Final Results Due In March 2005.

http://www.cityfin.co.uk
Trades over 450,000 shares are delayed in reporting by 1 Hour.

One of City Financial Associates (CFP's) main operating goals is to bring fledgling companies to the market. With the depressed stock market over the last few years many potential clients have deffered entry to the LSE. Markets have now turned and the reality of a sucession of new floatations is growing. CFP are well positioned to enjoy the rewards that will be benefited to them in this growing market place.

Why the EXCITEMENT - will here are the reasons why I think we're on a winner.

1) My motto is when it's comes to investing there are three things. Management, management and management. With any good investment - the management should be the driving force in a company. Can they cut the mustard, are they dynamic, do they have good contacts? I think so if you read the following profile.

Stephen Barclay, Executive Chairman

Stephen Barclay, aged 61, qualified as a Chartered Accountant in 1964 with Robson Rhodes before obtaining an MBA degree from Wharton Business School in 1967. In 1989, after a career during which he reorganised various companies, he established City Financial Associates Plc (formerly Clifton Financial Associates Plc) to provide corporate finance advice to small to medium sized private and public companies. In August 1998, City Financial Associates Plc was purchased by Talisman House Plc (now Seymour Pierce Group Plc) where he became group executive chairman. In December 1998, Talisman House Plc purchased an institutional stockbroker, Seymour Pierce Limited, where he became executive chairman. He resigned as a director of Seymour Pierce Group Plc and various other group companies at the end of March 2001 to found CFA Capital Group Plc. He is a director of a number of public companies including MICE Group Plc and Talisman First Venture Capital Trust Plc and is a governor of the London School of Economics and Political Science.

John Shaw, Executive Director

John Shaw, aged 54, qualified as a Chartered Accountant in 1975 with Touche Ross & Co in London. Subsequently he spent two years seconded to the Quotations Department of the London Stock Exchange returning to Touche Ross & Co to join the Corporate Finance Group until 1982. After a period as a sole practitioner, he joined Chase Investment Bank Limited in 1985, was appointed a director and founded the Equity Investment Group, formed to invest in unquoted companies. In 1990 he joined Henry Ansbacher & Co Limited as an Assistant Director of Corporate Finance. He started working with City Financial Associates Plc in early 1995 and was appointed a director in December 1996. He was appointed a director of Seymour Pierce Limited in December 1998 where he was initially Head of Corporate Finance and latterly Head of Private Equity. He resigned from Seymour Pierce Limited and various other group companies at the end of March 2001 to found CFA Capital Group Plc.

2) They have turned a 2 million loss into nearly a profit if you ignore costs for discontinuing operations - that some turn around.

3) With only small market capital of 3.83M it's feasible to suggest they could make a good profit this year as they have already got off to a good start signing more clients.

A profit of half million would give a pe ratio of 7.66

1 million a pe ratio of 3.83

1.5 million a pe ratio of 2.55

2 million a pe ratio of 1.91.

So it would only take a small profit to make this company super undervalued. Consider the possibility they could achieve a 2 million profit this year, which is the least, I expect, we could be looking at a share price of 7p. YES THAT'S 7P (An average p/e for the sector is 16.) Even with a profit of only 1 million that's still an upside of 3.5p.

3) Consider the fact that some of their clients pay their fee by way of giving large share holdings to CFP. All it would take is two or three creamy companies to give them valuable portfolio holding which they could cash in at a substantial return.

4) The IPO is sector has already increased three fold this year. More and more companies are coming into AIM and from abroad then ever before. Rules have changed where foreign companies can use a fast track scheme to get on board more quickly then ever before. I'm sure CFA Associates are well positioned to benefit with this increase in volume.

5) We could see a re-rating this year in this sector, which would be the cherry on the top.

I rest my case, to me this is a no brainer unless you want to wait for the next results for proof they have achieved profitability. If that's your cautious approach, fine but by then, you can then expect a much higher share price then now.

