Tag Archives: credit
Upbeat Deere Farm Takings Number Puzzles Investors
14 th Aug 2013, by Agrimoney.com US farmers’ cash takings are to remain at an “excellent level” despite tumbling in crop values, Deere & Co said, remaining sanguine on European farm finances too – but acknowledging some setbacks to former Soviet Union customers. Deere & Co, at an investor meeting after announcing better-than-expected quarterly profits, faced a barrage of questions over forecasts that US farmers’ cash receipts will fall by only $10.1bn, or 2.6%, in 2014 to $379.7bn, remaining “historically high”. Deere forecasts for US 2014 cash receipts, and (change on year) 2014 receipts: $379.7bn, (-$10.1bn) Comprising – Crops: $198.3bn, (-$6.5bn) Livestock: $170.3bn, (-$1.4bn) Gov. payouts: $11.1bn, (-$0.2bn) 2013 receipts: $389.8bn 2012 receipts: $402.1bn 2011 receipts: $384.7bn Barclays analyst Andrew Kaplowitz said that while Deere was “usually pretty conservative” with forecasts, “if I talked to bears out there on ag, they would say that your forecast looks not conservative at all”. Larry de Maria at William Blair asked why Deere, while utilising larger crop estimates than the USDA, was using similar price forecasts, when a large crop might imply weaker values, with Bank of America, Credit Suisse and JP Morgan analysts also questioning the receipts forecast. The cash receipts number is particularly important for agricultural machinery investors, in being closely correlated with equipment demand. Susan Karlix, Deere’s manager of investor communications, saying that cash receipts “are expected to remain at an excellent level, helping keep farmers in a financially sound position”, termed them “the number one predictor of farm equipment sales”. Volume and price However, Marie Ziegler, Deere’s deputy financial officer, strongly defended the estimate, saying that “at this stage of the game this is our best forecast”, flagging the role of strong crops in making up for lower prices. “Remember that cash receipts is a function of quantity, which will be very good this year, in addition to price,” she said. “Cash receipts doesn’t discriminate between the commodity price and the quantity.” Tony Huegel, Deere investor relations director, said that the Deere estimates had been put together before the USDA’s numbers on Monday. And while $4.90 a bushel was historically “very strong pricing” for corn, even with prices in the low-$4s a bushel, “farmers are still making good money”. Arable vs dairy Deere was sanguine over the impact of lower crop prices on European Union agricultural finances too, saying that while “arable farm income is weakening”, it “remains at supportive levels”. Furthermore, “improving milk prices will support dairy farmers”, with prices in the UK hitting a record 30.77p per litre in June and, in the EU as a whole, butter values last month standing 57% higher than a year before, with skim milk powder up by more than 40%. However, Deere acknowledged some dent to prospects in the growing former Soviet Union market from tight credit and some crop setbacks. “Hot, dry weather has impacted crop prospects in southern Russia and Ukraine, and credit availability is also hurting equipment demand,” Ms Karlix said. With import duties also weighing on combine demand, Deere nudged down to “moderately lower”, from “down slightly”, its forecast for farm machinery industry demand in the former Soviet Union this year. Continue reading
What’s The Role For EM’s After The Sell Off?
