Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

[papy02] 21/10/2023 15:11

And another try at djderry link:

[stentorian] 21/10/2023 12:12

Thanks djderry, very detailed article.

[djderry] 21/10/2023 11:06

Interesting insight into the Burford/Sysco spat on darroweverett.com website,Google ' litigation financier's battle against sysco provides food for thought.'

[extrader] 20/10/2023 10:09

Latest from Seb

"Judge Preska agrees to hear Argentina's case on the possibility of waving the guarantee bond issue. Will review a series of documents and make a decision after November 7."

Argentina to present arguments by 26 October (max 20 pages)

Plaintiffs to reply by 2 November (max 20 pages);

Argentina reply by 7 November (max 10 pages).

Election 1st round 22 October

Run-off 2nd round 19 November.

Interesting timing...
In other news, I see that Hollywood scriptwriters are no longer on strike.

ATB

[375uv] 18/10/2023 23:25

Burford does what it said it would do and files an appeal in the YPF Expropriation Case.

[djderry] 18/10/2023 21:54

Hi Dead Duck Resources,thank you for your response. I want to acknowledge your reply and therefore I am wrong to say that you did not reply.I apologise.
Now,to the issues you raise.Perhaps I can start with the last one,i.e,woe betide anyone who posts bearish/cautious/ pessimistic views on the company.I welcome such posts.All I ask is that there be some objective evidence to substantiate those views.I have no issue with someone buying/selling/ignoring this company.What I object to ( and we are now in the realm of opinion,which you can accept or dismiss as you see fit) is ,as Peter Lynch put it,the ' weekend worrier'.A person reads a bearish,unverified comment and days/weeks/months later it pops into the Investor's mind and,for no explicable reason,it leads them to sell the stock.That's what I object to.
In the case of your post,I objected to it on the basis that,under certain circumstances ( the loss of the YPF matter?) that Burford could be viewed as a 'one trick pony'.
In my view that is completely wrong.Burford is invested in hundreds of separate legal matters,pertaining to an even greater number of individual cases in many types of litigation.
It would be more accurate to describe Burford as a one thousand trick pony.That's my objection.
As regards the accounting,the CFO answered a question on this and in his presentation explained the headwinds of interest rates but,he emphasised,this will make no difference on a cash in/ cash out basis.
As regards the fair value methodologies used,I don't see it as perfect but at least we have ( for now) an agreed standard.I posited for a number of years that Burford's fair value gains a year out from annual results acted as a proxy for the cash returns,but with a large discount.( Year on year of around 30%) You could see this happening each year until the pandemic hit.
Burford's fair value accounting has erred on the side of caution for 11 years.Put another way,they under-promise and overperform.Yes,the new SEC methodology will require more from the time value element of the assets,but,in my opinion,Burford will continue to be conservative in their valuations.

[dead duck resources] 18/10/2023 20:59

djderry "Maddox received no reply to his comment"
Sorry just catching up on the day's posts, I'll reply now, although donald was first.

donald pond,
"isn’t the change all due to discount rate...nothing to do with actual cash returns?"
No I don't think so, but am happy to be corrected. The accounting adjustment appears
to have impacted non fair-value returns as well. Post 25123 took out that fair value adjustment. Non fair-value loss $15.5m in Q1, previously it was $67.5m profit. Is it not the case that as part of the new accounts treatment some previously reported non fair-value returns have been restated as fair-value?

Maddox,
The quote by the CEO about cash accounting was from the first annual report post-IPO and that policy quickly fell by the wayside. It's not so much the merits of 'cash vs fair-value accounting' but whether Burford's fair-value accounting has been overdone.
Also to say that post only showed the CEOs preference ignores the financial analysis.
Sounds like I'll need to post some of the SEC correspondence here to better discuss instead of mentioning in passing. Laborious to dig them out to find the interesting bits amongst the dry regulatory stuff and was hoping someone here had reviewed them.

planit2
"I found the poster to be disingenuous in their intent. i.e. DDR knew his posts were misleading and not 100% factual at the point of posting."
Interesting take. Woe betide a poster who posts a questioning comment on this thread that may contain an inadvertent error. Any comments from planit2 calling out bullish ADVFN posters who are knowingly misleading in their optimism? planit2: "By no means!"

[laughton] 18/10/2023 17:43

It's only BUR's when they get it.

[stentorian] 18/10/2023 15:50

In just over a month BUR has made nearly $31m in interest on its Argentina investments.

[djderry] 18/10/2023 15:48

Agreed,that's why I haven't filtered the poster yet.But unless one can substantiate one's points with objective fact the danger is that,as we saw in the Muddy Waters days,all kinds of fear mongering gets mixed into the short thesis.I've absolutely no issue with shorters but they need to make their case objectively.
Most are just moaning Minnie's,ie,look the share price is going down,and they think that is telling you something.It isn't.

[maddox] 18/10/2023 15:27

If the comment is the classic drive-by one liner by an obvious shorter - I ignore it. The Dead Duck has at least put a bit more effort in - so don't like to leave it standing without a response just in case someone inadvertently attributes some credibility to it.

