Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

[williamcooper104] 09/8/2019 00:21

Bur need to ask themselves if they would fund another company who had been short attacked If they wouldn't fund someone else then they shouldn't fund it themselves

[minerve 2] 09/8/2019 00:20

Perhaps if you had listened to Minerve when it was c1850 and sold, like Minerve did, you wouldn't be sat here on missed opportunity or great losses. Duh!

The WRITING WAS ON THE WALL for those that know what they are doing!

Most numpties on ADVFN are just that, numpties.

[onjohn] 09/8/2019 00:19

Market Summary > Dow Jones Industrial Average
INDEXDJX: .DJI
26,378.19 +371.12 (1.43%)

dow strong

[djderry] 09/8/2019 00:14

No disrespect but I've no idea what's been said above as I have the poster filtered.Having listened to the conference call again this evening,I welcome the comprehensive presentation and time spent on the Q and A after what's been a traumatic week for investors and company alike.I suspect that we will have some really positive analyst notes over the next few days.I'm in two minds as to whether the company should go after MW.On the one hand,they should not be allowed to get away with damaging a company by misrepresentation of facts and by stating untruths.On the other hand,I want Burford to focus on their core competencies,judging the merits of cases,along with ability to pay/ enforcement risk and so on.On second thoughts,go after the blighters!

[minerve 2] 09/8/2019 00:00

You probably don't even know who Peter Lynch is without Googling.

Oh dear, getting has lost quite a bit. Ruined his pathetic little holiday, I'm sure.

LOL

Minerve did warn the suckers on here.

[gettingrichslow] 08/8/2019 23:54

"his willingness to be open and transparent is second to none."

😂😂😂😂8514;😂ԅ14;😂😂;😂😂😂

[gettingrichslow] 08/8/2019 23:52

Minny, yes I think that was Peter Lynch.

But do you know which prize wally said this??

"minerve 16 Nov '15 - 22:10 - 465

I have been in this business over 20 years. I can reassure you Woodford is up there with the best there is, no question. Of course, investing is not a game of perfection, it never will be, it is a game of managing risk with a view to long-term growth and not many will do it better than Woodford. I am a great admirer of him as a professional and as an individual. His views and attitudes pretty much mirror mine and his willingness to be open and transparent is second to none.

If I had to hand my money over to someone in trust for the future, he would be the first, even before family members. Woodford is no different now than he was decades ago. Solid 100% professional with untouched integrity."

[minerve 2] 08/8/2019 23:38

Stop losses LOL

Show me a portfolio with stop-losses at 10% below market price and I'll show you a portfolio destined to lose 10%.

Peter Lynch said something like that. How true.

[babbler] 08/8/2019 23:25

the weakness is down to stop losses being trigger faster than they could be removed helped by the shorters taling the price down and the MMS shutting shop on both sides of the trade favouring sells over buys. IMO. FEAR is a very strong emotion. People sell first read or think later letting the panic set in. Self fulfilling prophecy.Now... looks like they will be taking MW to court. Going to be interesting...Not one for widows orphans or children but definately money to be made here. Both ways. Volatility is high... but market in USA just bounced 2 perecent.Short was called on the week the market had a mini crash due to China trade wars. That didn't help the speed of the drop either.Tomorrow will be fun.Gnight.

[showme01] 08/8/2019 23:22

DJDerry, It get's attention. Your situation is boring. That is why these facts don't get reported. I've made a good few quid trading these but have bought a decent chunk to hold so I am not at all bitter, it gave me an amazing buying opportunity as well as the staff and directors of Burford.

[djderry] 08/8/2019 23:15

While I'm at it,I'm also disappointed by the level of insight shown in the Lex column this morning,that 'soaring paper profits were riskily dependent on Burford's upward revaluation of ongoing legal cases'. No.Has the journalist not looked at the yearly results? We're very been around the block with this so many times I'm dizzy!Burford only revalues a case ( up or down) when a concrete objective judicial is made.Then,it is done conservatively.How do I know,because almost all the write up (average 65per cent if I remember) is done in final year.After a billion and a half worth of business,only twice did they have to write down the carrying value when the case concluded.Why can journalists print stuff that is not correct,with no attention paid to the facts?

[blusteradjuster] 08/8/2019 23:03

Froth classy as ever.

[trident5] 08/8/2019 22:54

DJD - Peterson value, maybe so - but we know the value others are assigning it as they've disclosed the revenue from partial sales. So the question of how much has it been written up by can't be that sensitive.

[showme01] 08/8/2019 22:52

SW, I don't blame them. They have built a great success model and why would they let this article backed with manipulation feel the need to justify their business? They fight litigation cases. This is a perfect storm for them. They have nothing to hide. The next few months will see this back to where it was imo and onwards from there in line with their business model.

[showme01] 08/8/2019 22:47

TW sees this as another Quindell. Couldn't be further from the truth but he is so full of his own self promotion, it comes as no surprise. Stick to your pizza restaurant!

[djderry] 08/8/2019 22:47

WilliamC,thank you But,on the substantive point,the eggs are not cracked.Muddy Waters put out spurious 'research' which has been refuted ,line by line.Where it is just factually wrong (ie with the 'turniver'of CFOs) to the baseless linking of outcomes (Napo)for their own disengenuis reasons.What is cracked? The only thing that I can see which is 'cracked' is MW's wilful misrepresentation of the facts.Today on their Twitter feed they desend to describing Burford's response to a caller regarding the carrying value of the Petersen matter as 'BS'.It was explained ,( for the upteenth time)that this information is case sensitive.If this were disclosed ,it would give lawyers for the opposing side tactical advantages when a case is still in progress.Muddy Waters is persisting with illogical arguments ,even when they have been shown to be plain wrong.

[blusteradjuster] 08/8/2019 22:40

That said, Woodford is having a dreadful time of it.

I’ve heard it suggested he is “doing a Rivington”.

[williamcooper104] 08/8/2019 22:39

What we all need now to restore confidence is an announcement that WEIF has double downed

[williamcooper104] 08/8/2019 22:35

Agree - dismissive of MW fine but should still have eaten pie for leaving company so vulnerable to bear raiders and taken steps to address that At the moment management is looking like a better spoken Mike Ashley

[williamcooper104] 08/8/2019 22:32

Dj Derry - made same mistake - you can keep all eggs in one basket you just need to watch that basket like a hawk and be prepared to bail out when a few eggs are cracked If I'd freshly invested at 15-17 in any other stock then I would have been out well before £10 - but I was much less bothered about my winnings as opposed to fresh money invested (and of course hugely influenced by previous form) For what it's worth Bur has i believe serious issues but it's not a fundamentally insolvent business a la Carillion - there's a floor in their somewhere and the asset class is still sound