Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

[qruz] 27/7/2019 15:30

Hello Luckymouse, great post.

Could you please share the Indicators you use below RSI on Trading view. Thank you.

[qruz] 27/7/2019 15:26

Having a mull over this in the last few days, Let's take a step back; could it be true that in reality people at BUR + the BoD don't really care about the share price:

1. The BOD only care that the Market cap is within the size they believe it should be for their size... it will never be exact but within 10-20%
2. The Big boy staff only care about cases winning

Isn't it true that the big boys within BUR invest their own money in the case funding and take a cut if it comes in...(I say big boys as it has to be people on a decent enough salary to have disposable income to invest) so as long as the cases win they win.. but problem is they get their $$$ whilst share holders get what ever the Share price does.

This in theory should be an amazing set up for any investor, but when people feel it's undervalued and the share price isn't reacting to results, here comes the problem.

End of key people and staff at BUR are getting fed but Share holders in the last few years aren't.. and they aren't too bothered.

All IMO.

[lomax99] 27/7/2019 12:05

CD-R news:Https://www.cdr-news.com/categories/third-party-funding/9894-burford-capital-brims-with-unbridled-optimism

[galatea99] 27/7/2019 10:48

Interesting to see that a smaller Argentine oil and gas company, Vista, has just raised US$100m in New York to finance investment in Vaca Muerta. I would assume that investor protection similar to that contained in the YPF by-laws would have been insisted upon by investors and that the rather spurious doctrine of "sovereign immunity" put forward by Argentina as its defence in the Petersen and Eton Park cases is not taken at all seriously.

[luckymouse] 27/7/2019 10:30

Cheers guys

[bamboo2] 27/7/2019 10:13

LM, interesting post.

PS. Trident doesn't do charts!

[jonwig] 27/7/2019 10:01

Veering off a bit from the results, there was a lot of comment recently about the Petersen case and Argentina's chronic misbehaviour in financial matters.

But I think there might be a different reason for its current delaying tactics. For the last couple of months, the peso and stockmarket have performed strongly, and Macri's popularity has passed bottom. There is a real chance he can see off the Peronists in October's elections.

So, pretty obviously, you don't do anything which could hand a gun to Ms Kirchner, like rolling over and admitting defeat in a multi-billion lawsuit against a US "vulture fund". What I mean is that the air might clear into an agreed settlement before the end of the year (and before Burford's financial year end).

FT's take on the country (5 July):

[jonwig] 27/7/2019 09:54

LuckyMouse - good points in #6772, thanks.

On the subject of law firm receivables, I'm invested in one (Gateley) where they appear to be rising, including the overdue ones. GTLY themselves have said it's a form of litigation funding, or "alternative finance". Fair enough, a PLC can do that, a LLP virtually not.

[luckymouse] 27/7/2019 08:52

Ha - theres always one - try these my short friend - you may need it

[3dwd] 26/7/2019 16:30

I believe that there are USA buyers happy to buy his stake ...not a big deal..

[williamcooper104] 26/7/2019 15:41

The fact that it's gobbling up cash and growing investments is what makes it cheap on a PEx And future equity raises so long as done to grow business rather than as a rescue rights issue should not be a problem

[williamcooper104] 26/7/2019 15:38

If they can constantly repeat reasonable levels of profit then PE multiple is surely the right valuation approach They aren't a property company

[williamcooper104] 26/7/2019 15:33

They usually claim to be running on a pro-for ma ebitda profit - but that's often by making lots of questionable ebitda adjustments and no one really knows the profitability until they actually start making them But with Bur there's no question that the underlying business is anything from highly to super profitable

[shanklin] 26/7/2019 15:31

Removed as incorrect...

p30 of
is worth a read re the valuation of unfinalised activities

[dgdg1] 26/7/2019 15:20

I can't see why this is such a problem, unless of course you think the company is being dishonest about the value of its investments, but I don't think anyone has presented any accusation or evidence of that. If you accept the values then it's like the company ownns a property or share portfolio which is increasing in value, and eventually assets get sold. The profir is recognised as the value increases, but of course eventually the cash is produced. Why is that so bad? If you are going to argue that the cash can't be distributed until it arrives, that's not an issue because it will still arrive after a couple of years on average. If the argument is that it can't be re-invested until it arrives then that too doesn't seem a problem as at the end of the day the asset values are increasing nicely and producing a good IRR.

[edmondj] 26/7/2019 15:02

But as it gets bigger, the greater also the element of 'profit' they are marking to market and boosting profits by way of taking a view on the outcomes of legal cases. Plus the gap between such profits and actual cash returns from investments during any reporting period. This is what increasingly concerned me a year or so ago; which was rejected here but since then the bull trend has broken down - replaced by a volatile consolidation phase, albeit no definite downtrend as yet. Investors are clearly calling some things into question.

[dgdg1] 26/7/2019 14:47

I view it as a normal company where cash generation is the relevant factor, it could choose to distribute some of the profits when they turn into cash and just re-invest the origianl capital, or to re-invest a small part of the profirs - it's just that it is choosing to re-invest nearly all the returned capital and profits back in to new cases as it wants to make as much profit as possible. At some point they can choose to re-invest a smaller proportion or indeed none of the profit and just re-invest the capital. So profits and p/e is what counts for me, it's just in a growth phase so it's re-investing profits. Based on pe it's cheap.

[edmondj] 26/7/2019 14:32

Graham Neary took a similar NAV approach, effectively to suggest the stock was not worth chasing, a year or two ago. The article(s) probably still on Stockopedia.

[minerve 2] 26/7/2019 14:32

Minerve will say 'when'.

😂😂😂😂8514;😂ԅ14;😂😂;😂😂😂😂
28514;

[mad foetus] 26/7/2019 14:16

You overlook the funds they manage, which generally have a payment of 20% to BUR of all profits after the original investment is paid back. These fees are all back loaded and are yet to contribute to results.