Member Info for Gtx1

I can't speak for anyone else, but that purchase of 2 million shares or £11 million pounds is the biggest single purchase I've ever seen with my own eyes on this forum, it was a buy ok.
The old saying follow the money comes to mind, will there be some Kind of unplanned announcement coming soon ?.
It's a massive buy coming right at this time when most investors are holding back to see how the world markets behave.
Someone is extremely confident around burfords heading news flow and potential.

CHEERS to that £11 million pound buyer.

2 million Shares bought, something good must be on its way then , that’s a massive buy .

Cheers FFC.

Yes TWT I'm also hoping that Argentina's debts get agreed on very soon, S.Maril,s take on things is fair enough, though more might have been written on the different avenues of court award collections, I think long term and one way or another Argentina must meet the courts judgement bill, sovereign bonds looks most likely, and failing a full upfront payment then burford I'm sure has a predetermined plan to secure as much as possible and get everything else over a set number of years , or we will meet them again in court every year until everything is paid outright.
It's a sad state of affairs that we have arrived at, though maybe, just maybe Argentina will learn to just stop stealing investors investments in Argentina. If they done that then maybe other big multinational companies would have the confidence to pour billions of investment money into the country.
I'm relaxed about my investment in burford now , and happy to wait it out without too many forum post.

Cheers TWT.

https://www.translatetheweb.com/?ref=TAns&from=&to=en&a=https%3A%2F%2Ffin.guru%2Fnoticias%2F202007%2Fburford-capital--un-impensado-defensor-de-la-reestructuracion-de-la-deuda-soberana-argentina_n13672

$ 5 billion , oops,

There's no way I'm going over to the nanoco forum to get ignored or laughed at LOL. It's on my own watch list because of the Samsung litigation story. I've enough to worry about here,

Yes FFC if we got say $3 billion I would like you want it all right away, though what perplexed me is why REPSOL, I think got $10 billion and took $5 + million to avoid all the award appeals that Argentina could throw at them , sure it's only another $5 billion of a difference LOL.

CHEERS EVERYONE.

JC. You can take that up with TB yourself, he’s posting again over on that nanoco forum, I’m sure it will give him a good laugh if he’s at all interested in anything we have to say.

Cheers everyone

I called that over several different post ffc, if you don’t believe me then you’re free to find it,

I actually think we would be very foolish to turn down any type of instalment plan spread out over many years, because I’m doing that we can bypass any of Argentina’s sovereign debt defaults, they have them every so many years, and the next one will be the worst I’m afraid. What bank wants to buy a countries Sovereign bonds debt when there’s a high likelihood of a default on that debt, by spreading it out over many years you can get all that money back as Argentina’s economy recovers over many years , and it’s Bonds are not shunned by international banks.
As I’ve said this option should never be discounted as a accommodating way to get a big settlement,

Cheers everyone

That’s a good indication to how judge Preska is thinking TWT, *** This is rather a simple case***

I think even Bogart stated in the call in that to them it was a open and shut case , something like that,

That’s what I also thought , now if Argentina hadn’t off paid Repsol $5+ billion , then I wouldn’t be as confident around getting a billion dollar settlement,

I also agree with FFC this case could have American investors scrambling for a slice of this settlement money,

What I would like to see is if we got say 3/6/9/12 billion then why not get in instalments over 3/5/10 years , that way Argentina get off the hook for one big massive sum, we all know they can’t afford it,
So if we got our # cross your fingers settlement, then we could strip out the risk of Argentina defaulting on its sovereign debts , they know they have to pay us over many years to make it look more palatable to their countries residents and voters, in doing that we know we will have a yearly amount coming in for say 3/5or even 10 years and underpinning our revenue stream. Argentina is in really bad economic shape , though it won’t always be like that, so getting a huge settlement spread out over many years could benefit all parties here.

I’m saying all that because our potential settlement figure could be $12 billion ,

What better a way to underpin our income stream and share price than a large sovereign bond issue over many years.

Just my thoughts, because I called judge preskas call on a Dual and simultaneous fact finding process for our case. Even though I didn’t even know if it was possible.

Just food for thought, nothing’s set in stone with my thinking around all these issues.

Cheers everyone.

GG you could be right, though these hedge funds can just pop up and just supply the funding money to the appropriate law firms. Though these wouldn't normally be described as very big technology IP litigation USA based funder by nanoco PLC.

Burfords headquarters is based in the USA, Madison avenue New York ,even though they are listed in the uk, also the majority of burfords business litigation funding is spent in the USA, on the balance of probabilities burford maybe nanoco's funder or not. We may never know.

CHEERS everyone

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/NANO/litigation-funding-agreement-p72jrx2eg4r51x3.html

Burford finances technology IP cases, it's possible they are the" very "big litigation funder for nanoco plc. This is a big case against Samsung, Samsung have a very long history at stealing technology IP from other companies.https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/NANO/litigation-funding-agreement-p72jrx2eg4r51x3.htmlCHEERS.

The most important line in this for me in my opinion, is the line below.

### The case shall proceed in accordance with the schedule of the plaintiffs/ Burford, in there letter dated June 26 2020 ###

It's actually the fairest thing the judge could do considering we are talking about a several billion dollar settlement.

I thought she might make that decision if at all possible, a reasonable compromise to run both request simultaneously, I just had no idea if that could be done.

I'm very happy at that fair result, now let's get on with getting our share price to £25+

CHEERS EVERYONE.

https://ar.linkedin.com/in/sebastianmaril

I think it's understandable FFC with the low volume and some speculating investors wishing to lock in some profits,

Sebastian maril seems to be a person to listen to going from his CV and experience, # see link below,#

Though I would be surprised if he didn't naturally express his opinions as a resident of the Argentina state, if he makes the wrong sounds over there , then he may make his own life much more difficult than it needs to be. He's only human after all. I would do the same thing in his job and country. So I'm bearing that in mind when reading his Twitter post and opinions.
It maybe the kind of opinion Argentina's ruling parties wish to see expressed in there country, Sebastian maril needs to keep his job and income after all. Understandable, also I think TWT expressed the same clever observation this morning.

https://gettheessential.com/author/smaril

Also judge Loretta Preska also seems to have experience with the Argentinean lawsuit tactics, and lawsuit claims against that country, see link below.

https://www.en24news.com/en/2020/07/judgment-against-argentina-will-have-to-pay-us-224-million-to-two-investment-funds-for-the-default-of-2001.html

CHEERS EVERYONE.

Warno1 I’m saying no more on the subject matter out of respect for FFC and others, maybe you could show the same respect too. Though you do have a adventurous sense of imagination.

Cheers warno1

Great find FFC, I see Burford in the medium to long term taking a lot more stakes in law firms from around the world, top strong players in the market, with diverse and comprehensive litigation Departments, that’s what I feel C. bogarts aim could be, a worldwide overarching Legal service that can bring in a better and consistent profit for the company, the potential here could be substantial and the rewards for Burford with it’s valuation and SP could be much higher indeed.

That article you posted really confirms what I’ve been thinking all along,
Thanks FFC

Cheers everyone

I wouldn't dream of filtering you FFC, far from it you might even get on my Xmas card list this year.

CHEERS FFC.

FFC I don't know everything that went on around you and him, though he must have been extremely rude to you for you to lower yourself to saying all those things to him, you seem a nice reasonable person to me, and very likable, so I would have to side with you considering everything I've said.

Investors don't seem to separate the Petersen case from burfords normal workload and potential. I actually think now that burford should try it's best to avoid such high profile cases, and in some way find a mechanism to keep the company's name out of the limelight. I want the profits but not the SP rollercoaster ride that comes along with these types of cases, but that maybe unavoidable.

CHEERS FFC.

JAMMYC I think TB has really effected you badly, please don't let him do that to you , your smarter and better than that, your one of my favorite posters on here, He's gone now, let's just forget all about him, I won't mention him again if it upsets you, your here he's not, so that's what I'm focused on now. Your a decent good poster that's what's important here, not some whirlwind of a past long gone poster. Onwards and upwards is what I say,

CHEERS EVERYONE.