© 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.
Good morning, and welcome to the Contura Energy Third Quarter 2020 Earnings Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note that this event is being recorded. I would like to turn the conference over to Emily O'Quinn, SVP, Corporate Communications. Please go ahead.
Thank you, Ely, and good morning, everyone. Before we get started, let me remind you that during our prepared remarks and the Q&A period, our comments relating to expected business and financial performance contain forward-looking statements and actual results may differ materially from those discussed. For more information regarding forward-looking statements and some of the factors that can affect them, please refer to the company's third quarter 2020 earnings release and the associated SEC filings. Please also see those documents for information about our use of non-GAAP measures and their reconciliation to GAAP measures. Participating on the call today are Contura's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, David Stetson; and Chief Financial Officer, Andy Eidson. Also participating on the call is Jason Whitehead, our Chief Operating Officer, who is available to answer questions on operations. With that, I'll turn the call over to David.
Thanks, Emily. Good morning to everyone on the call and thank you for joining us today. What an interesting and challenging year 2020 has given us. Just in the last few months, we have seen met prices dip to $105, spring back to $126, and just recently settle around $114. We've managed through the pain and hardship of the virus, assuring our teams have been well protected as possible, while still operating our business, dealing with economic implications and uncertainties in the domestic and international markets that we serve, and preserving our capital to strengthen our long-term sustainability. When we announced our first quarter operating results earlier this year, they were simultaneously praised and questioned as to whether our cost could be sustained at those levels. Then we reported our second quarter results reflecting lower cost. But again, I heard that we had to prove our ability to sustain our cost performance in order to be considered one of the lowest-cost producers in the metallurgical space. Well, as everyone has read this morning, I'm pleased to announce that we have another solid quarter to report on today. The Contura team continues to do a great job of being vigilant and flexible so we can adapt as necessary. And I've said before, we choose to closely manage the business based on factors we can control and this mindset has resulted in another solid quarter for Contura. Before I get into the details of the third quarter and our specific results, I want to briefly comment on last week's presidential election. Like the majority of the business community, we pay attention to politics, we seek to understand how election results may influence or impact our business. But our goal and the way we manage our business is for our company to be successful regardless who sits in the White House or which party controls Congress. I don't say this to diminish the importance of elections in any way because they are critically important to our democracy. We regularly engage in dialogue with elected officials at all levels to help inform them as to the importance of our products in manufacturing and the underpinning that they provide to a strong economy. However, election outcomes will never change the core principles that anchor our daily operations. Safety, responsibility, environmental stewardship and continuous improvement will continue to drive our actions each and every day and we remain committed to those important aspects of who we are and how we operate. Turning now to our quarterly results, which include adjusted EBITDA of $20 million for the quarter and the best cost performance on record for Central App met since the start of the company over 4 years ago. Andy will provide a more robust overview of the numbers after I finished my remarks, but I have to congratulate Jason and his team on repeatingly exceeding expectations and at just $66.49 a ton for the quarter, managing to beat our prior record-setting met cost performance. Importantly, all this progress has occurred while keeping safety in the forefront at all times. I simply can't say enough about the job they've done this year. I'll briefly comment on our '21 guidance and let Andy go into more detail. We are pleased with our committed met-only position in the Central App met segment with 34% of the anticipated midpoint of our shipments locked in for next year. The average price per committed tons for the met-only portion of the segment is just over $86 a ton. We expect to continue our strong cost performance with Central App cost per ton, anticipated in the range of $68 to $74. As for '21 CapEx, we expect it to come in significantly lower than our spend in 2020 at a range of $80 million to $100 million. We project SG&A for next year to be in the $45 million to $50 million range, which is slightly better than our 2020 expectations. In