Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

[lomax99] 11/2/2020 13:23

He says that "he is totally oblivious to any lawsuit against YPF or the State"

The Petersen Group takes distance from the trial in New York

From the diffusion of the new Argentine presentation, the first since the assumption of the new government, in the trial that is carried out before the judge of the South district of New York, Loretta Preska, on the consequences of the expropriation of YPF in 2012 , the Petersen Group assured this newspaper that "it is totally oblivious to any lawsuit against YPF and / or the National State in Argentina or abroad. That it expressly waived that right to litigate against the Argentine State and that it did not initiate the trial nor did he sell the rights to the Burford fund, with which the Petersen Group has no relationship, commercial or otherwise. "

In its statement it states that "the lawsuit against Argentina is driven by the Burford fund, to which the Spanish courts sold the rights to litigate against the country in the context of the bankruptcy process of Petersen Energía and Petersen Energía Inversora initiated after the expropriation of YPF. At the time of the start of the lawsuit, these two companies no longer had a relationship with the Petersen Group. "


They also say that "it was the Spanish justice that administers the Petersen bankruptcy process that auctioned those rights to litigate, which were acquired by Burford (the same fund that won the trial against Argentina for the expropriation of Airlines)."

Later, they schematically tell the story of that Group's relationship with YPF:

"The income of the Petersen Group in YPF was made through 2 companies based in Spain (a condition established by the lenders to grant the loans). Those 2 companies are Petersen Energía and Petersen Energía Inversora.

"After the takeover of YPF SA by the National State, Petersen Energía and Petersen Energía Inversora, they proceeded - not being able to face the repayment of the loans - to dispose of all the shares they held as collateral of the loans received for acquisition, which is why since that time (2012) they do not have any shareholding in YPF.

"The 2 Petersen companies were bankrupt and a liquidation process was initiated in the Spanish commercial justice (Commercial Court No. 3), which appointed a bankruptcy administrator.

"The bankruptcy administrator argued that by expropriating Repsol its 51 percent in YPF, the Argentine State should have launched a Public Offering (OPA) for 100 of the company, as indicated by the company's bylaws, something that did not happen. therefore, it determined that the 2 Petersen companies have the right to litigate against the Argentine State because they suffered damage.

"It was the insolvency administrator who defined the entry of Burford. That is, Burford bought the bankruptcy from the Spanish justice and with it the rights to litigate against Argentina and filed the lawsuit in 2015 in the New York courts (which accepted the claim because YPF shares are listed on Wall Street).



"On 4/9/15, when the news of the lawsuit filed by Burford on the previous day was known, and before erroneous information that began to circulate in some media, the Petersen Group issued a press release clarifying that it is totally on the sidelines and has no interference in any judicial process related to YPF. "

[f15jcm] 11/2/2020 13:12

Anything to do with this? hxxps://www.pagina12.com.ar/246806-el-grupo-petersen-toma-distancia-del-juicio-en-nueva-york

[williamcooper104] 11/2/2020 13:11

Far prefer US stocks as a general rule

[time_traveller] 11/2/2020 12:44

A shorters play thing. That's what you get when you stay listed on AIM.

We did warn them. Conventional investors get stopped out, or are just too scared to touch it in the first place.

[cokehookerscars] 11/2/2020 12:41

Yep, this company is dog sh*t.

[chimers] 11/2/2020 12:33

PS. I shall be sending out a fee in future.
I learned at the coal face and I shouldn't be giving it away for free like the missus does!!

[chimers] 11/2/2020 12:26

Right so....

[time_traveller] 11/2/2020 09:22

So much for hoping for a quieter day (I've given up hoping for an up day).

[stock surfer] 11/2/2020 08:22

@George, be fantastic to hear how you reach your valuation of 200p?

[george stobbart] 11/2/2020 07:45

I'd like to say

1)Good morning
2)Enjoy life
3)Stay Short BUR until it reaches its fair value at 200p

[ozzmosiz] 11/2/2020 07:35

NMC look like they've got offer/s!!

[onjohn] 10/2/2020 21:30

If NMC gets a bid this will fly up in sympathy

good proxy to buy in the morning when NMC opens 2 quid higher imho

[trident5] 10/2/2020 21:02

FCA getting involved at NMC re the directors, not MW.

[hazl] 10/2/2020 20:56

Indeed djderry!

[vstock] 10/2/2020 20:47

"Muddy Waters intentionally providing misleading and manipulative information which are not based on facts. His tweets has manipulative character using words such it seems like, i heard, it is possible, not providing hard facts."

[pal44] 10/2/2020 20:23

How come M still. Slagging BUR any day soon the shorts going to get burnt just wait and see .

[djderry] 10/2/2020 20:13

I really wish all the uninformed posters and speculators would move on.If you expected predictable and timely profits,you really should sell up.If you don't understand the asset class,you really should sell up.If you don't understand(or care not to)the due diligence process and the (up to now) rigorous selection methods employed,then sell up.Go and find something better.Let the strong holders continue to accumulate.Come back in,say,three years.

[mad foetus] 10/2/2020 19:14

https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b1k7nflbl3wz7c/Muddy-Waters-Krupa-Global-Investments-Spar-Over-NMC-HealthOne investor is trying to get the FBI involved.

[hazl] 10/2/2020 19:05

Paltry dismal very technical terms. Perhaps we ought to thank them? We've been able to get into a company at a third at least of its usual price!

[riverman77] 10/2/2020 18:59

I think the fall in profits may be at least partly linked to the MW attack. Firstly, with extra scrutiny ahead of the US listing they may have gone for an ultra conservative approach in terms of new value write-ups. Secondly, I think it's fair to say they are not as flush with cash as they once were - having deep pockets would surely have some impact on pushing cases through to an early resolution/settlement.

[trident5] 10/2/2020 18:47

Has he had an impact on B's profits though - the read-in from the latest update is that they barely made any in the 2H, after his shorting attack?