Sunday, July 6, 2008

Is the Buck Finally Stopping for Steel?

TweetThis
While steel has had an amazing run, my thesis is at some point prices reach a level customers balk. But that's been the thesis in crude oil too - and so far the voracious appetite by certain countries has offset the demand destruction in others. However, we have been warning of the first signs of demand falling [May 17: WSJ - Fast Rising Steel Prices Set Back Big Projects]

At some price point it no longer makes sense to build things, even for China (although they are forced to, to swallow up the masses of populace moving from the countryside to the cities). I have to say I've been amazed that the steel companies can continue to pass along all costs to their end customers but at some point this stops. The point seems to be closing in.

In the past week we are seeing increasing signs of stress - ArcelorMittal (MT) Says Half of Customers Rejected $250 Surcharge
  • ArcelorMittal, the world's largest steelmaker, said about half its U.S. customers refused to pay a $250-a-ton surcharge that was added in May to make up for soaring raw-material costs.
  • ArcelorMittal will seek higher prices from those that rejected the surcharge on fixed-price contract shipments in the next round of annual discussions, Lou Schorsch, head of the company's flat-rolled business in the Americas, said today in an interview in Chicago.
  • ``With about half the customers we've had some good dialogue and good resolution where we've made some adjustments,'' said Schorsch, who is responsible for about $21 billion of the steelmaker's business in the Americas. ``The other half have said, `We can't afford to eat it.'''
  • The company is trying to take advantage of soaring global demand to pass on higher costs for iron ore, the main ingredient in steel, and the energy to produce and ship the metal. U.S. steel prices rose to a record $1,052 a ton in June, 82 percent higher than a year ago, Purchasing Magazine said yesterday.
  • ArcelorMittal in April agreed to pay Brazil's Cia. Vale do Rio Doce, the world's largest iron-ore exporter, 87 percent more for the ingredient as rising demand from China pushed up prices. ArcelorMittal also may pay Cleveland-Cliffs Inc., North America's largest iron-ore producer, about 60 percent more this year. Costs for coke, scrap, energy and transportation also are rising.
  • Some steel mills may pressure reluctant customers to accept surcharges by threatening to reduce the amount of metal they will sell, Aldo Mazzaferro, an analyst at Goldman, Sachs & Co. in New York, said in a May 12 note to investors. Contracts usually specify the price for the steel rather than volume to be sold, he said.
And just today in the Wall Street Journal
  • Some automakers are refusing to pay surcharges on steel contracts they agreed to, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing Aditya Mittal, chief financial officer of ArcelorMittal.
  • Some of these automakers have threatened to challenge the surcharges in court, the Journal said, citing people familiar with the matter. The newspaper didn't identify any companies refusing to pay.
  • The resistance is one of the first strong signals to steelmakers that their hardest-hit customers have reached a tipping point and may not be able to withstand higher prices.
So we finally begin to reach the very interesting point of many cross currents. Is the demand in China so great for (insert any commodity here) that if European or US customers say no, then (insert commodity) producers can just take their product elsewhere and get ridiculous rates (and folks a 1 year increase of 82% in steel or 105% in crude oil *is* ridiculous - demand is not growing at that rate). Or will the curtain begin to fall and will producers of said commodities begin to be unable to pass along costs? I don't have the answers - some of these moves upward in price have gone far above my near term estimates - while I am a long term World of Shortages guy, demand is not increasing at triple digits year over year. But prices are for certain things. So the path ahead will be very interesting.

Now unlike Ken Heebner of CGM Funds I've taken a completely different tact in approaching the steel boom - I've placed our investments into the inputs - iron ore and metallurgical coal - while his money (since last quarter) is concentrated in the actual steel makers. From my end, if the steel makers finally reach a ceiling in price, their margins will get squeezed (and in theory their stocks should suffer, not their suppliers). Also much of the supplier product pricing is longer term in nature (1 year contracts) versus a much more fluid situation at the steel maker level. But one could make multiple arguements - (1) eventually the same pressure would travel downstream to their suppliers - i.e. steel maker says to iron ore producer we cannot charge our customer any more so we cannot pay a new higher price for iron ore.... causing prices to stagnate or fall for suppliers (very plausible) or (2) even if the suppliers can maintain high prices the stock market won't care and "throw the baby out with the bathwater" and punish the entire supply chain (also very plausible). I don't know how it will work out, but I've tried to think 3-4 steps ahead and try to position us for what I see as this eventuality. And hopefully the market does not devolve into situation 2. Frankly nothing can go straight up in price without causing cut backs. Cities and states simply cannot do projects at costs ABC, auto makers cannot build product at profit at costs ABC, refrigerator makers cannot make profit at costs ABC, etc. So the buck will stop - at what price we don't know. And how the individual components of the supply chain will be affected we also don't know.

With that said I do believe there is still quite a bit of upside surprise in 2009 and 2010 earnings in many of the suppliers to the steel industry even at current prices (i.e. if prices did not go one iota higher), and for U.S. Steelmakers they have the advantage of the ever limp US Peso so their pricing on the world market, will at least be "relatively" cheap (i.e. producers in stronger currency markets will see their demand falter first). But this speaks to the timing of investments - even the best thesis are going to have their ups and downs and speed bumps. The world does need steel to build it's infrastructure. But at what cost? Only federal governments can truly afford to build project after project at losses. Once again - many moving parts and we'll need to monitor it over the coming quarters and years.

I repeat it every week - inflation is a tax on all things, producers and consumers. If consumers cannot accept price increases - that means producers margins will buckle. While Wall Street tends to sneer at Main Street as inconsequential - corporate profits are the lifeblood of stock valuations. So if/when producers profit margins buckle that has a real impact on stock valuations. It's all connected in the end.

Long Cleveland Cliffs, Vale in fund; long Cleveland Cliffs in personal account

Note we use CVRD for the label for Vale since this is what it used to be known as.

10 comments:

nomar5better2 said...

Hey Mark,

Got some Heebner comments in today's Boston Sunday Globe:
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2008/07/06/portfolio_manager_casts_an_optimistic_eye_on_economy/

Also, sorry to be a loser but will I be able to transfer IRA funds when u are up and running? If so I would be happy to pledge 5k

Peter M
Hubbardston MA

nomar5better2 said...

what u think more pullback on CLF coming? IPI is now back to IPO levels

TraderMark said...

Hi Peter

That is covered in the FAQ (top right of the blog) Frequently Asked Questions.

Short answer yes

Everything a typical mutual fund can do we can do. We just won't be offered in the fund supermarkets or brokerages right away. Brokerages within a year, and fund supermarkets down the road when/if we get to a certain (big) size due to the onerous costs. But in terms of what type of accounts - anything a typical fund offers we will do the same. Thanks for the link - will take a gander.

TraderMark said...

Really depends on the market. If this 1260 is broken, S&P 1225 looks very viable and I'd expect more shooting of the generals.

IPI actually IPO'd in $30s - it just priced immediately in upper $40s. I was hoping it would price in $20s like it was proposed originally and then open in the $30s ... thats the last time I'll write an article titled "You thought the hottest IPO in 2008 was VISA? Wrong!" ;)

But to your question - stocks over the past year have been many times hostage to the market - not like 2003-early 2007 when they could rise/drop in a near vacuum, on their own volition. The drops nowadays are being caused by marked selloffs in the market. So to answer your own question you probably need to make a call on the overall market. I'll just say we remain at the precipice. (cliff)

soccerbill8 said...

It is quite interesting Mark. You compare yourself to Heebner or at least strive to mimic his strategy (although you have your unique touch to it)

But you are very bearish on US economy, while he is rather bullish (relative to the street now)

He doesn't make sense though, he says high inflation will contract PE's so how can he be bullish. It seems that he believes the government's "creative" numbers.

what do you think of Heebner's comments in the link above? I am just wondering because I would find your reaction priceless because I think you two have such similar investing themes yet different longer term sentiments.

nomar5better2 said...

cool, sorry 4 being lazy multitasking here w/Soxs game on. I have small IRA w/e*trade. I'll pledge 5k and will do the manual rollover, if not listed with them, if necessary.

Go Blue?

TraderMark said...

