Commodities & Business

Items

  • OIL: Mexico allows private sector back into oil production

    LatinNews 31 August 2011 Hits: 424

    On 18 August Mexico’s state oil monopoly, Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex), allowed a British oil services company, Petrofac Facilities Management, to take over two onshore oil fields and a Mexican company, Administradora de Proyectos en Campo to take over another This is the first time since 1938, when the Mexican oil industry was nationalised, that a foreign company has been allowed an incentivised contract to develop mature oilfields. The 25 year contract commits Petrofac to investing US$500m in developing two blocs. Petrofac will take a commission of US$5.01 for each barrel of oil it extracts from the fields.

    The two companies will be working under legislation that was approved in 2008. This legislation was essentially a re-model of previous agreements, in force up to the early 1960s, which allowed Pemex subcontracting companies’ a share of the profits, if their investment increased oil production.

    Despite the uncertainty of the new deals on offer, 27 oil companies bought the tender documents and 17 bid for the rights to increase production in the three fields. Among the under-bidders were Dowell Schlumberger de México, Repsol-YPF, Halliburton, Maersk Oil and Canacol Energy.

    The three fields currently produce 15,000 barrels per day (bpd); the goal of the contracts is to increase output from these mature fields, which hold 207m barrels of recoverable oil up to 55,000bpd.

    The two fields Petrofac will develop, Magallanes and Santuario, have been in operation since the 1960s and currently produce about 14,000 bpd from about 100 active wells; another 900 wells are currently inactive. Administradora de Proyectos en Campo, which got the contract for another smaller field, Carrizo, will get a commission of US$5.03 per barrel.

    Oil analysts claim that Pemex is getting a good deal because the new operators have offered to get the oil out for less than Pemex itself could: these analysts suggest that it would have cost Pemex between US$7 and US$8 a barrel to increase oil production from these fields to the target level.

    The big risk for Petrofac and Administradora de Proyectos en Campo is that the courts, or politicians, rescind the deal. The chamber of deputies has tried to get the supreme court to declare the new contracts unconstitutional. The new contracts were approved by the board of Pemex in November 2010. The supreme court first ruled that the deputies could not be act as plaintiffs because the alleged breach of the constitution did not affect Pemex’s prerogatives, because Pemex’s board, not the chamber of deputies, makes operating decisions for the company. The chamber of deputies appealed against this interpretation and its case was only rejected by the supreme court, which refused to consider the argument on 16 August 2011.

    The unwillingness of the supreme court to get involved now does not necessarily it will not be forced to make the definitive judgment in the future. The current contracts appear to be pretty similar to the five risk-sharing contracts which Pemex signed between 1949 and 1951. When these 25-year contracts were cancelled in 1970, the then-director of Pemex noted that there was nothing illegal about the contracts when they were singed but reforms in 1958 and 1960 had rendered them illegal. Both of these provisions are still in force.

    Furthermore, under the 2008 legislation, all payments to subcontractors have to be in cash. The 2008 law specifically rules out paying contractors either with a percentage of their oil production or according to the value of the oil they produce. Pemex has not said how the companies will be paid, but it appears that by offering a price-per-barrel deal, the companies will clearly earn a greater return the more oil they produce. Petrofac, clearly aware of the sensitivity of this issue, stated that it will not include the production from the fields as part of either its production or reserves, but this is beside the point. The key question is whether politicians and the courts regard increasing production from these fields as a potential infringement of the constitution.

    For Mexico these two deals are important because they may help it arrest the steady fall in oil output. Mexico is currently the world’s seventh-largest producer but Pemex, Mexico’s only producer, has seen output from its fields plummet from about 3.4m bpd in 2004 to about 2.6m bpd now. This is a decline of 24%. The private sector argues that the steepness of the decline has been accentuated by the laws which prohibited Pemex from entering into joint-risk contracts in which third parties share both the risks and rewards of oil exploration. This has meant that oil companies have been confined in recent decades to fulfilling narrowly defined service contracts.

