Juridica Share Discussion Threads

[philjeans] 05/2/2016 08:55

Nice to see L & G buying strongly and steadily, going from 3% to 11% !!

Bargain rating down here and clearly L & G think there's value here now.

So do I.

[djderry] 31/12/2015 15:33

I never thought the shares would be rated so lowly.

[neilyb675] 31/12/2015 10:33

DIV reinvested @ 42.77p, boom.

[neilyb675] 04/12/2015 15:59

Good to see

[speedsgh] 04/12/2015 15:55

Interesting to see L&G accumulating here...

Holding(s) in Company -

[woozle1] 29/11/2015 18:05

71% seems v high and points to one thing: decline. I'm sure that inward investment is good for Burford management who, like Juridical, pay themselves egregious fees. The issue is return to shareholders who are after all on the hook ans not the managers who pay themselves vast fees..

[cockerhoop] 28/11/2015 13:01

GM,

The 5p is payable on 30th December 15.

[guernseymoney] 27/11/2015 15:48

Is this a fair summary for JIL as things stand (things have moved quick the last few weeks, struggling to keep up):

= Winding up (or at least voting to)
= 5p div declared, payable in Jan 16
= Net asset value is circa 75p

Timeframe for realisation of assets? = any ideas?

Thanks in advance!

[holts] 27/11/2015 15:45

Tiswas , there is also burford bond .

[jonwig] 27/11/2015 15:28

It might be a single case, I don't remember.

They rarely comment on individual cases, but news does leak out from time to time. See for example comments on Rurelec in the thread.

[tiswas] 27/11/2015 15:01

Will do jonwig.
Sorry, I was reading this wrongly on a skim through the interims.

Litigation finance
This period saw Burford’s largest recovery to date
– $61 million in gross proceeds on a $25 million
investment for a profit of $36 million and a return
on invested capital of 144%.

So that is a portfolio, not a single case.

[jonwig] 27/11/2015 14:54

tiswas - check out the BUR thread, maybe? (No single huge success.)

[tiswas] 27/11/2015 14:18

Anyone got an opinion on Burford. Numbers look good but maybe flattered by a huge success this year?

[konkel] 27/11/2015 10:18

Just for interest: Chris Bogart is CEO of Burford

Comment on Juridica announcement

By Chris Bogart | November 18, 2015



Juridica announced today what has been inevitable for a long time: that it was closing its doors. In doing so, Lord Brennan, Juridica’s Chairman, acknowledged Burford’s approach to this asset class as being the requisite model to succeed by stating that “scale and diversity are required in order to invest successfully in this asset class”.

Juridica had neither—it is an investment fund, not a diversified specialty finance provider of multiple litigation solutions around the world, like Burford. Instead, Juridica focused only on traditional litigation funding of patents and antitrust cases, and it never grew.

I’m writing this post today not to highlight the closure of what used to be seen as a competitor to Burford, before people grew to understand the asset class better. Rather, I am writing to draw attention to an important fact that must not be obscured in the noise around Juridica’s liquidation: Juridica’s litigation investments made money.

That’s right—despite being challenged in a number of ways, Juridica proved the litigation investment model. Juridica’s return on invested capital in concluded investments is around 33%—less than half Burford’s return on invested capital of 71%, but still a solidly profitable number. That is basically like the performance of a third quartile private equity fund.

As litigation finance continues to evolve, Burford remains at the vanguard of incepting new solutions to meet the needs of commercial litigators. There will doubtless be more industry shakeouts as constrained and less innovative players come to realize they are also unable to obtain “scale and diversity” to compete.

It is also worth pointing out that capacity in the litigation finance sector as a whole is expanding fast and flourishing. Hundreds of millions of dollars of new private capital have been raised in this past year alone. Increased capacity is good for the industry and excellent for Burford.

The fundamental message investors should take away from these developments is that litigation finance is an inherently profitable business, even when conducted in a challenged situation.

[glasshalfull] 26/11/2015 10:35

Snap WJ...for exactly same rationale.

Regards,
GHF

[wjccghcc] 26/11/2015 09:49

Bought a few as well. At 44p, it's valuing the case investments at 33c on the dollar which seems a bit pessimistic even given their recent hiccoughs.

[tiswas] 26/11/2015 09:43

I think the ex div must have triggered a few stop losses hence the overreaction.

I bought a few more as I agree re discount but not been a good investment this one.

[cockerhoop] 26/11/2015 09:39

You're not the only one, I'd mentioned JIL on the Self Liquidating board a couple of days ago quoting the record date for the 5p return and I was still initially alarmed by the drop thinking it may of been a legal ruling not yet reported!

With the estimated NAV post return of 76p the discount at current prices looks extreme.

[tiswas] 26/11/2015 09:27

Thanks. These dates seem to have a habit of confusing me!

[cockerhoop] 26/11/2015 09:24

Yes it is, the record date is tomorrow (27th) so ex-div today. Was worried for a moment :-)

[tiswas] 26/11/2015 09:15

Is that ex 5p today?

[speedsgh] 24/11/2015 11:32

Litigation Funding Pioneer Hits a Roadblock -

Litigation finance—the business of third-party funders taking a stake in corporate lawsuits in exchange for a cut of the profits—has long been divisive in the legal industry.

As some funds’ fortunes have risen, others have shut their doors. Last week, Juridica Investments Ltd. added its name to the list of stumbling funds.

As the American Lawyer’s Julie Triedman reports:
The Guernsey-based company announced that it has decided to freeze its portfolio and focus on existing investments at the prompting of its shareholders. Juridica is one of just three publicly listed litigation funders worldwide, and it helped to pioneer the business in the U.S. market. It currently has $200 million in assets under management, the company reported.

Juridica only took an interest in a few areas of the law, according to Am Law, focusing half its investments in antitrust claims, a quarter in patent cases, and the remainder in commercial claims. That strategy may have cost them. In the statement announcing the investment freeze, Juridica Chairman Lord Daniel Brennan said the board and its investment manager “acknowledge that scale and diversity are now required in order to invest successfully in this asset class, which is not achievable under the company’s existing structure.”

A Juridica spokeswoman had no additional comment Monday.

Am Law has more on what prompted Juridica’s move:
Investor confidence has slid since June 18, when the fund announced that it was writing down a $30 million expected return on a claim involving alleged overseas price-fixing in the market for liquid crystal displays. The write-down appears to have been prompted by the U.S. Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari in two related appeals, Motorola Mobility v. AU Optronics 2409.TW -0.36% and Hsiung v. United States...

[philjeans] 19/11/2015 12:19

Even better - Legal and General picked them up.

[philjeans] 19/11/2015 07:36

Nice one - RBS Pension Trustees look to have upped their stake to 9%!

So I'm not the only one who sees value here.

[hession] 18/11/2015 15:53

I think the Board not a nasty shock with the underperforming case and realise the lack of diversity is more of a risk than they perhaps thought.Maybe the institutional s/holders are applying pressure to wind up the fund so as to retain some value for their unit holders.