: http://www.theasset….l#ixzz2c3ZUo3m7 15 Aug 2013 by Ramin Toloui The past would suggest that periods of underperformance in emerging markets (EM) ultimately could become buying opportunities. Over the past 10 years, quarters in which total returns were negative were followed by quarters of positive returns more than 70% of the time in local currency- and US dollar-denominated EM bonds. This implies that in the past a certain amount of mean reversion has been the norm, in which selling during periods of stress overshoots and is followed by a bounce in prices after the stress subsides. But it is dangerous to rely on simple historical patterns to form an investment thesis in the current environment. The past 10 years have seen an unprecedented decline in global yields. The recent sell-off of course was triggered by concerns that the tapering of large-scale asset purchases by the US Federal Reserve would remove a key source of support for market valuations. Whether or not onebelieves that the market reaction to prospective tapering is overdone, it is clear that after unprecedented intervention in financial markets, the Fed at some point faces the challenge of unprecedented withdrawal. With all these “unprecedenteds” floating around, backward-looking analysis should be treated with caution. Rather, in assessing value in EM bonds, or any asset class for that matter, it is important to anchor investment views within a macroeconomic outlook. The underlying strength of global economic activity ultimately acts as a source of gravity for global yields. Central bank policy rates and quantitative easing programmess will be responsive to growth and inflation dynamics. The interest rates that generate equilibrium between savers and borrowers will be driven by whether those savers are opting to buckle down or spend, and whether those borrowers have appetite to take on additional debt to consume or invest. In short, you cannot answer a question about where yields are going without a view on where the global economy is going. How strong is the global economy? So what is the global macroeconomic outlook? There are definite pockets of strength, some of the most significant of which are in the US. Housing prices rose 12.2% year-over-year in the Case-Schiller 20-city average index in May, and in July, consumer confidence as measured by the Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan index reached its highest level in six years, and the ISM purchasing managers index for manufacturing reached a two-year high. But the US economy continues to confront structural challenges that have made sustainable growth elusive. An enduring weakness continues to be what appear to be structural dislocations in the labour market, evident not only in the continuing high rate of total unemployment (7.4% as of July) and long-term unemployment (37% of those unemployed) but also in the apparent inability of the labour market to successfully match job-seekers with sectors of the economy that are hiring. Globally, there are some positive economic indicators, but the overall picture looks tenuous. Industrial indicators, such as sentiment of European purchasing managers, have recovered from the extremely depressed levels of a year ago, but are still hovering around neutral, reflecting the continued squeeze of austerity in Europe, which has bounced off of the bottom but remains mired in a very slow growth regime. Japan is benefiting from the expansionary monetary and fiscal policies of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, but the outlook is clouded by the prospect of a significant fiscal contraction in 2014 when a hike in the value-added tax is due to be implemented. Finally, the large emerging markets are either decelerating or stabilizing at substantially slower rates of growth than 12 months ago. Of particular importance: China is facing its most significant structural growth slowdown since the late 1990s. Cyclical policy tools to boost growth are losing traction. Following the global financial crisis, the Chinese authorities deployed a massive fiscal and credit stimulus which achieved the objective of boosting GDP growth – observe the rise in the credit growth line, followed by the rise in the GDP growth line during 2008-2009. But when Chinese authorities implicitly did the same thing last year, the rise in credit growth did not produce the same boost to GDP. Instead, China’s GDP growth continued to decelerate to 7.5% year-over-year in the second quarter of 2013 – an indication that the credit- and investment-driven economic model is reaching its limits. A pivot away from investment-led, credit-fuelled growth in China and toward household demand powered by rising incomes is a needed change, but achieving that involves difficult domestic reforms and also entails slower growth versus recent years when countries from Australia to Brazil piggybacked on ever-expanding Chinese demand. Emerging market central banks in a low-growth environment Amid these challenges to global growth, central