Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

[minerve 2] 08/8/2019 11:35

The morons lambasted it though. Thinking they knew better.

Well, who knows better now. ;)

[minerve 2] 08/8/2019 11:34

Chief financial officer of this company related to the ceo


I did mention that as a red flag. Not healthy and not needed.

[daymer58] 08/8/2019 11:32

The broker gets the fee and the interest, his problem to put them back in the client's account, who have given permission to lend the stock at account opening

[porsche1945] 08/8/2019 11:30

I agree, directors buying does not mean anything, in fact there was some research done that indicates usually they buy at the wrong times. Chief financial officer of this company related to the ceo??!!

[jpsmithson] 08/8/2019 11:29

It probably was the likes of Woodford and Invesco who stupidly lent their stock to MW. Often they will not know who it is being directly lent to though.
The fees they get for lending do not all get returned to the fund. So Woodford/Whoever get a proportion of the fees directly themselves. Clearly it is a conflict of interest as the fund can suffer but the fund managers make money.

[ltcm1] 08/8/2019 11:24

I don't see Director's buying being much of an indicator here, who wouldn't if it boosted their own holdings and I believe non disclosed pay packets???

Surely people need to satisfy themselves the MW analysis is not correct before buying, as opposed to following motivated directors.

[epo001] 08/8/2019 11:19

? The shorter makes them worth even less. If the price is driven down to 1p then they are seriously undervalued but have no actual redemption value.

[cc2014] 08/8/2019 11:18

epo001. you retain the right to sell your shares instantly. (at which point whoever is borrowing the shares has to find someone else to borrow from which 99.9% of the time is not a problem as if as a holder you believe the shares are going up why not make some money on the side by lending them out as well). Nearly all the time there are a whole load of investors with stock availalble to lend

[richard xii] 08/8/2019 11:18

EpoIf a shorter borrows your shares then your broker gets some kind of fee.

[spob] 08/8/2019 11:16

the lender owns the shares because they obviously strongly beleive they are undervalued

[epo001] 08/8/2019 11:13

I clearly don't understand how this works.

If I let a shorter borrow my shares then I get some kind of lenders fee. But if the shorter is successful the shares when returned are worth less, so I lose. In this case massively.

What's in it for the lender? Could the lenders have included Woodford or Invesco?

[daymer58] 08/8/2019 10:58

I know However we are dealing with prime brokers who will be borrowing of the major institutionsNot retail

[roddyb] 08/8/2019 10:56

I got it from the interview on YouTube with Carson saying early on that they will add to their evidence? He sounded unconvincing but as a former Quindell owner, I sold as soon as this guy got involved. With BUR I am buying as I think he has found some details that does not alter the story of the revenues we are making. Because I am a scaredy-cat, I am steering clear of the stock and focusing on the bonds... I am a buyer under £70 but today I think it is £mid eighties which is probably on the money and not compelling.

[chimers] 08/8/2019 10:52

If you own stock in a listed company on an online broking acc set up a limit sell order it can be at £1's above the actual price.
As long as there is a live limit sell order on a stock then it cant be lent for shorting.

[daymer58] 08/8/2019 10:44

AgreeWould buy into the opening and take profit

[blueteam] 08/8/2019 10:40

Been watching, no doubt their will be a big bounce once the response is done and detectors buy, shorts close and could see as much as 20% rise in a day. Long term can only see £10 top and then later in the year new financing. So could be a good short term trade. Long term holders may average down. Just bought a few on that dip. Risk and reward. We will see as USA market opens may get a RNS

[daymer58] 08/8/2019 10:37

What everybody has to remember , it is the existing shareholders who facilitates the Shorts to borrow the stock by lending it!!

[chris_engel] 08/8/2019 10:35

Roddyb, where did they say that?

[williamcooper104] 08/8/2019 10:34

Nope - good thing too I saved my shirt in credit crunch by reading short seller research Short sellers didn't write dodgy loans

[williamcooper104] 08/8/2019 10:34

Nope - it's the same as with tabloid journalism - you keep back something - it's known as monstering

[roddyb] 08/8/2019 10:32

My purchase of Bonds at £66 yesterday is looking good, I was thinking it would take much more time to come back? MW say they will add to their allegations soon - surely they have produced everything at this stage?

[spob] 08/8/2019 10:30

incidentally, if MW became negative about any stock I held, I would sell immediately and go short.

[chris_engel] 08/8/2019 10:29

sophia, good spot regarding the accounting method.

Re cash flow: There is 629m as proceeds from investments, not sure why they are in the "Changes in working capital" section. See also note 8 on p.87.

In total you have a negative 233m in cash from operating activity. But when you take into account the 738m + 33m of funding new investments, plus arguably the 75m increase due from brokers, you can see that they produce lots of cash (+613m).

[spob] 08/8/2019 10:27

Some people moaning about Muddy Waters

they are just giving their opinion


they are based in the US (the land of free speach) so i'm pretty sure Burford can't take any action whatsoever (in my opinion of course, DYOR etc )

at the end of the day, if everything is okay with BUR's accounting then shareholders have nothing at all to worry about and the shares will recover