addition to closely managing our costs, we've been operating with a strong focus on cash preservation, not only to help us weather the effects of the pandemic, but also help us navigate softness and recent volatility, the pricing of our products. As we predicted on our last call, the back half of 2020 has so far proven challenging, albeit with sporadic signs of optimism. We continue to believe we're doing what we can to manage through these challenges and the guidance we're issuing today reflects our thinking about what '21 will hold. I reiterate our prior statements from the second quarter call with regard to the long-term big picture strategy for Contura. We are accelerating our strategic exit from thermal coal mining and we've made great strides in executing our strategic vision to become a pure-play metallurgical coal company, providing critical feedstock for the steel production. As we discussed in prior quarters, our portfolio optimization efforts include bringing on some new met properties that are currently in development or being prepared to run in the future, while deemphasizing or removing from our portfolio other mines that are mining out, uneconomic or no longer offering synergistic value in terms of coal qualities, market demand or cost structure. Whenever there is a property that is idled or mined out, we look for opportunities to realign our coal processing workflows into fewer plants and to redeploy mine equipment to other locations in the company. These efforts allow us to tighten our cost structures and make the best use of existing capital in the organization. We regularly evaluate our portfolio and have been planning for the best utilization of our newer, high-quality mines. We continue to be on track or, in some cases, even exceeding our expectations in that regard. For example, Black Eagle is nearly finished with the corridor to the main reserve body, where we anticipate multisection production next year. We have accelerated our third section at Road Fork 52, with Section 3 now expected in early December instead of first quarter of '21. Lastly, the surface infrastructure installation is almost complete for our Lynn Branch underground mine, with intake and return shafts in place, belts installed and the finishing touch is being put on the track tunnel. We remain excited about these properties and we'll keep you updated on their progress. Like our peers, Contura has closely watched the market landscape and the ebbs and flows of recent weeks. Pricing was soft throughout the better part of the quarter, then increased significantly, before dropping meaningfully again in the recent weeks. Within the quarter, we received communication from customers either lifting or ceasing their force majeure notices. And we also negotiated agreements with certain customers to defer anticipated shortfall volumes from 2020 into 2021. We have largely seen limited impact of these circumstances to our metallurgical coal sale volume and production for the third quarter. Before I wrap up my prepared remarks, I want to congratulate our environmental and safety teams on another strong quarter of performance. Our environmental teams continue their near-perfect water quality compliance rate and a significant reduction in violations against the rolling 3-year average. Our safety teams ended the quarter with all metrics favorable to the national average. Additionally, 2 of our Virginia subsidiaries were recently presented with the safety awards from the state Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy for reaching milestones of work hours without lost time accidents. Those operations are the McClure Prep Plant, long branch surface and long branch high wall. Congratulations to each member of these teams and we look forward to your continued success. I will now turn the call over to Andy for some additional details on our financials.
Thanks, David. Good morning, everyone. As David commented on the multitude of uncertainties facing the world and our industry, our goal is to find ways to alleviate these risks in order to build a stronger, sustainable enterprise. Not to be redundant to what we said in prior quarters, but the way we believe this is best done is by focusing on the issues we've mentioned many times before: effective cost management, matching up production with demand, and most importantly, a sharp focus on cash flows and cash preservation. To that end, if we take a closer look at our balance sheet and cash flows for the quarter, we ended the quarter with approximately $162 million in unrestricted cash. Our ABL is that capacity right now due to the marketing impact -- or the market impact on our borrowing base both through accounts receivable and inventory. So we have no additional availability there. But quarter-over-quarter, we did use approximately $77 million in cash. And to dig into that a little bit to give you a better picture of the usage in the quarter, we did reduce our debt by more than $30 million to $598 million during the quarter. This debt reduction included ABL payment of approximately $12 million, $17.5 million in legacy payments related to