Steel companies squeezed by lower product prices and higher input costsPosted: October 28, 2010
A common theme has connected the earnings reports of most steel companies: lower prices for many steel products and higher input costs. This margin squeeze has produced poor earnings, and steel companies are providing very cautious outlooks. While pricing for steel products varies – some strong, some weak – the increasing cost pressures are near universal. Inflation is very real for these companies.
Arcelor Mittal (MT), AK Steel (AKS), and U.S. Steel (X) all reported this week. I have included some quotes from their earnings report to provide some examples of the pressures that these companies face.
“In Q3 the business performed towards the lower end of our expectations against a background of seasonally lower volumes, weakening spot prices and higher costs. Our outlook for Q4 remains cautious as the expected higher input prices continue to work through the business and demand remains muted, though with some regional differences.”
“Sales were lower during the third quarter of 2010 as compared to the second quarter of 2010 due to seasonally lower volumes (-8%), partly offset by higher average steel selling prices (+4%).”
“Sales in the Stainless Steel segment were $1.4 billion for the three months ended September 30, 2010, a decrease of 12% as compared to $1.5 billion for the three months ended June 30, 2010. Sales declined primarily due to lower steel shipments (-8%) as discussed above and lower average steel selling prices (-5%) due to a weak market environment and pressure from imports.”
“The company said its average selling price for the third quarter of 2010 was $1,075 per ton, a 2% decrease from the $1,101 per-ton price in the second quarter of 2010, and approximately 8% higher than the $994 per-ton average price realized in the third quarter of 2009.”
“2010 Iron Ore Price Increase Impacts Third Quarter:
AK Steel said that it has agreed with two of its three primary iron ore suppliers that the requirements for the establishment of the annual benchmark price of iron ore for 2010 have been met. That 2010 benchmark is an increase of 98.65% over the 2009 benchmark, and is higher than the 65% increase the company had previously estimated for the first half and for its third quarter guidance. The third primary supplier of iron ore to the company has not acknowledged yet that an annual benchmark price has been established. Instead, that supplier continues to seek a price increase in excess of the 98.65% annual benchmark price. The company does not agree that this supplier has a right under the parties’ contract to charge based on other than an annual benchmark price and, for purposes of the iron ore purchased from this supplier, the company has used an estimated benchmark price increase of 98.65% in its third quarter financial results.”
“The company’s third quarter 2010 financial results reflect the year-to-date impact of the higher iron ore price, which increased the company’s third quarter operating loss by approximately $76.0 million, or $52 per ton.”
“AK Steel said it expects shipments of approximately 1,300,000 to 1,350,000 tons for the fourth quarter, with an average selling price per ton decrease of approximately 4% from the third quarter. While the company expects fourth-quarter maintenance costs to decrease by about $20 million from the third quarter, it nonetheless expects to incur an operating loss of approximately $80 per ton for the fourth quarter of 2010, largely due to the lower shipments and selling prices combined with continued high iron ore and other raw material costs.”
(Quotes transcribed and paraphrased)
“Results declined in 3rd quarter from 2nd from lower flat-rolled average prices, higher raw material costs in flat-rolled segment and European operations: decreased shipments and production volumes, decreased average realized prices, increased costs for facility repair and maintenance (higher activity, not input costs), and consumption of higher cost coal, coke and iron ore purchased to support earlier facility restarts. Decreased spot prices more than compensated for increased contract prices.”
“In 4th quarter, expect lower average realized prices, lower spot and contract.”
“Tubular operations had higher average prices for fifth quarter in a row. Decreased costs for steel substrate. Not expecting same price performance in 4th quarter but costs should continue down.”
Disclosure: author owns X and AKS