Value Collector
Have courage, and be kind.
- Joined
- 13 January 2014
- Posts
- 12,237
- Reactions
- 8,484
Let me ask you this about what you think of the strategy of the 3 majors. Lets suggest for a moment that their sole intention is in fact to drown fortescue out of the market. It seems to me that its clearly evident at prices sub $50/tonne that the chinese have every intention of buying not only fortescue but every other viable mining company under duress regardless of what continent it sits on. It seems logical to me that every viable mine they send to the hands of the chinese is a nail in the coffin of their profits because its an extra tonne at lower prices that won't be purchased from them. If the chinese were to buy fortescue it would be an absolute catastrophe for the 3 majors because all of a sudden there is up to 200 million tonnes in circulation not subject to market dynamics anymore. I really don't grasp the strategy. They say its about market share but in fact they're not gaining market share - rather handing all their corporate power to their primary buyer. The strategy makes no sense to me??
As of Monday june 22, the port stocks have declined another 1.5%
So your basically saying that you believe that the majors are going to regulate the flow of supply to keep higher cost supply out of the market, rather than flood the market completely?
Why would they not be better off at a $90 per tonne mark? I appreciate the theory re market share but what's the point of working harder for less or equal money
What impact do you think that the Greece debacle will have on share value? The value has dropped a massive .60 in the last fortnight with no primary reason other than Greece and or people flicking fmg prior to the end if the financial year because it's been an atrocious performer? Not unless the stock is being heavily shorted again on the basis of likely lower ore prices
What impact do you think that the Greece debacle will have on share value?
I don't think FMG have lost value in the last 2 weeks, they are still worth at least $6.00
What you are seeing is fluctuations in market price, Price is what you pay, value is what you get. Price and value are two separate concepts.
Ok - so we're now at the end of the financial year, and for this half its probably fair to assume an average iron ore value of $60 per tonne. If we adopt $41 production costs, fmg should be making $10/tonne. 60 x 85% = 51 - 41 = 10.
Run rate 165mt x 10/2 = 820m profit for the half. If they continue the general policy of paying a third in dividends, I'm estimating a dividend of around 7 - 8 cents for this half. That would take the total dividend for the year to 10 - 11 cents for the year. The last time the company paid this sort of annual dividend was in 2013 and the stock was worth around 4.75.
Do you agree with these numbers as rough estimates and what do you anticipate the value of the stock when this report is released, bearing in mind that in 2013 the price of i/o was on the way up?
I don't value a company by how much the dividend is.
In 2013, FMG hadn't finished developing its projects, and had more debt, and its production costs were significantly higher now. so it is in a more secure position.
I value a company based on its earning power not its dividend, and also they use that these earnings are going to be used for.
Eg, a company earning a $1, that can deploy that dollar where it can earn 20%, and pay no dividend is worth more than a company that earns $1 and pays 80cents dividend, and deploys the left over 20cents at 5%
Yes, I appreciate what your saying, but the primary reason in investing in a company is capital growth and dividend returns. Dividend returns is the primary driver of capital growth, without it public investment exits, capital growth is more difficult to achieve and share prices fall.
Do you think that fmg could reach the $6 share price value without paying a dividend between now and then?
No, increasing earnings is the primary driver of capital growth. And the companies that retain earnings and deploy them at high rates of return will grow their earnings the most.
take Berkshire Hathaway as an example, it has not paid a dividend since the mid 1960's when it was $9 per share, now it's $204,000 per share and it earns more than $15,000 per share in earnings.
It has only grown it's earnings to $15,000 per share because it has retained every cent of earnings and deployed it into new investments where it can earn a high rate of return.
Yes, FMG could reach $6 without paying a dividend, if it focussed 100% of earnings into a mixture of clearing debt, adding to its assets (increasing reserve base, and development pipeline) and buying back its own shares, then yes it could go 20years without a dividend and the capital growth would be very good.
Its all about the iron ore price.FMG has been brutalised in the last few weeks. You guys reckon this is due to short term factors or long term debt issues?
Its all about the iron ore price.
You can’t value/price FMG without predicting the future price of Iron Ore. It’s hugely operationally and financially leveraged to Iron Ore Price. At a low enough Iron Ore price FMG will lose control of all their assets with no return for equity holders – at high enough Iron Ore Price equity holders will make a fortune..
Given it's all about profit are you expecting them to reach the $10 average per tonne profit this period?
The problem with allowing the iron ore price to collapse as it has, is that stockpiling is then undertaken by the buyers who know how expensive it has just been.
.
The collapse was also caused on the excess supply side by vale mining in Brazil
,If Australians wanted to get themselves out of the situation they find themselves in now, which is giving the ore to China at below cost
(remember that Australians funded the infrastructure on the stock exchange and taxes and the royalties are minuscule) then they need to start using the ore internally in Australia and creating products which can be sold at massive profit
The stockpiles have actually been shrinking, which leads me to think that some of the price weakness has been because stockpiles are being eaten into.
FMG now has a delivered cost lower than Vale.
,
The three big Aussie suppliers eg BHP, RIO and FMG, are not selling below cost.
The mines and infrastructure have not been solely funded by Australians.
Australians, chinese and various other international investors provided the equity, and the bonds and debt financing is largely international.
If you want to invest in a steel works to use our ore go ahead, I am happier to sell the ore to china.
With fmg currently sitting at near 12 month lows I assume you must be thinking that this must be an approximate floor for the price to go long on the stock for a long period? Why aren't you shorting the stock and making money on it during the next couple of years instead?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?