FMG - Fortescue Ltd

[qldfrog]

I'd like to know what Twiggy has in mind for this goose...

Former UK chancellor who crashed the pound to advise Fortescue from October

Kwasi Kwarteng will not be allowed to lobby British government in paid role as a senior adviser at Australian iron ore miner

www.theguardian.com

A lot of woke credits plus a bit of corruption and a way to thank you a WEF clique member

 

[Sean K]

This place is a circus.

 

[sptrawler]

Sounds like now Twiggy has come out and told everyone he is going to change the World, those who work for him and have to do it, are deciding if they really want that much work.

 

[qldfrog]

Sounds like now Twiggy has come out and told everyone he is going to change the World, those who work for him and have to do it, are deciding if they really want that much work.

Or do not want to work for a lunatic...

 

[Dona Ferentes]

The China crises is greatly exaggerated by the media.

was reading a recent Louis Gave piece ... he thinks it's the beat up du jour.
.
..
I’ll keep running with it. Funny story. If you look at Chinese bank shares over the past 12 months, they’re basically flat. They’re up marginally. They’re up like 3% or 4%. If you look at US bank shares over the past 12 months, they’re down 20%. So you’re like, “Okay. I’m supposed to worry about...”
China is having this EM systemic crisis, but its bank shares are outperforming US banks. Its bank shares are outperforming US Treasuries. What do you call an emerging market systemic crisis in which the local debt markets, the local stock markets, and the local bank shares all outperform US Treasuries by more than double
digits? I think you can call it one of two things. You can call it either unprecedented—because it would be—or you can call it inexistent. You choose. But everybody is banging on about how China is going through this crisis. Iron ore prices are up 50% since late October. The LVMH share price is close to all-time highs. It’s like, all of the things you would look for in the market, if The Economist cover was correct, you can’t see it. You can’t find it. The Chinese stock markets have not been great. They haven’t been, but they’re still up between 10% and 20% from late October when China reopened. So it’s not great. It’s been disappointing. Don’t get me wrong. It’s disappointing, but it’s not a systemic crisis. Let’s keep the hyperbole in check.
Ed D’Agostino:
You wrote about what is under pressure in China right now, and it’s essentially high-yield debt.
Louis Gave:
Yup.
Ed D’Agostino:
High-yield debt is under pressure....
.

 

[martaart077]

Or do not want to work for a lunatic...

Or they don't believe it can be successful

 

[Value Hunter]

was reading a recent Louis Gave piece ... he thinks it's the beat up du jour.
.
..
I’ll keep running with it. Funny story. If you look at Chinese bank shares over the past 12 months, they’re basically flat. They’re up marginally. They’re up like 3% or 4%. If you look at US bank shares over the past 12 months, they’re down 20%. So you’re like, “Okay. I’m supposed to worry about...”
China is having this EM systemic crisis, but its bank shares are outperforming US banks. Its bank shares are outperforming US Treasuries. What do you call an emerging market systemic crisis in which the local debt markets, the local stock markets, and the local bank shares all outperform US Treasuries by more than double
digits? I think you can call it one of two things. You can call it either unprecedented—because it would be—or you can call it inexistent. You choose. But everybody is banging on about how China is going through this crisis. Iron ore prices are up 50% since late October. The LVMH share price is close to all-time highs. It’s like, all of the things you would look for in the market, if The Economist cover was correct, you can’t see it. You can’t find it. The Chinese stock markets have not been great. They haven’t been, but they’re still up between 10% and 20% from late October when China reopened. So it’s not great. It’s been disappointing. Don’t get me wrong. It’s disappointing, but it’s not a systemic crisis. Let’s keep the hyperbole in check.
Ed D’Agostino:
You wrote about what is under pressure in China right now, and it’s essentially high-yield debt.
Louis Gave:
Yup.
Ed D’Agostino:
High-yield debt is under pressure....
.

That very interview was actually one of the sources I read before coming to the conclusion I posted that the China fears are over blown.

 

[Value Hunter]

Or do not want to work for a lunatic...

The whole situation is a little hard to understand. Usually when companies can do obviously dumb things (this happens far more often than it should) it can be explained by the fact that the executives and board are doing it with other people's money (the shareholders and debt holders money) and would never take the same actions if there own whole life's savings were on the line. But in this case Andrew Twiggy is doing these things with his own money which is a real head scratcher.

 

[basilio]

Twiggy is losing the confidence of his senior staff. I reckon that will end up being disastrous for the development side of his Green energy vision.

It is essential to have a confident, demanding, capable leadership team driving such an ambitious program. If he can't understand that necessity and develop/lead such a leadership group then the green energy program will just limp along. I can see a number of smaller elements being successful but the big deals IMO will not be achieved because

1) They won't have the committed staff to drive them
2) Outside markets will not commit to a program that doesn't have such a committed group of leaders.

