In Pittsburgh: Old is always new again

So Pittsburgh is being chosen as a center for energy education because.  Something new? No, we have long… very long… been Energy-Burgh.

and I see the news is catching up to this announcement from earlier in the week..  We are even a leader in….. Propane?  So we may have more sedans on the streets of Pittsburgh proper running propane than natural gas?  Someone didn’t send the Natural Gas Uber Alles memo to the French.   I am curious if we actually ever got the hydrogen fuel cell taxis here that were written about.

I have to admit I did finally see a customer using the natural gas pump in the Strip District.

Don’t forget… Not new, but there is a recent news mention reminding me that real energy future for the region may be just over the border in West Virginia which may someday become the new center of all things geothermal. I volunteer for the delegation to go to Iceland to investigate that.

More history: PNC is buying the Lord and Taylor building. It’s all very Back to the Future’ish.

I guess the exception may be that a ‘runner’s world’ may open in Shadyside. I guess there is no hope the Balcony will really reopen.  Google is fun: I still occassionally get e-mail from folks who seem to find that article presume that story was real.

Seriously though…  Between PNC’s continued construction, the new Oxford development that was sort-of announced last week and all the other development Downtown I still have a real question.  Given the scale of transit cuts coming, and lack of any new parking supply Downtown…  can Downtown Pittsburgh really support more daytime workers?  Even that debate is anachronistic since much of the debate in the 1940’s here was on the same topic and lead to not only the creation of the Pittsburgh Parking Authority but a lot of the public support of parking garages Downtown. All part of the Pittsburgh möbius.

Biggest Value for Agricultural Investors Revealed: Steve Hansen

Steve Hansen Steve Hansen of Raymond James sees the potash market as a barbell, with a handful of large incumbent producers on one end and dozens of junior miners clustered at the other. In this exclusive interview with The Energy Report, Hansen discusses which juniors may migrate to the mid-cap arena and why current share price weakness does not dampen Raymond James’ bullish sentiment on the sector, from Canada to Ethiopia.

The Energy Report: Potash prices and production collapsed in 2008. Why is Raymond James still bullish on potash?

Steve Hansen: It is a relatively simple supply-demand thesis. On the demand front, global food consumption is growing steadily alongside population growth, urbanization, rising disposable income and shifting dietary patterns—particularly in emerging markets. According to the FAO, global food production needs to increase by 70% by 2050 just to keep the world adequately fed. That’s an enormous uplift compared to current levels. We view higher rates of fertilizer application, especially potash, as one of the key factors in achieving these necessary production gains.

On the supply side, global potash reserves and production capacity are concentrated in the hands of just a few key players. The world’s top-five producers account for two-thirds of global potash capacity. The immense capital requirements needed to develop new mines present significant barriers to entry. This combination of concentration and capital creates an attractive supply-controlled environment; it allows the incumbent producers to extract favorable pricing.

TER: What countries are the major users and/or exporters of potash products? Which countries produce enough for their own consumption, and which are import dependent?

“There are three buckets of potash players in Saskatchewan: the incumbent producers, the ’super-major’ developers, and a handful of junior developers.” –Steve Hansen

SH: The largest exporters are Canada and Russia, where more than 70% of global potash reserves are concentrated and the largest incumbent producers are also based. The largest consuming nations are China, the U.S., Brazil and India, all of which have large, agriculturally influenced economies. The largest consumers are also the largest importers, although, in some instances, importers do have material amounts of domestic production. The obvious cases are the U.S. and China, both of which have fairly sizeable domestic potash industries that help reduce the amount of required imports. On the other end of the spectrum are Brazil and India. Because both have very little domestic production, they must rely almost entirely upon international imports.

TER: Saskatchewan holds 40% of the world’s potash reserves. Who are the major potash players in Saskatchewan? How have those firms been affected by the recessionary economic situation since 2008?

SH: From our perspective, there are three buckets of potash players in Saskatchewan. First are the incumbent producers, including the large-cap bellwether names, such as Potash Corp. (POT:TSX; POT:NYSE), The Mosaic Co. (MOS:NYSE) and Agrium Inc. (AGU:NYSE; AGU:TSX).

The second bucket is filled with what we call the “super-major” developers. These companies are relatively new players to the Saskatchewan basin, but they have very deep pockets and plentiful access to capital. These firms include BHP Billiton Ltd. (BHP:NYSE; BHPLF:OTCPK), Rio Tinto (RIO:NYSE; RIO:ASX) and Vale S.A. (VALE:NYSE). European producer K+S Aktiengesellschaft (SDFG:FSE), also entered Saskatchewan recently, as did a large Russian-backed player, ACRON Group (AKRN:LSE; AKRN:RTS).

The third bucket contains a handful of junior developers. These players are small-cap companies looking to advance their flagship greenfield projects through the traditional development milestones, typically with the goal of selling the asset and/or luring in a strategic partner. These juniors do not have the financial capability to advance a project beyond its initial development stages. A couple of the key players are Western Potash Corp. (WPX:TSX.V) and Encanto Potash Corp. (EPO:TSX.V).

TER: How did falling potash prices affect the industry during the past recession?

“There is an increasing risk that small firms working on good projects could be ‘left at the altar,’ with no partner to consummate the marriage. This is likely to trigger a wave of junior consolidation.” –Steve Hansen

SH: The effects have varied. The large incumbents were not impacted much. Their financial performance clearly suffered temporarily, as demand and pricing both fell precipitously during the downturn, but both have recovered handsomely since then, and these producers are now doing very well. There was also some industry consolidation in the east. Developers also fared reasonably well, buoyed by a few large takeouts in the space. Most have also made solid strides in advancing their flagship projects.

TER: Given that demand for potash is subject to large demand volume and market price fluctuations, what are the opportunities for potash juniors in Canada? What about juniors in other regions of the globe?

SH: Prior to 2007, the concept of a junior potash developer was pretty much nonexistent. Prices had dwindled below $200 per ton for the better part of three decades, and the major incumbent producers around the world had multiple decades of low-cost reserves. So there really was no economic incentive for junior developers to seek out new potash projects.

But as potash prices began to surge, post-2007, junior developers sprouted up all over the world, all racing to develop the next wave of greenfield potash mines, the likes of which had not been built since the 1970s.

Several early movers in the space have already played a major role in shaping the industry’s future. BHP acquired Anglo Potash Ltd. in May 2008, as well as Athabasca Potash Inc. in January 2010. K+S later acquired Potash One Inc. in November 2010. Most of these projects are now being advanced by their respective new owners with first production being discussed in the latter half of the decade.

TER: Can this trend continue?

SH: Looking forward, we believe it’s going to be more challenging. The new “super-majors,” which are the most likely players to construct new mines—BHP, Rio Tinto, Vale, ACRON, K+S—all appear to have made their beds at this point, each with substantial land positions and/or mega-scale projects already secured, thereby limiting the number of natural acquirers.

To be fair, we still believe there are reasonable prospects for large downstream players, the big consumers of potash, to step in and provide critical financing and/or offtake arrangements for junior developers. But there is an increasing risk that many small firms working on good projects could be “left at the altar,” with no partner to consummate the marriage. And as in most cycles of the commodities trade, this is likely to trigger a wave of junior consolidation over time.

TER: What is the potential for offtake contracts for junior potash players?

SH: That is the million-dollar question for the developers. The capital requirements are enormous for greenfield potash projects. A smaller niche project can require $750 million ($750M) in capital expenditures and a larger one can require $3–4 billion. Juniors just don’t have the financial resources to capitalize these large-scale projects.

There are, however, anecdotal stories of downstream Chinese and Indian parties preparing to step up. They’re doing a lot of due diligence. We know that. We just haven’t seen anything significant materialize yet.

The one exception is the recent offtake arrangement that IC Potash (ICP:TSX.V; ICPTF:OTCQX) struck with Yara International (YARIY:OTCPK). Yara is one of the world’s largest suppliers of fertilizers, and this specific deal entailed Yara taking roughly a 20% stake in IC Potash for $40M at a very nice 41% premium. Yara also entered into a 15-year offtake arrangement for 30% of all production out of IC Potash’s flagship Ochoa project.

There are opportunities for more offtakes, and I suspect we shall see more of them. But I do not expect a wave of them in the near-term future.

TER: Ethiopia has been a source of potash since the 14th century. In late 1960s, floods shut down potash production, and then war and internal strife kept the mines closed. How has this situation changed? Is the Ethiopian government friendly to foreign mining investment? Is it stable?

“Developers in [Ethiopia and Brazil] are likely to have access to capital from nontraditional sources, such as the International Finance Corporation and World Bank.” –Steve Hansen

SH: Ethiopia is blessed with a high-grade, relatively shallow, world-class potash deposit in the Danakil basin, which is located in the northeast near the Eritrean border. It’s very well positioned geographically to service some of the world’s highest-growth markets for potash, with relatively short shipping distances from Africa’s eastern coast. However, from our perspective, the principal challenge for the basin pertains to the country’s relatively undeveloped infrastructure. It’s still lacking in a lot of key roadways, rail, and power infrastructure. There are also key technical issues around water availability that still need to be addressed. The Ethiopian government has made significant progress on road development, however, having paved a large roadway into the southern side of the Danakil basin. The government has also contracted a Chinese state-owned railway group to build out the rail infrastructure. The early stages of this rail infrastructure are not headed into the Danakil, but there is the potential to extend rail there, which would be a huge win for the basin. Other large parties—Yara being a key example—are also making additional investments in the basin.