the LCC note and a small term loan principal payment of $1.4 million. We also had $13 million in cash interest payments, and we paid an additional $30 million in other legacy payments. Those include such things as pension and then some of the other legacy bankruptcy items that we've been clearing out. On top of those payments, we also provided roughly $19 million in additional cash collateral for surety bonding. As we discussed a couple of quarters ago, it was a little bit of a harbinger of things to come, but the surety markets, insurance markets, all these peripheral markets that we have to deal with for services become even more challenging day by day. So the third quarter for us was certainly no exception. We continue to see some benefit from our working capital, mainly inventory and accounts receivable, which provided a total of $30 million of cash in the third quarter and basically covered our CapEx for the quarter. Going back to the ABL for just a second. Well, we had borrowed and drawn down against the ABL earlier this year in March. At quarter end, that facility was down to $18.4 million in outstanding borrowings and it had about $122 million of letters of credit outstanding as of the end of the quarter. Subsequent to the quarter end, we paid an additional $15 million of the principal. And so the current outstanding borrowings on the ABL as of today, it's approximately $3.4 million. So we've about worked that back down. Next, I wanted to give a quick update on a couple of tax-related items. We still anticipate that we'll receive our $66 million AMT credit monetization refund in the coming weeks. It has suffered from a couple of processing delays, but we feel pretty good that we may actually receive it at some point this week, but certainly in the next couple of weeks. Also in connection with the Cares Act that we've mentioned previously, we still expect to defer approximately $14 million in payroll taxes until '21 and '22, with the total deferral amount distributed evenly across both years. Finally, we anticipate an additional $70 million NOL carryback related tax refund in the back half of '21. Moving to our financial results for the quarter. Our EBITDA increased $3 million quarter-over-quarter from $17 million to $20 million despite the continued decline in market prices relative to the second quarter. The strong EBITDA performance was driven by another quarter of excellent cost containment, particularly in the CAPP - Met segment, where we reported lowest full quarter costs since the inception of Contura of $66.49. The third quarter CAPP - Met costs were approximately $3.5 lower than the second quarter costs, if you kind of adjust Q2 for a more normalized run rate if you exclude the impact of our April furlough and other onetime type issues. On a 3-quarter moving average basis -- and this is really a testament to the sustainability of some of these cost decreases we've seen. 3 quarter moving average basis, our current average is $70.53, down more than $5 over the prior 3-quarter moving average and down from a high of nearly $90 a ton. So again, David mentioned the performance of the operating team. Just when we think that Jason and the operating team have kind of hit their peak as far as cost reduction, they go and they drop a quarter like this on us and we have to come up with new words to describe it. So just incredible work there. Overall, CAPP - Met generated $18 million of EBITDA during the quarter, basically flat with the prior quarter, while NAPP contributed $7 million of EBITDA. The CAPP - Thermal segment contributed more than $5 million of EBITDA in the quarter. Naturally, SG&A expenses aren't allocated into the segments. So to get the total, that will have to be added back in. On the shipments and revenue front, our CAPP - Met shipments remained strong in the third quarter with total volumes of 3.3 million tons shipped, and that's up about 100,000 tons from second quarter. And then the trend we've seen over the past couple of quarters, naturally, our revenues continue to be negatively impacted by a soft market and particularly in export market, with our CAPP - Met realizations down approximately $8 a ton to around $74 a ton in the third quarter. CAPP - Thermal volumes were essentially flat, with second quarter total shipments of around 600,000 tons and realizations improving to just under $58 a ton from $50 in the prior quarter. Prior quarter, we did have some cleanup of some lower quality thermal coal that impacted pricing. We also had some customer mix issues. But I think third quarter realizations were more in line with Q1 as our customer mix got back to a more normal baseline. Northern App revenue improved as a result of higher volumes with prices effectively flat at $40 a ton. Our shipments were up by about 300,000 tons, 1.6 million tons all-in. SG&A, excluding noncash stock comp, onetime items was $13.5 million in the third quarter compared with $10 million in the second quarter. And our third quarter CapEx was down $13.7 million to just under $28 million. Looking at '21. As David hit some of the high spots earlier, we do expect to ship a total of between 20.4 million and 22.2 million tons in '21. 12.5 million to 13 million tons of that will be pure met flowing through the CAPP - Met segment, will be approximately 1 million to 1.5 million tons of thermal that will also be going through that segment as kind of tangential or incidental production. For the CAPP - Thermal segment, we're guiding to 1.3 million to 1.7 million tons and 5.6 million to 6 million tons of Northern App. The CAPP - Thermal reduction relative to 2019 is part of our ongoing and planned strategic focus toward moving toward a pure-play met company. Based on the midpoint of our CAPP - Met guidance, the met-only portion of that is 34% committed and priced at $86.41, with an additional 27% committed but unpriced. The thermal portion of the CAPP - Met segment is 72% committed and priced at an average price of $52.11. And we're essentially fully committed in pricing CAPP - Thermal and Northern App at $57.17 and $40.43, respectively. Looking at costs for next year. We expect our CAPP - Net cost to be in the range of $68 to $74, while CAPP - Thermal should come in between $45 and $49 per ton. And that is holding relatively static at $33 to $37 a ton. SG&A, excluding noncash stock comp and onetime items is forecast to be in the range of $45 million to $50 million. Also, as you can see from David's earlier comment, we're expecting our '21 CapEx to be significantly lower than we were trending in 2020. We expect it to be near a more regular maintenance level of $80 million to $100 million as most of our growth CapEx were spent in the past 2 years and we don't have any large near-term projects to address. Idle operations expenses are expected to be between $27 million and $33 million as we continue that aforementioned shift away from thermal coal production. Cash interest should come in roughly around -- between $51 million and $55 million in '21, while DD&A is expected to be down meaningfully, in the range of $150 million to $175 million, mostly due to previously announced impairments and write-downs in the second quarter. And finally, the cash tax rate should be near 0. Before we open up the call for Q&A, I want to briefly mention that we still don't have any meaningful updates from the Department of Labor on our appeal regarding collateral amounts for certain black lung obligations. So really don't have any updates to share there. However, once something conclusive is determined, we'll obviously share that information with you. So with that, operator, we're ready to open the line for questions at this time.
[Operator Instructions] Our first question today comes from Lucas Pipes with B. Riley Securities.
Congrats on the outstanding cost performance, really great to see. I also want to thank you for the 2021 outlook at this point and all the encouraging updates included therein. My first question is on the cost side. You mentioned in the release and your prepared remarks a couple of drivers, productivity, labor cost, sourcing. Can you provide a little bit of a breakdown on the -- what these various buckets contributed in terms of dollars per ton vis-a-vis maybe the third quarter of 2019, just to have a kind of good sense for where the bulk of the savings came?
Lucas, it's Andy. So that's a little bit of a tough one because we've had so much transition going on inside the portfolio. The biggest driver -- and again, these overlap in significant fashion. Productivity really is the main driver here. It will obviously fall into separate buckets on your P&L. And that is where the labor and the supplies per ton improvement come from. We have seen slight reductions of each of those on an extended cost basis. But the real driver is just the amount of tons flowing through the system. And I'm probably stealing a little bit of Jason's thunder here if it came up in another question. But when you look at our portfolio from '19 rolling into most of 2020, we had roughly 22 mines contributing to the portfolio. That has continued to shift downward as we're consolidating production, optimizing outputs, taking higher cost mines out of the system to the point where when we get to probably the middle of next year, we'll have gone from 22 to 12 mines. So that's -- again, that's reflective of the kind of productivity and improvements that we've seen, really, since Jason came on board, just reenvisioning the entire portfolio. So it's kind of a -- I'm running around the question to get to the answer. But it's really driven by the productivity impacts on those individual buckets rather than themselves.
Got it. That's very helpful. I'll turn over to my second question. It's in regards to your 2021 met coal volume outlook. It's very robust, good to see. But to get to the question, kind of how do you feel about your sales book in regards to your sales outlook? And is there -- is the sales outlook, the shipment outlook for 2021, a reflection on the current forward curve on met coal? Or would you say, "Look, in any reasonable price environment, even what we've seen more recently, which, of course, hasn't been so great" -- to put it mildly -- "we would be able to put these tons to bed"?
