Archive

Posts Tagged ‘exchange rate’

Mining Week 44/’11: Exchange rate and steel headwinds

October 30, 2011 Comments off

Top Stories of the Week:

  • Peabody and ArcelorMittal get MacArthur; then ArcelorMittal gets out
    • Only 2 days after PEAMcoal, the vehicle set up by Peabody energy and ArcelorMittal to buy Macarthur, announced it obtained a majority interest, Arcelor decided to get out of the combination. The company will sell the 16% of Macarthur it had to Peabody. Peabody had teamed up with ArcelorMittal because an earlier bid had not gained the support of the major shareholders.
    • Sources: Reuters; Financial Times; ArcelorMittal press release
  • Vale suffers $2.8bln exchange rate hit
    • Vale posted disappointing results for the 3rd quarter: the weak Brazilian real compared to the US dollar hit the company hard, iron ore spot prices dropped 27% q-on-q, and production volumes were lower than planned.
    • Sources: Vale press release; Financial Times; Wall Street Journal

Trends & Implications:

  • The move of ArcelorMittal out of the Macarthur acquisition is a surprising sign of hesitance and uncertainty about the development of the global steel market. The company prefers cashing $700mln over having to pay an additional $1.2bln to get 40% of the Australian coal miner. It still plans to build an iron and coal mining business to increase self-sufficiency. US steelmakers are also struggling and iron ores prices have plummeted in expectation of falling steel demand.
  • Exchange rates remain a very important factor in the competitiveness of miners because sales for miners around the world are typically in US dollars, irrespective of the currency in which costs are incurred. As shown in the exchange rate graphs below the Brazilian real has been hit harder than the Australian dollar, key currency for iron ore production of Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton, in the past quarter.

©2011 | Wilfred Visser | thebusinessofmining.com

Advertisements

Exchange rates weigh on Rio Tinto profits

August 12, 2011 Comments off

“Rio Tinto’s iron-ore-driven profits set company records for the interim period but shares fell for a fourth day as investors’ flight from equities hits resources stocks hardest.

Tom Albanese, chief executive of the mining company, commented on the widening gap between miners’ rising earnings momentum and falling share prices. ‘There is a distorted set of economic drivers associated with the current uncertainties with respect to us and the European debt markets,’ he told the Financial Times. ‘You have an exaggerated diversion of ‘risk on’ to ‘risk off’ trades. It is difficult to come to any conclusions, but this is a backdrop that could persist for some time.’

… sector-wide pressures of rising costs and adverse exchange rates weighed on Rio’s profitability, contributing to earnings that missed consensus expectations. Higher costs for energy, materials and equipment lowered Rio’s underlying earnings by $479m, and exchange rates between the weak US dollar and strong Australian and Canadian dollars – currencies in which it incurs costs – reduced them by a further $810m in the first half.”

Source: Financial Times, August 4 2011

Observations:

  • Total increase of earnings because of price increases ($5bln) was offset by almost $3bln lower earnings because of volumes, costs and exchange rates.
  • Just as Anglo American, the company gives a detailed explanation of the rising costs, providing rare details on the waiting times for various types of equipment (see outlook – page 8). The outlook shows the average delivery time for equipment currently is approx. 6-9 months higher than average.
  • The impact of lost volumes because of weather impact (hurricanes & floods) in the first half of the year, often mentioned as important driver of prices, is only $245mln.

Implications:

  • Rio Tinto does not appear to be concerned with the current importance of iron ore as the driver of earnings. The company regards construction industry growth in China the most important metric for the economic outlook and mentions expansion of production capacity of Western Australian iron ore mines as key development priority. The company joins competitor Vale in this single-minded focus, while BHP Billiton appears to be more committed to diversify, as signalled by its acquisitions in the shale gas industry.
  • The presented $26bln capex package does not yet include projects in advanced feasibility stage such as Simandou (iron ore in Guinea). The relatively conservative dividend and buy-back program does leave room for very aggressive development spending and helps the company to keep a very low gearing. So far all major miners choose to keep the gearing low despite their positive commodities market forecasts.

©2011 | Wilfred Visser | thebusinessofmining.com

Russia: Silent Mining Giant

June 16, 2011 Comments off

Although Russia accounts for about 14% of global mining, most professionals in the industry know very little about Russian mining. Apart from a few large steel companies most large Russian mining firms are unknown in the market, and few people could name the most important Russian mines or mining districts. However, driven by the huge potential of its reserves and the modernization of its industry the country is slowly gaining a more prominent position on the international mining stage.
This article explores the current situation of the Russian mining industry and identifies two key trends that will shape it in the next decade: a struggle for competitiveness; and internationalization of the key players.

Russia’s Reserves & Production

Figure 1 - Russian mining production and reserves

Russia has been blessed with a large variety of mineral reserves across the country. The peninsulas in the northwest, the Ural mountains, Siberia, and the Far East all house important mining districts. Crucial inputs for economic development, like iron ore and coal, are abundant. The country holds 15-20% of the world’s reserves for these resources. The country’s position in reserves of gold and diamonds is very strong too. For a few minerals with only a small global market, like palladium and magnesium compounds, the country even has the potential of dominating the market. The most important observation when comparing the share of world reserves and the share of current global production is that for almost all key minerals the share of reserves exceeds the share of production (See Figure 1). In other words; it is likely that Russia will become more important in the global mining industry.

Current production in the country is more than sufficient to satisfy domestic demand, making Russia a net exporter of mineral goods. The country’s net export balance for ores, slag & ash was $1.3bln and for iron & steel over $14bln in 2010 (Source: ITC), with China being the largest trade partner for ores and Italy being the primary (initial) destination of Russian iron & steel.

Balancing domestic supply and demand

Russia is growing, and mining is needed to fuel this growth. Russian annual GDP growth varied from 4.7% to 8.1% in the period 2001-2008, outpacing growth in the western world (Figure 2). The economic crisis has hit Russia hard, making the economy shrink by almost 8% in 2009; recovering by 3.8% in 2010. However, growth is expected to outpace western growth in the coming years.

As a result of the high growth of the domestic economy, various industry development could take shape. If productivity increases, the potential of Russian reserves will enable a combination of exports and domestic sales, enabling rapid growth. However, if the Russian companies do not succeed in significantly increasing capacity, productivity will be too low to support both domestic and foreign growth. In this case export restrictions to protect the national growth could be instituted.

Corporate Landscape

The structure of Russia’s current mining production is largely shaped in the Soviet period. Mining districts were set up to provide the country with mineral self-sufficiency decades ago. After privatization in the ‘90s most of the state owned assets have been combined in the current private companies. The privatization and the poor financial situation of the Russian government at the time has led to a typical characteristic of the Russian mining industry: the importance of tycoons. Many private companies are owned and controlled by one or a few founders. These founders were at the right place at the right time and knew the right people at the time of privatization. Their position has further been strengthened by the government’s desperate need for funds, resulting in large amounts of debt being issued to the tycoons.

Figure 2 - Russian and global GDP growth

Whereas company owners in the rest of the world typically try to gain control over companies via the stock market, the large ownership stakes held by the tycoons in Russia lead to frequent power struggles among major shareholders. The struggle for control over Norilsk Nickel is the most recent example: Interros, controlled by Vladimir Potanin, and Rusal, controlled by Deripaska,both try to gain the majority in the board of Norilsk Nickel, one of the world’s largest suppliers of nickel and copper. In the last years the power struggles have led to the emergence of clear domestic champions for most of the key commodities: Rusal for aluminium; Norilsk Nickel for nickel and copper; Suek and Mechel for coal; Alrosa for diamonds; TVEL for uranium, etc. For steel and gold the landscape is (and probably will stay) more fragmented.

Attracting investment

Read more…