I think the iron ore business should stay on track. Theoretically it is a dig, move and sell program which has been largely sorted out. That isn't the case of course for Iron Ridge which is still building up its production capacity so there should be eyes on who is handling that hot potato. So theoretically FMG should still be moving and profitably selling 192m tonnes of ore plus. That is still excellent value.

The decision to bring in Kwasi Kwarteng as an advisor is, in my mind, just ludicrous. I think he has so much baggage from his ill fated spell as Treasurer he will be regarded as a poisoned chalice by staff in FMG. I struggle to see what sort of quality advice he can offer. It wouldn't surprise me if the appointment of Kwasi as an advisor was a last straw for some of the recent departures.

This is all a real problem for Twiggy and FMG. If he can't get his xhit together and realise that he must create a constructive atmosphere to drive the big dream, only the small stuff will work. The big idea was always a monumental challenge. Without a committed leadership team driving it and a realistic leader guiding it it will not happen.

 

[qldfrog]

The whole situation is a little hard to understand. Usually when companies can do obviously dumb things (this happens far more often than it should) it can be explained by the fact that the executives and board are doing it with other people's money (the shareholders and debt holders money) and would never take the same actions if there own whole life's savings were on the line. But in this case Andrew Twiggy is doing these things with his own money which is a real head scratcher.

Yes and no. A lot of subsidies from gov too.
I would just need 2 h with Forrest to have an open mind talk and he would have a more realistic and more science based view ..that is assuming he is not just doing pure PR while knowing it can not be achieved, and then blame his team for the coming failure..so the exits?
As for money, once you have a couple of billions ,who cares..
Unless you are Bezos aka a complete wanker

 

[Dona Ferentes]

simplistically:
.
Mark Hutchinson, CEOof the Energy division, has stated the green energy strategy is trying to reset the market’s view of the company, such that it goes from trading on a miner’s price-to-earnings multiple of between five and 10 times to a P/E multiple of between 15 and 20 times.

“In some ways, the earnings on the energy side are worth more to the market than on the mining side,” Hutchinson says.

Fortescue currently has a P/E multiple of eight times and has a market capitalisation of $60 billion. The implicit suggestion is that if Fortescue traded on 17.5 times, it could be worth at least $130 billion.
.
simples
......but what about those juicy dividends?

 

[bk1]

but what about those juicy dividends?

You're missing the point, what are the free cash flows from such a business?
ALL miners are valued through this metric.
The market simply does not believe the story so far. It's an Iron Ore business leveraged to the Chinese economy, or India.
It could take years to see meaningful profits from, as yet untested, technologies at scale.

 

[Dona Ferentes]

You're missing the point, what are the free cash flows from such a business?
ALL miners are valued through this metric.
The market simply does not believe the story so far. It's an Iron Ore business leveraged to the Chinese economy, or India.
It could take years to see meaningful profits from, as yet untested, technologies at scale.

I'm missing the point?. ha ha.

 

[TimeISmoney]

You're missing the point, what are the free cash flows from such a business?
ALL miners are valued through this metric.
The market simply does not believe the story so far. It's an Iron Ore business leveraged to the Chinese economy, or India.
It could take years to see meaningful profits from, as yet untested, technologies at scale.

I always thought that Hydrogen fuel was aimed at remote locations, it's not really feasible as a green replacement fuel for you're general suburban areas.

 

[bk1]

Acknowledged @Dona Ferentes , however, there are some that simply can't accept what others with a lot more skin in the game are saying.

 

[qldfrog]

I always thought that Hydrogen fuel was aimed at remote locations, it's not really feasible as a green replacement fuel for you're general suburban areas.

No no, we can add hydrogen in the town LNG networks etc and so have low emission gas cooking..
That is the story/ narrative..the truth is most of the h2 will leak before being burn but who cares with technology and sciences when you have a narrative and endless tax funded dollars
Same for CC and CO2...and more recently Covid Pfizer scam s..

 

[qldfrog]

No no, we can add hydrogen in the town LNG networks etc and so have low emission gas cooking..
That is the story/ narrative..the truth is most of the h2 will leak before being burn but who cares with technology and sciences when you have a narrative and endless tax funded dollars
Same for CC and CO2...and more recently Covid Pfizer scam s..

If you transform with a specific pipes,etc the distribution network:
for example: night gas turbine power generator and keep the h2 storage short, yes it can be used but is very expensive energy wise , and so far the main source of H2 is fossil fuel cracking..the irony
Anyway far from FMG except to prove how crazy the whole idea is unless you get some tax payer funded incentives of some sorts ..

