Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

[hatfullofsky] 08/8/2019 15:41

Highly qualified idiot now asking a question. Well telling BUR how to present financials etc

[tightfist] 08/8/2019 15:39

Clearly not JM!

[onjohn] 08/8/2019 15:39

will open well up tomorrow

[costax1654x] 08/8/2019 15:39

They will not!!!Skeletons in the drawers wait for MW response!The Guy is brilliant

[tsmith2] 08/8/2019 15:39

looking like they will

[knowing] 08/8/2019 15:38

Well if they sue MW then that will add to the bottom line.

[costax1654x] 08/8/2019 15:36

Someone is caught with pants down

[onjohn] 08/8/2019 15:36

900 by close

[costax1654x] 08/8/2019 15:36

CFO can not answer questions??:))))) hmmmm

[mastermatto] 08/8/2019 15:35

Elizabeth the CFO needs to go. She cannot answer questions.. I am not impressed and have a significant holding here.

[chimers] 08/8/2019 15:35

Never underestimate Muddy.
They wait for the rebuttal and then smack em down with the REAL JUICE.


Or...they dont.

I think in this case they will.
they are well aware of who they were taking on.

Also the CFO is struggling in this call.

[onjohn] 08/8/2019 15:35

When press report tomorrow £12 coming

could fly £2 tomorrow

[minerve 2] 08/8/2019 15:34

Never send a man to do a babies job.

[costax1654x] 08/8/2019 15:34

And soon the answer from MW....epic story

[mammyoko] 08/8/2019 15:34

Not going to give fair value of Peterson as would prejudice negotiations. Consistent with previous cases and gave example of Teinver

[lionheart69uk1] 08/8/2019 15:34

We don't really need obvious derampers like 1corrado on here. Either a blatant shorter or in the pay of Muddy Waters. Similar toads are to be found on other company threads.

[epo001] 08/8/2019 15:33

Never pick a fight with a building full of lawyers, especially when you have cost them all money. I want to see MW's blood and teeth all over the pavement.

[littlepuppi7] 08/8/2019 15:33

Galat,

Looks to me like MW have made a very bad call here. Very bad... They have painted what seems to be a sound business out as potentially bankrupt, which is not true... I can imagine MW could be adding to the the balance sheet here in damages... Releasing this document to a company run by lawyers was always going to be very dangerous..

[upgrade1] 08/8/2019 15:32

finish £9.50 -£10.50 today

[chimers] 08/8/2019 15:31

Well Amoot...thanks for all the fish.

Muddy get busy, then we can all make some more free money.

[molatovkid] 08/8/2019 15:31

Seems to me these guys are personally offended at whats happened here. Could be getting messy for Muddy.

[galatea99] 08/8/2019 15:30

Burford have not addressed the main issue here. Now, I understand their logic in adopting the accounting and case valuation approaches they use. Really I do understand it. I have likened their business to that of an engineering contractor having long-term contracts with contractual milestones along the way which unlock the right to bill customers and to take a share of profit corresponding to the stage of work completed, the successful signing-off by the customer of completed work, all with due allowance and provision for any problems, cost over-runs, etc. Just about all contractors follow this kind of approach so the market knows how to measure results and auditors know how to properly audit such companies.

The analogy would be that Burford's court decisions would be their equivalent of the work certificates signed off by customers. So, although perhaps imperfect, that is the closest I have come to seeing the nature of Burford's business.

However, their problem is that their competitors do not use their kind of approach, as IMF-Bentham have made clear again today, and the market is clearly no longer inclined to fully trust the people running Burford. The present system does clearly leave temptation in the way of management, perhaps too much temptation with too little control. In today's announcement, Burford seemed simply to double down on their existing practices and seem nowhere to adress the market's understandable concerns, through mechanisms such as independent verification of values attributed to cases through a supervisory "value determination" committee, a change of CFO so as to remove the doubt around the CEO-CFO relationship, etc. Whether Burford like it or not, unless these concerns are addressed, the doubts will now still remain and resurface again and again.

For the avoidance of doubt, I am not a "shorter" nor have I any motive to do Burford down. I did sell out on Tuesday, once I heard the dreaded name of Muddy Waters (of whom I do have previous experience), having made quite a lot of money out of holding Burford for quite some time. I know the market opportunity is there, Burford are clear market leaders........but, but things are not the same, there are now real issues of market perceptions that do need to be addressed and Burford seems reluctant to recognise and address this reality.

[sigora] 08/8/2019 15:29

back in auction