So the short answer is that Ethiopia still has clear challenges to overcome. But the quality and size of the resource is not to be ignored. Over time, the Danakil will certainly be developed, but a few more things need to fall into place before large-scale development can take off.

The one counterintuitive advantage Ethiopia has going for it is that developers in the country likely have access to capital from nontraditional sources, such as the International Finance Corporation and World Bank. Developers with projects in advanced countries, such as Canada, cannot access this type of capital. There are good examples of infrastructure-related projects—wind in particular—where the IFC and World Bank are already providing attractive financing terms to advance the economic development of Ethiopia. And we expect that potash developers in the Danakil basin likely have access to similar sources of capital. For example, Allana Potash Corp. (AAA:TSX; ALLRF:OTCQX) has already struck very good financing arrangements on both the commercial and international banking fronts.

TER: Who has Allana partnered with?

SH: On the equity side, Allana has received equity financing from Liberty Metals & Mining Holdings LLC. (a subsidiary of Liberty Mutual Insurance). Liberty is a large, sophisticated group with a great deal of mining interests around the world. The World Bank-affiliated International Finance Corp. has also taken an equity stake in Allana. This was a critical accomplishment for the company’s credibility. Thanks to a recent equity raise, it is now fully funded through its definitive feasibility study (DFS). The one key piece of the financing puzzle still to be completed is on the debt side, but this likely won’t occur until the project’s DFS is completed later this year. At that point, presuming everything goes to plan, the company will need to raise one last tranche of equity to finance construction. The big question for Allana is what percentage will go into debt versus equity? Typically, it’s a 60/40 or 70/30 split. But Allana may be able to raise the ratio even higher, perhaps even 80% debt, given its access to development agency financing. It just needs to address key technical issues that are still outstanding.

TER: Are there other players operating in the Danakil basin?

Yara has a partnership in the basin. South Boulder Mines Ltd. (STB:ASX) is on the Eritrean side of the border. And Ethiopian Potash Corp. (FED:TSX.V; FED.WT:TSX.V) has a deposit. BHP also has a large concession in the basin, although it hasn’t been too active there of late.

The Danakil footprint is well mapped out. It is a world-class deposit, with attractive attributes. Multiple parties are expressing interest in it. The big question remains: Is it the easiest deposit to develop in the current context, versus other opportunities?

TER: What other regions are you looking at for potash?

SH: On the incumbent producers’ side, we favor Canada. But in terms of the developing opportunities, we really like Brazil for junior developers. There are some very large potash deposits in the Amazon basin, but they’re not easy to get at. There are complexities around climate, humidity, access and infrastructure. A benefit is that Brazilian firms do have access to some of the same nontraditional funding I mentioned earlier, including the International Finance Corporation. Furthermore, the Brazilian Development Bank has already expressed definitive support toward other fertilizer projects, including one controlled by MBAC Fertilizer Corp. (MBC:TSX).

Brazil has become an agricultural powerhouse in recent decades. But the challenge is that it needs to import up to 90% of its potash. The government views this as a strategic issue, and it is working toward self-sufficiency in potash by 2020. That timeframe may be a bit ambitious, but at least it has outlined a goal.

TER: What are investors looking for in a potash company?

SH: Overall, from a financial constraints perspective, potash investors looking at junior developer opportunities seem to prefer smaller, bite-size capital projects, given the significant challenges around raising capital. Investors also prefer that production come online sooner rather than later, which is one of the reasons we suspect many projects are steering toward solution mining, versus traditional underground mining techniques.

TER: How do you determine a target price for your stock picks?

SH: For the large incumbents, we apply a target multiple to the company’s forward projected earnings. Flexibility in this target multiple, at least compared to its historical range, allows us to capture a wide array of potential factors that may also influence the share price and outlook. For the developers, our target prices are generally derived using a risk-adjusted, net asset-value (NAV) approach. Most of the junior potash developers do not have cash flows today. So, in simplistic terms, we forecast a company’s future cash flows based upon its development project attributes, and then discount it back to present day to derive a NAV. Finally, once we’ve got the aggregate NAV figure, we risk-adjust it for various factors, such as stage of development and geopolitical and technical risk. Handicapping is more of an art than a science, particularly for the earlier-stage developers when the cash flows are years away.

