 | |
- close
- close
|
Suggest other news sources for this topic
WIKI ANALYSIS
The Potash Corporation, the world’s largest Potash producer, helps farmers grow more crops per acre by selling them potash, and nitrogen, which are key ingredients for fertilizer. In 2008, Potash's operations abroad represented 22% of global potash capacity and 17% of global production.[1] Sales from these products totaled $4.1 billion and $2.5 billion respectively, accounting for 70% of Potash's total sales in 2008.[2] Potash also sold $2.9 billion in 2008 in phosphates which are used to make herbicides, like Monsanto Company (MON)'s Round-Up.[2] When demand for crops is high, and nothing is preventing farmers from growing crops (such as being destroyed by natural disasters), Potash sells more fertilizer.[3]
Rising gas prices from 2007-2008 massively increased demand for biofuels like ethanol and soybean oil. Droughts, economic growth, and natural disasters simultaneously caused the destruction of much arable land. Farmers needed to grow more crops with less soil, so they bought abnormal amounts of fertilizer from Potash at high prices. By the time fuel prices had reached their peak in Summer 2008, Potash’s share price had gained over 400%.[4] Similarly, total sales increased by 180% to $9.4 billion from $5.2 billion.[2]
Demand for bio-fuels has since collapsed along with Potash’s share price. Because bio-fuels have lower yields than petroleum, gas needs to be very expensive for them to be cost effective.[5] Crude prices have made a partial recovery in 2009 on hopes of a market recovery. [4] So long as bio-fuel is a popular alternative energy source , high crude oil prices will benefit the Potash Corporation.
Offsetting its reliance on oil, Potash has diversified revenues internationally. Over 41% of the company’s sales took place outside of North America in 2008. This increased from 29% in 2007, and 28% in 2006. [3] Potash has set its sights on Asia, putting up 70% of new Potash sells in that geographic region.[6]
Emerging Market indices have outperformed the US markets by over 40% on a dollar adjusted basis since 2005. [4] Prosperity in the developing world has resulted in a demand for more agriculture intensive food. For example the average Chinese citizen now eats twice as much meat as he/she did in 1990.[5] Each pound of meat produced requires about 16 pounds of grain for feed, which encourages farmers to improve yields and buy more fertilizer. [7]Not only does the growth of emerging markets benefit agricultural production, but it also increases aggregate oil demand, which in turn encourages bio-fuel production. Thus, a stronger developing world means a better business for Potash. The performance of emerging markets can be approximated by the Vanguard Emerging Markets ETF (VWO).
Potash is well equipped to expand internationally because of its enormous size and market share. Together with MOS, Potash controls about 75% of the world Potash market. Despite floundering world demand due to declining crop prices in 2009, these two companies have maintained their high contract pricing. This monopolistic pricing power is a function of a competitive landscape with extremely high Barriers to entry and Economies of scale .[8] Potash Corporation estimated in 2007 that a new entrant would have to spend at least $2.5B to get a new mine operational.[9] The policy of keeping prices up has, of course, been quite controversial in the context of the world food shortage, and October 2, 2008 saw the beginning of an antitrust lawsuit against the Potash Company that has yet to be resolved. [10] The maintenance of these high prices have also been attributed to plummeting profits as farmers refuse to purchase at existing contractual levels.[11]
As its anti-trust lawsuit pointed out, Potash primarily competes with only 2 other companies, Mosaic Company (MOS) and Agrium (AGU) . The Potash Company has made significant strides eroding Agrium’s dominance in Nitrogen production, while Mosaic and Agrium have been assaulting Potash’s phosphate market share. [3]
Company Overview
Business & Financial Metrics
The Potash Corporation dominates the world Potash market, which is the highest margin fertilizer business. earnings description
The following graph shows that the Potash corporation has enjoyed higher profitability and Return on Equity (ROE) than its peers.[13]
This relative economic strength has led to a premium price being placed on the Potash Corporation compared to its peers. You pay $5.24 for every $1 of Potash Corporation book value, where you would only pay $1.71 for $1 of Agrium book value, and $2.86 for $1 of Mosaic book value. This means that the market believes that Potash can leverage its on-book assets about 190-342% more efficiently than its competitors over time. This extreme valuation difference could be because Potash Corporation has a return on assets of 14.24%, which is 16% higher than Mosaic's and 47% higher than Agrium's.[13]
Investors pay about a 10% more for a dollar of Potash earnings than its competitors as of 2009, which could reflect the company's aggressive balance sheet. Notice that Potash has a much lower current ratio than its peers, which implies that it is relatively more interested in expansion. [13]The company's high debt to equity ratio further verifies Potash's intention to aggressively expand its business.
This aggression will pay off in the scenario predicted by the USDA, which anticipates Potash prices seeing near-record highs in Fall of 2009. Notice that current Potash prices are hundreds of percentage points higher than historical averages due to the effects of the world food shortage.[14]
While other agricultural fertilizers have seen price increases, Potash has seen the greatest surge. The following ammonia futures chart helps explain why the Potash company has enjoyed greater results than Agrium, which focuses on nitrogen (ammonia) fertilizer.
Thus, it is important to note that Potash's superior performance has been largely driven by macro-economic conditions and its status as a Potash monopoly, rather than inherent company advantages that could weather a commodity price collapse. [14]
Business Segments
Potash Corp sells its fertilizers and crop nutrients to three markets in over 50 countries:[15]
- Fertilizer, along with its crop nutrients (potash, nitrogen, and phosphate), is sold to to a number of retailers and distributors who then sell the fertilizer to farmers around the globe.
- Feed supplements are for livestock, like cattle. The rising population and increasing meat consumption around the globe have grown this division as farmers demand more feed for their animals.
- Industrial sells potash, nitrogen, phosphate, and ammonia to companies for a wide variety of products, such as computer screens, soaps, soft drinks, metal treatments, food products, and plastics[16].
Products
- Potash (17% of world production, 43.1% revenue)[18] is POT's main product. It is an important crop nutrient used for fertilizer and is limited in supply. It is mined in just 12 countries worldwide[9], and 50% of the world's reserves are in Canada,[19] where it has seven mines. Potash is mostly used in POT's fertilizer products.
- Nitrogen (2% of world production, 30.5% revenue)[18] is a naturally occurring gas that is necessary for cell maturation, plastics, resins, and is a key component of proteins and enzymes.[16] It is used in POT's fertilizers, animal feed, and industrial products.
- Phosphate (5% of world production, 26.4% revenue)[18] is a key nutrient used in increase crop yields, in soft drinks, and other food products.[20] Phosphates are mostly used in POT's industrial products.
Quarterly and Annual Earnings
Q4 FY 2009 Earnings and Annual Summary
Potash posted earnings of $243.6 million for the fourth quarter of 2009, compared to $788.0 million the same quarter in the previous year[21] For the full-year, Potash posted 2009 earnings of $987.8 million, a drop from $3.5 billion the previous year. Despite this year-ago comparison, 2009 annual earnings were the third highest in Potash's history.[21] This drop comes in light of the global economic downturn and is highlighted by the fact that 2008 was the company's most profitable year, posting record earnings, sale volumes, and prices.[21]
Potash sales volumes were at a record low for 2009, reflecting the lowest level of sales since PotashCorp became a publicly traded company in 1989.[21] Despite this record low performance, potash was still the greatest driver of financial posting, posting 74% of the $279.6 million earning in Q4 FY2009.[21] Similarly, potash also contributed 71% of the $1.0 billion for the full fiscal year.[21] Nitrogen was up for the quarter as compared to year-ago quarterly results, generating $43.1 million of gross margin as compared to $17.9 million in 2008.[21] Year-end comparisons reveal a different story, with Nitrogen posting gross margin of $191.8 million, as compared to the record-high $737.4 million for 2008.[21] Phosphate reflected losses for both quarterly and year-end comparisons, with gross margin dropping 73% and 91% for the quarter and year respectively ending at $30.3 million and $73 million.[21]
Q3 FY 2009 Earnings
Potash posted growth across the board in the third quarter from the previous quarter that same year; however, these earnings reflect drops in comparison with Q3 FY 2008 earnings. Between the second and third quarter in 2009, Potash posted a 28.4% increase in sales as well as a 102.9% increase in total gross margin.[22] More specifically, Potash and Phosphate grew by 136.7% and 115.6% respectively in gross margins; nitrogen, however, grew only by 15.3% in comparison.[22] Similarly, net income grew by 33.0% as well.[22]
Looking at yearly comparisons between Q3 FY 2009 and Q3 FY 2008, relative earnings tell a different story. Sales and Total Gross Margin fell by 64.1% and 80.1% respectively, with Potash and Phosphate posting 72.4% and 86.4% losses with Nitrogen posting a 90.0% drop.[22] Net income followed suit and fell by 79.9% as well.[22]
Losses indicate continuing hesitance amongst fertilizer purchasers; however, Potash anticipates that lowered demand for fertilizer will end soon according to the fundamentals for global development.[23]
Q2 FY 2009 Earnings
Potash's returns for the second quarter of 2009 was 15.3%, falling below the industry average of 17.0%.[24] Sales decreased by 7.2% between this quarter and the first quarter, but decreased by 67.3% as compared to Q2 earnings in FY 2008.[24] Potash's gross margins for this quarter show a dependence on the Phosphate segment which grew by 133% as compared to the same quarter the last year; that being said, margins decreased by 88.0%, 94.0%, and 79.1% for Potash, Phosphate, and Nitrogen respectively from Q1 this fiscal year.[24] Overall, net income decreased by 79.3% between this quarter and the first quarter for FY 2009, as compared to a milder 39.3% drop between the second quarter in 2009 and 2008.[24]
Q1 FY 2009 Earnings
Potash's returns for the first quarter of 2009 was 10.5%, falling short of the 16.7% sector average.[25] Sales decreased by 50.7% between this quarter and the fourth quarter of FY 2008, and similarly decreased by 51.2% as compared to Q1 earnings in FY 2008.[25] Potash's gross margins for this quarter show a dependence on the Nitrogen segment which grew by 202.8% as compared to the same quarter the last year; that being said, margins decreased by 67.6%, 94.4%, and 70.8% for Potash, Phosphate, and Nitrogen respectively from Q1 this fiscal year.[25] That being said, total gross margins decreased by 73% for both the quarter and the year.[25] Overall, net income decreased by 45.5% between this quarter and the fourth quarter for FY 2008, as compared to a more pronounced 60.9% drop between the first quarter in 2009 and 2008.[25]
Q4 FY 2008 Earnings and Annual Review
Potash's returns for the 2008 fiscal year was -48.9%, falling short of the -41% sector average.[26] Sales decreased by 39.0% between this quarter and the third quarter of FY 2008, but increased by 30.7% as compared to sales in the fourth quarter of FY 2007.[26] Potash's gross margins for this quarter show a dependence on the Potash segment which grew by 190.5% as compared to margins the previous year; that being said, margins decreased by 18.1%, 94.5%, and 49.9% for Potash, Phosphate, and Nitrogen respectively from Q3 that fiscal year.[26] That being said, total gross margins decreased by 49.9% for the quarter but grew by 63.2% for the year.[26] Yearly and quarterly net income statistics show two drastically different stories, reflecting the impact of the economic downturn. Net income decreased by 36.3% between this quarter and the third quarter for FY 2008, as compared to a more pronounced 109.1% increase when comparing 2008 and 2007.[26]
Q4 FY 2007 Earnings and Annual Review
Potash's returns for the 2008 fiscal year was 36.6%, falling short of the 37.8% sector average.[27] Sales increased by 39.9% between this year and the previous fiscal year, an increase from the 10.5% increase in sales in the third quarter of FY 2007.[27] Potash's gross margins for this quarter show a dependence on the Phosphate segment which grew by 326.1% as compared to the same margins the previous year in FY2006; that being said, margins increased modestly across the board by 15.9%, 10.3%, and 9.2% for Potash, Phosphate, and Nitrogen respectively from Q3 that fiscal year.[27] That being said, total gross margins increased by 78.8% for the year and grew by 12.6% for the quarter.[27] Yearly and quarterly net income statistics both grew drastically, exceeding 100% and 50% growth respectively.[27] Net income increased by 55.0% between this quarter and the third quarter for FY 2007, as compared to a more pronounced 102.6% increase when comparing 2007 and 2006.[27]
Trends and Forces
International Demand for Round Up (TM), and Genetically Modified Foods
The key ingredient in Monsanto Company (MON) 's Round-Up weed-killer is an herbicide called Glyphosate. [28]
Potash Corporation produces the phosphates necessary to produce this chemical. Starting around 1996, soybeans and other plants were genetically modified to resist Glyphosate. The crops resist the pesticide, the weeds do not, yields increase.
Spring and Summer 2009 have seen a collapse in demand for Glyphosate, resulting in lower prices and corresponding profits from the Potash Corporation's phosphate sales. [29]
Outside of food prices, European and Asian scrutiny of Genetically Modified Foods influences the demand for Glyphosate. Studies have found that exposure to glyphosate decreases mammalian sperm count by up to 50% and causes numerous genetic problems. Other studies suggest that the Glyphosate causes plant disease and soil damage. Monsanto, of course, vehemently denies the validity of these studies. [30], [31]
If these studies are to believed, then the international glyphosate market will shrink in the long run, causing POT's profits to falter.
Falling Natural Gas Prices and Global Climate Change
Natural Gas generally makes up 90% of the cash cost of producing ammonia. After spiking in 2008, Natural Gas has become much cheaper during 2009. Cheaper natural gas means lower production cost and higher margins. More expensive natural gas damages POT's profitability. [32]
So long as weather stays warm and factories stay unproductive, natural gas prices will stay low and benefit the Potash Company. [33]
2009 World Food Crisis and Drought
Large farming regions within the United States, India, and China are experiencing severe drought conditions that makes growing crops extremely difficult. On one hand, higher demand for food due to lower supply will improve demand to fertilizer. On the other hand, farms will not pay for fertilizer if there is not enough water to grow crops. [34]
Despite drought conditions in California, however, the Midwest is expected to yield a record corn and soybean crop in 2009. Good weather and favorable pollination conditions have driven crop prices down, anticipating record supply surpluses. [35], [36]
Even with supply surpluses, the world food crisis will place some upward pressure on food prices. A 2008 FAO report pegged the number of undernourished people in the world at 963 million, nearly 15 percent of the world's population. [37] Many liberal organizations blame US fertilizer companies for misleading farmers and partially contributing to the world shortage, but at the end of the day, high demand for food will translate into high fertilizer demand absent a severe worldwide drought.
High food prices, and moderate drought conditions will improve demand for the Potash Company's products. Severe drought conditions will decrease demand. Low food prices, and great weather will decrease demand for the Potash Company's products.
Lower Gas Prices, Ethanol Demand
Ethanol in the U.S. is produced from corn, one of the most fertilizer and nitrogen intensive crops. [38] From 2007-2008, corn prices jumped 125% due to heightened demand for biofuels, food, and livestock feed. [39]
The demand for Ethanol and biofuels peaked in 2008 along with gas prices, only to falter in 2009. People only consume ethanol, it seems, when gas prices are extremely high. For instance, the Midwest has seen a 52% drop in ethanol consumption, with only a 3% drop in gasoline consumption. Ethanol is about 15-20% less efficient than gasoline, and studies have shown it needs to be about 40 cents cheaper per gallon to compete. [40]
When there is less demand for ethanol, there is less demand for corn fertilizers. Lower gas prices hurt the Potash Company's bottom line.
Reduction in Arable Land
The amount of arable land worldwide is dwindling. The population boom has cut the amount of arable land per person in half over the past 50 years.[38] Brazil, China, and India are three of the five most populous countries and are trying to meet the growing demand for food, fuel, and feed for livestock. Brazil, China, and India each have just 7%, 15%, and 49% of arable farmland, respectively,[41] and with their respective populations on the rise, these countries need to make the most of the arable land they have. In addition, weather factors such as temperature, rain, floods, droughts, and hurricanes destroy arable land for a particular crop season and many times the land is unusable for a few seasons.
Reduction in arable land should increase the demand for yield-increasing fertilizers in the long run and benefit the Potash Company. In the short run, however, violent destruction of arable land through natural disasters could disrupt the Potash Company's contracts and damage the company's profitability.
Competition
Potash Corp has few competitors since the fertilizer industry has significant barriers to entry and Economies of scale . Potash Corp estimates that it would cost upwards of $2.5B for a new company to enter the industry.[9] A company would need five to seven years of development time to build mines and factories, build rail and gas lines, and purchase rail cars and storage before it can even begin making a profit.
Potash Corp has two main competitors, Mosaic Company (MOS) and Agrium (AGU). Studying the market-share graph below you will notice that the potash market has been in deadlock between Mosaic and Potash corp since 2005. Potash made a successful play on phosphates from 2005-2007, but started losing out to Agrium and Mosaic in 2008. Potash has enjoyed its largest competitive success in the expansion of its Nitrogen production, which has directly eroded Agrium's superior market-share.
.
- Mosaic Company (MOS) is a $19.04 Billion[42] fertilizer company, the second largest potash producer, and the largest phosphate producer with 15% and 16% of global market share, respectively[43].
- Agrium (AGU) is a $5.82 Billion nitrogen and supplies fertilizer producer. In addition, it produces potash and phosphate like its competitors and has a 16% global share of the retail fertilizer market due to the major increase in global demand for its fertilizer and crop nutrient products. [44] [45] and had a $206 M year-over-year net income increase[45]
Although Potash Corp and its competitors have similar revenues, POT's ability to set favorable prices by controlling the limited supply of potash have set it ahead of its competitors in terms of net income and margins. In addition, it also competes with private, government owned companies. Government owned companies are not usually profit driven. Government owned companies can set their prices below market value to help subsidize their farmers costs and would force the other companies in the industry to lower their prices too, or face losing their customers.
| Leading Fertilizer Producers 2008 Financial Comparison | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Company | Revenue | Net Income | Profit Margin | Operating Margin |
| Potash Corporation[46] | $9.4 B | $3.5 B | 37.00% | 49.07% |
| Mosaic Company (MOS)[47] | $9.8 B | $2.1 B | 21.232% | 28.60% |
| Agrium (AGU)[48] | $10.3 B | $1.3 B | 12.87% | 19.34% |
| Leading Fertilizer Producers' 2008 Annual Nutrient Capacity (million tonnes) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Company | Phosphate | Potash | Nitrogen | |
| Potash Corporation[49] | 2.4 | 13.2 | 3.5 | |
| Mosaic Company (MOS)[50] | 9.4 | 10.4 | 0.5 | |
| Agrium (AGU)[51] | 1.0 | 2.1 | 5.0 | |
References
- ↑ Potash Corp (POT) Form 10-K, Part I, Page 3
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Potash Corp (POT) Form 10-K, Part I, Page 14
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 | Potash Corp. 2008 Annual Report, "Company Overview: Potash," p. 1
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 | Potash Corp (POT) Google Finance Chart
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 “Low gas prices hurt sales of ethanol”, ABC
- ↑ Potash Corp (POT) Form 10-K, Part I, Page 16
- ↑ Meat production details
- ↑ Potash contract news release, Reuters 2009
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 | Potash Corp. 2007 Annual Report, "Company Overview: Potash," p. 10
- ↑ Potash Corp. 2009 Q1 Report, p. 8
- ↑ | PotashCorp's profit drops 80 per cent as farmers balk at high fertilizer prices
- ↑ POT, Q2 2009, 10-Q, Part 1, Page 57
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 Finance: POT, MOS, AGU Key Statistics and Historical Prices
- ↑ 14.0 14.1 l|Farm Futures
- ↑ | Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan 2007 Annual Report, "Company Overview", p. 6
- ↑ 16.0 16.1 | Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan 2007 Online Annual Report, "Essential Nutrients," p.5
- ↑
- ↑ 18.0 18.1 18.2 | Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan 2008 Annual Report, "Company Overview", p. 7
- ↑ | Potash Corp 2007 Online Annual Report, "6 Keys to Understanding Our Business," p. 17
- ↑ | Answers.com: "phosphate" definition
- ↑ 21.0 21.1 21.2 21.3 21.4 21.5 21.6 21.7 21.8 PotashCorp Reports Fourth-Quarter Earnings of $0.80 per Share
- ↑ 22.0 22.1 22.2 22.3 22.4 Q3 2009 Selected Financial Results
- ↑ PotashCorp Reports Third-Quarter Earnings of $0.82 per share
- ↑ 24.0 24.1 24.2 24.3 Q2 2009 Selected Financial Results
- ↑ 25.0 25.1 25.2 25.3 25.4 Q2 2009 Selected Financial Results
- ↑ 26.0 26.1 26.2 26.3 26.4 Q4 2008 Selected Financial Data
- ↑ 27.0 27.1 27.2 27.3 27.4 27.5 Q4 2007 Selected Financial Data
- ↑ Wikipedia Article About Round-Up
- ↑ | Potash Corp. Cuts Earnings, HAARETZ Israel News
- ↑ | Chem Tox Summary of Glyphosate and Other Pesticide Evidence
- ↑ | Wikipedia Synopsis of Round-Up Pros and Cons
- ↑ | Potash 2008 10k, p.10
- ↑ | Natural Gas Prices Lowest in Years
- ↑ | Map of International Drought, Global Researcher
- ↑ | UNL's Drought Monitor
- ↑ | Good corn pollination in the 2009 season so far
- ↑ [http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=30256&Cr=Food+crisis&Cr1 | UN News Centre]
- ↑ 38.0 38.1
- ↑ | www.wikinvest.com: Corn Prices
- ↑ [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090714/ap_on_re_ca/us_farm_scene_e85_outlook | Yahoo News: Massive Ethanol Decrease in 2009]
- ↑ | C.I.A. World Factbook: Brazil, China, India
- ↑ | Google Finance, "Market Cap Info"
- ↑ | www.wikinvest.com, Mosaic Company (MOS)
- ↑ | MSN Money: Agrium Inc (AGU), "Highlights"
- ↑ 45.0 45.1 | www.wikinvest.com, Agrium Inc.
- ↑ 2008 POT 10K
- ↑ 2008 MOS 10K
- ↑ 2008 Agrium 10K
- ↑ 2008 POT 10K
- ↑ 2008 MOS 10K
- ↑ [Agrium (AGU)|Agrium]]<ref>[http://www.agrium.com/uploads/Agrium_Fact_Sheet.pdf September 2008 Agrium Fact Sheet]</li></ol></ref>
External links
| ||||||
|
|
