 -180.83
5 TCF
prospect
999.06 629.47 394.59 242.03 160.10 63.65 17.51 -3.90
Source: VSA Capital
We can see from the table given below that if Tower Resources finds and develops one prospect of
100m bbls that on a severe risked basis and with both constant and declining crude oil and gas prices,
Minimum value of US$45m -
US$50m.
Conservative risked
resource NPV of around
US$580m

together with discount factors of between 10 % – 25 %, that Tower Resources has an NPV per share
range of between $-0.1 cents – 84 cents, compared with the current share price of 5.5 cents.
Table V: Hypothetical Returns per share (US$cents)
Constant Crude Oil Price US$70/bbl
Uganda Namibia
100m bbls 150m bbls 200m bbls 250m bbls 500m bbls 5 TCF
Net Return on
Investment
0.299 0.372 0.834 0.677 0.289 0.534
Net Return on
Investment (%)
0.091 0.130 0.157 0.152 0.110 0.104
Risked NPV
Value (10 %
disc.)
0.077 0.122 0.301 0.249 0.064 0.162
Risked NPV
Value (15 %
disc.)
0.043 0.060 0.184 0.155 0.027 0.094
Risked NPV
Value (20 %
disc.)
0.022 0.046 0.111 0.096 0.007 0.055
Risked NPV
Value (25 %
disc.)
0.010 0.027 0.066 0.060 -0.003 0.033
Declining Crude Oil Price US$70 - US$22 per barrel
Net Return on
Investment
0.055 0.045 0.039 0.324 -0.042 0.143
Net Return on
Investment (%)
0.033 0.027 0.011 0.225 -0.025 0.075
Risked NPV
Value (10 %
disc.)
0.000 -0.009 -0.045 -0.020 -0.050 0.029
Risked NPV
Value (15 %
disc.)
-0.009 -0.017 -0.054 -0.030 -0.045 0.012
Risked NPV
Value (20 %
disc.)
-0.014 -0.020 -0.056 -0.034 -0.039 0.003
Risked NPV
Value (25 %
disc.)
-0.015 -0.021 -0.054 -0.034 -0.033 -0.001
Source: VSA Capital
Comparative Valuation
We have also compared Tower Resources with other listed companies on the full LSE list and on AIM.
We can see from the table given below that Tower Resources is backed by a risked hypothetical
resource base of 77 bbls of crude oil resources per £100 market value, placing it ahead of Global Energy
Development with 42.9 bbls per £100 market value. The average value of reserves assigned by the
market for our universe given above is £6.8/bbl. If we assign such a figure to Tower Resources, then
the market value of the company assuming our hypothetical resource base would be £84.3m, compared
with a current market value of £14.8m.
There are two companies in our universe that resemble most closely Tower Resources, namely, Tullow
and Heritage. If we take the average value assigned by the stock market for the reserves of these
companies of £9.4/bbl, we can see that the market potential of Tower Resources is very large.
Table VI: Tower Resources: Comparison with other E&P Companies on the LSE & TSX
Share
Price
p/share
(29.10.0
Market
Capitalisation
(£millions)
Hydrocarbo
n Prod.
(boepd)
2P
Hydrocarbo
n Reserves
(million
bbls of oil
2P
Hydrocarbo
n Reserves
per £100
Market
Value of
reserves
assigned
by
market

7) equivalent) Capitalisati
on
£/bbl
LSE - Full Listing
Burren 1184 1669.5 38000.0 214.2 12.8 7.8
Cairn Energy 2463 3211.2 111700.0 568.0 17.7 5.7
Dana Petroleum Plc 1323 1152.2 20285.0 131.2 11.4 8.8
Dragon Oil 305.5 1559.1 28321.0 303.0 19.4 5.1
Emerald Energy 215 120.6 3674.0 14.5 12.0 8.3
JKX Oil & Gas 394.25 608.3 11146.0 56.0 9.2 10.9
Premier Oil 1181 968.0 33300.0 164.0 16.9 5.9
Tullow 647.5 4504.0 69700.0 492.0 10.9 9.2
LSE - AIM
Global Energy
Development
115.5 40.8 1236.0 17.5 42.9 2.3
TSX
Heritage Oil Corp (£) 2752 669.0 169.0 69.5 10.4 9.6
Tower Resources 3 16.1 18750.0* 12.4** 77.0 1.3
* Hypothetical
production
** Hypothetical risked
resources
6.8
Source: VSA Capital

