Jimmy
My grumbles are somewhat tongue in cheek - yet with a serious undertone.
IMF-Bentham's disclosure faults from being
too good. I
n earlier years when they juggled a few large cases, the outcome of each was indeed material. But now, when we have 60-70 cases and growing, and now most cases moderated into more manageable sizes, the significance of each one, EVEN where all full particulars were to be given, are largely immaterial.
I joking referred to IMF-Bentham's continuous disclosure as akin to BHP announcing when each next coal cargo ship dispatched from Australia shores.
I once understood 'price sensitive' as a rule of thumb to be about 10% the value of a balance sheet asset size, and anything that would impact the income statement's bottom line by more than 5%.
I once tried to make sense of these announcements, that they have become beyond meaninglessly vague out of the US, and vague too, as we now have the quantity of cases to know that cases will be constantly be written. I don't believe any investor makes any sense of them, and if so, I'd be keen to know how?
Are we simply to assume that each new announcement equals about a $60m case investment?
But if IMF-Bentham cannot disclose details upfront, then so be it.
I'd suggest:- Let's wait until the cases conclude, where a simple summation inter quarterly announcement with substantive facts, will keep the keenest investor up to date.
i.m.h.o.
------------------------------------------------
At this stage I too often fear clicking on the IMF-Bentham announcements will waste yet another precious 10 minutes of my life?