TER: Do you prefer any particular potash players?

SH: Our two favorite names are Potash Corp., which we rate as an Outperform with a $60/share target price, and MBAC, which is Outperform with a $4.50 target price. In the current environment, we generally prefer the larger companies with current cash flow. Potash Corp is the bellwether in this space. It is the world’s largest fertilizer enterprise with the number-one ranking in potash capacity. It is number three in phosphate and nitrogen. Potash Corp is in the final stages of a decade-long capacity expansion program, whereas many of its large competitors are just getting started with expansion programs. And at the same time, as its capital expenditure winds down, its free cash flow is set to balloon. That should facilitate stock buybacks, dividend increases and further strategic investments. Given its share price retreat in recent months, it’s now trading at ultra-low levels.

MBAC is a unique story. It is phosphate focused and it is Brazilian. Its flagship Itafós Arraias SSP project is fully funded and poised to go into production later this year. The potash industry today is a barbell. On one end are the big, incumbent producers and clustered at the other end are the small developers. MBAC is a junior developer that is going to migrate into the big production bell. We see that as a rerating opportunity for the company. We also see it as an opportunity for MBAC to develop as a large fertilizer enterprise, because it has a number of very attractive assets in its pipeline. MBAC is our second favorite name. The other developer that we are positive on is Western Potash. It has a very attractive property in the Milestone project in southeast Saskatchewan.

TER: Thanks for talking to us today, Steve.

SH: It was a pleasure.

Steve Hansen joined the Raymond James investment firm in October 2005 as an associate equity analyst covering the industrial sector. He was promoted to equity analyst in April 2007. Prior to joining the firm, Hansen worked as a stock analyst with Morningstar, covering the forest products sector. Hansen holds a Master of Business Administration from the Ivey School of Business at the University of Western Ontario and a Bachelor of Science in forestry from the University of British Columbia. Steve also holds a CMA designation and is a CFA Charter holder.

Hollowing out of the Indian financial system

Business as usual, in India, is taking us to a destination where RBI & SEBI & company will preside over a minor and inconsequential financial system. The bulk of India-linked finance will take place overseas, and the overseas market will dominate price formation for India-related financial products.

Why might this happen?

Finance is the business of bits and bytes. Orders being sent to India can be easily switched to other venues. An array of other venues are now springing up:

  1. Nifty futures trade in Singapore on the SGX
  2. An array of sophisticated derivatives on Nifty trade on the OTC market offshore (also termed `the PN market’).
  3. Derivatives on the rupee trade overseas on the OTC market (linear contracts are termed `the NDF market’).
  4. Trading in individual stocks is taking place on the ADR and the GDR market.
Let’s focus on Nifty – the most important financial product in India. (The arguments pretty much identically apply to everything else).
The success and survival of the onshore securities markets is fundamentally about NSE. NSE faces an array of problems rooted in domestic policy (example, example, example, example, etc). The overseas market faces no such problems. The CEO of SGX wakes up in the morning and thinks about competing with NSE. The CEO of NSE wakes up in the morning and thinks of an array of weird things.
And then, there is taxation. The fundamental principle worth using in this field is residence based taxation. We, as India, should not tax the activities of non-residents. For a global investor, sending orders to the Nifty futures on SGX is tax-efficient as Singapore follows a residence-based taxation system. Sending orders to India is inefficient today (owing to the STT and the stamp duty) and could get worse tomorrow (if GAAR is used to abrogate the Mauritius treaty).
We think we are comfortable, because India has capital controls, and residents don’t have much of a choice on taking their custom elsewhere. Things aren’t that simple. First, non-residents can pioneer sending order flow to overseas venues, and make them liquid. The next stage will be about Indian MNCs, who run global treasuries, who can easily patronise the overseas venues. The third stage will be HNI residents, who can take $200,000 per year per person outside India. In addition, the richest 1% of India would systematically shift money out of the country through various means fair and foul [example].
Put these factors together, and suddenly Nifty futures on SGX are a credible option. And this is exactly how things have worked out. Palak Shah in the Business Standard says:
As on date, the SGX Nifty OI is 27 per cent higher than that for Nifty futures on the National Stock Exchange (NSE). The figures are more alarming if one considers the OI in a single month in May as the built-up positions on the SGX are 70 per cent higher than on the NSE. In May, the SGX Nifty OI was worth over Rs 16,200 crore while that on the NSE stood at over Rs 9,250 crore. As far as three-month contracts go, the Nifty futures OI on the NSE is over Rs 12,750 crore.