Major Shareholdings:
Stephen John Barclay 64,600,000 11.66%
Pershing Keen Noms Ltd 49,610,000 8.95%
John Richard Shaw 29,400,000 5.31%

RNS Number:9414C
CFA Capital Group PLC
15 September 2004

CFA Capital Group plc
Interim results for the 6 months ended 30 June 2004
CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT

Highlights

* Nominated Adviser to 20 AIM companies - broker to 15 AIM companies

* Currently handling a number of AIM flotations and other major transactions

* Strong second-half order book - solid outlook for year

* Turnover for the period up 95% to #510,000 (6 months to 30 June 2003:
#262,000 from continuing operations)

* Losses before taxation of #58,000, (loss 6 months to 30 June 2003:
#208,000 from continuing operations)

* Currently recruiting to further strengthen team

Introduction
I am pleased to announce that CFA is now retained as Nominated Adviser to 20 AIM
companies and broker to 16 AIM companies. The company is currently working on a
number of AIM flotations and other major transactions, and as such has built a
strong order book for the second half of 2004. The fees generated by this
activity, taken together with our underlying retainer income and largely-fixed
overhead base, leaves us well-positioned for a satisfactory outcome to the year
as a whole.

Sharply reduced losses for the first half were achieved even though we had to
incur costs on two flotations that were not completed until July 2004 which
generated revenues of #225,000. These revenues were not recognised in the
results to 30 June 2004.

Turnover for the period nonetheless increased 95% to #510,000 (6 months to 30
June 2003: #262,000 from continuing operations), with losses before taxation of
#58,000 showing a marked improvement from #208,000 (6 months to June 2003 -
continuing operations).

Following the sale of CFA Securities Limited in 2003, CFA is now firmly focused
on servicing the needs of clients who are essentially AIM listed companies run
by entrepreneurs. We now have a team of eight, comprising executives and support
staff, providing corporate finance and broking advice. We are in the process of
recruiting further executives to join the team. This recruitment will ensure
client service levels are maintained as we meet the increasing demand for our
services.

In accordance with my statement on the results for the year to 31 December 2003,
CFA started the beginning of 2004 with a good pipeline of work and with a degree
of optimism that market conditions would enable these deals to be completed and
this was the case in the first quarter to 31 March 2004. However, in the second
quarter, in a number of cases transactions that we anticipated completing in the
first half have either been completed since the end of June or have been
deferred. This adversely affected our earlier expectations of financial
performance in the first half of the year.

Financial review
Despite these factors CFA achieved a creditable result in the first half.
Turnover was #510,000 (6 months ended 30 June 2003: #262,000 from continuing
operations), overheads (including plc running costs) were #609,000 (2003:
#458,000 on continuing operations) and the loss before taxation for the period
was #58,000 (6 months ended 2003: loss #208,000).

These results need to be seen in the context of our having completed the
flotation of Smallbone plc (admitted to AIM on 26 July) and Ragusa Capital plc
(admitted to AIM on 15 July). No income is taken into account in the period in
respect of these transactions, although a significant amount of the costs
relating to these flotations were incurred in the period.

CFA is now retained as Nominated Adviser to 20 AIM companies and retained Broker
to AIM 15 companies. Annualised recurring income currently totals over #340,000
representing approximately 30 per cent of total budgeted group costs, and we
anticipate that our level of retainers and this source of revenue will show a
significant increase by the year end. Our increasing base of retained clients
not only provides a source of recurring revenue but is also a prime source of
transactions.

On 27 May 2004 we announced a placing of 65 million new ordinary shares at a
price of 0.7p per share, to raise #441,340 net of expenses. As at 31 December
2003 the net assets of CFA Capital Group plc were #534,000. The impact of the
placing and the small loss in the period, has been to increase the Group's net
worth as at 30 June 2004 to #914,000, creating a sound financial base.

Current trading
We currently have a strong order book both in respect of a number of AIM
flotations and other transactions partially arising through our existing client
base. On the basis that we complete a good number of these transactions, we
anticipate a satisfactory outcome for the year as a whole.