    Successive Mexican governments have also mismanaged Pemex, demanding that it produce as much crude oil as it can while starving the company of long term investment. The company funds investment with debt and as a result its balance sheet is a nightmare. The growing industrialisation of Mexico has meant that imports of fuel and other oil derivatives have now become an important item in the balance of payments. Pemex’s net contribution to the country’s total exports of about US$340bn is now probably less than US$12bn.

    Pemex officials hailed the new contracts. “This is just the beginning,” Carlos Morales declared. Morales is the head of Pemex’s exploration and production unit and he took part in the ceremony announcing the new contracts at  Villahermosa, the capital of both Tabasco and Mexico’s onshore oil industry. “We are sure that we will be able to significantly increase the recovery of these reserves for the benefit of all Mexicans.”

    International experts are not convinced that the new contracts are attractive enough to lure foreign companies to Mexico. Other countries offer incentives which reward companies for outperforming (and indeed penalise them for under-delivering).

    Petrobras: Profits at Petrobras rose 32% in the second quarter after a sharp appreciation of the local currency slashed the cost of the Brazilian state-controlled oil group’s dollar-denominated debt. The group reported net profit of R$10.9bn (US$6.5bn) compared with R$8.3bn, a year earlier, almost entirely because of currency and investment gains. Meanwhile, operating profit dipped 2.1% after administrative and exploration costs wiped out the extra revenue from higher global oil prices.
    The head of the state oil giant Petrobras, José Sergio Gabrielli, has warned that Petrobras may delay a planned US$13.6bn divestment of non-essential assets until the market improves. Petrobras recently announced a long-awaited plan to spend US$224.7bn over the next five years, following months of battling with the government over cost-cutting. Petrobras’s total revenue in the second quarter rose 12% to R$61.5bn from R$53.6bn in the same period of 2010, while earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation increased from R$15.9bn to R$16.1bn. Its dollar-denominated net debt hit US$44.1bn at the end of the second quarter, up 18% from US$37.3bn at the end of 2010. The company has said it would need to raise as much as US$91bn in debt over the next five years to pay for the highly costly process of extracting oil from its ‘pre-salt’ reserves, so called because they lie below a 2km-deep layer of salt under the seabed.

  • MINING: Mining companies agree new royalty system

    LatinNews 31 August 2011 Hits: 460

    On 16 August mining companies and the Peruvian government said that they had agreed a new royalty system. The new system is more what the companies wanted than the government did. In the new system, the government will charge royalties on operating profits, rather than easier-to-monitor sales. Currently, mining companies in Peru pay royalties of between 1% and 3% on their sales. The new royalty figure has yet to be published.

    Mining companies say that the change will boost investment: since charging a royalty on sales would make a lot of marginal investments unprofitable for the companies.

    The Peruvian government may also levy a windfall tax, when metal prices boom and mining companies’ operating profits soar, according to Ricardo Giesecke, the minister of the environment.

    What the government seems to have got in return for the switch to operating profits from sales is a significant increase in its revenue inflow. The risk is that if metal prices fall, however, the government’s take will also come down, along with the companies’ operating profits.

    In Chile, mining companies pay a royalty of between 4% and 9% of their operating profits, after a new agreement at the end of 2010.

    The big mining companies operating or with projects in Peru are: Xstrata, BHP Billiton, Anglo America, Barrick Gold and Southern Peru Copper, which is now part of Grupo México.

    Chile: On 5 August striking miners at La Escondida, the world’s biggest copper mine, ended their two-week long strike. The miners accepted a management offer of a special production bonus for 2010, a year in which the mine had record earnings, a spokesman for the mine's largest union said. The strikers accepted a Ch$2.6m (about US$6,000) bonus, about half what they were initially demanding. La Escondida reported US$4.3bn in earnings in 2010, a 35% increase over the previous year.
    The mine produces about seven percent of the world’s copper. Chile accounts for a third of the world's production of the metal, which has soared in price along with other commodities.
    The strikers blinked before BHP-Billiton, the operators of La Escondida. The strike had driven the copper price up towards new highs.
    Support for the strike has been strong and at the end of July La Escondida was forced to declare ‘Force Majeure’ because it was unable to meet its supply commitments. The company’s production is down by 33,000 tonnes (t), worth US$330m.
    The strikers dropped their demand for a compensation bonus even though the mine is now working thinner ores and thus it is producing less copper. Originally, the strikers wanted a bonus of US$11,000.
    The company was unwilling to give a bigger bonus than Ch$2.6m (even though this would cost only US$20m over a year) because of the precedent it would set.
    The company expects production to get back to normal pretty quickly.

