Member Info for Poindexter

It happens from time to time. Usually back on Google the next day.

I must have missed something - is Burford an airline, or a nightclub operator or something?

Yes, it's frustrating that if they've got something to say, they can't say it now. But being an optimist, it's says to me that there can't very well be another "profit warning" in the pipeline

It's possible, but equally possible is beating expectations. I am sure the market knows no more than us, because you can confident burford is not a leaky ship; They know their legal responsibilities!

I've seen 650 mentioned - don't see it myself. £6 would be strong support. Target 950 for the next good run.

The other factor which doesn't seem to be reflected in these price, is the rich pickings burford would make for a PE assisted MBO. Someone here said that it would be too big for PE, but for example Signature Aviation at double the size, has multiple offers from PE.

It's puzzling and irritating me too. I can only think investors are mulling the baffling bad tempered demands of the Petersen case judge, but it's trivial in the grand scheme of things. As for the chart, I have it sitting on the 9 month rising support.

Someone mentioned opportunity cost. Well, another day of an ugly blotch of red for Burford in an otherwise sea of blue, so the opportunity cost of holding Burford since the us listing is becoming huge - it would need to jump to £11 to catch up with my average gains elsewhere.

Do I think management have been incompetent; No, quite the contrary. But I do think a whiff of arrogance and complacency still lingers, and hurt us mightily in the run up to MW. For example concerns which were loftily waved away such as about being AIM listed, about his wife being on the board, about mark to market, and the weasel words used to justify a huge bonus sat alongside a profit warning and a decimation of the share price. So in some ways I feel they may be more suited to management and/or PE ownership.

Whatever the reason, (and I don't think it's any of the below, but just low liquidity and big II positions, thanks to now being spread extra thin over two exchanges) - but anyway, I'm back to"day"trading the"noise".

I never said down 5%, I said UNDERPERFORMING 5%

But in the meantime, BUR is conspicuously underperforming - by about 20% in two months, and almost 5% just today. Do we have an iceberg on the order books or something? For all its promise, Burford remains a company I wish I had never heard of.

As a non lawyer, it's dispiriting to see how even peripheral details involve a long winded and expensive tail chase. IMO it reflects badly on the justice process, and ironic that LitFin comes in for such stick, because without it, justice would be the preserve of parties with a LOT of money and time on their hands.

"the judge has requested the Argies Legal system intervene to request such summons. The judge wants to know who is involved in the case. The Petersen Company and provided a statement which we already know, confirming they have no part in the legal case."
I thought the judge had asked Petersen's lawyers get an answer from the Eskenzis, not Argentina? Either way, it's problematic, because their team has no leverage to get an answer, while personally I wouldn't trust a response solicited by the defendants. What's wrong with the judge just asking burford the direct question? It's not as though they can get away with lying about it?

I wouldn't worry - whenever the US races upwards after the UK close, it has damn all effect on the opening price the next day. So a plummet (now 6.5%) should be the same.

On the other hand ... !

So far all the dual listing has done is dilute the equity over two exchanges rather than one, making the pricing even more disfunctional than before (which was fun to trade on AIM in the 550-600 oscillations, but now I'll leave it alone, as is so difficult to read). Still very positive on the core holding, but getting irritated seeing red here again, when my other Holdings have gone ballistic in the last three weeks.

Up?

Mostly it is. But for several days, I made small 3-4% day profits because the "spread" would close up about 4pm. Normally wouldn't bother, but no stamp duty, and I'm bored. It didn't happen on Friday though, but it did still close 2-3% higher in $. Higher volume days will also bring AIM and NYSE closer together.

It baffles me how the MMs continue to be happy to line my pockets with AIM shares costing 4% less than they do in the NYSE.

A bot might work better, but yes I've tried it a couple of times for a very small profit, but mostly the market is too small to bother with, especially lacking level 2.

I think they simply don't know about us, so here we languish, still below the price prior to the NYSE listing. It has been very quiet, so I do hope Bogart/Molot are rectifying this behind the scenes.