Summary
On 31 July 2004, John Shaw stood down as a Director of CFA Capital Group plc and
all Group companies. John has worked with me for over 10 years and was a founder
shareholder of the Company in 2001. The Board thanks John for his significant
contribution and wishes him well for the future.

The Board also extends its thanks to the entire team for their efforts so far
this year.

Tony Rawlinsons comments would lead yopu to believe that they are hoping to win some deals buy the end of the year.there is only six weeks of this year left!so is good news just around the corner?

I hope i am not wrong when i say that the negative posts of yesterday may have been a little "downbeat". I hope there was no other motive

I have read with interest the opinion of overgrowth on CFP. I personally respect everybody's opinion after all each one does their own research and is responsible for their decisions.
I would point out that overgrowth says nothing to disprove my post earlier.
Therefore people should think hard on his motives.
As to whether the company makes money or not, I do not know for sure. But overgrowth claims he knows they are on profit because of a carry over. Well this shows to me that he does not or cannot read the interims or he wishes to paint a rosy picture.
This company needs revenue of no less than 1.2 million before they make profit. You should ask overgrowth where is this money. Then you would have a better view. The truth is he does not know nobody does.
The rest of his answers to my points are personal views and he has nothing to hold on.
I merely point out a contrarian view in my post I do not intend to deramp.
People should not fall in love with this stock nor follow a single opinion. Usually there is more than one answer to an issue.
When a director departs sure it can be for ordinary reasons. But for small companies it has an impact.
Whatever overgrowth says my best defence of the arguments I presented to you in the previous post IS the share price. At the end of the day it is you you buys or sells the market and your opinion determines the sp. Have a look at it. Does it look healthy to you? So things cannot be running smoothly.
It cannot be the market and smallcaps.
It is not me who tries to pull wool over your eyes.... Have a great day.

Overgrowth: Here you go....Rowlinson agrees with me on point 1 of my assertions.
Thank you

In fact every one of my 5 points are facts imo.

Willfagg: You said it. Lead you to believe ...sure but he does not say that they will be in profit. I do not know either if they will be but they are NOT yet. Look at the interims and the response to the interims from the MARKET...a price drop ....

I hope they will become in profit....We ask Overgrowth what revenue is needed to justify the EXISTING share price on FUNDAMENTALS . Where does he think it will come from when we do not know yet of any new companies floated and we have only weeks from the end of year.....I hope they be on profit but what are the chances?

Eric: I agree with your post above but I do not think the fair price of 0.7-0.8p is correct. That sp requires far more revenue and profits and is highly unlikely in my opinion to be produced.

In my opinion max profit of 250k would be fantastic (but I fear unlikely) if they can deliver it..... then you work out what sp this corresponds to it cannot be as high....

I wish therefore it could be but my hard thinking says sorry I dont see it.

And finally good luck all.....I mean well and you should not feel bad for me being hard in my words above but fair. After all the market determines the price not me. Be good!

morning all . just read all the recent posts and i have to say well done to all. a fair and balanced reasoned arguement. im saying this because there are other threads where things get personal and arguement becomes bs.all i can say is that it helps re reading post 1. and this is a long term play.be patient and take a look next march.

Andros , I respect differing opinions. I think the decline of the share price argument does not stack up as companies like PXC and CYH have a pretty unhealthy share graph showing decline, but their medium term prospects are good(IMO). They are not accused of being badly managed companies. However "these" companies are at times not the best at communication and as we have seen this usually results with share price drift downwards.You could write your comments to fit a large number of small cap shares and so I guess it ends up as a matter of personal assessment,analysis and intuition.
Profit is not everything in a company in fact most small companies operate at a loss until they have grown a sufficient revenue base. On this assumption we would not have bought SPS who are still making a significant loss
The company has a level of revenue and we await their hopefully successful announcemants of cotracts theya re winning to move it towards profit.The quaestion perhaps should be are they moving towards profit according to the plan they have reported and is this plan seen as an acceptable rate of progress for the city? I believe the answer lies in new contract announcements in the near future......I hope.
As a final note based on your criteria I do not think any of us speculative punters would ever buy a single share.