Everything I've read from his has been a lot more bullish than me on the general economy. That said - economic theory doesn't really matter - its a bottom line business and he is doing great by being in the right spots. He did short Washington Mutual so he can't be positive on everything but in a general sense he seems to believe in a much more positive outlook for the US. Only lately have I read anything on him about inflation which I was not seeing 6-9 months ago in his interviews. Whereas I've been calling for it since day 1 of the blog (and far before that) I'm obviously also a lot more concerned about inflation effects on the emerging markets (and hence US multinationals being affected) than it appears he is.

I do not compare myself to Heebner - only on that steel story did I make some comparison and in a sense of making top down concentrated bets we are similar. If I have a 25 year record of success than I'll compare myself. It's like a NBA rookie comparing themselves to Larry Bird.

Since he is almost always 100% committed to long side he should actually outperform when times are going well, and hopefully our insurance policy will help dampen some downside for us - whereas he has some bigger swoons. I know some investors simply say go for the gold and do whatever gets you the best long term performance but I think there is something to be said for avoiding some periods of carnage in terms of your investors psyche. One could argue if its better to do that through investing 95% long in the best sectors or by actually holding cash/short positions in larger magnitude - a case could be made either way. I think my strategy will be more dampening in terms of volatility than his but he could generate better long term results. But we'll see - hopefully most people hold 5-7 mutual funds and if in 5 years I am even under consideration in the same breath I'll be tickled. Since he does not like technology if we enter another era of "technology is king" in which he lagged severely the last time around that might cause some underperformance. Or maybe even solar is king (I don't see any solar in his exposure)

But since he is the current Tiger Woods it is good to have him in the line of sight - just like golfers should do even if they don't hope to beat Tiger. Bill Miller was the king before and he has fallen off his throne the past few years, and how quickly these "stars" get tossed to the side ;) A bottom line business.

We'll check back in 12 months to see if 2-4% US growth is there. As you know that means if the real economy is growing 0 to -2% then the government reports will show 2-4% ;) So maybe he has a chance on that. Somehow I doubt it but I'll be happy to be wrong because it means investing on the long side will be a lot easier.

TraderMark said...

Nomar,

Blue = U of Michigan

You really don't do anything manually - you'll send a request to our transfer agent that you want to rollover an account somewhere else, and our transfer agent contacts the other brokerage (in your case Etrade) and does the transaction. When people ask me I always say never handle the money yourself - you can do it in theory but you need to roll the money over (if you take physical delivery) within 60 days I believe, or else its considered a distribution.

So I always advise - let one institution contact the other and let them do the work amongst themselves. That way you never have a chance of screwing up and/or pushing the day you get around to working on it etc. 60 days can go quickly when you have to deal with paperwork.

Thanks for the investment.

hrs0944 said...

here is part of your answer, the last sentence, "....It will be downstream users who will have to bear higher prices."
:)

BHP

Posted: Fri, 04 Jul 2008
[miningmx.com] -- BHP Billiton Ltd/Plc has matched Rio Tinto Ltd/Plc's near 100 percent price hike for 2008-2009 iron ore deliveries, Chinese industry officials said on Friday, ending protracted talks over contracts worth billions of dollars, Reuters reported.


The officials confirmed an unsourced report in the Australian Financial Review that BHP Billiton, the last hold-out in bitter-fought talks, had secured terms in line with takeover target Rio's 96.5 percent increase for iron ore lumps and a 79.88 increase for fines, won from Baosteel two weeks ago.

"For the industry from mills to iron ore producers, everyone wins," Judy Zhu, commodity analyst at Standard Chartered Bank, said.

"Iron ore producers will make more money and the steel makers, although they are paying more for their raw materials, will be able to pass these higher costs to their customers. It will be downstream users who will have to bear higher prices."

hieunguy said...

Yeah right, look at the volume on the rebound of CLF, my call this won't stick at 100. you will have lower price to buy.

Post a Comment

Disclaimer: The opinions listed on this blog are for educational purpose only. You should do your own research before making any decisions.
This blog, its affiliates, partners or authors are not responsible or liable for any misstatements and/or losses you might sustain from the content provided.


Site by codeeo
Original WP Premium theme by WP Remix