[djderry] 18/10/2023 14:03

planit2,I've filtered most at this stage.Burford committed almost $1.7 billion in the last two quarters and has a group wide portfolio of $7 billion of litigation assets and the duck suggests Burford may be a ' one truck pony'.Farcical.
I could give you a list of those who have posted ill-informed and incorrect information.They're on here most days.When I've pointed out the error of their ways,no reply.Just as Maddox received no reply to his comments.
If you wish to create real wealth,it's important to hear and see valid arguments. However,in my view,it's important to avoid misinformation and disinformation and certainly to not let it seep into your decision making.
I find filtering works well.

[planit2] 18/10/2023 13:01

Dead Duck Resources seems to have everyone in a twist again with no new information than last time.

I only give their posts a cursory glance now as although honest debate on both sides is a good thing, I found the poster to be disingenuous in their intent.

ie DDR knew these posts were misleading and not 100% factual at the point of posting.

[extrader] 18/10/2023 11:27

And maybe RU attracts a more affluent sector of the populace?
It did initially (the expat Brits who introduced the game), I don't know about now.

[greyingsurfer] 18/10/2023 11:12

Or loads of them are living in Europe?

[maddox] 18/10/2023 10:41

Watching the Rugby World Cup and Argentina playing in a large French stadium - I was struck by the huge number of Argentinian fans - the pale blue and white looked to be dominant. It appears that whilst the country is pretty much bankrupt it's populace isn't.

[maddox] 18/10/2023 10:34

Hi Dead Duck Resources

Yes say more - your post 25123 only points out that Chris Bogart preferred cash accounting rather than fair value accounting - as do I.

However, when the SEC say we've decided upon a methodology that needs to be followed, you have no choice, you follow it and make prior adjustments to reflect the changes. Your auditors aren't going to approve anything less.

[stentorian] 18/10/2023 10:12

thanks alter ego for the link to the Guardian article:

"In addition to creating environmental and social problems, critics say, Vaca Muerta has not brought the benefits to people promised by the authorities. Argentina’s rate of inflation is 124%, poverty is increasing but the government continues to hand out large subsidies to the energy industry.

A reservoir in a mountainous landscape Peru’s melting glaciers bring new harvests – and fears for the future Caratori says: “Vaca Muerta is being sold as the future. They are saying we can flood the world with our energy, but at the same time [the companies] are saying they need public investment to build a pipeline, [with] fixed prices in dollars. I can’t believe both statements.”

Slipak says: “Ten years ago, Vaca Muerta was a promise, and politicians today are saying it is the future. But Vaca Muerta was the future 10 years ago. If you go to Neuquén today, 37% of families live in poverty.”

[alter ego] 18/10/2023 08:43

Lengthy article about Vaca Muerta in today's Guardian. No mention of BUR.



“For Argentine politicians, Vaca Muerta is the golden goose and the one thing that would save our economy. I think that idea has been successfully passed into the minds of many people on the street,”

[saltraider] 18/10/2023 07:10

That is my understanding, DP.

It seems to me that the prescribed approach is far too sensitive to short-term fluctuations in interest rates. A more robust approach would have been to require the use of a moving average rate which would significantly dampen fluctuations in valuation/profits.

[donald pond] 18/10/2023 06:42

DDR but isn't the change all down to the discount rate applied to future earnings? In other words, as rates start dropping likely to be sharply reversed. And nothing to do with actual cash returns?

[dead duck resources] 17/10/2023 22:24

Extrader,
your post 25232 quoted a December 2021 RNS, the quote re: IFRS was from that same RNS.

Maddox,
post 25123 had my thoughts on the restatement, Q1 $67.5m profit restated as -$15m loss
need I say more? There were some posters here who even commented the results were good
with those posts getting thumbs up, while comments suggesting the results are bad seem to be met with bewilderment. The market reaction corroborates the latter point of view.

[extrader] 17/10/2023 17:22

Hi djderry,

You mentioned Quinn Emmanuel in the Credit Suisse AT1 context, suggesting (I think) obliquely that they have a working relationshiop with BUR.

Seb's latest may set the cat amongst certain (fat) pigeons :
QE has an NY Court order forcing certain banks to disclose identities of 'politically exposed persons' from the Province of Buenos Aires (PBA)who've had dealings in amounts over $ 25K in the last 7 years...

Sebastian Maril
@SebastianMaril
🔴 Quinn Emanuel (representatives of funds suing PBA) confirms that BoNY and Pershing will hand over data related to transfers made by Argentine officials categorised as Priority 1 in a list published last week.

These transfers, if they exist, relate to transactions made in the last 7 years for sums in excess of USD 25,000.

Quinn Emanuel clarifies that it has already received information on transfers made by public officials. If the officials' funds are found to be public funds, they can be seized.

We note that the Glacial Capital, LLC and TRSE Holdings, LLC funds are seeking to collect USD 35 million from a provincial bond lawsuit.

Interesting times.

[maddox] 17/10/2023 15:52

Hi Dead Duck Resources,

What in your opinion was so bad about the restatement?

[kirkie001] 17/10/2023 10:16

Burford SEC filings:

hxxps://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=0001714174