© 2024 Alpha Spread Limited. All Rights Reserved.
www.alphaspread.com is not operated by a broker, a dealer, or a registered investment adviser. Under no circumstances does any information posted on www.alphaspread.com represent a recommendation to buy or sell a security. The information on this site, and in its related newsletters, is not intended to be, nor does it constitute, investment advice or recommendations. The information on this site is in no way guaranteed for completeness, accuracy or in any other way. In no event shall Alpha Spread Limited be liable to any member, guest or third party for any damages of any kind arising out of the use of any content or other material published or available on www.alphaspread.com, or relating to the use of, or inability to use, www.alphaspread.com or any content, including, without limitation, any investment losses, lost profits, lost opportunity, special, incidental, indirect, consequential or punitive damages. Past performance is a poor indicator of future performance.
You don't have any saved screeners yet
Intrinsic Value is all-important and is the only logical way to evaluate the relative attractiveness of investments and businesses.
Daniel, you can start now.
Thank you. Hi. Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to ArcelorMittal's Q3 2018 Analyst and Investor Call. This is Daniel Fairclough from ArcelorMittal Investor Relations team, and I'm joined on this call today by our Head of Finance, Genuíno Christino.We're here to answer your questions on the results published this morning so as usual, this call is being recorded. Hopefully, everybody's had the chance to read our earnings statement and the supporting Q&A document and the presentation with the detailed speaker notes. All of those were published on our website this morning. So the plan today is for the call to last around 45 minutes or so to address any questions you might have on those results. We're going to answer the questions in the order that they're received. [Operator Instructions] So with that very brief opening, Genuíno and I are ready to take your questions, and I think we're going to start with Ioannis at Macquarie.
A couple of questions on my side. First of all on FSTU. I appreciate the deal has not closed yet but could you perhaps provide rough guidance on the upfront balance sheet impact and whether you have hedged the currency rate? And also within that, have you -- I see you lower your long-term growth ambition from 20 million tonnes to 15 million tonnes. Could you perhaps elaborate the underlying reasons and discuss where you need to own any business to deliver the brownfield expansion? And I'll leave it there.
Great. Thanks, Ioannis. So to talk about the impact of Essar on the balance sheet, obviously, we published a press release detailing the offer that's been accepted by the committee of creditors. So we have a payment to the creditors of $5.7 billion, and we also have a $1 billion payment to the creditors of UG and KSS, which we agreed previously. And then there's a $1.1 billion equity injection into the joint venture in order to kickstart the turnaround, the improvement and the CapEx cycle there. As we talked about previously, the expectation is that, that JV will be funded on a ratio of 2:1 in terms of debt to equity. So 2/3 of the numbers that I just talked about will be funded at the JV level with debt, and 1/3 will be contributed by the equity partners, ourselves and Nippon Steel. So hopefully, that gives you the right sort of framework to be calculating the impact that you're going to see on our balance sheet in terms of cash flow and net debt, assuming we close this by the end of the year. I'll let Genuíno talk about hedging.
Thank you, Daniel. Ioannis, so as you can appreciate, this is really market-sensitive so we are not really in a position to comment right now on the hedging.
And just to be clear in terms of our plan for the assets, our midterm -- or medium-term plan is to obviously improve the production level to 8.5 million tonnes. That's what we've committed to as a medium-term objective in our resolution plan and the resolution plan to the medium-term to long-term ambition to take the capacity up to 12 million to 15 million tonnes. So the intention is to obviously use Essar as a vehicle to participate in the growth that's anticipated in the Indian steel demand and production and its significant prospects, which we all know about. And based on the current relatively low levels of steel intensity and per capita consumption in India today, they're roughly 1/3 of global average levels, so a lot of expectation for growth in the years to come, and Essar will provide us with a vehicle to participate in that growth. So move on to the next question from Alain to Morgan Stanley, please.
2 questions if I may, firstly on the profit bridges between Q3 and Q4. Seems that you have incurred a few one-offs in Q3 such as the hyper-inflation adjustment, operating stoppages in Europe, and if I'm not mistaken, in the U.S. Is it possible to quantify those "one-offs" to see how the profit bridges will evolve? That's 1. And 2, we are in November now and I presume you do have a good overview of your CapEx guidance for 2019. Can you give us a flavor of the ranges of spending you do expect to incur next year?
So let me try to address your first question, Alain. So yes, you're right. In Argentina, so we had now, for the first time, the impact of hyper-inflation and it's about $100 million. It's hard to predict whether this is going to repeat in quarter 4. I would expect no. If only the reason why it happened this quarter is primarily because you have a disconnect between how you index the local financials for in pesos and the translation so there is a disconnect between the exchange rate movements and the inflation used for the indexation. So to the extent that in quarter 4, that stabilize, then you're not going to have a repeat of that impact, and we have a normal contribution from our Argentinian business. And in terms of the operational issues that we experienced in Europe in quarter 3, roughly, this is about 400 kt. And we would expect -- we expect that the -- this will not reoccur in quarter 4, so we would expect our shipments in quarter 4 for Europe and for the group as a whole to be excluding any impact that we will have from ILVA to be at similar levels as we saw last year. And in NAFTA, the wait-and-see approach that we experience in quarter 3 also meant for us about 400 kt not only in U.S. but also in Canada and probably a little bit more pronounced in Mexico. So we would expect, based on what we can see right now in our order book, we would not expect that to reoccur. And then looking to Q4, we would expect our shipments in NAFTA to be stable compared to quarter 3, given that, as you know, in quarter 4 traditionally, we have some [ synergy ] in NAFTA.
Does that help, Alain?
Yes. A follow-on, a quick follow-on, on this question. I think you also had some operating issues in the mining division as well. Is it possible to just put a number behind the impact, the dollar impact in Q3? That's the first part of my question.
Yes. So in quarter 3, Alain, you see that our shipments, our marketable shipments without, I think, primarily, we had 2 issues. One was the wet season in Iberia, which we hope it will not repeat in quarter 4. And then we have also the -- some of the issues that coming from the peaked issue that we announced in quarter 4 last year, 2017. So we have been shipping from inventories. And that's why you see now this reduction in the shipments also coming from Mines Canada. So today, we are -- our run rate there is back to the normal levels, so we would expect production to be back to the normal levels in quarter 4. However, we're not going to be able to recover the shipments that we lost during quarter 3, and that's why we are revising our guidance of marketable shipments from 10% to 5%.
Great. And just to come back on your question on CapEx, Alain, for 2019, obviously, we'll give you some firm guidance with our full year results. But I think directionally, clearly, CapEx is expected to increase next year. If you think back to our Q2 results, we did announce at that point that we were going ahead with our downstream expansion at Vega in Brazil. We also talked about the study that we were doing to potentially look to add a concentrator at our Liberian iron ore operations. We're still waiting for the detailed feedback of that study before the board moves forward with a decision. But the bigger driver is obviously going to be ILVA, and so we have the confirmation today that we've taken ownership of ILVA. And so if you think about 2019 versus 2018, there will be a step-up in our CapEx, just reflecting the ILVA work that we're going to be undertaking. So hopefully, you can see some of the components of that. But as I say, come our results in February, we'll give you a much more detailed overall picture. Great. So we'll move to the next question please from Seth at Jefferies.
I have 2 on the U.S. and then one specifically on ILVA. On the U.S., on the NAFTA business, obviously, your NAFTA operations had been hit by tariff bringing material costs to U.S., Mexican, Canadian borders. Can you quantify how much those tariffs costs you? And if 232 changes to quotas rather than tariffs, in aggregate, would that hurt or help your NAFTA business? Secondly, within the NAFTA realm, can you comment at all about auto contract negotiations? We've heard from some of your peers some constructive outlook going into 2019, but we've heard from automakers more pushback in their ability to control that cost. Do you see upside to your margins on the back of auto contracts? And then I'll let you start with that and I'll come back for one question on ILVA, please.
So Seth, let me take your first question on the impact of the tariffs. So in quarter 2, we had basically 1 month of impact, right, because in Canada and Mexico, the tariffs kicked in, in construction. And now in quarter 3 then we have the full impact of that already in our results. So in terms of qualification, basically quarter-on-quarter, it's about $60 million negative to us. But overall, I think it's important to -- I think it's clear that net-net, Section 232 is a benefit for us.
And on the topic of auto contracts, I think obviously, 2018 has been a good year for ArcelorMittal and the steel industry. But an area of our business that hasn't really seen significant improvement is the auto volumes because we haven't had a major opportunity to reprice those tonnes. So we are obviously starting the negotiations for quite a lot of that business. There's a majority of those terms which we price on a 1st of January basis. And the -- [ there's a day ] reprice on the 1st of January so we're renegotiating those contracts now and I think we go into those contract negotiations with a lot of optimism. The industry significantly improved over the past 12 months. If you look at where steel prices are today versus where they were 12 months ago, that's a positive sign. There is raw material inflation, which we need to factor into those contracts as well. And finally, we're consistently providing innovative solutions for our customers to help them achieve their objectives. That's costing us money in terms of R&D dollars. It's costing us money in terms of the CapEx that we need to spend in order to have the industrial capacity to provide those solutions. So it's only fair that we are compensated for that. So all told, I think we're going into those negotiations, as I say, with a degree of confidence.
[Audio Gap] Some changed EBITDA accretive year 1 on 2016 conditions. Clearly, the European market strengthened a lot since then, although it seems like ILVA's performance has perhaps deteriorated. Can you give us any sense on how you expect ILVA margins to compared to core Mittal Europe in the coming years? And then when we take into account the known disposal remedy assets, should we still expect net-net earnings accretion or will there be something different in that, at least in the early years?
Yes, thanks. So just to confirm what we said previously, which is we expect ILVA to be EBITDA positive in the first year, free cash flow positive in the third year. Yes, I think it's fair that the operating performance of that business has deteriorated over the past 12 months, but at the same time, the overall industry conditions have improved versus where they were 12 months ago. So we're happy to reiterate that expectation and plan to be EBITDA positive year 1, free cash flow positive, year 3. In terms of the net-net impact, so the integration of ILVA versus the sale of the remedy assets. To be honest, I think that's going to be a wash. So the EBITDA that we gain in year 1 from ILVA should offset the EBITDA that we are selling through the remedy asset package.Great. So we'll move to next question please from Cedar at Bank of America.
Follow-up questions on ILVA, please. Can you talk about the quantity of shipments that you're divesting in the Latin Ostrava and compare that to the current shipments at ILVA and then also talk about the upside to ILVA's shipments over 2019 and 2021? And then can you also just follow up on where we are with the remedy assets outside of those that have been agreed to be sold to Liberty House? How is that process shaping up?
Yes, so I think in terms of the shipments from the assets that we're selling, it's -- based on the 2017, it's a very similar number. So the shipments from the remedy assets are very similar to the performance of ILVA. Obviously, I just noted in the previous question that the performance of ILVA, we believe, has deteriorated over the past 12 months. And so that's something that we will need to address and will need to improve upon, and that's a major part of our undertaking and our ability to turn around and improve that business. What we outlined in terms of our shipment plan is obviously a near-term plan to ship 6 million tonnes from ILVA and then gradually, as we -- or not gradually, but once we've executed our environmental improvement CapEx plan, that will allow us to move to a higher level of production and shipments. So once that plan is complete, then we'll be able to step up the production in shipments from ILVA towards 8 million, 8.5 million tonnes.
And then the other remedy assets, anything to say about that?
So on the remaining asset sales, that's imminent. So we're making good progress, I think, there on that -- on the sale of the remaining rolling assets in Luxembourg and Belgium.
Daniel, how do we think about the importance of those assets in the total remedy package? I mean, if you look at the last book value of those -- of the remedy assets and then in payments you've taken, book value is sort of $1.3 billion for the entire remedy asset group. Can we assume that the majority of that is [ fixed ] with the upstream asset set, Ostrava and Galati?
Yes, that's a good assumption, Cedar.
Great. So we'll move to the next question from Bastian at Deutsche Bank, please.
I've got 3 questions. And the first one is a quick one on NAFTA. If we look at your ASPs, they develop pretty much as they probably should have been in this market environment. But then if we look at cost on the other side, they have been up much more on a per tonne basis. What has been driving this? Because feels like this has been much more than what we could explain but just the lower fixed cost illusion variable cost and tariffs. And then my second question is on market dynamics. [ If we're ] obviously talking a little bit about this customer standoff giving the market dynamics and the falling prices in markets such as the U.S. Has this come to an end already or do you continue to see the market being rather a little bit in the slow mode? And then my last question is on just some product mix. Is there anything we have to keep in mind with regards to the fourth quarter?
Sebastian, in terms of your question on NAFTA, basically, if you look at where the profitability where we show quarter-on-quarter, you will see that it's really volumes and offset by higher pricing. And that's basically the, in a nutshell, plus, of course, the impact of Section 232 that we discussed. That basically greets your results. We talked a little bit about the weakness in Mexico also impact our long business, primarily our long business in Mexico. That is also a component there. And that's basically what we see. In terms of prices, yes, I think, as I am sure you're aware, most of the players announced price increase and -- based on what we can see, we feel that those are sticking.
And then on product mix, please?
In terms of product mix, there is nothing that -- other than maybe what we need to factor in, in Brazil in quarter 4 is traditionally, given this is analogy, you have high exports traditionally. So that is something that I would highlight to you.
Great. So we'll take the next question please from Rochus at Kepler.
Can you elaborate on the cash needs for 2018? When I look at the run rate of your CapEx and of your cash taxes, so you're actually well below that guidance you have given before. So shall we expect a certain shortfall in this original plan or is there a message rise on both sides? The second question is on this Argentinian thing, you've done this inflation accounting rather than proper asset impairment. Maybe can you explain why this is not being done sort of an asset impairment? And thirdly, for the working capital release in the first quarter, you've given quite a big range between $1.3 billion and $1.8 billion. As we are now already in November, what are the main elements for creating that uncertainty for the rest of the year?
Okay, Rochus. Let me -- in terms of the cash needs, so we are, as you can see now in our Q&A, we are reconfirming the $5.8 billion. So yes, you're right, so CapEx traditionally, we have a larger chunk of our CapEx come in quarter 4, so we feel comfortable with the guidance with the $5.8 billion. In terms of Argentina, so impairments and hyperinflation, these are 2 separate things. In fact, that you apply hyper-inflation, it doesn't mean that you have to impair your assets. That will be done the exercise. Impairment review will be done as we always do in quarter 4. But one thing has no correlation with the other. And in terms of [ our Acindar ], I think the key driver is really as we see every year. So the fact that we have the release in quarter 4, it's part of the -- this is analogy of our working capital. And the key drivers will be a reduction of metal spark that, as you have seen in quarter 3, we built inventory so in quarter 4, we haven't released as we improve shipments. And then traditionally in December because of the holiday season, [ issue plus ] compared to where you were in end of September. So those, I would say, are the main drivers for the working capital release. So it's a reduction in metal spark. And it's a reduction in volumes for the last, let's say, 15 days of December vis-à-vis September. And the range, as I hope you appreciate, there are so many elements here that it's very hard to be precise. So that's why the range.
Okay. Maybe one brief follow-up on Essar. What is the residual risk you're seeing that deal is not materializing at all?
Yes, thanks, Rochus, for the question on this topic because I think it's important that it gets asked. From our perspective, we've had a very positive development in the recent weeks, the news that we've been selected by the committee of creditors as the winning bidder for Essar. And we now move to the final stage of the process, which is having a resolution planned approved by the NCLT. So throughout the process that's been laid out, we follow that process. There was a Supreme Court ruling, which we followed. So we expect the process to continue to follow the clear terms of the IBC. So next step, NCLT approval, that's the final step hopefully by year-end, and really we don't see any legal grounds on which the committee of creditors decision to be challenged.
Great. Thanks, Rochus. So we'll move to next question please from Carsten at UBS.
3 questions from my side. The first one is on your outlook, which is comparably constructive to what we have seen across the board in the third quarter. Could you elaborate what are -- what is the driver of this constructiveness as the market seems to worry about the -- at least about the price direction and the earnings direction? Second question is on the net working capital. The high net working capital seems to be mainly in NAFTA and ACIS. Could you tell us what caused the buildup other than the higher U.S. steel prices? Were there any other elements, especially in ACIS, which caused the rise in net working capital? And is that being reversed in the fourth quarter?
Great. Thanks, Carsten. So before Genuíno comes back to you on working capital, I'll talk about the outlook. So the reality of that business conditions remain favorable, demand is growing, utilization rates are high and high utilization rates are supporting healthy steel spreads and that continues. If you look at the indicators, they're continuing to support an outlook for positive demand growth. So yes, the PMI readings, on an aggregate basis, have come up the high, high levels that they were in Q1 and Q2, but they're still comfortably above the 50 level, telling you that demand continues to expand. I think if you look more broadly, the economic indicators and forecast for 2019 are also suggesting growth. And for all it's worth, the World Steel Association came out with their forecast in the past couple of weeks and they're forecasting growth in all of our core markets. So obviously, we will be detailing our growth forecasts for 2019 at the time of our full year results. But so far, the WSA have put their numbers out. So I think hopefully, that gives you some context to -- around the outlook for the business but happy to go into it in more detail if you would like.
Maybe just on the U.S. market because it's stated in your press release that you have seen a weak U.S. market, which, given where we are pricewise, was a bit of an interesting comment. Is that weakness with regard to demand or is that just weakness because of, I believe, off-inventory release in that market?
Yes, I think you're absolutely right. So it's a contrast really between apparent demand and the robust underlying demand. So we can all see the robustness of the U.S. economy, the strong GDP trend for this quarter. So the real underlying demand indicators are very positive. But what happened during the third quarter is obviously steel pricing started to come down and when steel pricing comes down in the U.S. market, where possible, buyers will sit on their hands, they'll step to the side and allow the price to drop, they'll reduce their inventories and look to come in at a lower price point and replenish our inventories then. What we said in a previous call Genuíno -- a previous question Genuíno addressed was we increased our prices just a couple of weeks ago and transaction prices in the U.S. market have moved up. And so that should be a positive signal for that.
Carsten, one of your questions on working capital, maybe if I can start with CIS. So you're absolutely right. So what happened in CIS this quarter was that so increase our production, which is good news as we, as you know, we faced operational issues in Kryviy during first and second quarter. So during those quarter, we were selling also from inventories. As we recover from those operational issues in quarter 3 and we increase production, as you can see, by about 15% in CIS, we were forced to replenish our inventory levels. So what it means is as we move now into Q4 and we don't need to replenish inventories anymore and our production remain at normalized levels, we want to be able to ship much more. And that's why guiding for higher shipments in CIS in quarter 4.
Great. Thanks, Carsten. So we'll move on to the next question please from Luc at Exane.
Got a bit of follow-ups, if I may. You mentioned the potential approval of a new concentrator in [indiscernible]. Would it be possible to ballpark quantitative guidance as to what kind of CapEx we are talking here? That would be my first question. And second question, could you confirm that Gangra will be included in the JV? And what are the kind of synergies that you are targeting by including the assets in the JV? And last but not least, maybe you also referred to bidding for EPC construction, which is related to Exane, to some extent. What can you say around this?
Great. Just addressing the Essar question first. I think the -- it should be clear that the intention is that the investments in Uttam Galva will be a part of the joint venture and funded by the joint venture. So hopefully, that's clear. And the second point around ESP, et cetera, I -- this headline came out earlier this week, and we chose not to comment then and I think it's inappropriate to comment today on any market speculation in India or in any other markets. But the reality, I think, is that with the $1.1 billion of funding that we are putting into the joint venture, it's going to be a very well-financed business and with all of the capacity and capability to do what it needs to do strategically and CapEx-wise to realize the potential of the joint venture.
Look, let me just compliment on the synergies between UG and Essar. So UG is basically a downstream business. So it treats very well in the overall footprint in Essar and UG. So Essar has some more HRC capacity so that we're going to be able then to roll in UG. So we believe there is an important synergy to be captured once we can have the 2 business together. And in terms of the concentrator, I think we're at a very early stage. So we are still going through the engineering phase. So will not be the right moment to talk about or to try to quantify amounts. I think this will come as part of our next quarter release.
Maybe Luc, just to highlight a couple of points, though, that we already have a lot of capital equipment on the ground. We have effectively a half-built concentrator so a lot of capital equipment sitting in boxes. We obviously also have the infrastructure, which is already there to handle more volumes from Liberia. So if you were to think about the CapEx intensity of a potential growth of our capacity in Liberia, it is low. So it's -- we're considering a low CapEx intensity at brownfield expansion of our Liberia capacity to produce what would, we hope, be a very high-quality product. So hopefully, that gives you some more context to how we're thinking about that potential investment decision, assuming that the feasibility study comes back positively.Great. Thanks, Luc. So we'll move to Francisco at Banco de Sabadell.
I have 3 questions, please. First one will be regarding working capital. We've already discussed about the inventories. I can also see an important decrease in your trade payables. I don't know if this is something that you would like to comment about. The second one will be on your costs in ACIS, which have had a very good performance this quarter. And I would like if you could give us some more color on that issue and if it's something we should see also in the next few quarters. And the last one would be regarding Europe and Brazil. If you could comment a little bit in what are your expectations going into Q4 and 2019.
Francisco, so on your first question on working capital, you're right. So we see a reduction in payables. This is just a function that once you increase your metal stock, you don't have -- so then part of your payables, just they get automatically reduced because it's an increase of your metal stock and marked raw materials and things like that. So here what we see is with an increase of metal stock. In terms of CIS, 1 of the 2 drivers I would mention this quarter. One, of course, is the stable operations in Ukraine. That helps, of course, from a cost point of view. And secondly, the effects. So we had a significant devaluations in most CIS countries, so just if we look at the rand, what's 12% depreciation, ruble, so all the currencies depreciated, which of course then helped this business to the extent that they are competing the export market so that is a positive. In terms of Europe and Brazil, your inquiry talked a lot about those -- the trends for quarter 4. So we talked about how we see shipments evolving. You have already a good channel on show -- on causes and prices. So I think you have all the elements you need to come up with your forecast.
Great. Thanks, Francisco. So we'll move to Phil at KeyBanc, please.
Daniel, I know it was talked about a couple of times in terms of the specific weakness that you called out on the United States in the third quarter. Was this perhaps buyer-strike phenomenon specific to your automotive customers? Or was it broad-based? Because I know auto is a big part of your book.
I don't it's a more broad-based comment. It's not industry-specific.
So it's nothing more than commentary just related to your volume? There's nothing related to pricing or spreads that you're making here?
Yes, no -- it's -- the reality is that we had those 2 effects, so pricing was declining and order book shortened because in a falling price environment, you effectively have, whether you would to call it a buyer's strike or short-term destock, you have this sort of temporary phenomenon where the volumes in the markets come down considerably. So that is what we experienced as we went through the quarter. It impacted our results, but as I say, given the positive underlying real trends for demand, we see it as a temporary phenomenon and -- rather than something that we are more concerned by.
And just a second question, if I may. In terms of what your sense is on the Chinese steel markets moving into the fourth quarter. I know that there's some being written about them throttling back production in some regions for environmental and seasonal reasons, some others that are counter to that view. Just curious in terms of what you all see because I know you have operations there and obviously compete against them across the world.
Yes. So fundamentally, I think we indicate it as positive. If you look at where utilization rates are, if you look at where production rates are in China and then cross-reference that with the very low levels of inventory, the year-on-year reduction in exports and the fact that pricing in that market is still very healthy, in particular for rebar where the spreads are still very, very healthy, indicate that the underlying conditions in the Chinese market are still very healthy. And then it's -- it is the 1st of November today so it is the first day of the winter shutdowns, so you're now going to have an enforced sort of constraint on production within the -- pretty much across the industry. It's a more targeted, more nuanced approach than we had 12 months ago and -- but it is a broader program. And so although some companies will have a more limited impact because they've been able to improve their environmental performance over the past 12 months, which is their whole idea of that program, so there will be some exclusions because it's a broader plan at the impact we feel on capacity and production will be very similar to what it was 12 months ago, so through last winter. So yes, we should expect to see that come through in the productions that's in the coming weeks and months.Thanks, Phil. So we will move to the last question from Christian at SocGen.
I missed the first 10 minutes so if I repeat a question you already asked, I apologize. I only have 3 of them and they're quite short. The first one is on your CapEx 4Q and I know you've mentioned it but -- and it's always the fourth quarter which is the highest level. But over 40% of year-on-year CapEx is coming in that third quarter. So my question is whether it's an accounting thing or whether there is some potential disruptive CapEx taking place in the quarter? And if so, where is that maybe? Second question is on that hyper-inflation accounting in Brazil. For the first time, we get a negative amount if we multiply the average price you provide with the shipments, we get more than your turnover. So the question here is simply, should we state at a potential negative impact in fourth quarter -- in the fourth quarter because this accounting or whether that's irrelevant. And the last thing is on your European costs, which for the third quarter in a row, we seem to be much higher than we were last year, over 9 months. So my question is, are the 2 higher costs in Europe, A, FX? And B, iron ore? Am I right in thinking these are the highest costs year-on-year?
So Christian, on CapEx, I think if you look back year after year, you will see that Q4 traditionally is the quarter where we have the highest spend and this is how it works. I mean, you have your budget cycles happening now actually. The projects get approved, then they go out and we start placing the orders. Takes time for you to start to see the materials being delivered to you. So we are comfortable with the guidance. We have reconfirmed our cash needs, which includes CapEx. Of course, I mean, at the end of the year, it can always be a little bit higher or lower, but fundamentally, the cash needs of the business remain what we have guided at the beginning of the year. And the hyperinflation we talked about it, I think it is -- this is a new phenomenon. This is in Argentina. That's the first time that hyperinflation accounting has been applied. And it's just back as the result of Argentina now inflation over the last 3 years reaching 100%. So that's a negative development, of course, for the country and we have to reflect that in our books. Going forward, going into Q4, we also discussed that the impact should not be as extreme because it's really a function of how the peso moves, the FX and the indexation that is used to update your financials in Argentinian pesos. And in terms of European costs, you also ask. So this quarter, in particular, we had the translation impact that I can quantify it for you so that it's about 30 million impact in our costs this quarter. Other than that...
Great. Thanks very much, Christian. So that just bring today's call to an end. Thank you very much for your interest and attention. And I think we did get through to everybody's questions today, but if there are any further questions, then please do reach out to me either by phone or e-mail. And we will look forward to seeing many of you in the coming days and weeks. So thanks very much.