American steelmaking is becoming a market-oriented enterprise

Introduction "Austerity" is perhaps an overly generous description of the past three years in the American steel industry. Steel plants operated at an average of only 57% of their capability in 1982-84. The dismal losses for last year are still being totaled. But during the two years before this period, American steelmakers recorded an aggregate net loss of a staggering $6.8 billion. Steelmakers responded by closing numerous marginal facilities. And production capability was cut by 13.6 Mt (15 million st). Capital expenditures still averaged $2 billion annually. But this was inadequate to maintain the existing base of steelmaking facilities. The general economy experienced a satisfactory recovery during this period. American steel, however, continued to suffer from a lagging recovery in the capital goods sector. This was due to record penetration of its domestic market by imports and from very weak realizing prices on the volume that was available. In addition to the direct influx of offshore steel products - which itself depressed prices - the industry also became painfully aware of the growing importance of "indirect" imports. These came in the form of steel-containing producer and consumer durables. Industrial equipment and autos fabricated from foreign steel accounted for the equivalent of 6 Mt (6.5 million st) of lost market opportunity for domestic steel-makers last year. That is over and above the 23.5 Mt (26 million st) of direct steel imports. Given these factors, Inland Steel was not spared from the threeyear downpour of red ink. Despite its record of continuing modernization in steel, our single-plant location in the world's best steel-consuming market, and the high proportion of consumer durables related products, such as cold rolled and coated sheet in our mix, Inland suffered aggregate losses of $277 million during the 1982-84 period. Strategic Planning The foregoing establishes a perspective - a base from which we have restructured our view of the steel industry, and of our own role within that picture. Until possibly two years ago, this present weakness in steel demand was viewed around the world as an aberration, eventually to pass. By contrast, it is now recognized that austere times are the normal steel environment. The topic here is management of resources. This implies an emphasis on strategic planning. It is worthwhile to examine some of the more critical assumptions that were driving strategies among a number of steel companies just before the 1980s. Those projected characteristics of the future steel environment were arrived at through painstaking analysis. They were carefully and heavily quantified and were generally shared by outside observers and our peers within the steel industry. • First, the assumption was made that domestic steel demand would continue to grow at an average rate of 2% per year. • Second, it was assumed that this growth in the American market would continue to be filled predominantly by US mills. It was believed that increases in steel and steel-related demand overseas would absorb much of the ominously growing capacity of third