    Codelco: Output at the state-owned copper company in 2011 is likely to be less than the 1.7m t originally forecast, but the company’s profits are likely to be higher than the US$5.8bn the company made in 2010 because of higher copper prices. Codelco expects prices, and Chinese demand, for copper to remain at their current (early August) levels for the second half of 2011.

  • AGRIBUSINESS: Mozambique courts Brazilians

    LatinNews 31 August 2011 Hits: 462

    The government of Mozambique has offered large areas of the country to Brazilian farmers to grow soya, maize and cotton. The statement came from the Mozambique agriculture minister, José Pacheco.

    Brazil has three advantages for Mozambique: the first is that both Mozambiqueans and Brazilians speak Portuguese; the second is that Brazil has successfully developed over the past 30 years the Cerrado (an area of the outer-Amazon basin), which Pacheco claims physically resembles land in Mozambique. The third reason is that Brazilians are more in tune with the rhythm of life in Mozambique than the Chinese who are also seeking agricultural land in Africa and Latin America.

    Pacheco said that Mozambique had offered Brazil 60,000 km² of land in the north of the country for US$13 a hectare (0.01 km² per hectare) a year for a term of 50 years. The only other demand the Mozambique government is making is that 90% of the labour employed in developing the land should be from Mozambique.

    Mozambique is also offering Brazilian agribusiness groups tax breaks on the importation of machinery and equipment.

    Carlos Ernesto Augustín, the president of the Mato Grosso cotton growers’ association, said that Mozambiquean land was very similar to a lot of the interior of Brazil. He added that another advantage the African country offered was a simpler system for environmental permits. Augustín said that it was now all but impossible to get permission to clear new land in Mato Grosso and thus open it up for agricultural development. However, developing northern Mozambique comes with its own constraints; due to poor infrastructure in the north of the country, any agribusiness investment would require an expansive long-term investment in infrastructure. Whilst the soil types are claimed to be similar, the climates are in fact quite different: Brazil has four seasons; Mozambique has two.

    Brazil expects that around 40 agribusinessmen will visit Mozambique in September to set up in the northern regions of Niassa, Cabo Delgado, Nampula and Zambezia.

    Bananas: On 18 August Ecuador declared a state of emergency in the banana market because of a glut. International consumption and purchasing of bananas is falling away, partly because of the global economic crisis, and this is having major affect on producers in Ecuador. Ecuador is the world’s biggest banana exporter. Bananas are the country’s second biggest export earner after crude oil. 
    The agriculture minister, Stanley Vera, said that the initial state of emergency will run for five weeks. What the government intends to do is spend U$15m on buying excess bananas from the domestic market. The government calculates that this should be enough to take between 1m and 1.5m (22kg) boxes of bananas off the market. This is equivalent to about 0.7% of the country’s total annual output. The fruit will probably be destroyed.
    Banana growers have been complaining that the weakness of the market had forced them to sell their bananas for as little as US$2 a box, when the official intervention price is US$5.5.
    Vera said that the idea was that by restricting supply the country could push up the international price. The big risk is that rival banana producers, from Central America, will step into the space created by the government’s action.
    Eduardo Ledesma, the executive director of the Asociación de Exportadores de Banano del Ecuador (AEBE), said that he also wanted the government to help local producers break into new markets such as Canada, Switzerland and Turkey.

  • VEHICLES: The contrast between Brazil and Mexico

    LatinNews 31 August 2011 Hits: 419

    Brazil’s car market is booming thanks to strong domestic demand and, more surprisingly given the strength of the Real, rising exports. Mexico’s car market still depends on exports to the US, where the economy is starting to toil and there are signs that the current recovery may be petering out.