 

[Dona Ferentes]

Mark Hutchinson has stated the green energy strategy is trying to reset the market’s view of the company, such that it goes from trading on a miner’s price-to-earnings multiple of between five and 10 times to a P/E multiple of between 15 and 20 times.

Fortescue currently has a P/E multiple of eight times and has a market capitalisation of $60 billion. The implicit suggestion is that if Fortescue traded on 17.5 times, it could be worth at least $130 billion.

and more flesh ...

In the wake of Fortescue's announcement that its clean power projects would yield only half the returns of its iron ore developments, questions loomed large during investor briefings led by Fortescue boss Mark Hutchinson over the past two weeks. Investors clamored to understand how the company could advocate for fair competition among its mining and energy growth projects while simultaneously accepting lower returns from its energy ventures.

"This was probably most of the discussion with the investors…because they are trying to understand where we are coming from," Hutchinson revealed in a statement on Friday after returning to Perth.

Fortescue's capital allocation strategy has been under intense scrutiny, underscoring the dramatic shift the company has undergone in the past four years. Fortescue, known for its mature iron ore division, has been striving to integrate a clean energy and hydrogen business into its portfolio.

Unlike the established Pilbara iron ore division, which has already recouped its $US10 billion-plus investment in railways, ports, and other infrastructure, the five hydrogen, ammonia, and fertilizer projects Fortescue plans to initiate later this year represent first-generation infrastructure aimed at new, emerging markets.

Comparing these mining and energy growth projects based solely on their internal rate of return would leave the clean energy projects at a significant disadvantage, with projected returns of around 10 percent or less.

However, Hutchinson stressed that the Fortescue board would consider a broader, long-term perspective when deciding whether to invest in these clean energy projects. He emphasized that the shift toward clean energy could add more value to the market compared to the mining sector.

Hutchinson outlined a typical plan for financing the first five clean energy projects, where approximately 60 percent of the construction cost would be funded through non-recourse debt. The remaining 40 percent might be raised by selling equity stakes in the projects to sovereign wealth funds, ranging from 50 percent to 75 percent.

In a bid to reduce risk, Fortescue does not intend to build renewable power assets for these projects but plans to purchase clean power from other sources.

Hutchinson also pointed out that the true value of these initial projects may lie in their future expansion potential or their ability to stimulate demand in emerging markets...

......but what about those juicy dividends?

clearly FMG will be less attractive to some.

 

[sptrawler]

and more flesh ...

In the wake of Fortescue's announcement that its clean power projects would yield only half the returns of its iron ore developments, questions loomed large during investor briefings led by Fortescue boss Mark Hutchinson over the past two weeks. Investors clamored to understand how the company could advocate for fair competition among its mining and energy growth projects while simultaneously accepting lower returns from its energy ventures.

"This was probably most of the discussion with the investors…because they are trying to understand where we are coming from," Hutchinson revealed in a statement on Friday after returning to Perth.

Fortescue's capital allocation strategy has been under intense scrutiny, underscoring the dramatic shift the company has undergone in the past four years. Fortescue, known for its mature iron ore division, has been striving to integrate a clean energy and hydrogen business into its portfolio.

Unlike the established Pilbara iron ore division, which has already recouped its $US10 billion-plus investment in railways, ports, and other infrastructure, the five hydrogen, ammonia, and fertilizer projects Fortescue plans to initiate later this year represent first-generation infrastructure aimed at new, emerging markets.

Comparing these mining and energy growth projects based solely on their internal rate of return would leave the clean energy projects at a significant disadvantage, with projected returns of around 10 percent or less.

However, Hutchinson stressed that the Fortescue board would consider a broader, long-term perspective when deciding whether to invest in these clean energy projects. He emphasized that the shift toward clean energy could add more value to the market compared to the mining sector.

Hutchinson outlined a typical plan for financing the first five clean energy projects, where approximately 60 percent of the construction cost would be funded through non-recourse debt. The remaining 40 percent might be raised by selling equity stakes in the projects to sovereign wealth funds, ranging from 50 percent to 75 percent.

In a bid to reduce risk, Fortescue does not intend to build renewable power assets for these projects but plans to purchase clean power from other sources.

Hutchinson also pointed out that the true value of these initial projects may lie in their future expansion potential or their ability to stimulate demand in emerging markets...



clearly FMG will be less attractive to some.

Which kind of goes back to what we were discussing around post #4,975.
Blue sky dreaming.

 

[Dona Ferentes]

Which kind of goes back to what we were discussing around post #4,975. Blue sky dreaming.

yep, and now it's official. Honcho faces the instos, stuff goes on spreadsheets, and projections get altered.