Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

[dekle] 28/10/2021 13:35

That report is 6 months old, would be nice to find more up to date information

[three black crows] 28/10/2021 13:17

The analysis would be similar to Travis Weidower/s analysis
Titled .............

Burford Capital is By Far the Most Undervalued Company I Know Of

and can be viewed here for those who have not had the pleasure

hxxps://traviswiedower.com/

[three black crows] 28/10/2021 13:15

The analysis would be similar to Travis Weidower/s analysis
Titled .............

Burford Capital is By Far the Most Undervalued Company I Know Of

and can be viewed here for those who have not had the pleasure

hxxps://traviswiedower.com/

[jockthescot75] 28/10/2021 09:08

Thanks HOP. Anyone read it? I assume the analysis is no different to want long term holders here know already?

[houseofpain1] 27/10/2021 22:35

New idea just posted long Burford Capital $BUR - the "market leader in litigation finance" - which the contributing PM calls "one of the few firms in the world that could be worth 5x in 6 years, no matter what happens in the world.

[chester9] 27/10/2021 15:40

Someone manipulating a position. It's the AIM. Soon be back to 8:00. Games going on

[lomax99] 27/10/2021 15:38

C'mon, let's see a blue finish!

[time_traveller] 27/10/2021 14:56

The selling does seem to be stateside - can't blame them really - an ugly blotch of red in a sea of blue for any American who invested at the NYSE debut, amongst zaro listing pizzazz.

[prokartace] 27/10/2021 14:47

That is a sustained drop which I assumed would be at least partly corrected by US opening, but not so, what are we missing?

[lomax99] 27/10/2021 11:54

Yes, looking like it. Happy to start adding in low £7's

[dekle] 27/10/2021 09:15

Usual volatility?

[chester9] 27/10/2021 08:58

Looks like an AIM'less drop before going Xd on the 11th. Wild West sometimes. Unless Seb Marle or Judge Presca have said something

[donald pond] 25/10/2021 14:02

Log, there is no "US". There are US courts and a US government and if anybody has a judgment debt, especially one arising from a case where the Supreme Court ruled the US was the proper court, and that debt is unsatisfied they can ask for an order from a judge (ex parte) against the defendants US assets, which means any dollars it owns anywhere in the world. It then serves that order on every major bank in the world and Argentina would not have any access to dollars. The same applies to YPF, which would be reduced to selling oil in pesos.

[loglorry1] 25/10/2021 12:36

Why do you think the US would stop all of Argintina's $ transactions while at the same time supporting the IMF to prop up Argintina so it can hopefully trade its way out of debt?

A pragmatic approach is the only thing that will work. I doubt very much that a vindictive/punative approach will help BUR get paid anyway and all parties know that.

[williamcooper104] 24/10/2021 10:31

That's actually Venezuela; which goes to show that oil reserves means little if you've a deeply dysfunctional government/economy

[donald pond] 24/10/2021 10:29

It is one thing to default on bonds, where investors know they are taking counterparty risk on the government. To ignore a US judgment debt arising from a breach of a contractual term designed to ensure there is no such counterparty risk is very different. If they don't pay one enforcement solution as I've mentioned before is to get a seizure award that would allow Burford to freeze any dollars belonging to Argentina anywhere in the world. Such an approach would starve Argentina of dollars and tip them into hyperinflation very quickly. I'm not saying it will be easy, but it won't be easy for Argentina to evade their liability either.

[tnt99] 24/10/2021 10:12

Biggest oil reserves in the world as I understand it we could accept a profit share from the production of the countries oil maybe lol

[reubion] 22/10/2021 20:52

This is all just speculation on my part, but I think the enforcement fears if Burford wins are overblown. Let's say it's a $ 10 billion judgment, wouldn't it make much more sense for Argentina to pay and default on their normal government bonds later on? I mean capital markets have really short memories, just in 2017 Argentina managed to raise a 100 year bond.

The story for refusing to pay out Elliot's vulture investments was much better ("they only payed cents on the dollar"), but at some point, all this asset hiding etc. is very onerous.

[maddox] 22/10/2021 13:54

Agreed. I'd be happy with an instalment plan as long as the first one was immediately payable and equivalent to BUR's prevailing mkt cap ;-)

[flare1] 21/10/2021 13:54

In the unlikely event that Burford lost the case, can you image the resulting shock waves - that would be sent out - throughout the USA stock market. Any Argentinian related stocks that are listed in the USA would surely take a share price hammering, as would any new Argentinian listings. A no brainer really. The American legal system must set an example to prevent the Argie Government (and any other third world governments) from carrying out similar strong arm tactics when they wish to take over US listed stocks. After all, wouldn’t that be in line with our own LSE rules?

On winning the case/or should Burford take an early settlement, it wouldn’t surprise me to see the settlement paid in instalments which are related to future YPF earnings. Just a thought!

[maddox] 21/10/2021 10:31

I would think that if Argentina/YPF lose the case - sod the valuation calculation - exemplary damages would be in order. Surely, a 'fair' valuation would not adequately reflect the clear flouting of the rules.

In recognition of that surely a settlement is vastly in Argentina/YPF's interests. And with a settlement - an agreed payment schedule.

[donald pond] 19/10/2021 22:54

https://twitter.com/sebastianmaril/status/1450537688080257025?s=21$23bn on the line next June. Argentina are going to be feeling the pressure

[williamcooper104] 19/10/2021 12:22

Think that's right - even a negotiated settlement at the current carrying value should lead to a share price gain as would remove uncertainty and free up a lot of cash for investment (and/or special divi) Winning the case ought to be pretty likely given the facts (albeit a QC I know likes to say that if you ask him if a court will decide that the sun is going to rise he'd give a probability of 95 percent) The greater risk is that it takes a long time to enforce judgement

[donald pond] 19/10/2021 11:58

You have to remember how the Petersen case arose. The Argies privatised a company on the NYSE, with a prospectus setting out what compensation would be payable in the event of government seizure if the asset. They voluntarily submitted themselves to the US system and sought money from US investors on the explicit basis that on this occasion investors were not taking a risk on the Argentine state. The idea that this is analogous to a bind issue, where investors explicitly do asses counterparty risk, is wrong. If the case was found against Argentina and the country (and YPF) didn't pay then I don't think enforcement will be a problem. You try to run a basket case economy without access to dollars and see how long that lasts.