![](/cdn/assets/images/search/clock.png)
We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Burford Capital Limited | LSE:BUR | London | Ordinary Share | GG00BMGYLN96 | ORD NPV (DI) |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-9.00 | -0.84% | 1,058.00 | 1,058.00 | 1,060.00 | 1,090.00 | 1,054.00 | 1,067.00 | 137,397 | 16:29:44 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Unit Inv Tr, Closed-end Mgmt | 1.39B | 610.52M | - | N/A | 2.33B |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
04/9/2019 10:33 | 4th attempt today to clear £7.00p once through I think a good rise will come. | ![]() wardy333 | |
04/9/2019 09:58 | adnan "Henchard - you proved my point Tesco clearly state "no provision was required". So why do Tesco believe no provision is required for there legal liabilities. But yet you expect Burford to set aside provisions?" Nowhere have I said I expect BUR to make provisions. You must be thinking of another poster. Obviously, if a potential liability meets the criteria for requiring a provision, a provision will be made. I'm surprised, though, given the nature of BUR's business, that it mentions no contingent liabilities. | ![]() henchard | |
04/9/2019 09:48 | All four Buford bonds are rising today against a backdrop of generally declining bond markets, that speaks volumes | ![]() lgm1 | |
04/9/2019 09:47 | Henchard - you proved my point Tesco clearly state "no provision was required". So why do Tesco believe no provision is required for there legal liabilities. But yet you expect Burford to set aside provisions? "Contingent liabilities: The Committee further considered management’s assessment of the status of ongoing regulatory investigations and litigation relating to prior periods. The Committee concurred with management’s assessment that due to the stage of the remaining matters and the uncertainties regarding the outcomes, no provision was required, and disclosure as contingent liabilities at the year end was appropriate. See Note 32 to the financial statements." "As previously reported, Tesco Stores Limited has received claims from current and former Tesco store colleagues alleging that their work is of equal value to that of colleagues working in Tesco’s distribution centres and that differences in terms and conditions relating to pay are not objectively justifiable. The claimants are seeking the differential between the pay terms looking back, and equivalence of pay terms moving forward. At present, the likely number of claims that may be received and the merit, likely outcome and potential impact on the Group of any such litigation is subject to a number of significant uncertainties and therefore, the Group cannot make any assessment of the likely outcome or quantum of any such litigation as at the date of this disclosure. There are substantial factual and legal defences to these claims and the Group intends to defend them" So, they have mentioned it, but they have not set aside any provisions for it. Even though the cases have been ongoing for 3 years. That was the whole issue that SweetK raised. | ![]() adnan17 | |
04/9/2019 09:38 | Nowt more to be said. | ![]() achenaton | |
04/9/2019 09:31 | I have no need to explain anything I only post as nw99 get off my back | ![]() nw99 | |
04/9/2019 09:31 | Explain posts 12093 and 12098 then. | ![]() achenaton | |
04/9/2019 09:23 | Go back and look at previous posts on other threads tell me we are connected I don't think so | ![]() nw99 | |
04/9/2019 09:17 | nw99 and ONJohn Explain posts 12093 and 12098 then. You've got to laugh - can't even work out which name they're supposed to be posting under. Also talking to each other at one point. | ![]() achenaton | |
04/9/2019 09:09 | Adding more here | ![]() nw99 | |
04/9/2019 09:08 | No cannot stand that poster | ![]() nw99 | |
04/9/2019 09:08 | nw99 nothing to do with him | ![]() nw99 | |
04/9/2019 08:56 | nw99 / ONJohn One and same? Posts 12093 and 12098. | ![]() achenaton | |
04/9/2019 08:18 | Any upward progress stopped by the A/Ts, will need some decent news here to start a decent recovery. | ![]() wardy333 | |
04/9/2019 08:05 | should see 700p + to day. | 1corrado | |
04/9/2019 07:49 | ONJohn, Are you nw99 as well? | ![]() achenaton | |
04/9/2019 07:15 | Should get muddy response today can see 500p | ![]() onjohn | |
04/9/2019 00:08 | nw99 You wouldn't also be poster ONJohn as well would you, by any chance? | ![]() achenaton | |
03/9/2019 22:55 | Yes all good value | ![]() nw99 | |
03/9/2019 22:24 | Burford capital 22, 24 and 26 retail bonds have in fact gone up in price today, see the London stock exchange retail bond prices | ![]() lgm1 | |
03/9/2019 21:57 | I can see what johnwig means! He’s definitely trying to bore us to death. Truly obsessional. | ![]() brianarthur1939 | |
03/9/2019 21:57 | In contrast to Tesco, BUR makes no reference to contingent liabilities in its last annual report. Aside from under note "28. Financial commitments and contingent liabilities" where we have "At 31 December 2018, the Group had outstanding commitments for $646,631,000 of which $618,338,000 are for investments and $28,293,000 are for new initiative investments" but no contingent liabilities at all are mentioned. | ![]() henchard |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions