Jump to content

PKX - POSCO


Liberty

Recommended Posts

Based on the initial high level figures, it seems steel operating profit is stable from last quarter but there are bunch of other potential negative stuff: lower energy price impact on Myanmar gas field, fx impact on USD based debt, potential investment portfolio write downs and another tax penalty from government (come on at least pay the taxes right!). I guess we won't know for sure until Feb 5, when they disclose more detailed numbers. (I can't really tell why the company disclose the summary financials first and the details later; I guess they want to torture their investors by leaving them in the dark for a couple of more days :-) ) Although, I am still positive about the prospects of the company, I guess, I should have known more about their diversified business portfolio and their investments portfolio before investing. Lots of moving parts other than steel for this company...

 

I also think decrease in iron ore prices should continue to help with the margins. Based on a report I reviewed recently, like 35% of the total ex-china steel production is based on EAF, which uses scrap material vs Blast Furnace which uses iron ore and it seems the scrap material cost is more stable vs the huge drop in iron ore prices so cost curve of all these EAF based producers will be disadvantaged vs the BF based producers. This factor might be supporting the steel prices vs the iron ore on a relative basis. Of course there are many other factors like transportation costs, FX impact etc. which affects the competitiveness but I found this EAF vs BF difference very interesting. Posco is all BF producer I think. Having some of their iron ore coming from their own mines could actually be a disadvantage though in this type of depressed iron ore market. In the long run it should provide a diversification benefit in terms raw materials resourcing probably. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 473
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Based on the initial high level figures, it seems steel operating profit is stable from last quarter but there are bunch of other potential negative stuff: lower energy price impact on Myanmar gas field, fx impact on USD based debt, potential investment portfolio write downs and another tax penalty from government (come on at least pay the taxes right!). I guess we won't know for sure until Feb 5, when they disclose more detailed numbers. (I can't really tell why the company disclose the summary financials first and the details later; I guess they want to torture their investors by leaving them in the dark for a couple of more days :-) ) Although, I am still positive about the prospects of the company, I guess, I should have known more about their diversified business portfolio and their investments portfolio before investing. Lots of moving parts other than steel for this company...

 

I also think decrease in iron ore prices should continue to help with the margins. Based on a report I reviewed recently, like 35% of the total ex-china steel production is based on EAF, which uses scrap material vs Blast Furnace which uses iron ore and it seems the scrap material cost is more stable vs the huge drop in iron ore prices so cost curve of all these EAF based producers will be disadvantaged vs the BF based producers. This factor might be supporting the steel prices vs the iron ore on a relative basis. Of course there are many other factors like transportation costs, FX impact etc. which affects the competitiveness but I found this EAF vs BF difference very interesting. Posco is all BF producer I think. Having some of their iron ore coming from their own mines could actually be a disadvantage though in this type of depressed iron ore market. In the long run it should provide a diversification benefit in terms raw materials resourcing probably.

 

This is something i haven't really thought about, thanks for the insight tylerdurden. this led me to think about whether whether EAF or Blast furnace is a more efficient way to make steel. Posco might be the cost leader in blast furnace made steel(operating margins of 8% this year compared to 0-4% operating margins of it's competitors) but it seems like the EAF/mini mills have comparable or better margins. (hyundai steel had operating margins of 9.5% and nucor had operating margins of 6%). Maybe it will take a few quarters for the lower iron ore prices to pass through like tylerdurden mentioned and that will lift POSCO's operating margins but the whole thesis for me being long is that Posco is that it is one of the best steel companies in the world trading at .5 book. If it turns out that Posco not only has to compete with it's blast furnance competitors but also EAF mini mills then this whole POSCO as a cost leader might turn out to be not true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

thanks for the Report! :)

 

a dumb question i dont get it right now,  they are paying 8000 won per share dividend that would be around 7$ and a yield of over 10%?

 

iam missing something  ???

 

The ADR is 1/4 common share.