Yes. I'll just hit a brief preface on that before I let Dan dig into the details that he wants to share. But I think when you look at our production, it's kind of looking mostly flat on the met side. '20 to'21 maybe a slight pickup. But again, we don't have any better information than anyone else out there to go off of. The futures are where they are. Everyone's optimistic about getting there. But we just don't know necessarily the timing or what the curve looks like to get there. So I think, by and large, we're pretty comfortable. Dan and his team have done a fantastic job getting a domestic book locked into place in this kind of a challenging market. So I think we feel pretty solid about the volumes in total. Naturally, we can't control the price. But Dan, anything you'd like to add to that?
Yes. Thanks, Andy. Lucas, yes, I think we're comfortable going forward. We're shipping at about a rate of 3 million tons a quarter this year and through some very difficult times and challenging markets and challenging times with our customers. And I think it's fair to say we're a little more optimistic about 2021 as far as the volumes. But we're moving the coal right now. We're moving it in Q4. We're going to move it into Q1 and Q2. And as far as the domestic book, we like our position there. We took the business that we felt like we wanted and left some business we didn't want. So I think we like the balance that we have.
[Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from Mark Levin with The Benchmark Company.
Yes. Great. And echoing Lucas' comments, congratulations to the team on a great cash cost performance. I remember it wasn't that long ago where net cash costs were in the 90s, and it's really quite an improvement. Let me ask you a couple of questions on cash. So Andy, in the fourth quarter, I guess you referenced some confidence you'll get the $66 million AMT refund. So I would assume it's reasonable to assume that your cash would build Q3 over Q4? Or are there some other factors that we should be mindful of?
Yes. I don't -- Mark, by the way, I don't -- I hate to guide too precisely, again, just because we don't know where the market price is going to fall out. It's been so inconsistent in the past couple of months in particular. But I will say the third quarter every year is our heaviest cash burn quarter just because July is when all of our legacy payments hit. And so I certainly would expect the fourth quarter, all things being equal, to be considerably better from a cash usage or cash generation perspective than Q3. Again, I don't want to get into any specifics of projecting what it looks like. But I think just by virtue of not having those payments weighing upon us for Q4, we should be $30 million to $40 million better, all other things being equal.
Plus the $66 million AMT refund, right?
Plus the $66 million, correct.
Right. Okay. Got it. And then you referenced the $17 million cash collateral call -- or collateral call from third-party surety providers. Maybe you can give us just a greater understanding of how to think about what the exposure is, how to model what those cash call collateral requirements could look like going forward? I know this morning Peabody disclosed that they had reached a standstill agreement with their surety providers. Their situation is obviously markedly different. But I'm just kind of curious how to think about what the exposure looks like and then what to think about it going forward?
Yes. The main exposure still is coming from thermal permits. The surety companies, by and large, aren't terribly excited about holding thermal permits and they're under the same pressures as all the other third-party providers. Not only is there risk from a market perspective and just ongoing economics, but it also has a considerable amount of ESG risk involved from the sureties perspective themselves. So it's kind of hard for these surety guys to go upstairs and ask for permission to even take new bonds or have to justify not requiring higher collateral levels. So I think by and large, we're in a pretty good position on our bonds right now. We do continue to have conversations with our sureties. But we have a very long-standing relationship with the sureties. Most of the book have been with us for many, many years going back to legacy Alpha days. And so they've been partners with us for a long time and they have been very patient through challenging markets. But I do think with what we did to shore up collateral in Q3, I think we're in pretty good position. But to the degree that we continue moving away from thermal markets, that will only [ inure ] to our benefit.
Is there a way, Andy, to quantify what to expect -- or how to maybe think about it?
No. I mean, you have to look at any given company's total bonding exposure. And then if you're looking...
And what is the total bonding exposure now?
