.

545 posts

. banner
.

.

@Broswar1

Katılım Kasım 2015
905 Takip Edilen114 Takipçiler
.
.@Broswar1·
@siyul There is a % of the Opex tied to that the long-term incentive compensation including accruals but actual return for shareholders from the book is far different from your math. Most of Opex is salaries, G&A and annual incentive compensation that is not tied to changes in FV.
English
1
0
0
89
Siyu Li
Siyu Li@siyul·
@Broswar1 OpEx is for both existing and future, a big portion of it is performance-based fee. The bridge walk doesn't care too much about the actual number (be it $5B or 10B), it just shows the haircut process.
English
1
0
1
125
Siyu Li
Siyu Li@siyul·
$BUR: A top pushback on my recent cautious view is: “At a ~$1B market cap with $5.2B in future cash realizations, Burford is cheap.” I’ll walk through the bridge from $5.2B in gross realizations to the actual shareholder return. First, some background. Burford began featuring future cash realization, rather than commitment/deployment in 2025, a smart marketing shift, imo. But let us do the rough math: 1⃣✔️Using 85% historical ROIC, $5.2B gross realizations imply $2.4B net cash proceeds. 2⃣✔️~30-35% OpEx on net proceeds and ~10% tax, remaining ~$1.5B operating income. 3⃣✔️Modeling total 8Y (avg gross $600+Mn/year), subtracting $0.9Bn cumulative interest (8% IR on $1.5Bn net debt), cumulative net income ~$0.6Bn. 4⃣✔️apply 8% discount rate to ~$0.4B NPV of true shareholders' return. $5.2Bn to 0.4Bn Bridge. At a $1B+ market cap, does it still look cheap?
Siyu Li@siyul

Burford $BUR "When a stock drops sharply, we face three choices: double down, hold, or fold. Smart decisions come from a disciplined process: staying engaged, removing ego/emotion, and thinking critically." Today, that process is being tested in real time, as Burford plunged 47% in a day after its $16Bn YPF claim reversal, ~70% below when I first wrote it a year ago. I break down how the reversal affects Burford’s three core assets: ✔️Burford-only portfolio, ✔️asset management platform ✔️PF claims I provide a Sum-Of-The-Parts estimate, my positioning plan, key headwinds, and what I’ll be watching closely. Link in the bio

English
6
1
26
9.1K
.
.@Broswar1·
@siyul You are comparing future opex obligations against portfolio that does not need opex(already had it opex costs when originating it). That future opex will be used to find new cases and should be measured against the capital available and the IRR of that capital.
English
2
0
2
129
.
.@Broswar1·
@siyul WAL is 3.3 years so assuming 8 years re debt interest is unfair. OPEX is high I won’t say otherwise but it has been already spent in paying staff for analyzing current portfolio of cases. Future opex should be measured against future cash receipts to evaluate profitability.
English
1
0
4
371
.
.@Broswar1·
@Spii75 Seems they are going to exhaust both avenues and then move to ICSID arbitration!
English
0
0
1
39
aj
aj@Spii75·
@Broswar1 what do you think comes next? Seems like en banc and cert are both unlikely but given the remarkability of the situation, perhaps there's a much higher chance than normal?
English
1
0
0
52
.
.@Broswar1·
The YPF decision is extremely concerning. It creates a regretable precedent: even where US courts have jurisdiction, contractual disputes against sovereign states can be displaced by framing them as “expropriation” $BUR
English
1
0
5
663
.
.@Broswar1·
@AnotherBio 1) NOLs are huge and they will be keep in AnaptysBio 2) Jemperli royalties at 10% IRR given that the last patent expire 2035 is way higher than that figure just using GSK consensus 3) Label expansion is huge due to entering in the highest royalty bracket
English
1
0
1
87
AnotherBioInvestor
AnotherBioInvestor@AnotherBio·
$ANAB some thoughts. The TRAX PIPE is nice to give us some area of demand, and I´d like to think that it happened at a discount to what most investors were comfortable with since Nodelman is a seller in it. As to $ANAB I think the ~10mln / year are quite unnecessary, but I guess larger investors don´t want the stock to go OTC so they cannot go down to minimum expenses of probably closer to 2-5 mln/year. Quicky valuation: TRAX at PIPE is worth 13.81$ / share Net cash in ANAB is 140 initially, let´s substract 10 for burn until Sagard is paid off -> 4.64$/share Jemperli royalties slightly above consensus but still meaningfully below GSK guidance is ~37$ per share after taxes at ~10%IRR -> 55.27$/share with some meaningful jemperli upside (including current litigation against GSK), but also from upcoming data and very likely label expansion which is probably only partially in consensus numbers. Still like the shares in the mid-50s, but majority of my exposure is still in sold puts (all short-term) with strike 50, where I feel quite comfortable.
English
1
0
5
1.6K
.
.@Broswar1·
@NestBetter You need to value BV of Burford with their historical IRRs and discount with the current pf WAL, then add the capacity for future originations at, again the carry they make. Using accounting metrics or TBV is useless here. YPF case should be down hugely but no 0.
English
1
0
0
132
Better Nest
Better Nest@NestBetter·
$BUR: I get ~2.80/share of TBV concentrating on just the burford only segment, 0-ing YPF and ignoring the third-party interests (which they will collect meaningful fees on). I get 3P will be worth a decent chunk and YPF isn't going to marked @ 0 but is $BUR even cheap here..?
English
5
0
28
7K
A Capital
A Capital@ACapitalLP·
I know - I’m being facetious. I might not be a talented investor, but I crack myself up. Here’s my key point: Imagine going to IC to buy $BUR bonds and saying impairment is wholly dependent on the outcome of a binary legal decision... “Sounds good, equity-like risk, wave it in!”
A Capital@ACapitalLP