    Sales of new cars are a good proxy for the state of consumer demand. In Brazil the 8.6% increase in the sale of new vehicles (cars, pick-ups and trucks) in the first seven months of 2011 (compared with the same period of 2010) shows that Brazilians are still pretty confident about their future. What makes the stats from Brazil’s motor industry so illuminating is that they also show that the industry has increased exports by almost 25% this year, despite the strength of the Real.

    In the first seven months domestic sales of new vehicles came to 2.04m units, slightly ahead of domestic production of 2.02m units (figures from the Associação Nacional dos Fabricantes de Veículos Automotores, Anfavea).  Sales of new passenger cars were actually down by 10,000 units in the first seven months of the year, compared with the same period of 2010, but this fall was made up by increased sale of pick-ups (up 15%) and mid-sized trucks (up 27%). This suggests that businesses are more confident than households.

    In Mexico, the year-on-year figures look good. In the first seven months of 2011, sales of cars and light vans came to 481,859 which were 11.3% up on the first seven months of 2010. The figure is, however, 20% below domestic sales level for the first seven months of the pre-Crisis year of 2008. In Brazil, however domestic sales are well ahead of 2008, as are numbers of licensed vehicles. In 2008, 2.4m new vehicles were licensed; in the 12 months from August 2010 to July 2011, 3.68m vehicles were licensed.

    Mexico’s vehicle industry depends on exports to the US. Production in the first seven months came to 1.438m vehicles which was 14% up on the same period of 2010, and 20% up on the same period of 2008. Exports are currently running at 83% of production. In the first seven months of 2011, 1.197m vehicles were shipped out, 16% more than for the same period of 2010 and 25% more than for the same period of 2008.

    What is fascinating is that the value of Brazil’s exports of vehicles and agricultural machinery in the first seven months of 2011 was up by 24% at US$8.5bn. This suggests that the Brazilian motor industry is beginning to overcome the challenge of an overvalued currency. The big increases in exports by volume have been in pick-ups (where exports are up by 19% in the first seven months of 2011 at 63,344) and heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) where exports are up by 46% at 5,694.

    To be fair, imports of passenger cars in the first seven months of 2011 were also up, by 46% at 308,881. This increase was only slightly more than the increase in the imports of trucks which was up by 39%. As a proportion of total new cars sold, imports now account for almost 23%, up from 15% in 2009.

    At the beginning of August BMW, a German manufacturer of luxury cars, said that it was considering building Brazilian plant to service South American demand. Currently BMW has only one factory in the Americas, in South Carolina, in the US. Such is the worldwide demand for BMWs that the company is currently building 2% more cars than its factories were designed to produce

    What is interesting about the Mexican figures is that Mexican-built vehicles are taking a bigger slice of a shrinking US pie. The overall US market for vehicle sales in the first seven months of 2011 stood at 7.36m units, 11% up on the same period of 2010 but 14% below the comparable figure for the same period in 2008.  Exports of Mexican-built vehicles to Canada were up by 14%. More strikingly, exports to Latin America were up by two-thirds, year-on-year and now account for 15% of total exports, up from 10% in the first seven months of 2010. The US is still by far the industry’s biggest market but its weight is diminishing. In the first seven months of 2010, 69% of vehicle exports went to the US. For the first seven months of 2011, 65% did.

    Exports to Europe, the industry’s third biggest market, were up by 12% but still stand at just over 9% of total exports (just ahead of Canada, which buys 8% of Mexico’s vehicle exports), much the same as they were in the first seven months of 2010. Exports to the less important markets of Africa and Asia were up by 27% and 32% respectively.

    Research & Development: On 3 August the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first specific treatment for scorpion stings. The treatment, Anascorp, is the first drug that has been developed in Mexico to be authorised by the FDA. Anascorp treats stings from Centruroides scorpions, which can be lethal for young children. Around 250,000 people a year are stung by scorpions in the US and Mexico. Anascorp is made from the plasma of horses immunized with scorpion venom. Anascorp’s effectiveness was based on results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 15 children with neurological symptoms of scorpion stings. These symptoms were resolved within four hours of treatment in the eight subjects who received Anascorp, but in only one of the seven participants who received the placebo. Anascop was developed by the Instituto Bioclon de Tlapan.

