Burford Capital Share Discussion Threads

[extrader] 30/6/2023 08:11

Hat tip to Mr Marroc

LORETTA A. PRESKA, Senior United States District Judge: The Court has received several inquiries from members of the public and the press concerning the upcoming trial in this matter. The Court issues this order to inform members of the

public and the press that the trial, which is scheduled to commence on July 26, 2023 at 1:00 P.M., is open to the public

and that any person who wishes to attend may do so (subject to space limitations) by simply entering Courtroom 12A at 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007. Members of the public may also listen in using the following listen-only conference line: Dial-in: [phone], access code: 6545179.

--

Good opportunity to meet those who have followed this case from the very beginning.

ATB

[djderry] 30/6/2023 07:38

Judge Preska invites public to attend or listen to proceedings.The hottest ticket in town.

[extrader] 30/6/2023 02:43

Congo case (Sundance expropriation) is at ICC level, AIUI, without same level of enforceability clout.

It’s a $ 12 bn claim for expropriation of an (unexploited) mining license, with a lot of ‘hope value’ built in…..and maybe a fair bit of ‘nuisance value’ too.

Meanwhile

› argentina-central-bank-all...

3 hours ago — (Bloomberg) -- Argentina's central bank will allow the country's commercial banks to open customer accounts in yuan, as it seeks to address ...

De-dollarisation step by BRICS candidate Argentina , as it seeks to pull away from Washington / USD orbit….

Impact on post-judgment, post- election settlement negotiations …?

[lomax99] 29/6/2023 21:47

Apart from YPF I seem to remember an anti-trust related case (?) where their outlay was at least £200m, hoping that one will be coming to fruition in the not too distant..... (and then there is the Congo case....)

[tnt99] 29/6/2023 20:15

Must be a stonking buy as they have just won the biggest case on their books and possibly one of the largest cases in history and the share price is Not reflecting half of the true value 20 pound a share seems very reasonable

[jockthescot75] 29/6/2023 19:34

Donald - thanks.
Is there a link to the news at all?

Thanks

Jock

[coyy] 29/6/2023 14:53

Thank you Maddox for your reply to my post on the 27th June ref the weak share price for Burford.

The share price just keeps falling and given the newsflow it really makes no sense if one is a long term holder.

I really believe this is a transformational year for Burford.

[planit2] 29/6/2023 12:19

Just listened to that and it looks like 100% of the Claim does not belong to Burford.

The reason of the initial argument was Sysco had sold/passed on portions of the claim to its customers (who were the end victim of the price fixing). Burford got the rest of the claim assigned and I guess are working for the Sysco customers for their portions.

[extrader] 29/6/2023 12:04

Me again,

Thanks to Renegade elsewhere, I've found this.

Sysco (history) - Chris Bogart interviewed on Advisory Opinions Sarah VS Serial - 55.35 sec into the podcast.

hxxps://thedispatch.com/podcast/advisoryopinions/sarah-vs-serial/

Chris goes into some detail about convolutions in the case - $ 140m is indeed how much BUR has financed - no info re quantum involved, but (if you have the time) an educational 20 mins about the various complex procedural (and policy) issues at stake....and an insight into BUR's key determinant when assessing whether to take on a case or not :

"Your motivations are insufficiently economical."

ATB

[planit2] 29/6/2023 12:03

This looks like a great development, Sysco look to have excused themselves from the claim after acting in very bad faith. This was a stupid move considering litigation is Burford's business and result looks excellent - it looks like 100% of proceeds will go to Burford (please let me know if this is incorrect)?


The advantage to Sysco is they can move on in their relationship with suppliers ("we tried to fix it but it's now out of our hands") and Burford don't make them look like amateurs in court (remember that Sysco's law firm also were on Burford's side).

Burfords first step should be to work out if any other claims can be won and rolled into this one before coming to agreement with the suppliers.

Are there any figures on how many times larger the claim would be to the outlay of $140m? Plus the claims could now be bigger if they can connect more business.

[extrader] 29/6/2023 11:21

Hi donald pond,

I'm obviously missing something. You said above that 'we've advanced 140m'. What does that number refer to? And do you have a link to the source, pls.

Thanks!

[donald pond] 29/6/2023 08:47

Sysco is a huge company: revenues of $75bn so 2 or 3 times the size of Diageo. About 20% is meat, and the claim goes back many years. Sysco wanted to settle because they need to have ongoing relationships with their suppliers. Burford don't. The defendants want to settle because there are multiple similar claims and they don't want to risk a high benchmark being set (q: will Burford now try to fund those other claims). But you can see how this could settle quickly for a big profit. We don't of course know how much we paid to acquire it, but we do know what Sysco were willing to settle for

[extrader] 29/6/2023 08:29

$ 140m advance?
Wow! Any idea what the headline amount of the claim is?

All I've dug up is this

.."Details of Sysco's proposed deals in the antitrust litigation, which has generated hundreds of millions of dollars in settlements for other plaintiffs as part of class action proceedings, were not revealed in court filings..."



TIA

[donald pond] 29/6/2023 08:06

Just as a reminder, that was a case about food price fixing initially bought by one of the largest food companies in the US against its suppliers. We've advanced 140m. Sysco wanted to settle but we said "not for that amount" and they tried to force us to agree and lost. Now we've had the settlement assigned to us and I assume: 1) the defendants will not want any settlement to become public knowledge; 2) will be concerned that they have no commercial relationship with the litigants; 3) the litigation is for a very big sum.

[donald pond] 29/6/2023 07:48

https://twitter.com/emilyrsiegel/status/1674196074628612103?s=46&t=YfR7OyhMlqZLtI-h86iCxA

[donald pond] 29/6/2023 07:45

Sysco have backed down and assigned the claim to BUR. That's a potential biggie

[hashertu] 28/6/2023 18:02

From the AGL thread.

sicilian_kan 28 Jun '23 - 15:14 - 19763

BG British Smaller Co fund closed yesterday, 27/6.
As at 31/5/23, BUR was its largest holding at 8.3% in the fund.
BG might have been selling.

[maddox] 28/6/2023 15:55

'Why is the share price so weak?' the million dollar question - who knows.

All I can say is that everything looks good from my viewpoint, ignoring YPF:

>> This should be a bumper year for case conclusions (61 further case milestones scheduled);

>> BUR has raised more cash to meet high market demand for new case financing;

>> Debt profile looks highly conservative;

>> Historic case performance - IRR 29% stable - 1Q23 update p16.

So, underlying business looks to be in excellent shape. My only niggle is that they are not managing to communicate this to Mr Market - more work to be done here to simplify the complexity and messaging IMHO.

Including YPF -

>> A final decision on YPF case valuation becomes due after 4 August; only two remaining issues for Judge Preska to decide - she ain't quick, but it is only two issues. So, a final decision looks likely in 2H23.

>> YPF cash settlement - remains an unknown.

I cannot offer an explanation on the share price fall back but BUR looks to be in excellent shape. As BUR is uncorrelated or even negatively correlated to the wider economy - this should be attractive to investors.

[maddox] 28/6/2023 14:19

The Share Centre offered very good Shareholder voting services - they then were taken over by ii that have continued the service. Most other platforms are very poor and unfortunately there isn't any regulation to encourage them. It's an appalling situation that really needs to be changed.

I've no insight into what's offered in the US - but would like to know?

[carcosa] 28/6/2023 12:35

Thanks Peter

[greyingsurfer] 28/6/2023 09:23

II have been doing it for a while, and it seems to cover all or at least most of my holdings with them, it's not just BUR. I'm not clear if there's any new legistaltion behind it, but it's certainly a good move, and I understand II are not alone in doing it.

[carcosa] 28/6/2023 09:04

Am with Interactive Brokers and have just been given a link to vote on all of the AGM items. In my 20+ years of investing this has never happened to me outside of a CREST holding.

Is this some new legislation being implemented or because of the US listing?

[time_traveller] 27/6/2023 15:21

I think this rearrangement of borrowing doesn't help.

[coyy] 27/6/2023 14:08

Why is the share price so weak?

[tobydd] 26/6/2023 15:41

The 2024 bonds will probably be paid off at par. The terms of the optional repayment means that the company has to pay the greater of par and the price which would give a yield equivalent to the yield on the 2.75% 24 gilt + 1%. At the moment, the gilt is yielding around 5.35%, which would imply a yield of 6.35% on the Burford bonds and a price of around 99.7. If gilts manage to rally about 25bp in the next month, then it is possible that the price might be slightly higher than par. Either way, it is a good deal for Burford bond holders, as the bonds were trading at around 98 before the announcement.