 

ah ok thanks  ;)

 

that was my mistake

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Iron ore and scrap over time reflect one another. Eaf economics have a lot to do with electricity costs as well.  Outside of the us bf steel making is usually cheaper even at high iron ore prices.  The other issue with eaf is that they are mostly producers of long steels not flat.  I believe it's basically uneconomic to make high spec flat steel in an Eaf.

 

Also marginal capacity in slab is nearly always BF so that's what drives prices.

 

 

BTW Hyundai is bf - that's one of poscos biggest problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

When you have a great business with smart and able people, they will find ways around obstacles.  That would be great to become more integrated in India and drive the economic growth there as well.  But it has been one extraordinary challenge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt India ever happens. With iron ore where it is the economics are less compelling than supplying HRC out of SK for the rolling mills.

 

And consider the way you lose money long term on Posco involves the balance sheet and I find it hard to see a scenario in which the India expansion is good for shareholders. The world doesn't need blast furnace capacity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems it will probably "happen" through the backway. They will keep doing smaller more specialized projects in India. Maybe there is some upside to keeping the Odisha thing open in that, I don't know. But I would tend to agree, the political situation for that particular mill seems impossible anyhow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a post on gurufocus

 

The 10-k of DJCO states:

... Company’s investments were concentrated in just six companies and included one investment based in a foreign currency.

I think the bit I underlined was not mentioned before. This is interesting because it was previously disclosed that two of their six holdings were foreign manufacturing companies.

Now they come out and say one of those investments is in a foreign currency. This implies the other foreign company is listed on a US exchange and they initially bought the shares of both foreign companies on a US exchange (in dollars). BYD would be a likely candidate. It is a foreign company that Munger likes and can also be bought in the US (with dollars).

Since:

1) We know DJCO stil owns the same six companies they owned last year

and

2) DJCO's current cash position doesn't indicate there was an outright sale

we can infer that perhaps they sold one company to buy more shares of another but this wouldn't explain why they now mention the bit about foreign currency.

The other explanation is that that some of the investors you mention sold the ADRs of Posco to buy Posco's primary shares in Seoul instead. You see, DJCO reports the holdings of the ADR but not neccesarily the holding of the primary shares.

In sum, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that DJCO didn't sell Posco, maybe they just own them direct (in Seoul) now instead of through the ADR.

They would do this if at some point the primary shares in Seoul temporarily dropped relative to the price of the ADR and they rolled them over, thereby buying a greater number of shares without spending any money. If I find evidence of that, I'll follow up on this thread.

Another reason they would do this is because Posco may be spinning out some shares of publicly traded subsidiaries. If you own the primary shares in Seoul, you get direct ownership of the shares they spin out. With the ADR, you probably get cash instead.

Perhaps someone can plot the price of the primary shares in Seoul against the price of the ADR in the US. That will prove if there was a temporary arbitrage opportunity at some point.

Also, if Martin Whitman (third avenue) did this, it should show up in their next letter. Instead of the ADR their funds should be reporting ownership of the primary shares in Seoul.

just some thoughts.

 

 

 

Also the primary shares can convert into ADRs at a ratio of 1 to 4 but not the other way around.(like brk.a/brk.b) I don't see any reason not to own the foreign shares as opposed to the ADRs unless you're a small retail investor who doesn't want to go through the trouble of getting your broker to buy them in Seoul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think BYD has been in foreign currency (HKD) all along - that's why it doesn't show up on the 13F. That is, if there aren't any special rules which exempt unlisted ADRs from disclosure, something I have never heard of. If they changed from PKX to 005490, they would probably state that they own two businesses denominated in foreign currencies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Maybe it didn't meet their investment return, maybe competition is heating up in the domestic market, Chinese steel exports causing havoc in the industry? 

 

Why would they switch from the ADR to Seoul?  Spinoffs are possible, but sales are more likely.  Strongest argument.  Mild argument is arbitrage or ownership via the Euro or actually owned on Seoul exchange. 

 

You think when BYD had the huge sell off they sold Posco and bought more BYD? 

 

These things we may never know.  Since we don't know them, fact checking and due diligence is still the way to move forward. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...