In 2008, before these troubles had come together, SGX open interest was 59.78% of NSE. By 2012, where all these problems have come together, SGX open interest has come to 101.77% of NSE’s. It is astonishing to see that for the biggest Indian product – Nifty – an overseas exchange has got superior open interest.

In the baseline scenario, Indian policy-making will meander on clueless and unconcerned. NSE will continue to lose ground. Why do we care? Is this mere protectionism – what is wrong if the entire India-linked equity index derivatives business takes place overseas?

  • A rich and complex ecosystem of finance has developed surrounding the Nifty contracts. Hundreds of thousands of high skill workers are in this industry. A decisive loss of market share for India would endanger their livelihood.
  • The tax revenues associated with all these activities, at present, come to the Indian authorities. The Indian tax man earns income tax (on wages and on corporate profit) and VAT (on an array of activities of the firms). All this will go away if the business shifts to Singapore.
  • A sophisticated Indian financial system is required if monetary policy is to be effective. The demise of the onshore financial system will damage the onshore monetary policy transmission. It will further take us back towards a world where government is unable to play a role in business cycle stabilisation.
  • Prospects of Bombay emerging as an international financial centre will subside. If we can’t even hang on to market share for Nifty or the rupee, where is the question of competing against overseas financial firms or markets on things that aren’t India-linked?
  • Access to finance for firms will tend to split into a two-tier world: the big firms will go abroad to get their corporate finance done. The small firms will face greater constraints since they will not easily access finance abroad (there is a greater information distance between the typical Singapore investor and the typical Rs.1000 crore or Rs.100 crore Indian company), and the local financial system would be weak.
When India started trying to build a mature market economy in 1991, at first, it felt like a sophisticated financial system would emerge, which would both serve India and start competing for the global market. From 1993 to 2001, India achieved a remarkable revolution in the equity market. This increased optimism in the ability of India to understand problems, to achieve change, and to maintain high ethical standards.
It now seems that those hopes were premature. The more likely scenario is one where India-linked finance will happen offshore, while RBI/SEBI/CBDT/CCI/FMC/IRDA squabble over a minor and inconsequential onshore financial system that is riddled with ethics problems. In the short term, onshore Indian finance will suffer from one setback after another.
We are likely to go back to the conflicted arrangements that gave us the Harshad Mehta scandals of the early 1990s and the Ketan Parekh scandals one decade later. I used to think we were finished with those problems. But we are about to restart on that entire story; there is little institutional memory about how those things came about and how dangerous our present path is. Each future scandal, of this nature, will be greeted with joy by overseas financial providers, who will scoop up market share every time India falls into turmoil.
Many years from now, we may one day get to fundamentally superior governance arrangements in finance, and achieve high ethical standards in public life and securities infrastructure. If this happens, we would be able to come back to these questions. As an example, Japan lost the Nikkei 225 contract to Singapore in the mid-1980s and got back into this to a significant extent 15 years later. In the years or decades that will go by until domestic financial governance structures are corrected, a great deal of organisational capital in the onshore financial system will have been lost.
The revolution in the stock market used to be one of the best success stories of economic reforms in India [link, link]. It may well fall apart in coming months and years.

Economic Events on June 1, 2012

The figures for motor vehicle sales for November will be released today.  The consensus estimate is that 14.5 million autos were sold last month, which would be 100,000 more than the previous month.

The Monster Employment Index for May was released today, and the index moved up 1 point from last month to a value of 147, but is 3% higher than last May’s value.

At 8:30 AM EDT, the Employment Situation report for May will be announced, and the consensus for non-farm payrolls is an increase of 150,000 jobs compared to 115,000 in the previous month, the consensus for the unemployment rate is that it will remain at 8.1%, the consensus average hourly earnings rate is expected to increase 0.2%, and the consensus for the average workweek is 34.5 hours.

Also at 8:30 AM Eastern time, the monthly Personal Income and Outlays report for April will be released. The consensus for Personal Income is an increase of 0.3% over the previous month and the consensus Consumer Spending index change is an increase of 0.3%.

At 10:00 AM Eastern time, the Construction Spending report for April will be released, and the consensus is that there was an increase of 0.4% in spending compared to the previous month.

Also at 10:00 AM Eastern time, the ISM manufacturing index for April will be released.  The consensus estimate is that it decreased 0.8 points last month to a value of 54.0, but will still signal economic growth as it stays above the mid-point of 50.

Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts