ADVFN Logo

We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now

Toplists

It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Hot Features

Registration Strip Icon for discussion Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.

BUR Burford Capital Limited

1,243.00
-9.00 (-0.72%)
28 Mar 2024 - Closed
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Burford Capital Limited LSE:BUR London Ordinary Share GG00BMGYLN96 ORD NPV (DI)
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  -9.00 -0.72% 1,243.00 1,251.00 1,255.00 1,283.00 1,249.00 1,266.00 389,149 16:35:05
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
Unit Inv Tr, Closed-end Mgmt 326.08M 30.51M 0.1393 90.02 2.75B
Burford Capital Limited is listed in the Unit Inv Tr, Closed-end Mgmt sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker BUR. The last closing price for Burford Capital was 1,252p. Over the last year, Burford Capital shares have traded in a share price range of 535.50p to 1,387.00p.

Burford Capital currently has 218,957,218 shares in issue. The market capitalisation of Burford Capital is £2.75 billion. Burford Capital has a price to earnings ratio (PE ratio) of 90.02.

Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

Showing 25951 to 25973 of 25975 messages
Chat Pages: 1039  1038  1037  1036  1035  1034  1033  1032  1031  1030  1029  1028  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
29/3/2024
07:00
Excellent,very useful,thank you.
djderry
29/3/2024
06:40
Timetable from Seb expecting Appeal decision H1 2025.Republic's principal brief (already filed)February 22, 2024.Plaintiffs' principal-and-response brief (already filed)March 25, 2024.Republic's response-and-reply briefYPF's principal-and-response brief (principal in the conditional cross-cross-appeal and response in the cross-appeal)June 24, 2024.Plaintiffs' response-and-reply brief (response in the conditional cross-cross-appeal and reply in the cross-appeal)July 24, 2024.YPF's replyAugust 23, 2024.Deferred joint appendixAugust 23, 2024.Final briefsSeptember 6, 2024
chester9
28/3/2024
14:23
This paragraph of the shareholder letter in today's Annual Report should attract some interest:
"We also believe we have reached the point of financial capacity and maturity such that we can try for a few “more
Petersens”. What that really means is having a willingness to take on some matters that come with higher risk and
potentially longer duration but the prospect of much higher returns upon success. We have largely avoided such
matters in the past, sensitive to public investors’ preference for lower risk, shorter duration, more predictable
matters; Petersen was an outlier for us because, candidly, we were able to obtain the rights to the matter very
inexpensively compared to its potential value. However, we are missing out on a valuable portion of the litigation
market with this approach, and we believe our scale permits us to take on over time a few more matters with
moderate capital outlay that have the potential for ten-figure outcomes."

tradertrev
28/3/2024
12:31
In today’s annual report (pg 10 & 147) the company restates the message shared in the shareholder letter about losing US foreign private issuer status and gaining a full US issuer status from Jan 25 with the benefit of qualification for US indexation, probably this year.

Given the propensity to passively invest in index tracking ETFs this feels like it will cause a material step up in demand for BUR shares with no change in supply, leading to decent price action.

Current market cap would qualify for Russell 2000.

Am I wrong/missing something here?

kuk1doh
27/3/2024
22:51
So if they buy AIM shares would they be for UK staff is my point. If that’s correct should we expect a buying of shares on US stock market once the final UK ones purchased
syoun2
27/3/2024
22:30
According to the RNS announcement, Bur will buy £5M worth of shares on the AIM London. That’s about 450k shares. Through to yesterday 250k were purchased. Probably another 50k today. So a bit to go still. It’s providing support for the share price in London yet the breakouts are happening in US, as we saw again today. Nice to see that momentum… it’s picked up since the appeal rebuttal documents went in this week and the chicken judgement last week.

Has anyone a link to the appeal document? Keen to read the challenge to Preska’s choice to assign no blame to YPF itself.