For us, we're -- I'm not sure I know that one off the top of my head. It's roughly going to reflect our undiscounted reclamation cost. But we'll snag that number in just a second. But the weighted average mix is what's going to get you. Any kind of thermal permit is -- a surety is probably going to be looking for north of 50% collateral on that kind of a bond. If it's met, you're going to be considerably lower than that. So it's, again, to the degree that we can get away from thermal permits -- because we're currently -- across our book, we're a little bit over 30% in total collateral. So on a weighted average basis, the met has helped pulling that number down. So again, I think we're in pretty good shape and shouldn't have too much incremental exposure from that perspective. But as we move forward, as the political climate moves forward, especially regarding thermal all bets are on.
No, that makes sense. That dovetails into something I'm sure you're not going to want to discuss so much, but I'm going to ask anyway. You referenced ongoing progress with the NAPP asset sale. Maybe your degree of confidence 1 to 10 scale that you think you can get something done and then what the timing might be? And if you did do something, would it require cash going out the door? Or would this be at worst a cash neutral transaction?
So actually, to close out the loop, Mark, this kind of partially answer a little bit of your question here. We do -- we have roughly $350 million of bonds outstanding, and that's more than just reclamation bonds. That includes some workers' comp, things like that. But of that $350 million, around $150 million of that is Cumberland. So that kind of feeds into your question [indiscernible] transaction. On a scale of 1 to 10, I would probably put our likelihood of getting a deal done at somewhere between 1 and 10.
That was terribly not helpful, Andy.
Yes. Mark, it will be more than 1, but less than 10.
Excellent. That is the color that -- that is outstanding color.
I could be real precise in my answer to you [indiscernible].
All right. But how about to the follow-up, which is would it -- if you sold it and there were -- a buyer actually had to post all sorts of cash collateral. I mean could you do a transaction -- or would you -- is that the bottom line that you would do a transaction that was cash neutral? Or might a cash -- might a transaction involve you actually having to put some cash on it?
Yes. Well, Mark, I think when you look at a deal like this because of the strategic benefit to the entire enterprise, you can mix and match lots of financial and nonfinancial benefits on something like this. So is it possible to expect a transaction -- I mean, can you envision a transaction where you could get some cash? Maybe. Can you envision one where you get some cash? Maybe. So really, again, I hate to give you a nonanswer answer, but there are so many pieces that you can move around to benefit the overall enterprise. It's kind of hard to put a dollar tag to it without knowing all the other pieces in the mix.
Okay. Perfect. That's fine.
But those kinds of...
I get it. I understand. There are a lot of moving pieces. All right. My last question is just really -- it's more on the market and the met market in general. So since China announced their sort of unofficial import ban, have you guys seen any -- or would you -- I mean, I don't think you sell anything into China, but would you consider selling anything into China? What are kind of the puts and takes if trade flows start to change and they start to keep Australian coals out of their market for an extended period of time? And then the second piece is India, which is such an important market to the seaborne coking coal demand. Maybe you can discuss a little bit what you're seeing out of that market recently and kind of what the book looks like there over the next 3 to 6 months or how you see that market?
Go ahead, Dan.
Mark, yes, I'll start with the China -- the trade war issue in China. We don't sell any coal to China. We're aware we've had a few inquiries. By and large, Mark, as you know, they shut the -- a lot of the coal that goes into China is from Australia. It's low vol coal. And that's generally what they're looking for. We don't export a whole lot of low vol. We're very balanced in our portfolio with it. So we're not pursuing actively at all any sales into China. And we are aware of some inquiries and maybe some of our competitors have shipped a vessel or so over there. With regard to India, yes, very important customer, has been pretty steady all year. Like most customers, they had some slowdowns and some difficulties with the pandemic. But by and large, our shipments have remained steady there and I expect them to be steady into 2021.
Congrats again on the cost performance.
This concludes our question-and-answer session, and I would like to turn the call back over to David Stetson for any closing remark.
Well, thank you very much. Thanks for everyone joining us this morning. Have a great -- at the end of your year. And we appreciate it so much. Thank you.
The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.