found this 27 Sep 2013 13:43
Coalfield Resources being a simple property play, they should read what I have just had posted on a Yorkshire Post news item about Coalfield Resources: "Coalfield Resources aiming to concentrate on property investments" @
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/business/business-news/coalfield-resources-aiming-to-focus-on-property-investments-1-5957685
"I would argue that this news report misrepresents the property portfolio of this Company, when it claims that it want to concentrate on redeveloping 'former coalfield land' implying that it is concerned to develop former deep mine sites. This may be true in some cases, but further research produces a different picture about what the bulk of this land is and what 'development' may mean for it.
The company recently produced a prospectus in support of its attempts to raise £5m. In it, it states that it has a 30,000 acre estate, of which 20,000 acres are agricultural land, some of which contains 'minerals'. Looking further back, to the last annual report produced for UK Coal plc in 2011, this company's predecessor, it showed that these 'minerals' were nearly 78m tonnes of surface mineable coal.
The question then that needs to be asked is whether, for this 'former coalfield land' development will mean seeking planning permission to exploit these coal reserves. This will be a much more long drawn out process that redeveloping brownfield land, which will meet with local opposition, as witnessed currently where all former UK Coal planning proposals for new opencast sites are opposed by local groups."
For those of you thinking of taking up the placement offer, look at my previous posts on this issue, check the prospectus to see whether there is any mention of coal (p 71 is the best place) and ask questions of the management about where the 78m tonnes of coal mentioned in UK Coal's 2011 Annual Report has gone. If it is still counted as an asset, why not mention it in the prospectus?