In addition, the market is assigning a value of £1.3/bbl for our risked hypothetical resources, the lowest
in our universe. It should be stressed that this is a hypothetical scenario as Tower Resources does not
have any proven and probable reserves whereas the other companies have booked reserves.
Exhibit VII: Value of reserves assigned by market capitalisation (£/bbl)
10.9
9.6
9.2
8.8
8.3
7.8
5.9
5.7
5.1
2.3
1.3
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
JKX Oil & Gas
Heritage Oil Corp (£)
Tullow
Dana Petroleum Plc
Emerald Energy
Burren
Premier Oil
Cairn Energy
Dragon Oil
Global Energy Development
Tower Resources
£/bbl
Source: VSA Capital
FINANCIALS
At the end of June 2007, Tower Resources had cash balances of £2.13m, after spending £0.48m in
capital expenditure and a reported loss for the six months to 30 June 2007 of £0.25m. Tower Resources
expects to receive US$1.7m from Arcadia in back costs as part of the farm-out arrangements. For the
current year we expect the Company to report a net of loss of US$3.5m.

We have estimated the Company's Profit & Loss, Balance Sheet and Cash Flows up to 2009. In our
financial projections, we have used a declining crude oil price from US$70/bbl in 2007 to US$63.18 in
2009. We have also assumed a 100m bbls reserve field that comes on-stream in 2012. Again, this is for
illustrative purposes as the Company does not have a reserve base.
The hypothetical financial projection shows that if Tower Resources found a 100m bbls field in Uganda
it will probably report a negative operating cash flow of US$12m in 2009 as it starts developing its
discovery. Its balance sheet will clearly deteriorate as its capital expenditure increases significantly in
2010, with estimated closing net debt of US$48m in 2009.
Table VII: Profit & Loss, Balance Sheet & Cash Flow Projections, 2005-2009
PROFIT & LOSS US$m 2005a 2006a 2007e 2008e 2009e
Year End 31 December
Revenue 0 0 0 0 0
Cost of Sales 0 0 (2) (3) (6)
Gross Profit 0 0 (2) (3) (6)
EBITDA 0 (2) (5) (9) (5)
Operating Profit (before
GW and except.)
0 (2) (5) (9) (5)
Goodwill Amortisation 0 0 0 0 0
Exceptionals 0 0 0 0 (1)
Other 0 1 2 (3) (6)
Operating Profit 0 (1) (4) (12) (12)
Net Interest 0 0 0 0 0
Profit Before Tax
(norm)
0 (1) (4) (6) (11)
Profit Before Tax (FRS
3)
0 (1) (4) (6) (12)
Tax (0) 0 0 0 0
Profit After Tax (norm) (0) (1) (-4) (-6) (-12)
Profit After Tax (FRS3) 0 (1) (4) (6) (12)
Average Number of
Shares Outstanding (m)
536.7 536.7 536.7 536.7 536.7
EPS - normalised (p) (0.0) (0.0) (-0.1) (-0.1) (-0.2)
EPS - FRS 3 (p) 0.0 (0.0) (0.1) (0.1) (0.2)
BALANCE SHEET
Fixed Assets 0 0 5 13 15
Intangible Assets 0 0 1 5 5
Tangible Assets 0 0 4 8 10
Investment in associates 0 0 0 0 0
Current Assets 1 1 8 39 124
Debtors 0 0 3 25 75
Cash 1 1 4 13 34
Current Liabilities 0 0 5 45 75
Creditors 0 0 5 45 75
Short term borrowings 0 0 0 0 0
Long Term Liabilities 0 0 35 75 100
Long term borrowings 0 0 35 75 100
Other long term
liabilities
0 0 0 0 0
Net Assets 1 1 52 171 314
CASH FLOW
Operating Cash Flow (0) (1) (4) (6) (12)
Net Interest 0 0 0 0 0
2009 closing net debt of
US$48m