banks throughout the world are likely to remain accommodative despite the pockets of improvement in the economy. In the US, tapering may suggest reduced asset purchases, but that is very different from interest rate hikes, which are unlikely for an extended period amid the still-slow rate of recovery. In Europe and the UK, the European Central Bank (ECB) and Bank of England (BOE) surprised the market with commentary aimed at guiding forward interest rate expectations downward. In Japan, the BOJ continues to implement its expanded asset purchase programme. In EM – with a few notable exceptions for countries with weaker balance sheets seeking to defend their currencies – interest rates are likely to remain on hold, and some may even be looking to ease policy. Against this, the sell-off in global bond markets has now embedded expectations of sometimes significant interest rate hikes in yield curves for some EM countries. The table below shows the changes in the policy rate embedded in various EM local bond curves through the end of 2014. Moreover, the term premiums across most EM curves (the slope between the two-year government and 10-year government bond yields) have increased significantly in the past three months, reflecting the increased stress in global markets. Emerging markets: changes in central bank policy rates reflected in yield curves Market implied policy rates changes through year end 2014 (bp) Latin America Eastern Europe/Africa Asia Brazil 262 Hungary 28 Indonesia 178 Colombia 150 Poland 65 Malaysia 22 Mexico 50 Russia -51 Thailand 34 Peru -26 South Africa 146 Turkey 88 As of 8 August 2013 Source: HSBC, PIMCO Buying bonds is all about locking in yields. If the global growth environment remains tentative, it is likely that the interest rate increases priced in most EM local curves will not materialize, making it advantageous for the bond investor to lock in yields now and position to benefit from the carry as well as potential capital appreciation if a revised lower interest rate path compresses yields. Brazil is a good example. Brazil is one of the few EM countries that is hiking interest rates. Responding to headline inflation at the top end of its 4.5% +/- 2.0% target, Banco Central do Brasil (BCB) has already increased policy rates from 7.25% to 8.50% since the beginning of the year. The Brazilian yield curve anticipates that the policy rate will rise another 262 bp to 10.86% by the end of 2014 (as seen in table). Will Brazil hike policy rates by this much? Brazil’s economy remains tepid, with GDP running at around 2% and industrial production growing around 4% YOY. Add the fact that slower Chinese growth is likely to impart a contractionary impulse to Brazil’s economy, which is heavily dependent upon the export of mining and agricultural commodities. While the 15% depreciation of the exchange rate since early May will support some foreign demand for Brazilian exports and boost inflationary pressures that the central bank is seeking to combat, it is unlikely that these would overwhelm other disinflationary factors, unless the global economic picture improves. Buying a Brazilian 10-year government bond that (as of 13 August) yielded 11.43% in local currency terms would have locked in an annual yield differential of 871bp versus a 2.72% yielding 10-year US Treasury, if held to maturity. In thumbnail terms, that would mean that for a Brazilian bond to underperform a US Treasury, the Brazilian real would have to depreciate more than 871bp per year for the next 10 years (a total depreciation of almost 60%) – illustrating the attractiveness of the EM local bond. The alternative case How might the preceding analysis be wrong? That is a question that we are asking ourselves constantly, particularly in the context of a fluid economic and financial market environment. There are three main risks. First, the call on tepid global growth could prove to be too pessimistic. If actual growth is more robust than we expect, then global yields could continue to increase. In particular, if the US economy surprises on the upside, that could produce further increases in US Treasury yields or more rapid Fed tapering, both of which could push global yields higher and produce further strength in the US dollar to the detriment of EM currencies. It certainly helps that the starting point of higher yields on EM bonds means that there is more cushion from carry to absorb increases in yields (and losses from currency in the case of local bonds), but cushion is not the same as immunity. Second, it may be possible that more emerging markets than previously recognized have financial vulnerabilities that prevent them from smoothly navigating a more hostile global growth environment. In fact, this was the “old normal” in emerging markets, where heavily indebted EM countries in the 1990s and early 2000s were compelled to hike interest rates despite sharp economic contractions, in efforts to stem capital flight and avert further currency depreciation that threatened to make foreign currency-denominated debts unsustainable. A critical thesis for investing in EM today – in particular in local currency-denominated bonds – is that most countries have the ability to cut interest rates in a slower global growth environment, because their basic economic stability is not at risk even amid currency depreciation. Clearly, there are some countries that have felt compelled to tighten monetary conditions in an attempt to prevent further currency depreciation. Particularly vulnerable here are countries with large or growing current account deficits, foreign currency mismatches in their assets and liabilities, or relatively thin reserve cushions. Both Turkey and Indonesia have hiked interest rates recently in an attempt to keep foreign capital from withdrawing. India has implemented a variety of new measures affecting the foreign exchange market, targeted at limiting pressure on the rupee. For the most part, however, the major systemically important EM countries fit the profile of “New Normal” flexibility in which policymakers have the freedom to ease monetary conditions into economic weakness. Third, it may be the case that technical factors like the unwinding of large EM positions that were put on with an expectation of continued Fed asset purchases – or an increase in redemptions from EM mutual funds – could cause EM bond prices to continue decreasing in the near term. That is, even if eventually the fundamentals of slower growth were to reassert themselves over EM yields, investors in EM assets could absorb some significant bruises before that happens. This risk is inherently difficult to analyze. Based on our observations, there has been a significant technical element to the sell-off in EM, as well as other asset classes. Positions that were owned by foreign investors tended to be positions that were sold. Positions that were less widely owned by foreign investors tended to perform better, even when those countries had fundamentals that were arguably more precarious. In an environment where many trades – including in EM – are premised on the idea of clipping carry in a world where the Fed continued to provide an unlimited backstop, financial markets will remain vulnerable to the ongoing reassessment of Fed intentions and are liable to lurch on each piece of data or Fed-speak that implies a move in one direction or another. This calls for discretion in the scaling of positions in the face of inherent unknowns about market technicals. Emerging markets assets after the sell-off So, is now the right time to buy? From a fundamental point of view, we see value in the higher yields available on many EM bonds, both in local currency and US dollars. In a global environment characterized by continued concerns about growth – even amid firmer economic indicators – policy interest rates in both developed and emerging countries are poised to stay low. In that context, yields (as of 13 August) of 6.54% on EM local currency government bonds, 5.95% on US dollar-denominated EM sovereign bonds, and 5.73% on US dollar-denominated EM corporate bonds offer advantages to cash and a defined income stream in a world of questionable corporate profit growth. Moreover, we continue to expect a reallocation by global investors away from lopsided allocations to developed countries and into emerging markets to provide support for EM asset prices in the years ahead. On the negative side, we expect that there will be continued volatility in EM assets alongside the continued reconciliation of market positioning with expectations about Fed actions. Even if our view on weaker global growth is correct, it could be negative for EM currencies as softer economic conditions produce less appetite for investors to go abroad. In other words, what is good for EM yields might not be good for EM currencies in the short term. This is especially true of countries with weaker fundamentals (current account deficits, mismatched currency denomination of assets and liabilities, unorthodox policy regimes, and low foreign reserve coverage). These countries are vulnerable on both the interest rate and foreign exchange fronts. Adding this all together, we think that investors should consider using the valuations in EM bonds after the sell-off as an attractive entry point to build positions toward a long-term strategic target, emphasizing strategies with a higher-quality bias. This is premised on the observation that the starting point for most investors is very low exposures to EM bonds – which represent only about 7% of total US mutual fund investments in bonds (and therefore an even lower proportion of overall US investor portfolios), according to EPFR. In a world where large global investors are rotating into EM assets, periods of market weakness provide an opportunity for smaller retail and institutional investors to build toward their strategic allocations, while retaining dry powder for additional purchases should market volatility persist. Ramin Toloui is the global co-head of emerging markets portfolio management at PIMCO Continue reading