kuk1doh
27/3/2024
22:28
There’s more US staff so let’s hope
syoun2
27/3/2024
22:19
I think so … share price getting ready to Rumble!
futurekid
27/3/2024
20:57
Burford purchased £15 million in shares for staff does that mean we will hear on Friday they will buy Us shares ?
syoun2
27/3/2024
20:56
10% ownership is c$350m! They are going all in ..
futurekid
27/3/2024
18:53
Let's hope they become billionaires through their holdings!
reddirish
27/3/2024
16:55
They definitely have a lot of skin in the game.
chester9
27/3/2024
16:53
Burford's CEO and CIO invest $5.1 million in Burford's Ordinary Shares.On March 22, 2024, Burford's Chief Executive Officer, Christopher Bogart, and Burford's Chief Investment Officer, Jonathan Molot, used their respective cash compensation to invest in aggregate $5.1 million in Burford's ordinary shares of nil par value ("Shares") through Burford's employee deferred compensation plan..These investments total 333,528 Shares, comprising 167,991 Shares by Mr. Bogart and 165,537 by Mr. Molot..Christopher Bogart, Burford's Chief Executive Officer, commented:."Jon and I have together made significant investments in Burford's ordinary shares in recent years and now together have exposure to almost 10% of Burford's shares."
chester9
26/3/2024
16:24
Seb moreYPF judgment creditors filed a response to Argentina's appeal and have also cross-appealed the the ruling that relieved YPF of any wrongdoing.
chester9
26/3/2024
16:21
From Seb with thanks • Beneficiaries of the YPF ruling:"It is always appropriate to require parties to fulfill contractual promises, but when it comes to foreign governments and international financial markets, it is absolutely essential.The promises of the Argentine Republic were not improvised comments or informal agreements. They were unusual-and exceptionally clear-commitments necessary to provide peace of mind to potential investors and allow a foreign nation with a troubled economic past to access U.S. financial markets and raise billions of dollars by privatizing YPF.If those promises can be ignored with impunity, plaintiffs will be hurt in the short term, but everyone, investors and foreign governments alike, will lose in the long term."This court must enforce the promises Imade by the Argentine Republic when privatizingYPF] and correct its clear contractual breaches."It is alwave anpronriate to hold narties to their contractual nromises-butPost your reply
chester9
25/3/2024
17:11
The London Judge in Argentina's GDP-Linked Warrants litigation, offered Argentina two alternatives to appeal and stay the enforcement of the EUR 1.3 billion judgment: pay or post a guarantee. Argentina chose to post a guarantee in the form of a Letter of Credit issued by Santander and UMB Bank. The guarantee is worth about $330 million.

The chief difference between the London judge and Judge Preska, is that Argentina would not be able to appeal unless it met one of the two alternatives. Preska didn't go that far.

So, Argentina's pledging of the guarantee cannot be viewed as voluntary. It had no other choice.

375uv
25/3/2024
16:31
Where there's a will there's a way.From Seb.Argentina announces that it is going to create the RofA Special Trust 2024 in New York to create a guarantee of nearly USD 330 million as a condition to be able to appeal the PBI Coupon ruling in London..
chester9
25/3/2024
13:20
Tom, you are still incorrect. The interest rate is variable and depends on the prevailing interest rate at the date of the judgement, which fixes it forevermore. This was decided by the Supreme Court years ago. For your further edification, here is an example link that explains it: hxxps://www.steptoe.com/en/news-publications/is-the-federal-post-judgment-interest-rate-variable-yes-and-no.html
anon14
24/3/2024
18:04
Link to the podcast on Burford AI

hxxps://law-disrupted.fm/ai-and-data-science-in-litigation-finance/

syoun2
24/3/2024
12:54
Apols Tom
Fear, Uncertainty. Doubt.
'Google is your friend' - in this respect at least.

As to Preska appointment to the SC, Trump has previously successfully 'packed' it in Republican's favour, he'd probably not want to undo his arguably most significant, durable accomplishment to date.
SC appointments are for life.
The Dem-venerated Ruth Bader Ginsburg overstayed/ was allowed to overstay 'en poste', which on her death during Trump's tenure gave him an opportunity...

The reported 'qualification/query' re BUR's results reads :

.."In our forthcoming Form 20-F, we will be reporting a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting and that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective in the aftermath of the adoption of our new valuation policy. That material weakness and corresponding controls' determinations relate to the lack of documented available evidence demonstrating the precision of management's application of the process to determine certain assumptions used in the measurement of the fair value of capital provision assets. To be clear, this is an issue of internal documentation of a management process; no material accounting errors were identified as a result..."

AIUI

extrader
24/3/2024
12:40
Thanks anon14. The post judgement interest rate is Federal, and not decided by the presiding court, as is the pre judgement rate. It is based on the average Federal Treasury Bill rate and is variable, not fixed. If it is compounded annually (interest on interest) I apologise.

Thanks Extrader: New York district judges all retire at 65, over 11 years ago for Preska. They can however continue to adjudicate on their continuing cases only. Some including Preska are then promoted as a ‘senior’. This is a very important but not full time role which involves judicial appointments and the administration of all courts.

I am informed that she may be appointed to the Supreme Court if the next US president is a Republican, as she is.

She has no current judicial function, apart from influence, of the forthcoming appeal, and I was wrong to suggest otherwise.

The FY23 audit report has not yet been published.
I am sufficiently stupid to have no idea what FUD-like means.

Tom Trudgian

tomtrudgian
23/3/2024
12:30
On page 84 they refer to, under the “settlements” section, those with whom they have settled and those “opt out” plaintiffs with whom they continue to negotiate settlements. They have accrued $300M to cover these outstanding settlements for “chicken broiler” damages only.

Beef and Pork antitrust liabilities have their own separate sections underneath.

kuk1doh
23/3/2024
09:41
There was a 'broiler' antitrust case settled in 2021, involving many of the same suppliers, and Tyson was reported as having closed off all future claims - and of having received leniency for cooperation with the DOJ. It's this all the same thing, resurrected somehow?
reddirish
Chat Pages: 1039  1038  1037  1036  1035  1034  1033  1032  1031  1030  1029  1028  Older

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock