Capital formation and projectfinance prospects : A newagenda for metalsmining

Introduction A new mining agenda is before us. Born of government policies and world economies, the years ahead will show reduced growth. Metals, mining, and most other natural resource industries are inflation dependant and capital intensive. For these, a long period of contraction of outmoded and costly capacity will evolve. In some cases, this will be supplanted by new, lower cost capacity. But this will occur only if the cost of production - including cash operating and debt service costs - comes in at or below current market conditions. The industrial outlook for metals mining can be characterized as bearish. A US bank economist said mining companies planning their five-year forecasts should take current market conditions and straight-line them to the end of the decade. With low growth and low inflation, the real price of metals will remain flat or decline slightly. As a result, capital funding will be problematic. The low-cost producer will succeed. That means only the producer with low cash costs and low principal and interest costs per unit of production, will succeed. Gaining a perspective One must look back 30 years to see the evolution of the capital markets, for metal mine financing. This period can be divided into two economic periods. The 1950s were a time of stable economics. Mining companies earned and reported good profits. They had good corporate creditworthiness. In essence, mining companies of the 1950s were highly self-reliant. When equity infusions were needed, they were easily obtained. Financial management kept long-term debt low. Fixed rate, long-term financing was readily available in the long-term bond markets. The commercial banks of the 1950s were rarely used by the mining industry. When necessary, mining companies went to the banks for short-term financing - the kind that was needed for working capital requirements. Changing rhythms In the old rhythm there was an orderly market. Even into the mid-1960s, 75% of world annual copper production was controlled by eight companies: two in the UK, one in Belgium, and five in the US. During times of poor market demand, these producers would control supplies to the market. They took their losses out of retained earnings. Capital was easily restored during the ensuing good times. The new rhythm called for copper to be an economic means to a political end. Third World copper producers brushed aside the market fundamentals of commodity economics. Yet, the political solutions of these countries - their lack of response to the market - have seldom achieved their original objectives. Each commodity has its own old and new rhythm. Aluminum may have a similar rhythm, coming 10 to 20 years later than copper. By the late 1960s, changes were occurring. Inflation was on the rise. Ore reserve quality was falling. As a result, capital expenditures were necessary to maintain existing output. These costs created an increase in corporate leverage, thus adding to inflation and rising interest rates. Indicators A comparison of the gross national product (GNP) deflator index, consumer price index, and the metal mining deflator index is instructive. (Fig. 1 and Table 1). With 1972 equal to 1, note that the metal mining deflator reached its lowest point in 1967. From that point, the metal mining deflator has accelerated severely for 16 years. Only two minor downturns occurred during the business recessions of the mid-1970s and the early 1980s. In essence, Fig. 1 shows that while GNP has grown modestly, a miner's dollar in 1972 would require $3.48 in 1980. This is an almost 17% compounded growth rate over that eight-year period. Beginning in the late 1960s, for the first time in mine financing, the risk of success shifted from the corporate balance sheet to third parties. Limited-resource financings were taken up by banking syndicates that accepted certain of these risks. The lender needed to be well acquainted with the types of risks to be evaluated. These include resource quality and quantity, construction and completion, capital and operations costs, market risks, force majeure, and political and exchange rate risks. Project financings became the basis whereby mining companies were able to maintain their borrowing capacities. In essence, the lender was willing to share some of the project risk while only receiving lenders' returns on these investments. Over the last two decades, mineral project financings have become highly complex transactions involving multicurrency, multi-