Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

[stoxx67] 07/8/2019 09:19

would be fascinating to be a fly on the wall in Burford boardroom at this moment.

would imagine they are in highly litigious mood.. all we shareholders can do...is wait

[bbmsionlypostafter] 07/8/2019 09:19

Here's a thought.

I'm guessing the reason MW can come out with such outrageous & damaging accusations is simply because they are true & MW can back up what they say.

[epo001] 07/8/2019 09:18

One of MW's arguments (p5) appears to be that only a few cases are highly profitable and that if you disregard the highly profitable cases the business looks shaky. Well if you take any business and disregard their most profitable activities then that business would also look shaky.

I doubt Burford are saints but this looks a weak attack on a business full of lawyers. If the report can be linked to short selling activity then MW could be in trouble.

[fft] 07/8/2019 09:18

Or watch the short video httPs://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=bEBV6rXbqJ8

[shanklin] 07/8/2019 09:16

You can access the report from

[epo001] 07/8/2019 09:13

@7256 because I skimmed it and read the introduction.

[nigelpm] 07/8/2019 09:13

wow - that's much stronger than I expected - explains the move yesterday.

[mad foetus] 07/8/2019 09:10

1)Move to main market
2) Get a dual US listing
3) Get Bogart on the board
4) Move O'Connell to another role and appoint a heavyweight CFO (no aspersions on O'C, its just a perception thing)

All sorted. All own goals I'm afraid.

[bbmsionlypostafter] 07/8/2019 09:10

How can you say "while I haven't read the MW report (yet) it looks heavy on innuendo and completely bereft of anything resembling an objective fact."?

[hawkind] 07/8/2019 09:09

Should be illegal what Muddy Waters do! They should be behind bars. Would the BOD do an RNS like that if their was any truth, they would keep stum. Strongest year yet, loads of cash, does that sound like a company insolvent to you. Common sense in these situations and you then can make a lot of money.Fill your boots time

[djderry] 07/8/2019 09:08

I'd like a slice of that ( proposed) litigation! Oh,hold on, I do!!

[epo001] 07/8/2019 09:07

Revised my limit buy down to 900p last night. Now sitting on a 31% loss.

Burford's response to this will be crucial to all holders. This certainly looks like blatant market manipulation and while I haven't read the MW report (yet) it looks heavy on innuendo and completely bereft of anything resembling an objective fact.

SP could be depressed for a while now.

[ali47fish] 07/8/2019 09:05

where's the report can someone provide a link please!

[slaccs] 07/8/2019 09:03

Similar thing happened to PAYS. How can people get away with this sh..te?

[my retirement fund] 07/8/2019 09:01

Quite a strong statement openly stating Burford have been deliberately misleading.THE GAME IS UP !!!

[stoxx67] 07/8/2019 09:00

wonder if the money muddywaters have made will cover their legal costs and damages, obviously the report was privy to "front running" yesterday

time to pay the piper methinks..

[18bells] 07/8/2019 08:58

Look at that share price drop!!!

[bbmsionlypostafter] 07/8/2019 08:57

Whether it turns out to be BUR or not doesn't the fact that yesterday it dropped so precipitously as people thought BUR was the target set alarm bells ringing?

If there was no doubt BUR was solid & honest in their reports wouldn't the threat of MW having a go have been like muddy water off a duck's back?

[jonwig] 07/8/2019 08:57

The bonds have at least partly recovered:



BUR3 still below par, was able to buy online just now.

[lomax99] 07/8/2019 08:55

We are short BUR. For years, it was the ultimate “trust me” stock. Thanks to a light disclosure regime, the esoteric nature of its business, and unethical behavior by its largest shareholder, Invesco, it turned Enron-esque mark-to-model accounting into the biggest stock promotion on the AIM. This has all recently changed though. Just this year, BUR began publishing more detailed investment data. This data proves that BUR has been egregiously misrepresenting its ROIC and IRRs, as well as the state of its overall business. We have identified seven methods by which BUR manipulates Concluded Investment ROIC and IRR.

BUR’s top management, through their shareholdings (and sales), is in effect primarily compensated for aggressively marking cases in order to generate non-cash fair value gains. Until now, BUR has gotten away with aggressive and unwarranted marks by touting ROIC and IRR metrics. We show that BUR heavily manipulates these metrics. BUR then actively misleads investors about how its accounting for realized gains works. As a result of this deception, we believe investors give credence to BUR’s fair value gains. In actuality, BUR’s net realized returns have relied on a very small number of cases. Just four cases have produced approximately two-thirds of BUR’s net realized gains since 2012. (One of the four outsized contributors was actually a loss a trial, and was bailed out by BUR’s largest shareholder, Invesco, at the direction of Neil Woodford protégé; Mark Barnett. Absent the bailout, the case almost certainly would have been a total loss.)

BUR is a perfect storm for an accounting fiasco. BUR’s governance strictures are laughter-inducing. The CFO is the wife of the founder / CEO. Under the best of circumstances, this should alarm investors; however, with a company that consistently books non-cash accounting profits, it is unforgivable. BUR has cycled through four prior CFOs or senior finance managers (none of whom stayed for long). These facts beg the question “Is (current CFO) Elizabeth O’Connell the only CFO who can be relied upon to approve the accounts?”