willfagg: Thank you for your post and I think I have understood you. I do not disagree necessarily but what I said may need clarification.
Has the company progressed from last year: My answer is YES it has.
Has it progressed well? For me and for some who bought over 1p No it has not.
Is it managed well? I said PR has been a problem. This is not my job but the management's responsibility. They have admitted to this being below par aleady.
Have they managed to make money? Not yet but they are getting there slowly. More slowly than I would like and certainly the market thinks so since after the interims the market was negative towards CFP and the price dropped significantly. Overall this management is so old fashioned I am not saying they have not experience. But any organisation requires NEW blood. New ideas, energy.
You say profits are not essential. Well we have no profits that is why the sp cannot be sustained at the levels it has been....If it was not essential then we could have been at 2p months ago.....based on sentiment only.
Is it a good investment?....Well I hope it becomes. But at the moment things look dire. I hope by January if we get an RNS things to improve. The question one should ask is how does this investment compare say with others such as CYC? Sue Helen had a nice comparative graph between CYC and CFP. I am not sure if it is still around. After all one thing we all have is choice. I leave this to be answered by others after all your criteria for buying and selling are not the same as mine perhaps....Best Wishes....

I posted this today on a.d.v.f.n

DFGO - 11 Nov'04 - 12:42 - 1324 of 1333 edit


Hoodless Brennan have a write up on CFA which is quite intresting.

www.hoodlessbrennan.com point to market update, in the box click HB Archive
library, scrool down to cfa you will need adobe reader to read the report

www.hoodlessbrennan.com

DFGO - 11 Nov'04 - 16:00 - 1330 of 1333 edit


Andonis

IPOs are 100k in fees plus 4-5% comission on funds raised.

Secondary equity raising on a similar fee plus commission basis.

CFA need 60k a month to cover overheads (overheads 609k in june 2004 interrims) so 60k might be on high side as no replacement yet for John Shaw.

current fund raising in the pipeline expected to complete H2 are worth
approx 800k in fee income it could be more?

recurring income 15k - 20k per broker/nomad client CFA at interims had
20 nomads and 15 broker clients which will increase by year end

225k carried forward from interims.

25k from sale of ashdene shares.

if they do 800k in H2 that would make 400k plus before tax

DFGO - 11 Nov'04 - 16:19 - 1332 of 1333 edit



So working on SBL Price earnings chart 0.0142p is possible at year end

here!S hoping


DFGO - 11 Nov'04 - 16:21 - 1333 of 1333 edit



Hood B do say 800k in pipeline H2

I hope AMG72 don!T mind me posting this from cfp thread on a.d.v.f.n


AMG72 - 10 Nov'04 - 23:51 - 1312 of 1333


whitewestie (post 1265) and pareagle (post1302)

I posted on here last night (1264) saying I too had emailed CFP (Stephen Barclay)re. the lack of news. I've just got in and checked my email and I've had a response from Tony Rawlinson! See below.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr Garrod

Thank you for your note to Stephen Barclay. I take on board your comment and we will improve the information flow to the market. We are working on a number of deals at present and are determined to get as many completed for the year end as possible.

Kind regards

Tony Rawlinson
MD

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Donna Miller On Behalf Of Stephen Barclay
Sent: 10 November 2004 09:19
To: Tony Rawlinson
Subject: FW: CFP


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: AMGarrod
Sent: 09 November 2004 21:47
To: Stephen Barclay
Subject: CFP


Dear Mr Barclay

I am a small share holder in CFP and I strongly believe it is an excellent company, but I must admit I am growing increasingly frustrated at the lack of progress news.

I really can't understand why CFP don't release trading news more often. DAN & CYC release RNS's on business won/completed and their share price is ticking along nicely.

CFP is an excellent company but I feel you really do need to blow your own trumpets a bit more, and surely if you did this would increase your profile and help you win more business?

I'd be grateful on your (or a representative of CFP) thoughts on this matter.

With best regards.

Andrew Garrod

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I hope they do manage to get the deals completed on time and this is the start of improved information flow to their investors!

AG

If DFGO's estimation turns out to be true then this would be excellent.
The worry is nobody knows. If the company releases RNS that will help a lot.
Good Luck

Best Wishes

andros, DFGO

Helpful posts. Its good to have a constructive debate. The dangeer on a bb such as this is that those participating are all postive because they want to be. So I see andros role as devils advocate very helpful.

DFGO's post ties in with previous ones. Essentially, there is 225K in the bag plus 200K retainer fees (probably low). Quote refers to pipeline so there may be other fees already booked. If 800K booked for the second half, then we would be talking about operating profit for year of order of 500K. That's 0.08p per share or PE of 6. If there is a significant carry forward for next year, then at least it will be clear what the trading level is going forward.

andros seems to be arguing from the low current price. No doubt, he would have argued the same about the ASOS current price a year ago of 5p. Current price is just the effect of market forces. SueHelen, I suggest, hits the nail on the head when she talks about the disinterest of the market at this time of year, so she will be a buyer, but not until the New Year. However, there is an argument that the current price is ridiculously low, lower than the funds injected although the indications are that the company is performing well. Essentially, the company consists of fee-earners, each of whom will earn a very good multiple because fees are task rather than time related, together with a success factor, e.g. in fundraising exercises.

So I fundamentally disagree with andros that the value of CFP has much to do with its price now in the market. If someone was to do a due diligence now, what value would they arrive at? We will know more in March. We may know more earlier, as a result of a level of commitment taken on board by Rawlinson. The only real point in debating this now is to discourage readers from taking a loss now. For new investors, one approach is to follow SueHelen and wait until January, or perhaps end of December, to be in before the price moves. That is only 6 weeks away. The price could move in the meantime. But the decision whether to invest now depends on the alternative homes for your funds.

Eric

p.s. There is a very significant upside for this share, which operates in a very attractive market sector. There just isn't a downside, except possibly in the very short term.

DFGO: The answer to your question is yes.

EWRobson: IF this company produces 500k profit the sp will most likely reach 1p! The market will love it!
I do not think the company has performed as well as we expected. The interims were not up to scratch, people expected a profit not a loss.
I agree selling at this stage at least for my own situation is not a viable option. I cannot recommend this to others obviously.
The chances for this to go much lower are in my view less probable but not impossible in view of the 'likely' release of news from tony r. of CFP.
If news comes this will certainly change the environment.
The email from T.R. is encouraging but can be interpreted either way. It is up to you how you wish to interpret it.
I somehow do not think (not what I wish for) that this company will produce great results. If 250k profit is produced this in my view would be good to sustain current price....time will reveal all.

Best of luck.

andros

I think we respect each others views. It seems that the main difference in viewpoint depends on the view taken of the interims. You are clearly right that the interims disappointed a lot of people. But those interims turned on delay in taking credit for two contracts for which most of the work had been done. 225K of additional sales would have meant a pbt of 125K. The market would probably be looking at 500K for the year or a pe of 12.5 at 1p per share. It seems that the drop in price is largely explained by this accounting practise.

Having said that an expectation at the interim stage of 500K at finals would have supported a price of 1p, I would have thought that such a result in March would move the price further ahead based on the expectations for 2005. 800K in the pipeline now is indicative of significant growth potential. If the amrket looks for 1M in 2005 then that would be a pe of 6 at 1p, or more lokely a price more like 1.5p.

Much of the argument appears to have been half empty v. half full. Lets dirnk to it! Cheers

Eric

Eric: Yes yo are right. In my view 800k in the pipeline is a dream scenario which I do not bank on. You seem to be taking it in your stride. I do not do so on the basis of absence of good evidence. I wish I am wrong in the end and that they manage it. I would rather be cautious than take too much for granted which I did prior to the interims and it backfired.
And I do not think too much at all of this management that is true in view of the way they have manged the market, plus they seem to be unable to understand PR and new technology and take advantage of it.
Problem is at the moment the half empty cup is the most sensible approach and the approach the market takes.
Yea lets hope they come up trumps....cheers to it.