Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

[mad foetus] 08/8/2019 07:50

One irony being that in investor meetings Bogart himself has said he's not keen on IFRS as he has no interest in unrealised gains because they doesn't give him money to invest. But we could do with a breakdown that removes all the unrealized gains from the figures. It is enough to do from the raw data. Committed - invested - returns - unresolved (at cost). Though how would you cover Petersen? Invested £15, returned £300, unresolved 12 (though we just sold 1/6 of that for 100.

[tsmith2] 08/8/2019 07:50

https://youtu.be/9KvmdZK8VNg

[tsmith2] 08/8/2019 07:48

To be fair to the International Accounting Standards Board, it might have been hard to contemplate a situation in which a fund manager could be this heavily incentivized to aggressively mark fair value gains. We know from two sets of data points that BUR's Net Realized Gains equal Proceeds minus Invested Capital.Lol - to be fair to the IASB

[tracy_moore] 08/8/2019 07:47

lolo, galatea99, angry shorters do make me giggle,they always show their true colours much sooner than later. I won't stoop to your level by name calling, it's awfully childish.

[galatea99] 08/8/2019 07:46

Tracy Moore, do grow up, you moron.

[tracy_moore] 08/8/2019 07:46

thanks for your input jonwig

[jonwig] 08/8/2019 07:45

@ Tracy_Moore - personally I much prefer information to noise, especially of the ad hominem sort.

[tsmith2] 08/8/2019 07:44

Would look up what finance costs typically include (and more importantly do not include) if I was you

[tsmith2] 08/8/2019 07:43

Look at the disclosure the company provides in accounts and additionally on its website on Mark to market versus cashlook at how much cash was generated in H1, and case numbers continue to grow which will bring in stacks of cash - there's a lead time between costs and cases being heard/decided etc look at sovereign fund deal - 33% funding for 60% (or was it 66%) of return..

[tracy_moore] 08/8/2019 07:42

galatea99 you cut and paste an awful lot from others, and you remain " a target " just as BUR is yours.

[jonwig] 08/8/2019 07:41

@ tsmith2 - I'm not sure what point you are making, though the "lol" suggests you might be having a laugh.

Dividends are a financing cost (like interest paid) in a company's cashflow statement.

[williamcooper104] 08/8/2019 07:40

The solvency bit is the weakest part as you say future investment commitments are assets not liabilities - though they are a liquidity problem. It's balance sheet solvent but not necessarily liquid So it will need future funding - and now bond market is closed The strongest part of the MW note was around the use of Fair Value accounting to flatter P&L and skew portion of realised to unrealised However there's plenty in there that does raise trust issues with management and those issues are not helped by obvious governance issues Fair Value accounting of the nature Burford uses only works with a very high level of trust

[tsmith2] 08/8/2019 07:40

what are the odds muddywaters approached the company to check through their "thesis". This one reminds me of the "cable car" one - remember that one?

[galatea99] 08/8/2019 07:38

Tracy Moore, check out my posts.
I post info and sensible comment and argument.
I am open about my position.
You have the wrong target.

[tsmith2] 08/8/2019 07:37

divis are not a finance cost..

[williamcooper104] 08/8/2019 07:35

I know - I was was struck by that - however when you add the two numbers together it came to over 17 percent not 16 - so don't think the 16 percent figure actually includes dividends - it's sloppy wording (I think)

[galatea99] 08/8/2019 07:35

Comment from The Times on the main elements of the MW report:

[tsmith2] 08/8/2019 07:35

BUR is arguably insolvent. If subtracting BUR's funded debt balance of $637.8 million from the adjusted capital base, there is only a $243.1 million cushion.109 However, BUR has future balance sheet litigation commitments of $708.2 million.110 Historically, approximately 85% of these commitments are eventually deployed, implying that BUR has an off balance sheet liability of $602.0 million. When looking at BUR's solvency through this methodology, BUR has negative equity of -$358.9 million relative to the adjusted capital base.Off balance sheet - see we did tell you it was Enron - btw did we mention Woodford was/is involved in this fraud (we mean Enron like company) - run for the hillsno mention of cash on balance sheet, future cash flows, access to credit linesMore I read the report more it strikes me why the company said: without merit

[tsmith2] 08/8/2019 07:31

Financing costs – BUR's LTM interest expense was $39 million, which is 4.4% of the adjusted capital base. BUR's LTM dividends were $27 million, which is 3.1% of the adjusted capital base. In other words, financing costs were 7.5% of the adjusted capital base on a LTM basis.Divis in financing costs lol

[nobilis] 08/8/2019 07:31

I would have believed a short seller in size would have bought back yesterday in a different name and will move stock over once dust settles

[tsmith2] 08/8/2019 07:28

#4 Choosing its Own cost Denominator When the Total Cost is Much GreaterBUR selectively sets the denominator in its returns calculations, allowing it to overstate IRRs and ROICs by understating historical expenses or ignoring future funding needs.may be portfolio finance and using a just and reasonable apportionment basis on a given particular case within the portfolio has something to do with it??

[tracy_moore] 08/8/2019 07:26

galtea99 we can assume from your posts you're bullish and a share holder then LMAO ! Here all day again ?

[nobilis] 08/8/2019 07:23

Hopeful of a £3 jump today

[tsmith2] 08/8/2019 07:22

ambulance chasers - check them out.