Tax 0 0 0 0 0
Capex 0 (1) (1) (5) (5)
Acquisitions/disposals 0 0 (1) (1) (5)
Financing 0 2 11 25 50
Dividends 0 0 0 0 0
Opening net
debt/(cash) 0 0 1 7 20
HP finance leases
initiated
0 0 0 0 0
Other (0) (1) (12) (27) (56)
Closing net
debt/(cash)
0 1 7 20 48
Source: VSA Capital
DIVIDEND POLICY
The Company is unlikely to pay a dividend while it builds its asset base.
MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS
The major shareholders in the Company are given below:
Table VIII: Major Shareholders
Name %
Bayview Investments 18.6
Credit Suisse Clients Nominees 12.4
Peter Taylor 9.82
Peter Blakey 9.82
Forest Nominees 9.7
Teawood Nominees 6
Bruce Rowan 4.7
TOTAL 71.04
Source: VSA Capital

VSA RESOURCES INVESTMENT RESEARCH TOWER RESOURCES PLC COMPANY REVIEW NOVEMBER 2007 23
S.W.O.T. Analysis
Strengths
 Good and experienced management, with
extensive knowledge of the oil industry.
 Situated in one of the hottest areas for finding
hydrocarbon resources in the world at the
moment.
 Its exploration and drilling commitments are
fully funded having farmed-out its interest to
strong industry players.
Weaknesses
 Main competitors with substantial financial
muscle.
 Lack of readily available drilling rigs.
 Potential time scale of development.
Opportunities
 High oil prices expected to remain for some
time leading to continued interest in the Oils
sector.
 Uganda's Albertine Graben and Namibia's
Dolphin Graben are underexplored basins.
 Further opportunities in Africa.
Threats
 High oil prices lead to a decline in world
economic growth and hence weakening
demand for crude oil.
 Exploration drilling in Uganda and Namibia
is unsuccessful.
 Exploration acreage close to Congolese war
zones.
 Political instability in central African regions.