Seeking Biomass Feedstocks That Can Compete
Biofuels and biobased chemical makers hope to win with cellulosic sugars By Melody M. Bomgardner On the hot, dry agricultural land of California’s Imperial Valley, 17 new varieties of an unusual crop are being tested on a 100-acre plot. If the tests are successful, the valley’s bounty of lettuce, cantaloupes, and broccoli may someday be joined by plants that are converted into fuels and chemicals. The crop, energy cane, is a less sweet cousin of sugarcane. It is a perennial grass that was developed by plant scientists to create a large amount of biomass quickly. Canergy , a biofuels start-up, plans to grow enough energy cane to power one or more commercial-scale fuel ethanol plants starting in 2016. Although the valley is known for producing fruits and vegetables, more than half of its 450,000 acres are actually devoted to crops such as Sudan grass, used for hay. If enough farmers decide to add energy cane to their crop rotation, the region would produce a huge amount of biomass. “It grows extremely well there—we’re expecting phenomenal yields,” says Timothy R. Brummels, Canergy’s chief executive officer. He estimates that 1,800 to 2,200 gal of ethanol per year can be made from 1 acre of energy cane, compared with about 400 gal from 1 acre of corn. Energy cane is a dedicated energy crop, a category of plants that also includes the giant reed Arundo donax, napier grass, switchgrass, and hybrid poplar. Investments in energy crops are one part of a larger push by the biobased fuel and chemical industry to secure cheap, abundant feedstocks. Chemical companies can use the material to produce acrylic acid and butadiene, for example. Genomatica, Gevo , and Myriant have built their processes to take in sugar from corn or sugarcane. Those sources carry downsides. For instance, prices rise and fall along with other commodities such as petroleum, and the supply of sugar may not be ample enough to meet the needs of high-volume chemical makers. To ensure the viability of their industry, they are eager to replace those food sugars with a cheaper, more stable cellulose-based raw material. Executives say they are watching the growth of the cellulosic ethanol industry closely. Its success would pave the way to securing new cellulosic feedstocks for chemicals, they believe. “Just about every one of our chemical partners is interested in the potential for using biomass feedstocks,” says Christophe Schilling, CEO of Genomatica. “The motivation comes from a couple of different potential advantages—the first one is the potential for lower-cost feedstock. It still needs to be proven, but that is the hope. Then it is the stability of a secure supply of feedstock that doesn’t have the volatility of hydrocarbons or commodity agriculture.” Schilling adds that getting feedstock from nonfood sources is also important. Thanks to a half-decade of effort by the ethanol industry, clues are now emerging about how a cellulosic feedstock supply chain for chemicals would take shape. One thing is certain: The route is more complicated than for fossil-fuel feedstocks. “Part of the challenge is that shale gas is shale gas no matter where on Earth it comes from. But biomass is different with each crop,” says Brian Balmer, chemical industry principal at the consulting firm Frost & Sullivan . For that reason, making inexpensive sugars from plant-based feedstocks has become its own specialty. Canergy, Genomatica, and Gevo have partnered with Beta Renewables , which is a joint venture between the engineering firm Chemtex, owned by Italian chemical maker Mossi & Ghisolfi; private equity firm Texas Pacific; and enzyme maker Novozymes. The biobased chemical makers are interested in Beta Renewables’ process for breaking down cellulose with steam and enzymatic treatment to release sugars. Beta Renewables is already using the process to produce ethanol from wheat straw and A. donax at its commercial-scale biorefinery in Crescentino, Italy. Chemtex plans to build a facility in Clinton, N.C., that will run primarily on a mix of energy crops that includes A. donax and use the Beta Renewables technology. Beta Renewables says its process can deliver sugar from biomass for 10 cents per lb, a substantial discount from today’s corn-derived sugars, which cost around 18–20 cents per lb, notes Michele Rubino, the company’s chief operating officer. That is a price that pleases Gevo’s CEO, Patrick R. Gruber. “I hope he’s right. To make it big we will want cellulosic sugar,” he says. “To get more carbon per unit of land is better for everyone.” Gevo makes isobutyl alcohol from corn-based sugar. The output of Gevo’s first plant, in Luverne, Minn., is being used as a solvent and in jet fuel for the U.S. Air Force, but isobutyl alcohol is also a candidate to be an intermediate for p -xylene in Coca-Cola’s project to make 100% biobased soda bottles. Biobased chemical maker Myriant is working to adapt its organisms to squirt out succinic acid on a diet of cellulosic sugar, which contains both five- and six-carbon molecules. However, Alif Saleh, Myriant’s vice president of sales and marketing, says chemical industry customers have not yet demanded a switch away from corn sugar. Poet-DSM is contracting with farmers to obtain 285,000 tons of corn stover for its 25 million-gal-per-year plant. The companies need lots of local growers, so they have started a major outreach campaign , including advertising on local radio stations . DuPont plans to collect stover from a 30-mile radius for its similarly sized facility in Nevada, Iowa. Neither firm has disclosed its cost to make sugar. An alternative is to grow biomass on purpose by planting energy crops on agricultural land that cannot be economically used for food crops. That so-called marginal land may be ideal for some types of energy crops, particularly perennial grasses. By not shifting land use away from food production, companies can also defuse much of the concern about the impact of biobased fuels and chemicals on the food supply—the crux of the food-versus-fuel debate. “For us, having a base load of a dedicated energy crop is a pretty nice way to set up the supply chain,” Rubino argues. “It gives us high density, high yields, and requires less land. We base the facility off of that and take additional locally available residues from agriculture or mills.” The relatively modest amount of land needed to grow dedicated energy crops is appealing to biobased chemical makers. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, A. donax should produce as much as 15 dry tons of biomass per acre. In contrast, DuPont estimates it will collect 2 tons of corn cobs, leaves, and stems per acre. Of course, that land also produces corn. Obtaining feedstock can be further simplified by contracting with companies that control large amounts of land or biomass. In July, Beta Renewables signed a long-term agreement with Murphy-Brown, a livestock subsidiary of Smithfield Foods that is arranging for energy crops to be grown on land where hog farmers spray animal waste. The high-yielding perennial grass crops will help take up the excess nitrogen in the waste. Similarly, cellulosic sugar firm Renmatix has signed a development agreement with UPM, a pulp and paper firm, to develop sugars from UPM’s woody biomass. Renmatix CEO Mike Hamilton says the most cost-effective biobased chemicals will be manufactured on a site near the feedstock, perhaps at a pulp and paper mill. “If people are planning to ship low-value biomass around the country, that is not an effective process,” Hamilton says. “If you can assemble the end-to-end value chain, that is where the economics are optimized to compete with fossil-fuel chemicals.” Hamilton and other biobased chemical makers know that newly abundant natural gas is challenging the economics of their business. Indeed, the rise of shale gas will create biobased winners and losers, experts say. “What biobased chemical makers should focus on is the higher carbon chain lengths that you don’t get in natural gas,” Frost & Sullivan’s Balmer advises. Two- and three-carbon biobased chemicals, in contrast, will struggle to be competitive because petrochemical versions can be made from natural gas. “The rise of natural gas is a fascinating situation,” Genomatica’s Schilling says. “In our case, we benefit because of the products we make.” The firm has developed sugar-based routes to butadiene, which is used to make synthetic rubber, and to 1,4-butanediol, a raw material for urethanes, plasticizers, and coatings. The petrochemical industry has historically made 1,4-butanediol, butadiene, and other four-carbon chemicals by processing by-products from ethylene facilities that consume crude-oil-based feedstocks. But ethylene plants that run on ethane and propane extracted from natural gas produce a much smaller C 4 stream. In the past few years, experts say, prices for 1,4-butanediol and butadiene have significantly increased, and the trend should continue for the foreseeable future. Still, traditional companies aren’t going to cede territory to biobased chemical makers without a fight. For example, one company, TPC Group, is planning to make butadiene via butane dehydrogenation at a plant it owns in Houston. And the seven giant shale-gas-based petrochemical plants that have been announced for the U.S. are going to flood the market with chemicals of all sorts. At Renmatix, competing with chemicals made from shale gas has been on Hamilton’s mind lately, but he believes he is on the right side. “First, natural gas is not renewable. Second, it is also a volatile commodity, whereas biobased materials are significantly more reliable. Where there is competition, the least volatile, more long-term option will win.” [+]Enlarge Credit: POET-DSM (corn stover), Wikimedia Commons (grain sorghum), Beta Renewables (Giant reed), GreenWood Tree Farm Fund (hybrid poplar), USDA (energy cane, napier grass), Shutterstock (switchgrass) Chemical & Engineering News Continue reading