How to suffer loss
The following blog post was written by Bruce Packard CFA, an independent value investor and personal friend of Cormac Leech, CEO of AxiaFunder. The author is not affiliated with AxiaFunder and this post does not reflect the views of AxiaFunder.
Bruce Packard writes about the different ways in which we should consider the risk of loss. He reflects on the lessons we can learn from the very first joint stock companies of the City of London, the St Petersburg Paradox discussed by Daniel and Nicolaus Bernoulli in 1738, and what these can tell us about the risks of loss in litigation finance.
The idea of litigation finance is simple, legal cases cost money and sometimes a claimant is unable to afford to fight a case; so in exchange for money up front, they share the return of any settlement winnings paid out in the future. Burford Capital does this very successfully – but Cormac is trying to allow retail investors to fund smaller cases.
Bruce Packard reflects on the ways in which the idea at the core of litigation finance are actually very simple. In exchange for providing the upfront cash to fund the fees of fighting a case, a claimant agrees to share the proceeds of any settlement winnings which will be paid out in the future. He finds the appeal of it is partly due to the fact it should be lucrative but also because it reminds him of the original spirit of adventure that the City of London’s first Joint Stock Companies had. These Companies were formed to trade with overseas countries and were created to allow the risk of trading to be pooled across the members of the Company with each member contributing some money to a joint “stock”.
Litigation finance also reminds him of the St Petersburg Paradox. This is a paradox which was discussed by Daniel Bernoulli and Nicolaus Bernoulli in 1738. This paradox was first proposed as a resolution to a dilemma initially framed as a discussion of lottery tickets, but the paradox is also applied to a discussion of merchants trying to protect themselves from the risk of their ship sinking.
In the example, Bernoulli describes the dilemma facing the lottery ticket holder. For a very poor person who obtains a ticket, that ticket will yield either one of:
- 20,000 ducats
Now consider the situation of someone bringing a court case. The analogies should become clear. A fixed sum of money, for example 10,000 ducats is worth much more to a poor person whose net worth is only 50 ducats than it is to a rich man who already has saved 100,000 ducats.
The implications of this become interesting when we consider whether you should take a bet. It has the result that, though the odds are strongly in your favour, it may not make sense to take a gamble. Even if you have a very high chance, say 90%, of winning a court case for the poor person with only 50 ducats it may still not be worth it to take that gamble. If they lose (and there is always a chance of losing a court case) the case will bankrupt them entirely. Many litigation funders give quotes of win rates at 85-90%, so the parallel is applicable. A chance of 1/10 of bankruptcy isn’t a sensible gamble for most claimants. Bruce Packard goes on to consider the ways of spreading that risk and how that gamble can make sense for investors.
Originally posted on Bruce Packard’s blog on 12 October 2018.
- The Investor Appropriateness Test
- Risks for investors in litigation funding
- AxiaFunder HDR Investment Volumes and Returns
- AxiaFunder FCA Direct Authorisation
- AxiaFunder won Innovative Lender of the Year Award
- Access to litigation investments
- The Peer2Peer Finance News Power 50 2022
- AxiaFunder Review by P2P Platforms
- AxiaFunder Review by 4thWay
- AxiaFunder interview with CEO Cormac Leech
- AxiaFunder Targets Double-Digit IRRs
- AxiaFunder Review in iTech Post
- AxiaFunder launched new litigation finance product
- Back the suits who are bankrolling disputes
- Catalysing class actions using litigation funding
- Introduction to litigation funding
- Litigation funding and access to justice
- Financial Thing: Q&A with AxiaFunder
- Innovations in Litigation Funding Digital Event
- Flexible litigation funding