COMPANY AFFAIRS.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 279, 24 November 1928, Page 4

COMPANY AFFAIRS.

NORTH AUCKLAND LAND CORPORATION.

A GOOD BEGINNING

The first annual report issued by the North Auckland Land Development Corporation has just been issued. The accounts show a net profit o£ £5701. It is not proposed to pay a dividend, as the chairman of directors, Mr. A. J. Hutchinson states, firstly, that the auditor does not recommend it, and, secondly, that he is more anxious to see the corporation prove "that closer settlement is possible, that by careful management and co-operation home settlement on email areas can be financially successful, than the payment of large dividends. In his report to the board, the managing director, Mr. G. E. Alderton, states that: "The first year's operations have been completely successful, and have exceeded anticipations. The net profit earned is larger than was estimated in the company's prospectus, and the costs of administration are below the estimate. The profit earned represents 24 per cent on the paid up capital." The balance sheet shows authorised capital of £35,000, of which £18,279 has been paid up. The chief outside liability is to the Public Trustee, £46,151, and the principal assets are property, £57,152, and sundry purchasers, £14,078.

COAL OIL (NEW ZEALAND), LTD. "Oilrock" writes:— The somewhat dogmatic assertions made by Mr. E. A. Goldsmith regarding the finding of approximately 400 acres of petroleum deposits in the Omata district of Tarauaki, would appear to need some qualification. Whilst the writer would bo the last to decry the value of science as applied to oil location, it must be understood that this science of geophysics is now only on its trial. The drill is stiil the final arbiter in petroleum getting, and some negative bores have already been put down in the Omata district of Taranaki. In the prospectus issued by the Coal Oil (New Zealand) Ltd., special attention is drawn to the Waipatiki petroleum fields, and several pages are taken up in belauding the above fields, together with the reports oi several geologists. A report that is not mentioned is one by an eminent geologist now occupying probably the highest position in Australia. He reported on the Waipatiki fields in 1922, and an extract therefrom reads thus:— '"No encouraging results were obtained from Number 2 bore, and it seems inadvisable on this ground alone to proceed with Number 1 bore. It is practically certain that the Waipatiki bore Number 1 is placed unfavourably for a prospecting bore, and that it is one of the many cases in which money expended could have been saved by a preliminary geological report." To the writer it seems fair that both sides of the picture should be presented, particularly as this bore, Number 1, is cited as a considerable asset in the prospectus.