Archive for foreign railroad consulting

The Big Short. Next movie version may cover Africa as a series of bad bond deals might unravel // Get a second opinion

EUROBOND FEVER

A few years ago, many African governments started issuing Eurobonds (bonds issued in a foreign currency) as a way to raise money. Nigeria, Zambia and Kenya are just a few to have tested their money-raising luck on global markets. Interest payments on some of these Eurobonds are due this year..

Important point… ….- most of those payments have to be paid in US dollars. That’s not great if your local currency has lost up to half of its value against the dollar.

Any one short these bonds?

Many investors have become increasingly worried about the ability of some African governments to repay their Eurobonds… …the credit ratings of many countries have been sliding to near-junk and junk status.

Need evidence?  CHECK OUT the related BBC report

Zambia issued its first Eurobond in 2012 at 5.4%. When they did, copper prices had already been falling. Where was the due diligence?

Falling copper prices, a power crisis and a credit rating downgrade now mean that investors who willingly lent money to Zambia in 2015 ignored the reality that these deals would actually be more risky than it had been in 2012.

When the country issued its third Eurobond last year, the rate was 8.5%. Now Zambia has to make those increased interest payments from declining tax revenues. And with much more expensive dollars. This will not end well.

Other projects from mines to railways and ports badly need due diligence second opinions.  When they don’t get them, buyers should beware.  Or the next Academy Award nominated best movie could be about you.

This includes massive mine/rail projects in Namibia, Botswana, South Africa, Senegal, and Mali…    …to name a few.

Most of these strategic plan paper projects lack due diligence pro forma assessments of their long term Income Statement outcomes against traffic risks projections ofrevenue volume being unrealistic.  Always get a second opinion.

Stunning graphs on resource capital project spending is a “wake up call” for planners

From mines around the world to the dependent rail and port projects, the changing global economics commodity cycle suggests a downer “Bear” market for projects that add to global capacity and output.

This down cycle could last from a short 2 to 3 years OR AS LONG AS 7 or more years. Strategic Planners to to rethink their now outdated assumptions from supporting logistics projects in diverse places like Mozambique, Botswana, Mongolia, Brazil, and even in the Canadian/Alaska Yukon region.

What ever capital plans for building the supporting ports and railways they had developed by big engineering companies — the underlying due diligence economic assumptions are now likely “under water” so to speak.

Billions and billions of proposed dollars in drawing board completed project engineering can no longer pass an economic feasibility test for recovery of he rail project capital P&I.

Instead these industry planners should brace themselves for at least another two years of shrinking budgets and outlays. The earliest signs of a “subdued” resource recovery might not be until early in 2018 say some experts.

But even this prediction might be too bullish. Why? Because metal prices have already fallen 12% further than they did during the bear market in the 1990s. In that bear market, capex only recovered to its pre-crash (1997) level after seven years (2004),” according to Mark Fellows.

Mark Fellows, director of consulting for a mining research firm reports that “while sustaining capital expenditure is down 13% since the peak in 2012, capital expenditure on new developments has been even harder hit.” “Spending on brownfield expansions is down 25% while greenfield project expenditure has plummeted by nearly one third” on a global basis.

Mr Fellows concludes this by comparing the current 2013-2015 downturn to the previous bear market in mining which ran from 1997 to 2002. He therefore argues that the current witnesses global capex cutbacks are far from over.

The report is published by SNL Metals and Mining. DOLLARS OF PROJECT EXPANSION PLANS AT RISK

The report finds that total capital spending across all mining companies has declined by around $70 billion since the 2012 peak to just over $150 billion forecast for this year. As one business case example, the project investment at BHP Billiton this year will be $10 billion below its 2013 peak. The world’s number one miner only has four projects in the works, two of which are almost complete, compared to 18 mine and infrastructure developments just two years ago.

In a Mining.com press story by Frik Els on 21 September 2015 titled: “This is the scariest mining chart you’ll see today”, the investor alert numbers are brought out visually.

This is another piece of economic trend evidence in my blog’s strategic theme of changing times for traffic that feeds the dreams of massive new rail freight projects.

“a Bridge Too Far” analysis?

Only the strongest as low cost per ton-kilometer cost new rail projects might be competitive.

Too many rail projects on the drawing boards are simply under designed as to the necessary competitive productivity to prosper as investment grade scenarios. Trains would be too small because they often lack big train technology design features of the most successful resource rail carriers. Axle loads too small. Train lengths too short. Clearances too shallow. Net to tare wagon rates are too low

Too many are now ill advised rail schemes. “Schemes” in North American business language generally means a buyer beware concept plan”.

In Africa alone, I estimate that as many as two thirds of “announced” rail line freight projects may be too risky to build as currently designed around old market demand and old post World War-2 rail engineering standards. That could mean as much as $25 to $34 billion of “schemes” seriously require a second due diligence look just in Africa.

Africa is not alone. The billions in proposed rail engineering in the Canadian Yukon/Alaska region also need serious market demand re-examination. If not by the project sponsors, then certainly by the investors they will approach. Brazil, Mongolia, Swaziland, Senegal — all of their rail design and expected market traffic assumptions need serious review for their current planning.

For more, log onto Mining.com

Chart Sources: SNL Metals & Mining

Greenfield cap ex spending chart

Bear market recovery projection for commodities chart

Should Transnet wander off on global and African project consulting? Or first fix the domestic needs?

Transnet’s Africa announced it management plan to offer consulting service outside of its domestic market.  This may be a flawed corporate strategy.  Lets discuss.

21 September 2015

TRANSNET’s announced plan to increase its international revenue by consulting in other countries.  Good or Bad Idea?

Some say that the diversion of skilled managers could increase or mask its domestic  weaknesses.  It is not yet world class at its domestic markets.  Good?  Yes.  But probably not world class.

Transnet acting CEO said last week that the state-owned freight and logistics company intended to increase its revenue from international business to 25% by 2025 from 4.2% currently. Most of this would be from business on the continent and opportunities in the Middle East he suggests.

A local transport economist Andrew Marsay retorts that Transnet is not yet “intrinsically viable” at performing in its critical home market.  The company should focus on restructuring itself to become more viable in SA, rather than looking abroad for solutions, he asserts.

Transnet’s general freight business today does not yet fully cover BOTH its rail operating and capital costs.

There are some who believe that much rail business is subsidised by other Transnet  business units such as the ports or the pipeline sectors.

Transnet instead need to focus on examining how to fully implement its 7 year plan to obtain a lion’s share of the general cargo business against trucks.  The planning period to obtain a stated objective of as much as 80% general cargo share is about half over and the truck share is from most independent reports actually at  better than an 80% share.

BENCHMARK

We as Conrail managers  faced this dilemma in its corporate history. We elected to avoid what some saw as potential consulting and rail operations markets in 1994 European markets with their so called open access — in favor of executing domestic at home projects with far less risk and higher potential operating income growth.  Looking back, it was a good choice. By working at home we managed to improve our company rail operating ratio from 84% to 79.9%.

At the same time, we rolled out a very strong truck competitive doublestack market share. In some long distance lanes, we managed to earn a 40% or better share with bog train technology.  With interline container train service between the West and East Coast, we managed to get a 75% estimated market share against long haul trucking.

THAT is a WOW impact for a freight railroad.

Wandering off to Europe would have been nice.  But no where near as profitable.

What do you think Transnet?  Where is you WOW impact gong to come from?

Can you accomplish such WOW market truck to rail general cargo share shifts with fewer skilled people because of some wandering off to other overseas ventures?

http://www.bdlive.co.za/business/transport/2015/09/21/transnets-africa-plan-masks-local-failings