Must be 1230 then |
The Q3 Ly was strong but results are H2 weighted, hope no reason but due some good news after disappointing H1 |
Not a fan of quarterly results,to be honest.In legal matters three months means nothing.I think one has to view it over several years to possibly discern trends.
My portfolio is full with Burford shares,although I sold some ( tobacco) holdings to add more today. |
Hopefully they didn't issue that statement to settle the market before Q3 results disappoint.
This has been a rollercoaster day
If they delay much more it will tank again |
Where's the Q3? |
Robust statement.Still in Preska's court,pardon the pun.' Not binding' on the court. |
 07/11/2024 12:03pm
RNS Regulatory News
RNS Number : 3977L
Burford Capital Limited
07 November 2024
November 7, 2024
Burford Statement re YPF Matter
Burford Capital Limited, the leading global finance and asset management firm focused on law, has noted inaccurate media reporting and subsequent market reaction to an expected court filing last night by the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") in the Petersen and Eton Park matters. The filing in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York restates DOJ's position on a narrow question of law in relation to enforcement of judgments. The filing pertains to one motion filed in the Petersen and Eton Park matters as part of the overall, ongoing effort to enforce the judgment against the Argentine Republic. The filing does not reflect DOJ's taking any broader position on the overall case or the enforcement campaign; indeed, DOJ has previously taken the position that pursuing Argentina in the US courts for its breach of contract in this matter was appropriate, and DOJ has not made any filing at all on the pending appeal (and the time to do so has passed). In its filing, DOJ took the view that Argentina could not be required by a U.S. court to move property presently located in Argentina into the United States so it could there be attached for creditors under New York law, which is an unsettled legal issue. The DOJ view is not binding on the court and further briefing and proceedings will ensue. The Company will provide a further update on the Petersen and Eton Park matters during today's earnings call. |
Now have a BUR RNS on YPF.
Also worth reposting post 26367 from 10 September as last night's news was neither a surprise nor particularly significant IMO:
"I've never been very keen on the turnover motion because if BUR wins and ARG refuses to turn over the shares how can the US courts sensibly respond to the breach of the court order? And if BUR wins and (hypothetically) ARG turns over the shares, what move will ARG then make -- I'd imagine revoking licences, taxing profits at 99% or similar leaving BUR with nothing worth having or capable of sale. So the turnover motion has always seemed to me to be about hassling ARG into coming to the table.
The DOJ's decision to consider whether to intervene presumably reflects ARG lobbying which, in turn, must reflect an ARG belief that they are otherwise (at least quite) likely to lose the turnover application. As a Judge I'd be a bit frustrated at the state coming in so late in the process, only indicating that it was considering intervening (rather than applying to actually intervene), and requesting 2 months to come to a conclusion. In her shoes I'd nevertheless accede to the request (don't want the Courts and State in major tension), but would press on with the alter ego applications (where there's no problem with international comity - if the aircraft or the bank account is in the US, the Court can order its seizure). From BUR's perspective, keeping the turnover motion in suspense is no bad thing (given that its purpose, in my view, is simply to hassle ARG, rather than to take delivery of the shares).
In terms of getting ARG to the table, we await the ruling from the Court of Appeals. Whilst ARG has presumably been advised that the prospects of success are very low (evidenced by Milei's statements earlier in his Presidency), the opposition seem unwilling to acquiesce in a settlement whilst there remains a prospect of overturning the main judgment." |
They have just released statement re ypf |
New Statement out |
Trading in US halted and no RNS? |
falling at 13% - |
Once Trump gets his feet under the table the markets will wake up to the fact that Trump is going to help Millei reform Argentina, but will also insist on the proper resolution of past misdemeanours, which will include this legal settlement. Burford will be back over £15 within 2 years. |
(From Seb on Twitter) Brief opinion:1. Did we know that the White House would issue an opinion on the transfer of YPF shares as a form of payment on Nov 6? Yes, it was announced on Sep 6.2. Did we know that the White House would favor the Argentine Republic? Yes, it was expected. Check my posts since Sep.3. Is this decision about the $16.1 billion judgment, the alter ego, or the appeal? No, it is exclusively about the transfer of shares as a form of payment because Argentina did not deposit a bond to appeal on Jan 30. |
Lowest i got was at 820Altho i have to admit was starting to sweat |
Spot on explanation. Been a great few days on the market made even better by the gift from the gods to buy more under £9 |
I agree, but that being so, it was reckless of Burford to apply for the turnover; they should have thought ahead to the read across when it's refused. At the time, I really couldn't work out how a handover of ypf shares would work anyway - far too easy to circumvent. |
I think this is a massive overreaction - certainly at -25% but even now at -10% as I write.
I don't think anyone following the case closely can really have expected Burford to get hold of YPF's shares. The shares barely moved when the turnover motion was filed and CB himself guided just a few weeks ago that the US may take the position that the turnover motion "goes too far". The turnover motion was/is just one aspect of a multi-faceted enforcement strategy all of which is designed to irritate Argentina to the point of getting them to the table to settle. The shares have reacted as if this is a significant negative legal development - not helped as ever by misleading headlines stating that "US sides with Argentina in dispute over $16bn YPF judgement" - when the reality is that nothing has really changed... |
You might get your chance! |
No but I wish I had added at low 8's. Some have people have made some good money. |
It's politics alright. Burford eventually will get a payout but the news has crashed the SP |
Added to which that is an opinion from a Biden/Harris DoJ. A Trump DoJ in January may well take a different view. |
I don't read it like that at all. It was always a long shot trying to get Preska to force Argentina to hand over shares for a company in their own country. I saw it as more of a nuisance rather than something they expected to win.
I assume the DOJ is worried about precedents that might be set.
This is separate to the issue of whether Argentina owe the $16bn. |
Ho hum - Chris Bogart is going to have to earn his $m’s on today’s Q3 call.. |
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
Hot Features
Premium