So $BUR raised significant debt capital against a single asset (YPF litigation claim) whose sole value was derived from the outcome of a binary legal decision and there is no residual value related to the core business? Isn’t that a key diligence question a new issuance bond investor would think about?

English
2
0
2
1K
.
.@Broswar1·
@ACapitalLP @lawyIRR @gruust $OMEX has nothing to do with a possible commercial arbitration claim against Argentina re YPF breach of contract. Omex had a quantum problem, the sunk costs were nill and the damages seek were delusional.
English
1
0
0
342
.
.@Broswar1·
The Second Circuit is applying the wrong Argentinian law—full stop. The tender was a PRIVATE, separate commercial obligation in the bylaws; under Argentina’s administrative law its breach didn’t impede the 2012 expropriation. Recasting it as sovereign act is indefensible. $BUR
English
2
0
6
667
.
.@Broswar1·
@Toori73 @upshift_fi @TheoriqAI When can we withdraw coreUSDc from your own protocol? Please guys a week has passed already
English
0
0
0
58
Upshift
Upshift@upshift_fi·
Earn yield on your tokenized Gold. The @TheoriqAI Gold Vault is now live, targeting 2.5-3.5% APY. Theoriq integrated Upshift for its flexible infrastructure, enabling multi-strategy yield generation on XAUT across DeFi. Deposits are open today.
Theoriq@TheoriqAI

Theoriq Gold Vault is live Tokenized gold has been sitting idle onchain for years. DeFi yield strategies to change that already existed: cross-venue carry, term yield, capital-efficient loops The vault didn't. We built it. Earn yield on your XAUT today Full details below. ⤵️

English
8
6
26
4.3K
.
.@Broswar1·
@laventana Sois despreciables.
Français
0
0
0
34
La Ventana
La Ventana@laventana·
Andrea Villoria repasa la cronología del caso de Noelia Castilla, que mañana, tras casi dos años de lucha, recibirá la eutanasia
Español
145
217
902
241.4K
Tânia Silva |Uphold🇺🇸
Tânia Silva |Uphold🇺🇸@Adele1winters·
@Broswar1 Just a heads-up that withdrawals from the CoreUSDC vault are on hold for now. We’re wrapping up the final reconciliation and getting everything ready for the withdrawal phase. During this time, we’re finalizing a snapshot of the vault balances that are eligible for withdrawal, and we need to submit and verify the positions before we can start enabling withdrawals.
English
1
0
0
95
.
.@Broswar1·
@upshift_fi when are you guys opening CoreUsdc vault for withdrawals ?
English
2
2
2
137
.
.@Broswar1·
@upshift_fi Is the 1.92% the only exposure upUSDC has to RLP or USDR? When will the withdrawals be enabled again?
English
0
0
1
134
Upshift
Upshift@upshift_fi·
@Broswar1 coreUSDC allocates to upUSDC and overall has 1.92% exposure to RLP. We’re working to liquidate the loan via upUSDC
English
3
0
3
618
Upshift
Upshift@upshift_fi·
Following the Resolv exploit, here is an update on Upshift vault exposure: earnAUSD - No direct or indirect exposure to USR - 0.63% exposure to RLP via the Morpho RLP/AUSD market (~$315K of ~$50M TVL) - Deposits and withdrawals paused as a precaution to preserve vault accounting until the RLP position's liquidation price is clarified upUSDC - ~6% exposure to RLP (~$700K of ~$11.7M TVL) via loans outstanding against RLP collateral - We are actively managing health factors on these positions and will liquidate when possible and if necessary We are also looking into exposure on coreUSDC and have already temporarily removed the pool on Pendle. Resolv has communicated that the collateral pool remains intact and that no underlying assets have been lost. We are monitoring the situation closely and will provide further updates.
Upshift@upshift_fi

We are monitoring the Resolv USR hack situation. As a safety measure coreUSDC, upUSDC, and earnAUSD have been temporarily paused. Updates will be shared shortly.

English
9
3
42
13.9K
.
.@Broswar1·
@upshift_fi That’s the only exposure coreUSDC has to rUSD or RLP? Thanks
English
0
0
2
240
.
.@Broswar1·
@upshift_fi Thank you! Will keep monitoring for updates
English
0
0
1
115

Keşfet

@siyul @Spii75 @AnotherBio @NestBetter @ACapitalLP @lawyIRR @gruust @SebastianMaril