  • DEBT: Argentina imposes order on credit rating agencies

    LatinNews 31 August 2011 Hits: 481

    Argentina’s Comisión Nacional de Valores (CNV) issued a new regulation on 9 August, requiring credit rating agencies to publish their methodologies. The government claims that this will improve the system.

    From 1 September, all the credit rating agencies operating in Argentina will have to publish their criteria for evaluating companies and other issuers of debt. The CNV said the new regulations will give investors more inormation about how the agencies work out their ratings.

    The Argentine move follows the controversial decision by a credit rating agency Standard & Poor’s to downgrade the US from its AAA credit rating. Embarrassingly, US officials pointed out an arithmetical error in the S&P calculations: the agency corrected its figure and said that the US$2bn change did not affect its conclusion.

    It is worth noting that Dagong, China’s credit rating agency, currently rates the US as an  ‘A’ risk, below Chile (A+), the top ranked Latin American credit , according to all the main agencies, S&P, Moody’s, Fitch and Dagong. Dagong rates Brazil A-, Peru BBB+, Mexico BBB, Venezuela BB+, Argentina B and Ecuador CCC.

    MEXICO: Ernesto Cordero, the finance minister, and possible Partido Acción Nacional (PAN) presidential candidate, has launched an attack on borrowing by Mexican states. As 19 of Mexico’s 32 states are controlled by the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), the move is clearly designed to reduce the support these states can provide to the PRI’s candidate for the presidency in 2012, almost certainly, Enrique Peña Nieto, the outgoing governor of the Estado de México.
    Cordero’s attack, however, may not be as politically motivated as it seems.  Under Peña Nieto the Estado’s borrowings have been lower than under the previous administration. It is also worth noting that on official (finance ministry) figures, the indebtedness of Mexico City (technically not a state, but effectively treated as one) has fallen marginally in the past year. Mexico City is run by Marcelo Ebrard, a likely left-wing candidate for the presidency in 2012.
    The finance ministry figures show that the states’ and municipalities’ total debts now stand at M$316.7bn (US$26.4bn), which the ministry said is M$2bn (US$163m) up on the end of 2010 figure. The states account for M$250bn (US$20bn) of the total.
    Some states have been borrowing heavily in past six months: Zacatecas for example, has increased its debt by 171% in the past six months (to the still modest figure of M$1.78bn [US$144m]). Although Mexico City has reduced its debt by 1% in the past six months, it still has the biggest debt of M$52.1bn (US$4.5bn). Ebrard, however, likes to point out that Mexico City’s GDP is slightly bigger than Argentina’s. The Estado owes M$37bn (US$3bn) and the northern industrial powerhouse of Nuevo León M$34bn (US$2.75bn).
    The states with the biggest problems, according to the finance ministry, are Quintana Roo, Veracruz and Coahuila, which have mostly short-term debt. Coahuila, which was ruled by Humberto Moreira, now the president of PRI, before he handed it over to his successor who was his brother, Rubén, has been the butt of most of the criticism about the rising states’ debt.

    MEXICO: In the first six months of 2011, public sector debt increased by 8.2% to US$389.54bn. In the first half of 2011 fiscal revenues came to M$1.52 trillion (US$129.1bn) up 4.6% on the same period of 2010. Public spending rose by 5.3%, year-on-year, to M$1.65 trillion (US$140.2bn).

    PANAMA: The government has bought back a highway which had been built and operated by a Mexican constitution company, ICA since 1996. The highway links the business district to the Tocumen airport. The 14 year bonds were issued by the Empresa Nacional de Autopistas (ENA) to buyout ICA. The bonds are secured against the tolls that will be generated by the Corredor Sur and do not carry the guarantee of the government. The ENA was set up by the current government to take over the Corredor Sur and the Corredor Norte. The Corredor Norte is run by another Mexican company, Proyectos y Construcciones (PYCSA) which is also in the process of being bought out by the government.
    The ENA issue was in two tranches: the first, for international investors, pays 5.75%, while the second for domestic investors, pays 5.25% but allows holders to use the highway toll free.
    Critics of the deal say that ENA is overpaying for the highways which should have been depreciated over the past 15 years, but appear not to have been.