Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

[tsmith2] 09/8/2019 13:20

1/2 right. disagree on your point re: ceo and cfo

[williamcooper104] 09/8/2019 13:16

Sk - growth in terms of invested capital going out door and stepping up is real The SWF didn't commit that capital without high degree of confidence that it would be spent How much Peterson is exceptional is of course up for debate

[williamcooper104] 09/8/2019 13:14

Wood v Holden established the board being held outside of the UK principle - the core principle is Central Management and Control It used of be thought that you just needed to have the board meeting outside of the UK - the big no no was having directors phone in to board meetings from the UK - you actually had to get the plane down to Jersey Since then there's been more case law on substance v form However keeping the cfo and ceo off the board is clearly showing that the substance is that the company is managed in the UK and not off-shore It doesn't help - and could actually weaken their tax position

[tsmith2] 09/8/2019 13:12

Feelings like short squeeze about to start

[williamcooper104] 09/8/2019 13:09

Yep - you have to go to Jersey to do board meetings - you need to actually do the board meetings in Jersey You do need Jersey directors - but not all directors need to be resident in Jersey

[williamcooper104] 09/8/2019 13:07

Not a Director for tax reasons and not to escape potential liabilities and keep renumeration secret - falling off chair LOL

[tsmith2] 09/8/2019 13:06

Did you ensure that jersey residency was managed properly? How so..please list steps

[sweet karolina2] 09/8/2019 13:05

brexit,

Is BUR really growing as rapidly as it claims or is that growth partially imaginary and partially driven by one exceptional case the likes of which are very unlikely to be repeated?

[williamcooper104] 09/8/2019 13:05

Brexitplus - which is why if you value Burford as a PE company you would apply a premium but that's a premium to NAV Investment trust/PE at a premium to NAV is much much lower than a PE fund taking their yearly investment performance and putting an earnings multiple on it

[tsmith2] 09/8/2019 13:03

Reinforce trust issue lol

[sweet karolina2] 09/8/2019 13:02

Adnan,

My view, as I have expressed many times, is BUR is not worth the £3Bn it was at, what it really is worth is very hard to determine given accounting methods and lack of transparency and the serious questions raised regarding contingent liabilities not in the books. You have come up with £9.15 per share. You could be right or you could be wrong in both directions, but that figure is much more reasonable than £13+.

[brexitplus] 09/8/2019 13:02

tsmith2, who are you responding to?

[tsmith2] 09/8/2019 12:59

Looking more likely

[tsmith2] 09/8/2019 12:59

It's to do with ensuring tax residency of company, if you understand the concept.

[brexitplus] 09/8/2019 12:57

WC

I am only making the point that valuation of existing investments is similar to PE.

Unlike PE, in my opinion, Burford is in a rapidly growing business with a faster payback, and probably more chance of success as demonstrated by its history, which should command a big premium, particularly when you add Petersen.

Just my opinion.

[williamcooper104] 09/8/2019 12:56

74tom I've got a small long position - looking to average in - and also waiting to see MW reposte and market reaction

[williamcooper104] 09/8/2019 12:55

Really hate that management isn't on the board - and being lawyers know full well that they are side stepping many legal liabilities Anyone else think of an internally managed company where CFO and CEO are not on the board

[adnan17] 09/8/2019 12:53

Sweet Karolina I already did a like for like comparison. If Burford was not using Fair Value and applying the same multiple on the book value Burford would be 9.15

I guess its up to everyone else to decide whether there should be fair value or not. Given that its within the rule book, Burford are not doing anything illegal.

In addition surprisingly both Burford and IMF are audited by E&Y. One would think they would be consistent. But given how audit companies are structured the Australian auditors and British Auditors don't probably talk to each other. Maybe that will change post-Brexit and we have greater trading arrangements with non-European countries.

But the question here is to Fair Value or Not? I believe one should Fair Value within reason. Going back to Trafford Centre and Intu, I would not want Intu to hold it and report at book value. But neither would I want Intu to exaggerate the value and say it is worth GBP 3bn, when it is worth around GBP 2bn.

[williamcooper104] 09/8/2019 12:53

Brexit - if you cannot see any differnce then Burford would be valued at NAV (perhaps at a premium) and not on an earnings multiple You are making the bear case

[1corrado] 09/8/2019 12:51

any taker at 900p????????????????

[brexitplus] 09/8/2019 12:50

Sweet K

Clutching at straws methinks.

Please report correctly. Elizabeth has been at Burford since the beginning and involved in accounts prior to 2014.

As the company grew and got big wins of course the profits and NAV would increase.

You are obviously a disciple of MW.

Try again. 2 out of 10, and only for effort.

[74tom] 09/8/2019 12:48

It’s a tricky one this, feels like a no brainer when you read the target prices & results + defence. However, once you own shares you can’t help but think MW will come back for more, firstly to save face & secondly to counter the pompous tone. Think the time to buy is after seeing how MW respond, and how the market reacts. £8 feels like a natural halfway house until we see what MW have to say for themselves...

[1corrado] 09/8/2019 12:48

any taker at 900p????

[sweet karolina2] 09/8/2019 12:44

"The position of the CFO was questioned, not only due to her relationship with the CEO, but also concerning personnel turnover in the role. As we had understood before, Elizabeth O’Connell has effectively been in the job since Miriam Connole left at the end of 2014."

That is even worse! There is a distinct shift up in profits and NAV growth being reported from 2014. Mrs CEO was effectively doing the books from then and nobody officially in the chair, and therefore potentially liable, will stay for more than a year!