24 TOWER RESOURCES PLC COMPANY REVIEW NOVEMBER 2007 VSA RESOURCES INVESTMENT RESEARCH
EBITDA Profit after Tax (FRS3) Net Closing Cash Balances
EBITDA
-10
-9
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
2005a 2006a 2007e 2008e 2009e
US$m
Profit after Tax (FRS3)
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2005a 2006a 2007e 2008e 2009e
US$m
Closing Net Debt
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2005a 2006a 2007e 2008e 2009e
US$m
Growth metrics % Profitability metrics % Balance sheet metrics %
EPS CAGR 05-09e n/a ROCE 2008e (0.0) Gearing 2008e 37
EPS CAGR 07-09e n/a Avg ROCE 05-09e n/a Interest cover 2008e 0
EBITDA CAGR 05-09e n/a ROE 2008e 3 % Stock turn 2008e 0
EBITDA CAGR 07-09e n/a Gross margin 2008e n/a Debtor days 2008e 0
Sales CAGR 07-09e n/a Operating margin 2008e n/a Creditor days 2008e 0
Gross mgm/Op margin n/a
Principal shareholders % Forthcoming announcements/catalysts Management
team
Bayview Investments 18.6 Preliminaries 2007 5.5.2008 Chairman: Peter Kingston
Credit Suisse Clients Nominees 12.4 Annual Report 2007 6.5.2008 Non-Ex Director: Peter Taylor
Peter Taylor 9.82 AGM 2.6.2008 Non-Ex Director: Peter Blakey
Peter Blakey 9.82 Interims 20.9.2008 Non-Ex Director: Mark Savage
Forest Nominees 9.7 Non-Ex Director: Jeremy Asher
Teawood Nominees 6.0
Bruce Rowan 4.7
IMPORTANT NOTICE
This research report has been prepared by VSA Resources
Limited, for which it has been paid a fee, as corporate finance
advisors and arrangers to Tower Resources plc and is solely for
and directed at persons who have professional experience in
matters relating to investments and who are Investment
Professionals, as specified in Article 19(5) of the Financial
Services and Markets Act 2000 (Financial Promotion) Order
2001. This research report is exempt from the general
restriction on the communication of invitations or inducements
to enter into investment activity and has therefore not been
approved by an authorised person, as would otherwise be
required by Section 21 of the Financial Services and Markets
Act 2000 (the "Act"). Persons who do not fall within the above
category should return this research report to VSA Resources
Limited, 43 London Wall, London, EC2M 5TF, immediately.
This research report is not intended to be distributed or passed
on, directly or indirectly, to any other class of persons. It is
being supplied to you solely for your information and may not
be reproduced, forwarded to any other person or published, in
whole or in part, for any purpose, without out prior written
consent.
Neither the information nor any opinion expressed
constitutes an offer, or an invitation to make an offer, to buy or
sell any securities or any options, futures or other derivatives
related to such securities.
The information and opinions contained in this research
report have been compiled or arrived at by VSA Resources
Limited (the "Company") from sources believed to be reliable
and in good faith but no representation or warranty, express or
implied, is made as to their accuracy, completeness or
correctness. All opinions and estimates contained in the research
report constitute the Company's judgements as of the date of the
report and are subject to change without notice. The
information contained in the report is published for the
assistance of those persons defined above but it is not to be
relied upon as authoritative or taken in substitution for the
exercise of the judgement of any reader.
The Company accepts no liability whatsoever for any direct
or consequential loss arising from any use of the information
contained herein. The company does not make any
representation to any reader of the research report as to the
suitability of any investment made in connection with this report
and readers must satisfy themselves of the suitability in light of
their own understanding, appraisal of risk and reward,
objectives, experience and financial and operational resources.
The value of any companies or securities referred to in this
research report may rise as well as fall and sums recovered may
be less than those originally invested. Any references to past
performance of any companies or investments referred to in this
research report are not indicative of their future performance.
The Company and/or its directors and/or employees may
have long or short positions in the securities mentioned herein,
or in options, futures and other derivative instruments based on
these securities or commodities.
Not all of the products recommended or discussed in this
research report may be regulated by the Financial Services and
Markets Act 2000 and the rules made for the protection of
investors by that Act will not apply to them.
If you are in any doubt about the investment to which this
report relates, you should consult a person authorised and
regulated by the Financial Services Authority who specialises in
advising on securities of the kind described.
The Company does and seeks to do business with the
companies covered in its research reports. Thus, investors
should be aware that the Company may have a conflict of
interest that may affect the objectivity of this report.
The analyst who prepared this report has not and will not
receive any compensation for providing a specific
recommendation or view in this report.
Investors should consider this report as only a single factor
in making their investment decision.
The information in this report is not intended to be
published or made available to any person in the United States
of America (USA) or Canada or any jurisdiction where to do so
would result in contravention of any applicable laws or
regulations. Accordingly, if it is prohibited to make such
information available in your jurisdiction or to you (by reason of
your nationality, residence or otherwise) it is not directed at you.
VSA Capital Ltd. is Authorised and Regulated by the
Financial Services Authority

Tower Resources Research Report 19.11.2007

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (8)

Similar to Tower Resources Research Report 19.11.2007

Similar to Tower Resources Research Report 19.11.2007 (20)

Tower Resources Research Report 19.11.2007